Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Statement about the emergency evidence session by the EHRCJ Committee

198 replies

ArabellaScott · 18/12/2022 21:59

14 women's rights organisations have written to protest at bias in the Scottish Government's GRR Bill - I'm guessing it's okay to reproduce large parts of this statement, as it's public:

'Women – in particular those with concerns about the potential impact of this bill on women who have experienced male violence – have been treated with contempt throughout this process, first by the Scottish Government, and now by the majority of the Scottish parliamentary committee. Their concerns have been belittled, misrepresented and dismissed.'

...

'The following questions should all be asked of Mr Madrigal-Borloz:

Is it your view that women and girls around the world are singled out for discrimination and disadvantage, such as female infanticide, education denial, forced marriage, restrictions on their liberties and rights, and multiple other legal, social and economic disadvantages, on the basis of something other than their physical sex?

Which countries that have introduced self-declaration systems for legal gender recognition have undertaken evaluations of the impacts on women and girls? Please provide MSPs with details of any such reports, the scope of the evaluation undertaken, date published etc.

How is the monitoring of effects of such laws on women and girls possible where datasets have ceased collecting data on sex, in favour of collecting data on self declared gender identity?

How do you define harms against women and girls? Is it your view that harms should be confined to physical and sexual assaults?

What analysis have you undertaken to assess the degree of reluctance women and girls experience in reporting any incidents? For example, concerns about accusations of committing a hate crime.

What importance do you place on ensuring women and girls’ privacy, dignity and psychological safety?

You claim that women objecting to this law change believe that all transwomen are predators. Please can you provide specific examples of organisations that have made such statements in Scotland.

How would you expect evidence to be found about the change in the incidence of non-contact sexual offences committed by males in women-only spaces, such as voyeurism, after changes in the law and policy?

In countries that have introduced self-declaration systems for legal gender recognition, what measures have been put in place to quantify the numbers of women and girls self-excluding from women-only spaces and services that are now open to transwomen?

Is it your view that safety and fairness matter for women and girls in sport?'

This statement is signed by:

Evidence-Based Social Work Alliance
Fair Play For Women
For Women Scotland
Frontline Feminists Scotland
Keep Prisons Single Sex
MurrayBlackburnMackenzie
Scottish Feminist Network
Sex Matters
Women and Girls Scotland
Women’s Rights Network
Women Voting With Our Feet
Woman’s Place UK
Women Speak Scotland
FiLiA
Johann Lamont (former MSP)
Elaine Smith (former MSP)
Jenny Marra (former MSP)
Marlyn Glen (former MSP)

forwomen.scot/18/12/2022/emergency-evidence-session-by-ehrcj-committee/

OP posts:
Pixiedust1234 · 18/12/2022 22:07

Thank you for posting.

Thank goodness for these people ❤

xalo · 18/12/2022 22:15

Thanks for this post

ahagwearsapointybonnet · 18/12/2022 22:15

A very good statement and set of questions. I agree, thank goodness for these people!

fabricstash · 18/12/2022 22:17

Great statement

ClaphamSouth · 18/12/2022 22:19

They are good questions. I am very interested to hear Mr Madrigal-Borloz's answers.

ArabellaScott · 18/12/2022 22:19

Me too, ClaphamSouth. Whether or not they will be put to him or whether he would answer them is another matter.

OP posts:
Impossiblenurse · 18/12/2022 22:42

Chefs kiss. Magnificent work ladies.

It was hard not to feel demoralised by recent court ruling...but i see now ... it was a win/win (Bit slow on the uptake).

You are an absolute inspiration and I can't thank you enough. And thank you Arabella for posting.

TheBiologyStupid · 18/12/2022 22:48

An excellent statement. No surprise that the session is being held much too late in the parliamentary process, though.

LangClegsInSpace · 18/12/2022 22:51

This is an excellent statement.

I'll be watching tomorrow.

aweegc · 18/12/2022 22:56

Very interested in his answer. If he answers.

Whereareyourshoes · 18/12/2022 23:05

Thank you for posting. Am also extremely interested in the answers to these questions.

Impossiblenurse · 18/12/2022 23:17

I think the point is he can't answer... either the evidence simply does not exist, or he reveals his ignorance.

I remain hopeful that MSPs will find it increasingly difficult to wilfully ignore issues/concerns and manage to locate their integrity. What they choose to do next, who knows? But they can't pretend they didn't know or hadn't the opportunity to consider the range of issues.

Surely this and Badenoch meeting (with Robison) are impossible to ignore.

TinFoilHatty · 18/12/2022 23:39

Thank you Arabella. We shall see (hopeful but not hugely so).

Igmum · 19/12/2022 02:59

Thank you Arabella. Great questions. He won't answer them of course, but I really wish he would engage with them.

LorenzoVonMatterhorn · 19/12/2022 03:24

ahagwearsapointybonnet · 18/12/2022 22:15

A very good statement and set of questions. I agree, thank goodness for these people!

Absolutely.

im so sick if it all now.

southbiscay · 19/12/2022 06:18

This is stellar work.

But it's like that famous Far Side cartoon of what you say to a dog and what the dog hears.

When we talk about women we mean women. When they talk about women they mean anyone.

I'm also pleased to see Kemi's intervention, but the SNP MSPs will doubtless see her as a right winger with bigoted views that are not worth entertaining.

OP posts:
Needanewnamebeingwatched · 19/12/2022 09:31

Watching with interest

ArabellaScott · 19/12/2022 16:11

Session has now moved to 17.45.

OP posts:
Whereareyourshoes · 19/12/2022 16:24

Thank you. Will listen in if I can.

Interesting read from Sex Matters:

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/act-of-compliance/?mc_cid=7cd9efe1f5&mc_eid=30f077dc83

ArabellaScott · 19/12/2022 16:53

'He then elaborated on these “other requirements”, setting out the self-ID agenda: people should be allowed to change their legal sex, to man, woman, a multiplicity of other options, or no sex at all, without medical assessment, through a simple, free, confidential process of self-determination.'

I look forward to changing my sex to a multiplicity.

OP posts:
OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 19/12/2022 17:51

The rights of 'non transwomen and girls'. The only way this man can think of women is in relation to men.

OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 19/12/2022 17:51

He's saying trans people get far more harassment than women.

OP posts:
Melroses · 19/12/2022 17:53

I can't see how his constant invocation of 'gender' and 'gender identity' has anything to do with women whatsoever.