Sturgeon getting an absolute grilling on Channel 4 News

[dunBle]

I should imagine the clip will be doing the rounds on twitter shortly if it's not already, but their Scotland correspondant Ciaran Jenkins did a really good job in a brief interview with her when she was on a tour of a TV studio today. Raised the issue of Katie Dolatowski, and got her quite rattled trying to get her to justify her comments about transphobia and racism. Should be on about 8:15/8:20ish if you want to watch it on C4+1

Neale Hanvey was the only politician who responded positively,and politely,to my letters of concern about GRR. He also took time to talk to those of us gathered outside the parliament in the December protest.

Private Eye have been mentioning the SNP's dodgy finances for a while (loan to the party by Sturgeon's husband). Why aren't the mainstream Scottish press on a hot news story like that? Presumably they had great fun with the Number 10 wallpaper nonsense and Johnson's endless feebie holidays. Does she have some hold over the press?

Love the link to the Finnish trans figure skater falling down and not being able to get up again. (But apparently it was "fun")

(Schadenfreude - the gift that keeps on giving)

Ns needs reminding that most men do not commit any offences. Let alone offences of a sexual nature. If risk assessed, we could put most men in prisons with women. Sex segregation exists despite this fact. Women deserve single sex spaces.

As has been said already but deserves regular repetition - another point that needs to be rammed home is that now that even a diehard TWAW advocate like Sturgeon has clearly shown that Not All TWAW, how are women and girls supposed to keep the Pretendy TW out of all the other single-sex spaces like hospital wards, changing rooms, toilets, sports, etc.?

And at what point did Bryson tip from 'is doing nothing wrong, don't judge' to 'using TQ+ status to offend/is unacceptable' while awaiting trial?

Only after conviction for the wreckage of two women's lives in his wake?

Yes 1000 times over. This short but informative paragraph should be included in all news articles, interviews etc on this matter.

What facilities do rapists use when they're out of jail? A thread:

https://twitter.com/mjeslfc/status/1620157094979842048?s=46&t=l-hCV__xAOFp9zLGiDrqIg

TWAW peen-lovers are now in an invidious position. Either they have to argue:

1). That trans women are NOT really women and therefore don't belong in female prisons when they commit serious crimes. Which is what GC people have argued all along.

OR

2). Trans women ARE real women, but for some intangible reason, don't belong in female prisons. Even though that's where every woman-born-woman would go, regardless of the nature of their offending.

Before the likes of NS and her TWAW allies nailed their colours to the mast this week, I'd never met anyone who believes that women belong in male prisons.

• Not GC people.
• Not far-right American death penalty fundies who would pull the switch on sex offenders without turning a hair.
• Not even the fucking Taliban.

I think TWAWs have achieved a first.

@MrsOvertonsWindow Thank you!! Your post articulates what I've been feeling with crystal clarity.

THIS ⬆

NS needs to be asked why we separate prisons by sex at all. Why not put all the non-violent offenders in together? Perhaps it is because women (including those in prison) deserve dignity, privacy and safety when vulnerable (eg sleeping and showering) which can only be achieved by single sex arrangements.

So... there were more than 70,000 cases of rape reported to the police in 2021-2. Around 2,500 men were found guilty and jailed. Which means that there are thousands of men (with the number apparently growing year on year) walking around who have raped / sexually assaulted women but the case didn't proceed to court for whatever reason. And those are only the reported rapes.

Not only do we need to worry about the fact that those men are able to enter women's DV shelters, use rape crisis centres, enter women's loos and changing rooms but you're also suggesting that if they're convicted of fraud or burglary it would be perfectly safe to put them in prison with women.

Barking. Utterly barking.

No. See my post above. I used to work in a large international company where it was widely known that a man in a senior position sexually assaulted a number of female staff. The company compensated the women — to the tune in a a couple of cases of hundreds of thousands. He was never charged. It was all contained in-house. On paper he'd be one of those innocent men. In reality he was a sexual predator.

Patti, some men are sex pests not most. Most women if not all have met them. Doesn't change that most men will finish life without being criminals.

Women deserve single sex spaces regardless of how innocent the cohort of men is. We deserve dignity.

Who cares if they have gender reassignment-their penis taken off!

If my husband lost his penis in an accident or as a result of illness, he would still be a man.

His penis being lobbed off wouldn't stop him from being stronger than me.

It's all balls...or not but a man is a man, formed in the womb until the day he dies.

I read that initially as 'regardless of how incoherent the cohort of men is'.

The fact that so many transvestites have been subsumed into what was originally a transsexual cohort (which is still sexist, in my opinion), is finally dawning on the general public.

So, to me, if any of this has to be on a spectrum, using the very concept of the objectification of women in order to grant men access to them to further that objectification, is abhorrent and inhumane.

But, as other posters have said, even the most benign man should not be in women's spaces. Privacy and dignity is not just preserved through excluding sexual offenders. It's also by not being subject to the male gaze. This has always been understood. God knows why it's suddenly flown out of the window.

At the heart of this is the concept that men can literally become women.

When I first heard it (from Riley J Dennis) I thought it was absolutely risible and assumed no one would take it seriously. How wrong I was.

However, because no one actually believes it, I think there are quite a few people who don't quite realise how literal, 'literal' means.

Which is why, even after all this time, Nicola Sturgeon is falling flat on her face. She's trying to find a way of explaining how, of course, transwomen are women, but not literally women. And she's trying to find a way of explaining that, without saying any of those words.

Ah: sex pest. Minimising language, eh? You haven't explained how anyone would ever be able to tell which charming man is a sexual predator and which isn't. I used to think the senior manager who'd cornered colleagues in loos and groped them (and worse) was a lovely guy. 96% of people who commit sexual offences are male. Most male on female sexual assaults and rapes go unreported. 1 in 4 women will be raped or sexually assaulted in her lifetime. Those figures alone should mean that men and women are never imprisoned together.

96% of people who commit sexual offences are male

Ha! That figure is lower than it was. Why do you think that might be? Possibly to do with the number of “female” penis-havers committing rape?

I think that's the official figure. I think it fluctuates slightly over the years, possibly because of the number of transwomen who have been found guilty of sexual offences.

I think you are preaching to the converted Patti. Blister wasn't advocating putting Males in female spaces. It was in answer to NS and others claims that not all TW are abusive and therefore should be placed alongside women. The message I took was what is the difference putting non violent/abusive Males in as well in that case. We all know why not!

.

@Butchyrestingface although the wall is more like this at the moment