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

Reem Asalem, the UN’s special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, said she was “Remembering the many times we were told that the idea that predatory and violent males may want to take advantage of the presence of loopholes in system and weak safeguards to enter spaces reserved for females was ludicrous!”

And has now been made clear, predatory and violent males are part of the group this access was created for . There are no 'loopholes', this isnt a bug, it is a feature. Any male, with any agenda, can claim this right - but this trying to say there are two groups: males with TQ+ identities who are all perfectly safe and lovely, and violent monster males pretending - it's rubbish.

Scott is TQ+. Bryson is TQ+. Dolowolski is TQ+ And they all have the right to go into female spaces unchallenged under this awful ideology.

It would be much much pleasanter to keep trying to believe that violent and abusive males are never truly TQ+ but it's frantic avoidance of the truth. Some of the male TQ+ population are predatory and violent males and there is no way to separate and gatekeep nice males from not nice males.

This is why sex segregation happened in the first place.

I have mixed feelings about her standing down. I can't decide if:

• it will prove you can't do self-ID in a way that's non-Dentons compliant, and flush it all out, and be used as an example to all political and organisational leaders, that throwing us under the bus has real consequences

Or

• it will be used to hush it all up, kick the can down the road to the next GE, and move us to Labour's Shitty Sex Fudge

I'm sure the hush up will be tried. I'm sure there's a fantastic amount of sad facing and pressure and frantic attempts to control being poured on every political party in Scotland from the (government paid) pressure groups intent that females should be dust under the feet of important males and that safeguarding is old hat and reality is hate and we've always been at war with eastasia.

It isn't going to work though.

Doorstepping is going to be a bloody nightmare for these parties and they know it. And they've seen now: this does not wash with the general public .

It would be much much pleasanter to keep trying to believe that violent and abusive males are never truly TQ+ but it's frantic avoidance of the truth. Some of the male TQ+ population are predatory and violent males and there is no way to separate and gatekeep nice males from not nice males.

This! Too often we see ‘but we don’t mean proper trans people’ - ‘proper trans’ males (transwomen) are still men with at least the same level of predatory behaviours and the census suggests much more.

The one major positive is that other politicians will look at what's happened to sturgeon and wonder if that's the road they want to go down (Labour, I'm looking at you)

Hushing up and trying to use the dentons method just won't work anymore

Just reposting this, fingers crossed l for a ‘tweets that didn’t age well’ outcome.

Surely Keir Starmer is ordering himself brown trousers with 24 hour delivery about now?

NS has one eye on the Indy prize at all times. Everything is seen through the lens of gaining independence. So any policy that makes scotland look different, more "progressive" than rUK is instantly appealing.

@rainbowshit what a misfire then to make people feel they need to stick with the UK for safety and sanity.

Mad isn't it?

'If they behave like that then they're not truly TQ+!'

Ok, so any male who has committed any violent or sexual crime is not TQ+ in your view, and so those crimes should mean no chance of getting a GRC or being allowed to self ID. And no chance of being permitted in the women's estate. And any male committing an act against a woman in the women's prison estate should be immediately and permanently removed to the male estate. Right?

'You can't do that you horrible bigot! They are TQ+ if they say they are TQ+! Only they can know!"

But you just said.....

There is no logic, no sense, no coherence. This is no basis for planning a bloody tea party, never mind legislation.

Yeah

I’m hoping that Westminster politicians are finding this pretty instructive

In hindsight they’d have been better off waiting for the next Labour government to carry out its promised amendments to the GRA. This way round I think their bodge job will have made it much more difficult for Labour to do what they wanted to do.

India must be one of the most deluded men on the planet.

From the wonderful Jo Bartosch

twitter.com/jo_bartosch/status/1620542194099830785

PMQ’s ongoing at the moment. Rishi took a swipe at Labour saying Kier Starmer was unable to protect women in his own party, in reference to Rosie Duffield.

We’ll see if prisons come up.

Remembering Neil Kinnock he moved onto greater things. Sturgeon will have a second career lined up I'm sure.

I am praying Sturgeon goes. It will be the best news I've heard in a long, long time!

On another note, I see on Twitter Keeping Prisons Same Sex need a bit of help with their garden, if anyone has a couple of carrots going.

I received this response to a petition I signed - is there a faint chink of light here??? Should we be making more representations to our MPs about this?

“The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Remove references to 'gender identity' from relationships education guidance”.

Government responded:

We are developing transgender guidance for schools to be published later this year. We will consider, in parallel, whether changes need to be made to the RSHE guidance to align with the new guidance.

The Department for Education believes that all children should be supported whilst growing up. Our schools and teachers are committed to helping all pupils to succeed and reach their potential in a safe and respectful environment.

To prepare children for life in modern Britain, pupils need to understand the world in which they are growing up. RSHE is therefore designed to give pupils the knowledge they need to lead happy, safe, and healthy lives and to foster respect for other people and for difference.

We recognise that issues relating to sex and gender can be complex and sensitive for schools to navigate, which is why we are developing guidance for schools. It is important that we are able to consider a wide range of views, so we will undertake a public consultation on the draft guidance prior to publication.

We are also aware that some parents are concerned about what content their children are being taught regarding these issues, and we are planning to write to schools shortly to schools to be clear that we expect them to respond positively to all reasonable requests from parents to see curriculum materials. The letter will also clarify what the law allows them to share, including that schools can allow parents to view resources in person, rather than electronically.

We will consider whether changes need to be made to the RSHE guidance to ensure it aligns with this new transgender guidance and will consult on any proposed amendments in parallel with the transgender guidance.

Department for Education

Click this link to view the response online:

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/618970?reveal_response=yes

The Petitions Committee will take a look at this petition and its response. They can press the government for action and gather evidence. If this petition reaches 100,000 signatures, the Committee will consider it for a debate.

The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament”

I find the idea of convicted rapists in women’s prisons extremely disturbing too. Is it not possible to find two things disturbing at once? I am not saying that I find convicted rapists in women’s prisons less disturbing than the tone of the debate! It is the extremist thinking in some views ( and, as I said, on both sides of this and other issues) which I find difficult as I wonder whether it leads to people being afraid to have any sort of debate about anything, for fear of being totally annihilated.

@PineCone74 Actually, in the context of this debate, and the way it has been framed by trans radical activists, it isn't really possible (anymore) to find two things disturbing at the same time.

The 'No debate' position from Stonewall left no room for discussion at all. It was a straight choice: agree with them entirely, or you're transphobic. That's it.

As a woman and mother of a daughter, I chose to disagree with them because of safeguarding concerns, womens rights, etc. By their standards, I am automatically a transphobe and hateful.

There ARE reasonable trans gender women who are brave enough to see through this garbage and say, 'Not in my name'. And those TW are often very well accepted by GC women and on the receiving end of hate. But too often trans women are only concerned with how this debate makes them feel, and not how it actually affects women. That doesn't engender sympathy. I'm sorry, but exposing women to the risk of rape is way more serious than hurt feelings.

The Isla Bryson case is creating a degree of delight from watching those who sided with Stonewall, those who saw all of us as transphobic, now having to deal with a safeguarding issue while also trying to not sound 'transphobic' themselves. It's like they've hit a crossroad and are trying to go in two directions at once. They can't: Stonewall doesn't allow it. "No debate". And they've gone too far down the Stonewall path for any of us to have any respect for them at all.

Nicola Sturgeon made her choice, now she needs to live with the consequences of it, as I have to live with the consequences of mine. I didn't make the rules, but those are the rules.

This is absolute correct.

It's about winning the referendum.

But it is not just about showing that Scotland is different. In my view, it's more calculated than that.

The voting age in Scotland was lowered to 16. She thinks that this is an issue that will attract the youth vote.

It is all calculated.

Except kids aren't stupid, girls don't want boys in their changing rooms. Any more than the boys want the girls.

Kids of that age are just through puberty and boys as well as girls are very body conscious.
The "be kind" movement is all very good until it directly affects people. I don't mind the transwoman at work but I wouldn't want to be in the toilets at the same time.

Yes, it seems obvious to me that they geared up for a fight positioning Scotland as a fairer, more progressive country than rUK, looking outward to the future and not inwards towards the past. And also obvious that none of them actually looked in detail at what the policies meant past “be kind” and “most persecuted minority”, and noone did a critical analysis of the arguments on each side.

i think they thought this would be a great coming together moment like in Ireland when marriage equality was passed. Big mistake. Massive.

(I mean the miscalculation was a big mistake, not marriage equality which was long over due and the fight is still not won - looking at you CofE)

A 'we told you so' piece in the Telegraph: archive.is/88EOt

Sigh, posted a piece to the Telegraph via archive and it's been hidden.