The Gender Debate

[RH33]

I tore my mother a new one last night, she was like oh 16 too young. I asked her if she'd therefore stop people going to fight with the army and why would she be against people who have probably suffered for years changing a piece of paper.  Doubt she's changed her mind but she had no argument.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

14 minutes ago, RH33 said:

I tore my mother a new one last night, she was like oh 16 too young. I asked her if she'd therefore stop people going to fight with the army and why would she be against people who have probably suffered for years changing a piece of paper.  Doubt she's changed her mind but she had no argument.

You never will. People have those prejudices ingrained. They're the same folk you'll gurning about "WHAT ABOUT A STRAIGHT PRIDE DAY" in the comments sections of the papers. There's zero point in debating the matter. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

27 minutes ago, Benjamin_Nevis said:

You never will. People have those prejudices ingrained. They're the same folk you'll gurning about "WHAT ABOUT A STRAIGHT PRIDE DAY" in the comments sections of the papers. There's zero point in debating the matter. 

Many of the arguments are the same when homosexuality was decriminalised - it is quite simply bigotry.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

14 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Many of the arguments are the same when homosexuality was decriminalised - it is quite simply bigotry.

The good old British tradition of punching down on those who are either poor, marginalised, "different" or combinations thereof. 

[sparky88]

29 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Many of the arguments are the same when homosexuality was decriminalised - it is quite simply bigotry.

Every so often, someone will post a homophobic article from the 1990s written by Piers Morgan on his Twitter.  He's apologised profusely for writing stuff like that and feels able to pontificate about supporting gay rights as a result.

This is exactly the situation the loudest critics of trans rights will find themselves in in a few years. 

[scottsdad]

7 hours ago, Benjamin_Nevis said:

You never will. People have those prejudices ingrained. They're the same folk you'll gurning about "WHAT ABOUT A STRAIGHT PRIDE DAY" in the comments sections of the papers. There's zero point in debating the matter. 

I don't know about people not changing their attitudes. My dad and I argued about Section 28 years ago, him wanting to keep it and me wanting it gone. In the years since he really has mellowed out - I think when he was growing up, gay people were weird and amoral things to be avoided. It was the prevailing opinion at the time (he is almost 80). 

Now he has a completely different attitude. Getting to know a handful of gay people has helped break down these barriers. Having a gay nephew and grandchild also did. Years of societal education that gay=weird have finally gone. They're just...people. 

Took years but it can be done. And hopefully new generations won't be so blinkered. 

[Trogdor]

You can't possibly hope to build a consenus when you accuse the other side of being bigots. 

There is so much misinformation swirling around the GRA its untrue. From both sides of the debate.

I thought Stephen Flynn was pretty good on R4 this morning. He backed the GRA fully but was clear that more needed to be done to reassure the public especially with regards to concerns around those allegedly gaming the system (like Bryson).

This is sensible and exactly what the SG needs to do. Not enough effort has been put into bringing the electorate with them, the principle of making it easier for a trans person to get a GRC should have near universal support. It's the conflation with single sex spaces which is causing the issue. However, single sex spaces is an issue that actually needs addressed as well. You aren't a bigot for suggesting such.

As an aside, I see there is some suggestion the Scottish Government is going to drop the legal challenge to the UK Government's section 35 order. It was the Holyrood Magazine editor, Mandy something or other which is why it caught my eye. It wasn't the usual London based press. I don't know where that would leave us.

[Ginaro]

17 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

I don't know where that would leave us.

Waiting for a change of UK government?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

59 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

You can't possibly hope to build a consenus when you accuse the other side of being bigots. 

There is so much misinformation swirling around the GRA its untrue. From both sides of the debate.

I thought Stephen Flynn was pretty good on R4 this morning. He backed the GRA fully but was clear that more needed to be done to reassure the public especially with regards to concerns around those allegedly gaming the system (like Bryson).

This is sensible and exactly what the SG needs to do. Not enough effort has been put into bringing the electorate with them, the principle of making it easier for a trans person to get a GRC should have near universal support. It's the conflation with single sex spaces which is causing the issue. However, single sex spaces is an issue that actually needs addressed as well. You aren't a bigot for suggesting such.

As an aside, I see there is some suggestion the Scottish Government is going to drop the legal challenge to the UK Government's section 35 order. It was the Holyrood Magazine editor, Mandy something or other which is why it caught my eye. It wasn't the usual London based press. I don't know where that would leave us.

I said some of the arguments - as if a fucking rapist needs a bit of paper to rape - the more ludicrous claims need called out.

Btw - the loudest and emptiest vessels on the issue are bigots - I have no doubt.

Edited February 16, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh

[alan862]

7 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

I said some of the arguments - as if a fucking rapist needs a bit of paper to rape - the more ludicrous claims need called out.

Btw - the loudest and emptiest vessels on the issue are bigots - I have no doubt.

WOuld you be as vocal a supporter of this if it wasn't SNP pushing this? IF this was labour for example who came up with this would you be as supportive?

[Trogdor]

9 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

I said some of the arguments - as if a fucking rapist needs a bit of paper to rape - the more ludicrous claims need called out.

Btw - the loudest and emptiest vessels on the issue are bigots - I have no doubt.

I wasn't referring to you in particular. More the standard of debate generally.

The wings over scotland man definitely falls into that category for sure. 

Edited February 16, 2023 by Trogdor

[DeeTillEhDeh]

36 minutes ago, alan862 said:

WOuld you be as vocal a supporter of this if it wasn't SNP pushing this? IF this was labour for example who came up with this would you be as supportive?

Every Lib Dem backed the bill and Labour whipped their MSPs to vote for the Bill - as did 3 Tories.  This is ultimately the Scottish Parliament's bill.

And personally I couldn't give a flyng f**k who introduced it - it was the right thing to do.

[alan862]

Just now, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Every Lib Dem backed the bill and Labour whipped their MSPs to vote for the Bill - as did 3 Tories.  This is ultimately the Scottish Parliament's bill.

And personally I couldn't give a flyng f**k who introduced it - it was the right thing to do.

Disagree if im allowed too. WE needed to modernise it but the bill isn't right.

 

Still not convicing me you would be getting excited about it if it wasnt an SNP proposition.

[Jeff Venom]

5 minutes ago, alan862 said:

Disagree if im allowed too. WE needed to modernise it but the bill isn't right.

 

Still not convicing me you would be getting excited about it if it wasnt an SNP proposition.

How would you have modernised it?

[alan862]

Just now, Jeff Venom said:

How would you have modernised it?

well we did need to make a bit easier but I don't agree with the 3 months thing and it being ok at 16.

[Jeff Venom]

Just now, alan862 said:

well we did need to make a bit easier but I don't agree with the 3 months thing and it being ok at 16.

Ok. Why not at 16? 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

17 minutes ago, alan862 said:

Disagree if im allowed too. WE needed to modernise it but the bill isn't right.

 

Still not convicing me you would be getting excited about it if it wasnt an SNP proposition.

You clearly don't know me.

I didn't vote Yes in 2014 and backed Labour until 2016. When I lived in London I voted Lib Dem .  I'm not a member of any political party as I left the SNP last year over vaccine passports.

Sometimes doing the right thing is the right thing and not listening to ill-informed and disingenuous bullshit.

Edited February 16, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh

[alan862]

Just now, DeeTillEhDeh said:

You clearly don't know me.

I didn't vote Yes in 2014 and backed Labour until 2016. When I lived in London I voted Lib Dem .  I'm notva member if any political party as I kept the SNP last year over vaccine passports.

Sometimes doing the right thing is the right thing and not listening to ill-informed and disingenuous bullshit.

You don't come across that way

[alan862]

4 minutes ago, Jeff Venom said:

Ok. Why not at 16? 

its a massive life change. I know when I was 16 I wasn;t ready for making such a life changing decision neither was anyone I know.  18 is a more realistic age people do a lot of stupid mistakes.

 

It has to be the right thing for that person.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

29 minutes ago, alan862 said:

its a massive life change. I know when I was 16 I wasn;t ready for making such a life changing decision neither was anyone I know.  18 is a more realistic age people do a lot of stupid mistakes.

 

It has to be the right thing for that person.

At 16 you can join the army or get married.

Both can end disastrously . . .

 

Edited February 16, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh