Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

STURGEON IS QUITTING

986 replies

Clymene · 15/02/2023 09:59

Just seen on BBC headlines

OP posts:
Thread gallery
15
CaveMum · 16/02/2023 11:56

@OMG12 I've frequently said on here that we need a Mumsnet Party headed by JKR. There's enough UK based users that we could easily field a candidate in every constituency and the breadth of experience across these boards means we'd have people with actual real life knowledge of health, education, defence, etc for the Cabinet.

Viva la revolution, I say!

OMG12 · 16/02/2023 11:57

CaveMum · 16/02/2023 11:56

@OMG12 I've frequently said on here that we need a Mumsnet Party headed by JKR. There's enough UK based users that we could easily field a candidate in every constituency and the breadth of experience across these boards means we'd have people with actual real life knowledge of health, education, defence, etc for the Cabinet.

Viva la revolution, I say!

Oh that would be amazing- I would most certainly be a fully paid up member knocking on doors

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 12:04

BBC Breakfast is now on iPlayer and the interview with Mandy Rhodes of Holyrood magazine starts at 2:32:40. The comment on the GRR Act is towards the end, around 2:36.00.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001j74p/breakfast-16022023

Rainbowshit · 16/02/2023 12:05

I can't remember where I read it. It the section 35 has to be challenged by the 17th April. It's also not done for a government (executive) to make major announcements without a leader in place. Which makes it unlikely that they will challenge the section 35.

Which also raises questions about the timing of sturgeon's resignation.

Rainbowshit · 16/02/2023 12:08

Rainbowshit · 16/02/2023 12:05

I can't remember where I read it. It the section 35 has to be challenged by the 17th April. It's also not done for a government (executive) to make major announcements without a leader in place. Which makes it unlikely that they will challenge the section 35.

Which also raises questions about the timing of sturgeon's resignation.

Oh jeez what is happening to me? 🙈 Can't believe I'm taking any notice of Wings. Just remembered it was him that pointed this out. This issue really has turned normal rivalrys and alliances on their heads hasn't it?

twitter.com/wingsscotland/status/1626153097901875201?s=46&t=oyCyoGtf9DrKnYBxlLofOA

Shelefttheweb · 16/02/2023 12:08

Kate Forbes has been elected as an MSP, many of those who elected her will also be Wee Frees and it is quite right that their views are represented in Parliament. And those views should not prevent you being first minister - it is a leadership position, not a dictatorial one regardless of how Sturgeon treated it. Others in Parliament hold different views to Kate and in order to pass laws all MSP views should be taken into account in order to achieve a majority.

scratchedbymycat · 16/02/2023 12:19

Absolutely fair enough.

Nevertheless, I won't vote for someone who thinks abortion is murder, and homosexuality is a sin, even if Wee Frees deserve representation. Nor will I vote for a party headed by someone who has those views.

I am also of the opinion that Trumps views on women matter, even if sexists are entitled to representation. And of course they are ... but ...

SirSamVimesCityWatch · 16/02/2023 12:25

I think there is a big difference between voting for an MP who holds some views or beliefs you don't share, but who as 'only' an MP will be a single cog within the wider party, and voting for that person to be the leader of the party. The leader has significantly more power and influence, the leader sets the tone and direction of the party. As we have seen with NS.

Should a person's (quite strong) religious beliefs prevent them from running for leadership of a political party? Absolutely not.

Should voters disregard the religious beliefs of their potential political party leaders? Also absolutely not.

Interestingly we seem to be seeing a Europe wide shift towards the right, in terms of voting. Perhaps having had NS's left-wing uber-progressive leadership for so long, SNP members might go the other way? Kate Forbes can play the traditional Scottish values, family values etc cards. After the GRR bad press perhaps people will want that? It will be interesting to watch.

ResisterRex · 16/02/2023 12:28

DARK FORCES.

Spoiler: it's women writing letters

twitter.com/forwomenscot/status/1626167031111331841?s=46&t=JO8k6mA654fNv1d6joqA5Q

SinnerBoy · 16/02/2023 12:33

Writing letters?!! What an outrage! Who DO they think they are?!!

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 12:37

ResisterRex · 16/02/2023 12:28

I may get a T shirt.

I AM A DARK FORCE
or just
DARK FORCE

What font should I go for?

SinnerBoy · 16/02/2023 12:40

Not Wingdings.

CryptoFascistMadameCholet · 16/02/2023 12:42

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 12:37

I may get a T shirt.

I AM A DARK FORCE
or just
DARK FORCE

What font should I go for?

Old English 😬

OMG12 · 16/02/2023 12:43

SinnerBoy · 16/02/2023 12:33

Writing letters?!! What an outrage! Who DO they think they are?!!

so basically they’re re running the Eve-destroyer of worlds, corrupter of men story? The woman whose quest for knowledge and reality apparently led to the downfall of man? - oh well😂😂😂

Are we more or less satanic than a fat geezer in leather and a top hat though??

MarshaBradyo · 16/02/2023 12:44

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 12:37

I may get a T shirt.

I AM A DARK FORCE
or just
DARK FORCE

What font should I go for?

Gothic

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 12:49

SinnerBoy · 16/02/2023 12:40

Not Wingdings.

Nor Comic Sans.

A cursive one - a link with letter writing?

CryptoFascistMadameCholet · 16/02/2023 12:49

?

STURGEON IS QUITTING
STURGEON IS QUITTING
STURGEON IS QUITTING
STURGEON IS QUITTING
SinnerBoy · 16/02/2023 12:53

OMG12 · Today 12:43

Are we more or less satanic than a fat geezer in leather and a top hat though??
Without a photograph to peruse, I'm unable to form a meaningful opinion, sorry.

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 12:54

CryptoFascistMadameCholet · 16/02/2023 12:49

?

Oh. now Gothic would make my metalhead son so jealous.

Apparently there was a Russian thrash metal band called Dark Force, but it's status is currently unknown. Don't think they'll be threatening copyright suits.

OMG12 · 16/02/2023 12:56

Can you put a yoda quote on the back?

”When you look at the dark side, careful you must be.”

Gothic script defo

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 13:00

FFS! I put an apostrophe in 'its'.

Caffeine, stat.

Chersfrozenface · 16/02/2023 13:09

I no longer trust anything the Graun says.

RedToothBrush · 16/02/2023 13:11

I suspect The Fail report is most likely true. Its also my suspicion too.

Sturgeon didn't meantion the GRR once in her speech. And the rumour is she wants to try and go into some kind of human rights / lgbt rights role after this. So you'd think that she'd want to stress her commitment to trans rights but didn't. She did keep going on about women's rights though - which for me suggests she knows she's politically wounded on that and thats the noteworthy bit especially as she also kept on talking about her commitment to independence....

The way the GRR has been handled is dreadful, and Sturgeon pretty much walked straight into a political trap with it. By ploughing ahead with it, to the point Westminster intervened she created a problem for the SNP that was political suicide for her. She tied the GRR to Independence in a battle that almost inevitability is doomed to fail. She inadvertedly linked independence to a bill which is tarnished by the growing spectre of children being harmed and the concept of female rapists, murderers and paedos with penises in women's prisons. Not exactly a public winning combo to muster support for independence. I think if you made a list of things not to link to your main political ambition, looking like you support harming children, rapists and murderers is pretty close to the top of faux pas and things you would be mad to risk. Yet, Sturgeon has managed to play a blinder and played her best Top Trump card here. That takes some mighty skill to fuck up that badly. I suspect there are many SNP supporters slow hand clapping and joining conga lines celebrating her departure.

Her actions had meant for the SNP, they ultimately put themselves in a position where it was a choice to continue to keep going with the GRR and put the already stalled and blocked pursuit for another referredum and the chances of a yes vote OR drop the GRR and work to try and make progress and focus on independence again.

Ultimately I think it comes down to whether Gender Rights are more important than Independence for the SNP because of the way Sturgeon has handled it and the Tories have blocked her move to overrule Westminster. Thats never going to be a contest. (Its an interesting dynamic to watch with the Greens btw - they have a similar conflict. But not necessarily a problem that the LDs have)

It was a power over reach which damages the Independence Movement and thats the red line for the grassroots SNP. Its not opposition within the party to the GRR thats killed it - its the linkage to fucking up the prospects of independence.

Coupled with a financial scandal in the offing and other controversies lurking in the wings, I very much doubt Sturgeon could have survived the storm of trying to go ahead with it. Hence jumping before pushed after reading the room and realising the writing on the wall.

If the priority for the SNP, is indeed, independence and going head to head with Westminster in an attempted power over reach (which I suspect lawyers have looked at and suggested is going to be difficult to win in court and is also paying a part in Sturgeon's decision making), the natural outcome would be to try and quietly drop the GRR in a damage limitation exercise to Independence ambitions.

My thought is that it leaves the GRR in its current form dead.

Its possible that it could be revived after a General Election in some form so I don't think its buried. But I think by then we will be at a point where sunlight has been shone in even greater depth on the Tavistock and the rapist clause isn't going anywhere fast. I think that means that Self ID if it does start to be pushed by a possible Labour government (possibly with SNP support north of the border if the SNP maintain their dominance there) its going to have to include a fair few exceptions or nuance clauses.

That might actually make it harder to stop in the long run - but it might take out some of the worst elements of it and give Women's Rights groups crucial time to make their case and be heard by the public to a greater degree.

And in the interim I think theres a fair chance of more scandal emerging from poor handling of conflicting rights and how its also sparking a backlash that isn't necessarily in the interests of those who identify as trans.

My expectation is something will problem be back on the table in the next two years - probably now lead from Westminster itself, but its not going to be the proposals we are currently seeing.

And I would imagine that the way things unravel and public reception to these stories will be being carefully watched.

I suspect Sturgeon isn't much of a chess player because she really didn't see all the moving pieces.

RedToothBrush · 16/02/2023 13:32

scratchedbymycat · 16/02/2023 12:19

Absolutely fair enough.

Nevertheless, I won't vote for someone who thinks abortion is murder, and homosexuality is a sin, even if Wee Frees deserve representation. Nor will I vote for a party headed by someone who has those views.

I am also of the opinion that Trumps views on women matter, even if sexists are entitled to representation. And of course they are ... but ...

See this is where I think Tim Farron is relevant.

He has personal beliefs I don't like nor share, but he still thinks that there shouldn't be discrimination on some of those issues and takes a more nuanced (and yes controversial) view than puritans would like.

But is that really any different to some elements of the debate over the conflict between women's rights / trans rights?

He's been absoluetely hauled over the coals over it (and ultimatedly resigned as leader) because his views aren't pure enough for his party's tastes. But I don't think he ever actively discriminated and had more of a live and let live attitude.

I think its a difficult area but I'm mindful of the right to hold a belief even if its one we don't like is one we need to support and to realise that holding that belief doesn't necessarily mean moral superiority or a desire to activately discriminate. Just a desire to think differently and live our own lives in a particular way. Because its that recognition by the courts that 'its a bit more complicated than that' that has upheld the right to be Gender Critical and upheld freedom of speech.

And I don't think Farron was ever a 'one issue' politician hell bent on destroying the rights of others. He took on board majority views and realised it was his job to represent a wide range of views rather than merely evangelise and impose his views. Thats very different to Trump is / was. I guess my point is, is Kate Forbes more Farron or more Trump?

I had a certain amount of time for Farron in a way I wouldn't ever have for Trump. One isn't belligerent, but the other is. There is a difference.