Police investigate 'flasher' gender recognition reform protester

[IwantToRetire]

While critics shouted “shame on you” at the MSPs. One woman lifted their skirt and showed what initially appeared to be her genitals.

The woman shouted, “if you are not going to be decent, I am going to be indecent.”

However, it later transpired that she had been wearing some form of fake pubic wig.

According to the Scotsman, police did not arrest the individual immediately, however, the force has since received complaints and enquiries are ongoing.

uk.news.yahoo.com/police-investigate-flasher-gender-recognition-140324522.html

Well wasn't i in a happy mood as i awoke this morning!awoke

Why can't the government officials that were fawning and applauding that group see them as we see them. We know exactly what we are looking at and the personalities of those people.

AND I DON'T WANT THEM IN MY FUCKING TOILETS

Good morning, @Waitwhat23 sorry for shouting💐I'm rather angry this year.

Can't think why

Waitwhat23 · Today 10:19

'Scared' my arse. They were deliberately invading women's spaces, after Robison had declared (dishonestly) that the Scottish Government respect single sex services and spaces. It was a power trip.

Yes, I'd agree with that.

You're alright Boiled - I'm angry too. Particularly at the cheek of those particular group of creepy males, who have form for making threats about beating up women, having the brass affrontary to claim that they feel scared. They also have the sheer cheek to claim that they are the 'most marginalised and oppressed' when they've got the absolute wallopers in the SG clapping like circus seals while they cry tears of sheer joy that they can harass and frighten women with no comeback.

Fucking brave new world, isn't it?

Well it did just inspire a poem. You'll enjoy it.

Twats, and not the cunty kind.

I would quite enjoy listening to Elaine and a barrister in a court room, pointing out all the many, many egregious examples of activists that ended in absolutely no consequences whatsoever, or even disapproval from most establishment sources, while a woman speaking in the name of women's rights was treated differently.

Is there one law for TQ+ political matters/people TQ+ or not standing under that political banner and another for everyone else m'lud? Cos look at this whopping great pile of worms bursting out of that can, including a lot of footage of politically captured police standing around looking gormless while activists behave next to them like a lot of particularly badly managed toddlers?

Isn't a privileged protection against normal law and order for one group denied to another group .... illegal? And making a nonsense of law and justice? Where does the Equality Act talk about 'all these characteristics are equal but THIS one is the top trump and less has equality than special privileges?' And isn't that foundationally against the principles and constitutions of the country? Not to mention a really seriously bloody silly idea that will eventually end in tears for everyone, TQ+ activists included? Does anyone remember a world war about this kind of thing, lots of dead people, lessons learned etc? Or are we chucking out the memory of that along with science, common sense and words having meaning?

It's fab - I particularly liked the lines -

'Of course, we have been offered new third spaces, to be accommodating
But we've screwed our nose at those, as they aren't exactly validating.'

So, so true.

Maybe we should change the signs on Women's Toilets to 'The Validating Room'.

Ooh yes and.. The n once they are used to it change then all over to the men's one night

The signage that jus they'd just think the urinals were the next logical step in the ladies 🚺

Problem is, as I remember Datun explaining in that so very insightful way, it isn't the room that validates or is desired.

It's the physical bit of the sex classed biological females undressed and doing sex classed biologically female things in a space designated as only for the sex classed biological females. (But sex doesn't exist and there's no such thing as an adult human female and it's very naughty to say so and make people sad.)

Its so very dimorphically binary isn't it? Speaking the lies does nothing to hide the actions or realities.

And it is only the bodies required. The minds/feelings/inner souls/beliefs/any other aspect of the females is wholly irrelevant. It's absolutely biologically based.

The hypocritical faux-outrage is quite telling.
Should a man be able to get his genitals out on TV & play with them? Yes.
Should men be able to go into changing rooms with young girls & get naked? Yes.
Should 2 year olds be invited to an event where a man, with sexually explicit online images, dress up in a sexist parody of women? Yes.
Should women's rights to give informed consent be removed? Yes.
Should single-sex spaces be removed at the Scottish Parliament? Yes.
Should women have smoke bombs & glitter bombs thrown at them for simply being at a women's event? Yes
Is it a disgusting perversion for a woman to lift her skirt to show decorated gym leggings? Of course it is, how very dare you etc, etc.

You also missed should women be able to breast feed their children in public. Look at the outrage that STILL causes, with women being asked leave or cover up or go and feed in the toilets

Yes! Of course.

It's the age-old double standard isn't it?

Ach, boys will be boys. He's only using his penis to play the piano, what a laugh.

She's exposing herself to feed her baby! We should lock her in a cupboard.

Women's rights are going so far backwards, at this rate we'll be saying hello to the suffragettes themselves as we walk back down the path towards drown the witch.

uk.news.yahoo.com/scottish-parliament-busted-flush-under-200100916.html

So, it would seem that this has been fixed, right from the beginning.

Stephen Kerr said Holyrood’s proceedings are “rigorously controlled” by Scottish ministers, with them packing the parliament’s schedule with “largely meaningless debates” and many SNP MSPs “loathe to question or test the party line”.

For example, it said that Ms Johnstone had placed no time limits on MSPs’ speeches when debating amendments to Ms Sturgeon’s Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. But the Tories accused the Scottish government of attempting to dodge scrutiny by forcing MSPs to vote on more than 150 amendments in the final days before Holyrood’s Christmas break.

Mr Kerr said the highly unusual timetabling for the Bill meant that it was forced through “without full consideration of the evidence presented to parliament and without due regard to clearly flagged unintended consequences”.

without due regard to clearly flagged unintended consequences

Except I'm not at all sure any of the consequences are 'unintended' by the prime movers behind this legislation.

ErrolTheDragon · Today 14:16

Except I'm not at all sure any of the consequences are 'unintended' by the prime movers behind this legislation.

I think that they have to be careful and not say entirely truthful things, such as: "These clearly intended consequences."

I would quite enjoy listening to Elaine and a barrister in a court room, pointing out all the many, many egregious examples of activists that ended in absolutely no consequences whatsoever

Presumably, Elaine - or anyone else who is cautioned/warned/arrested by a police force which hasn't been as strict with TRAs - could sue the police force under the Equality Act, with the protected characteristics of belief (established by Maya) and sex. It would need to be the same police force, and similar (breech of the peace?) behaviour.

That would be really interesting and important. (And I would definitely do some gardening!).

I've thought this too, @JustWaking

Yes, that would be interesting. I'd dig too.

God, for Elaine and the glorious glorious 🌞 she and her merkin has helped shine on this I'd set up a direct debit fur weekly contributions if it came to it!