Stand back - this First Minister is reversing

[Terref]

https://x.com/ginadavidsonlbc/status/1834937956399780052

“In law, the ability to have women only spaces is central to the provisions of the Equality Act… it’s a position that must be protected and implemented effectively… the safety of women and girls ... must be protected at all times” - John Swinney on Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre report

What's a woman, Jonny?

This.

Agree with Jelly on this. He either needs to say biological or in my mind he's including transwomen who are biological males.

Labour tried this in their campaign but us women aren't silly billys, we see them,

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/john-swinney-says-woman-an-32794923

'John Swinney has said a woman is "an adult female born as a woman" but accepts "transgender women are defined as women".

Fucksake. I fell for the fudge.

What about women prisoners John do they get a say in what is an acceptable risk of rape by the men you and your party put in their prisons and cells?

The SNP First Minister also said he "will do nothing to threaten the safety of women and girls".

How's he going to do that when he can't accurately define the terms "women" and "girls"?

Easily done. It's exhausting to examine every slight utterance for the trap even when you suspect it's there.

Arendt warned about this. This level of (necessary) mistrust in authority and hypervigilance exhausts and isolates us, making us more susceptible to totalitarian manipulation on a society level.

Aaaand there it is

we will totally protect women and girls from male violence

(small print: men who say they have lady feelings are also women and should be able to access all everything actual Women can)

The Highland Fling

Unless he says 'Woman means biological female' it's just more SNP bullshit.

This is rhy the High Court case by Wings over Scotland is so necessary. One way or another, it will settle this point of law.

Zero reverse

Never forget how vigorously they opposed Lamont's 6 word amendment until the optics got too bad.

And this is why I couldn't vote for them.
Well, there were other reasons, but this was the main one.

Time to stop asking them 'what is a woman', they have the wiggling and squirming pinned down for that now, along with the sniffy 'well NICE GROWN UP people don't ask that question....' as if you're being a difficult five year old.

Time to start being direct about 'do you accept that creating and fudging about a mixed biological sex definition of 'woman' and 'female' has been proven now to benefit the access and self actualisation of male people at the expense of actual harm to females? Like for example the report of the ERC?'

And

'Do you understand that you are using a binary sexed basis to privilege men's interests, wishes and identities over women's equality and basic human rights? How is this not just fundamentally discrimination against women?'

It really is time to get a lot blunter. The fudging is all about protecting men from having to grant women equality of consideration and resources while still making it sound justifiable. It is perfectly possible to meet the needs of men of all identities without removing resources, access and equality for women. As in Sarah's example: the men involved would have lost absolutely nothing by a separate provision offered that was female only: they had three existing groups all for them, with all the focus and all the special care. It was purely the insult of something existing that said men weren't that sort of woman. And men feeling that was held as worse than a raped woman going without any care at all.

Are women equal humans to men or not?

What High Court case? Do you mean the one from For Women Scotland?

Your credit them with the intelligence and the empathy to understand the harm they are doing. If they had that intelligent and empathy you would not need to ask them those questions.

A rapist claiming to be a woman is as much a woman as he is a considerate and respectful lover.

That one, yes. <facepalm>.
Sorry - texting in between family demands.