Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Another victory! For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers in prisons case

198 replies

TheNoWord · Yesterday 12:04

It’s just been on the news in Scotland. More to follow….

OP posts:
Thread gallery
31
OP posts:
OP posts:
borntobequiet · Yesterday 12:07

Great news!

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · Yesterday 12:10

Let me guess, that's something else the SNP will be handling 'domestically'.
It's great news though, another clear and unequivocal statement from the courts. 😁👏👍

SwirlyGates · Yesterday 12:11

That's brilliant, thanks for the heads up.

(Bloody moronic government though, we shouldn't have to waste time, effort and money on such obviously stupid things.)

OP posts:
ItsCoolForCats · Yesterday 12:13

Amazing news. Thank you FWS 👏🏻 I'm wondering when this judgement would be out. Thanks OP

Igmum · Yesterday 12:14

Brilliant news and well done FWS! The impact those three women have had is incredible and I am very grateful for all of their work.

SwirlyGates · Yesterday 12:18

I haven't read it all, but here are a few quotes:

Insofar as the Prisons Guidance allows SPS to accommodate trans prisoners in
prisons for the opposite biological sex, it is in conflict with the requirement that prison accommodation be provided separately for men and women. That constitutes a mis-statement of the law.

There is no positive obligation, in general terms, based on Article 2 or Article 3, to accommodate a trans prisoner in a prison for the opposite biological sex.

It is possible that, in an exceptional individual case, in a situation where there is a threat to life through suicide, it may be necessary to consider an argument that accommodation in a prison for the opposite biological sex is necessary and that rule 126 should be disapplied. Whether that could be achieved compatibly with the requirements of the EA 2010 cannot be determined in the abstract.

(Does that mean that if the TiM threatens suicide they may get placed in the women's prison?)

In all the circumstances, the Prisons Guidance is unlawful and the petitioner is
entitled to orders for declarator and reduction.

Yay.

sohard · Yesterday 12:18

Amazing news!!!

Columbidae · Yesterday 12:26

Thank you! Although it's frustrating that they allow any chink in the armour to be possibly exploited. Just like the judge in the High court case musing over 'trans-inclusive' female toilets which has been latched on to.

CassOle · Yesterday 12:28

'However, the law recognises the necessity for clear rules which are not subject to a case-by-case analysis in their application.'

The 'case-by-case argument' has imploded. 'Article 8 rights' hasn't fared well either.

Another victory! For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers in prisons case
Another victory! For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers in prisons case
Another victory! For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers in prisons case
Another victory! For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers in prisons case
Another victory! For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers in prisons case
lcakethereforeIam · Yesterday 12:33

Brilliant.

Cantunseeit · Yesterday 12:34

Amazing! Another blow for reality and sanity. Thank goodness

ETA I have the fear that I’ve made up the “blow for” phrase and it looks like I’m saying this is bad news. For avoidance of any doubt this is v v v good news

IrnBruAndDietCoke · Yesterday 12:39

It is possible that, in an exceptional individual case, in a situation where there is a threat to life through suicide, it may be necessary to consider an argument that accommodation in a prison for the opposite biological sex is necessary and that rule 126 should be disapplied. Whether that could be achieved compatibly with the requirements of the EA 2010 cannot be determined in the abstract.

There’s a loophole here. They’ll all just start ‘attempting’ suicide. They’re very committed to this schtick.

Ereshkigalangcleg · Yesterday 12:45

Great news, though like pp I’m concerned at the idea that it should be ever considered that men should be accommodated in the female estate.

lcakethereforeIam · Yesterday 12:50

The 'suicide' is a stupid loophole, why just blokes who claim to be women and not any other man who attempts suicide.

CassOle · Yesterday 12:52

'Whether that could be achieved compatibly with the requirements of the EA 2010 cannot be determined in the abstract.'

The answer is 'No. It is not compatible with the EA2010'.

poodlemum01 · Yesterday 12:58

what does Q Man-I-Am have to say?

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · Yesterday 12:59

Apparently:

"They're going to win all of these until the law is changed."

So thats nice.

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1u9z4j6/for_women_scotland_iii/

334bu · Yesterday 13:00

Well done FWS.

MelOfTheRoses · Yesterday 13:11

CassOle · Yesterday 12:28

'However, the law recognises the necessity for clear rules which are not subject to a case-by-case analysis in their application.'

The 'case-by-case argument' has imploded. 'Article 8 rights' hasn't fared well either.

Thank goodness 🙏

MyrtleLion · Yesterday 13:12

I’m pleased we keep winning. But we shouldn’t have to go to court in the first place.