Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Female SNP lawyer tells court the suggestion that men would use gender self-ID laws to attack women is not “rational”

32 replies

mb2512cat · 19/09/2023 20:34

The case is before Lady Haldane, who in an earlier case involving For Women Scotland, determined that a GRC changes a person’s legal sex for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, hence Sex Matters’ campaign to change the act to specify that the PC of ‘sex’ means biological only. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/19/scotland-self-id-law-trans-gender-westminster-unlawful/

SNP government lawyer tells court that criticisms of gender self-ID laws are irrational

Scotland's Lord Advocate claims Westminster's blocking of Gender Recognition Reform Bill was against devolution settlement

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/19/scotland-self-id-law-trans-gender-westminster-unlawful/

OP posts:
RhannionKPSS · 19/09/2023 23:34

Stonewall was referred to 3 times by Ms Bain, despite the fact we, the public, can’t see their “ evidence “
You can watch the proceedings online via a link from the court.
UK government started their evidence this afternoon, and they will continue tomorrow.

Theunamedcat · 19/09/2023 23:37

So something that has happened never happens?

Gaslighting at it finest

Ramblingnamechanger · 19/09/2023 23:38

Item on ITV I think showed much better background pics and film of Scottish women with clear unambiguous messages on their placards. A change from the usual suspects except for one who said he feels unsafe.

popebishop · 19/09/2023 23:47

Of course it's not rational. It's not possible. The minute a man "uses self-id laws" to identify as a woman, then they literally become a woman. That's how it works, and that's what a woman is. Right?

You can't have a "fraudulent" claim to be a woman, because a woman is by definition any person, male or female, who has made that claim.

Toseland · 20/09/2023 00:28

...said the impact on single sex spaces would be “very modest”.
Modest?! Like the fucking guy dialating in Gatwick?!

dimorphism · 20/09/2023 07:40

'Katie' Dolatowski has already used self id to attack a girl in a women's toilet and got a piss poor sentence for it. So women can't even take heart that crimes like this will be appropriately punished nor steps taken to protect women and children in the future.

So this lawyer thinks the real harm that has happened to that child from policies of self id in that supermarket are not worth caring about? What an insult to Dolatowski's victims.

RebelliousCow · 20/09/2023 08:23

It's not just about being attacked, though, is it? Women and girls have the right to privacy and dignity. To my mind this should be the main focus when talking about single sex spaces. It is too easy to shout " scare tactics" " demonising transwomen" if the focus is always on physical assault, even if we know that such attacks do occur

You don't need to be physically assaulted to be used as the object of someone's voyeurism or fantasy role play, and this is the more likley consequence of permitting males into female spaces.

mb2512cat · 20/09/2023 08:46

Thanks for all your comments. I honestly don’t know how, as a woman, that lawyer could say that with a straight face. But I’m not optimistic that Lady Hale will find those arguments preposterous.

OP posts:
dcsp · 20/09/2023 09:04

I know this isn't the main point, but I don't think "Female SNP lawyer" in the thread title is accurate - Although she's appointed by the (mainly SNP) government, and often attends (though isn't a member of) cabinet, it is an apolitical role.

"SNP Government Lawyer" in the title of the article that's quoted is technically accurate as she is a Lawyer for the (currently mainly SNP) government.

Rightsraptor · 20/09/2023 09:10

It's Lady Haldane, not Lady Hale, @mb2512cat.

This puts me in mind of Shona Robeson's comment that men don't have to pretend to be women in order to assault us.

MargotBamborough · 20/09/2023 09:11

RebelliousCow · 20/09/2023 08:23

It's not just about being attacked, though, is it? Women and girls have the right to privacy and dignity. To my mind this should be the main focus when talking about single sex spaces. It is too easy to shout " scare tactics" " demonising transwomen" if the focus is always on physical assault, even if we know that such attacks do occur

You don't need to be physically assaulted to be used as the object of someone's voyeurism or fantasy role play, and this is the more likley consequence of permitting males into female spaces.

I agree.

If I were debating this in Parliament I would say something like this:

"The question as to whether male predators would use self ID to their advantage to gain easier access to potential victims should not be in dispute, since it has already happened on several occasions. The only question, to my mind, is how many times it needs to happen and how many victims need to be harmed before the proponents of self ID admit that this is a real safeguarding issue. However, I can see that our learned friends are not yet ready to confront that issue and so, to avoid getting bogged down discussing that one particular aspect of this debate, I would like to move on from the question of safety, to that of privacy and dignity.

My question is this: how can we make women's spaces inclusive and welcoming of trans women, whilst ensuring that they also remain inclusive and welcoming spaces for women who cannot undress in the presence of the opposite sex for religious reasons, such as Muslim women, and women who have been victims of male violence and whose brains have an inescapable trauma response to seeing a male bodied person in a space where they are vulnerable, even if they agree with the political position that trans women are women? Should these women be forced to self exclude from these spaces if they are unable to use them in the presence of a woman who had a penis, or are their needs also valid and worthy of being accommodated?"

stealtheatingtunnocks · 20/09/2023 09:40

@MargotBamborough for lord advocate

RebelliousCow · 20/09/2023 09:52

Third spaces and facilities have always been the obvious solution. A new audiorium in my city has such a facility. A Woman's and man's toilet block and a 'gender neutral' toilet for those that require that. If privacy and dignity is really the issue for trans identified people, then this is the obvious solution.

RebelliousCow · 20/09/2023 09:52

auditorium

AvacadoFieldsForever · 20/09/2023 09:56

How is it “rational” to let anyone be anything because they identify so without any classification of what that means, medical diagnosis, medication, investigation of knock on effects, open discussion with all stakeholders, advice from experts etc?

Gold medal darvo

Ramblingnamechanger · 20/09/2023 09:56

But we know that’s not what they really want Rebelliouscow

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 20/09/2023 10:06

I didn't listen to the whole session but I did listen to the afternoon bit where Stonewall was quoted a lot.

The argument was more subtle than "it never happens". The Stonewall/SNP argument was more like "transwomen already have access based on self-id so this legislation makes no difference to attacks on women or anything else, and the UK govt didn't give evidence that it will make any difference to women".

Waitwhat23 · 20/09/2023 10:10

Rightsraptor · 20/09/2023 09:10

It's Lady Haldane, not Lady Hale, @mb2512cat.

This puts me in mind of Shona Robeson's comment that men don't have to pretend to be women in order to assault us.

This one? I hope she cringes herself inside out when she thinks about this in the future (I mean, she won't, but saying it at basically at the same time as the world becoming aware of Isla Bryson must sting).

Female SNP lawyer tells court the suggestion that men would use gender self-ID laws to attack women is not “rational”
ArabeIIaScott · 20/09/2023 10:11

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 20/09/2023 10:06

I didn't listen to the whole session but I did listen to the afternoon bit where Stonewall was quoted a lot.

The argument was more subtle than "it never happens". The Stonewall/SNP argument was more like "transwomen already have access based on self-id so this legislation makes no difference to attacks on women or anything else, and the UK govt didn't give evidence that it will make any difference to women".

The argument appears to be that this change in the law makes no difference to anything at all.

So why on earth bother changing it, in that case?

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 20/09/2023 11:02

ArabeIIaScott · 20/09/2023 10:11

The argument appears to be that this change in the law makes no difference to anything at all.

So why on earth bother changing it, in that case?

Well yes, we know that.

I'm having a Lord of the Rings moment -

"and get from him, willing or no, a little ring, the least of rings, that once he stole. It is but a trifle that Sauron fancies, and an earnest of your good will."

It's a trifle, this least of rings, an earnest of our goodwill.

That's all they're asking.

maltravers · 20/09/2023 11:09

Rightsraptor · 20/09/2023 09:10

It's Lady Haldane, not Lady Hale, @mb2512cat.

This puts me in mind of Shona Robeson's comment that men don't have to pretend to be women in order to assault us.

Indeed, so why not lay out the red carpet for them and remove all inconvenient obstacles? It’s not like rape, sexual assault, upskirting, peeping toms, illegal photo trading, mysogyny etc is a problem.

maltravers · 20/09/2023 11:15

I always hated Russell Brand and his attitude to women, but how like the media and the authorities to be having an extended dark night of the soul moment about his historical behaviour (oh, but times have changed!) at the same time as finding it too difficult/politically embarrassing/personally dangerous to call out the misogyny and abuse of women being enshrined in law and practice in 2023 under the guise of GI and “be kind”.

Glamourreader · 20/09/2023 11:17

She might as well say that it's not rational for scammers to set up fake websites when they could just go out and mug people. Should we therefore trust all websites?

It definitely wasn't rational for a children's nurse to murder the babies in their care. Should her employers have continued to trust Lucy Letby?

We could obviously go on and on...

Tinysoxxx · 20/09/2023 11:23

MargotBamborough · 20/09/2023 09:11

I agree.

If I were debating this in Parliament I would say something like this:

"The question as to whether male predators would use self ID to their advantage to gain easier access to potential victims should not be in dispute, since it has already happened on several occasions. The only question, to my mind, is how many times it needs to happen and how many victims need to be harmed before the proponents of self ID admit that this is a real safeguarding issue. However, I can see that our learned friends are not yet ready to confront that issue and so, to avoid getting bogged down discussing that one particular aspect of this debate, I would like to move on from the question of safety, to that of privacy and dignity.

My question is this: how can we make women's spaces inclusive and welcoming of trans women, whilst ensuring that they also remain inclusive and welcoming spaces for women who cannot undress in the presence of the opposite sex for religious reasons, such as Muslim women, and women who have been victims of male violence and whose brains have an inescapable trauma response to seeing a male bodied person in a space where they are vulnerable, even if they agree with the political position that trans women are women? Should these women be forced to self exclude from these spaces if they are unable to use them in the presence of a woman who had a penis, or are their needs also valid and worthy of being accommodated?"

You’ve missed one category out - girls/women who have medical needs eg. Needing public toilets with a certain degree of visibility so if they collapse they can be noticed, and also if they are confined to a bed, have their personal hygiene from a woman. Both of these situations occurred in my young family.

maltravers · 20/09/2023 11:27

I don’t fit in any of those categories, but why should I and others (including young girls) have to undress in front of men, whether they are perverts getting off on it or not?

Swipe left for the next trending thread