The Gender Debate

[Bully Wee Villa]

A woman is someone who identifies as a woman. A man is someone who identifies as a man.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

1 minute ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I accept your point but if the individual has not yet received a GRC certificate then surely the individual must be classed as male bearing in mind that the individual still has male genitalia and male sex chromosomes.

Guidance would be appreciated.

Fair fucks for trying to out-creep all your previous contributions with this effort. 

[MrWorldwideJr]

Always wild seeing the bigots on this thread having to pretend to be incredibly thick in order to keep their 'pronouns are impossibly hard' grift going.

[carpetmonster]

23 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Not to mention that the ex-governor has an axe to grind - her opinion needs to ge taken with a large shovel of salt.

Yeah, she’s partnered up with Rowling and Joanna Cherry for the proposed trans-exclusionary rape center in Edinburgh. I’d be very surprised if that ever saw the light of day; I’m fairly convinced it’s a stunt, but in the meantime gender criticals have previously caused the Rape Crisis Center there to have to have locked doors because they very much object to the CEO, Mridul Wadhwa being a trans woman. 
 

 

[Leith Green]

2 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I accept your point but if the individual has not yet received a GRC certificate then surely the individual must be classed as male bearing in mind that the individual still has male genitalia and male sex chromosomes.

Guidance would be appreciated.

You dont need a GRC to specify what you are called or your pronouns. 

Back when I was a corporate whore, I had an asian guy in my team whos name didnt make it clear what his gender was.

He used to add (Mr) in brackets after his name, and that was waaay back before I had ever heard of trans people. 

The guidance, therefore is - if someone tells you what they should be called, use it.

Its basic manners if nothing else.

[carpetmonster]

7 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I accept your point but if the individual has not yet received a GRC certificate then surely the individual must be classed as male bearing in mind that the individual still has male genitalia and male sex chromosomes.

Guidance would be appreciated.

Reading the Equality Act 2010 is all the guidance you need. 

[carpetmonster]

6 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

You dont need a GRC to specify what you are called or your pronouns. 

Back when I was a corporate whore, I had an asian guy in my team whos name didnt make it clear what his gender was.

He used to add (Mr) in brackets after his name, and that was waaay back before I had ever heard of trans people. 

The guidance, therefore is - if someone tells you what they should be called, use it.

Its basic manners if nothing else.

I work remotely with folks from all round the world and Slack messaging is the preferred means of comms over video calls. If I get new team mates called Robin, Alex and Charlie, I do appreciate a he/him or she/her. 
 

ETA - and my boss is Ashley, but he’s English so even tho he’s a cis bloke he’s still a big girl.

Edited January 27, 2023 by carpetmonster

[HTG]

4 hours ago, 1320Lichtie said:

Isla Bryson really did come along at the right time didn't she.... making Sturgeon look like complete fanny who's all over the place (shock). Why shouldn't she be going to a woman's jail she's a trans woman and trans woman are woman!!!!! Isla said so herself. Sturgeon must be a TERF or a Transphobe? It must be the only explanation, surely?!

The fact that this is happening and has already happened with other people in Scotland is a total farce without even thinking about this GRR bill. Things should be getting dialled way back not getting even crazier and making it easier for people like that. 

People can do what they want and live their lives how they please but when that starts infringing on the rights of other people, especially the people who are truly the most vulnerable then they can take a step back and f**k right off. Keep men out of woman's and little girls toilets and changing rooms and out of women's sports and prisons. 

Making it easier for absolutely anyone to access these spaces and get a free pass based off what they ID as is fucking mental and anything but the progressive cause a tiny loud small minority of people seem to think it is. 

People can shout about it on places like here (mainly fully grown men by the way, so weird) and twitter and abuse anyone who disagrees all they want but thank f**k there seems to be some sensible people in the room at the places that matter and this shite has rightly been called out for what it is. 

What a hill to die on 

 

2 hours ago, approximately dave said:

Wow, what a horrific thing to say. Bryson is a rapist not a convenient opportunity along at the right time to make Sturgeon look silly.

You do realise there were victims who's lives have been ruined because of Bryson?

 

2 hours ago, Honest Saints Fan said:

People keep saying they are protecting women's rights. As a woman I have absolutely no issue with those who have changed their gender wanting to access toilets or whatever space they feel is appropriate to them. Sexual predators can get into these spaces no matter what. 

In regards to Isla Bryson, she has been risk assessed and deemed to not be suitable to be in a female prison. This has absolutely nothing to do with the bill that was passed in Parliament. Like all prisoners are risk assessed and moved to the most appropriate place for them and their fellow prisoners.

 

2 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

She, and the Justice Secretary initially said they would leave the decision to the SPS who sent him to Cornton Vale despite ministers having the power to overrule the SPS. Only when there was a great eruption from the public was it decided to remove him from there. She refused to admit that he was actually still in Cornton Vale yesterday.

 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

What the anti-GRR clowns don't get is that rapists aren't going to bother to get a bit of paper to rape - they will rape no matter what.

 

The fake concern for women and children is to cover up their own bigotry.

Edited January 27, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh

[Boo Khaki]

13 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

Yeah, she’s partnered up with Rowling and Joanna Cherry for the proposed trans-exclusionary rape center in Edinburgh. I’d be very surprised if that ever saw the light of day; I’m fairly convinced it’s a stunt, but in the meantime gender criticals have previously caused the Rape Crisis Center there to have to have locked doors because they very much object to the CEO, Mridul Wadhwa being a trans woman. 
 

 

I think this stinks of a 'bring it on' in the hope a transwoman will launch a legal complaint about being denied access to their service. First of all, that won't get off the ground because without being funded by a commissioning body who stipulates precisely who they should be providing the service to, there is nothing at all that mandates they must provide service to any transperson who requests it. Good luck proving you were denied service purely because of your trans status and not one of a myriad of sundry other perfectly plausible reasons.

Where I believe it might come back to bite them on the arse is the fact they are promoting themselves as an 'advocacy' service. Every single legitimate independent advocacy service in Scotland works under the auspices and oversight of the Advocacy Alliance, but because they are not centrally funded the AA will not touch them with a bargepole. All this would take is one single instance of a service user winning a case on the back of a claim that they were assisted on a path of action that did them harm, and the whole thing will crumple because of that total lack of outside scrutiny. It's basically a "rogue" service with absolutely no accountability or credibility outside of their own walls, and I would advise anyone thinking of using it to be very, very cautious.

[Mr Waldo]

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I accept your point but if the individual has not yet received a GRC certificate then surely the individual must be classed as male bearing in mind that the individual still has male genitalia and male sex chromosomes.

Guidance would be appreciated.

7Gender reassignment

(1)A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.

Strangely enough, it is counted as a male crime against a woman.

[Billy Jean King]

2 hours ago, Leith Green said:

You dont need a GRC to specify what you are called or your pronouns. 

Back when I was a corporate whore, I had an asian guy in my team whos name didnt make it clear what his gender was.

He used to add (Mr) in brackets after his name, and that was waaay back before I had ever heard of trans people. 

The guidance, therefore is - if someone tells you what they should be called, use it.

Its basic manners if nothing else.

Our template corporate signature has pronouns as standard and has had since the removal of titles about 3 years ago. You see as many digital sigs with a pronoun listing nowadays as without.

[Mark Connolly]

3 hours ago, Jambomo said:

I might sound like a broken record on here as I have said this before but I hate that these people claim to be speaking for all women. I totally agree with what you have said here.

No, you don't.

Like all genders, faiths, and races, you think what the white male Tories want you to think

[Boo Khaki]

Said it before, but it bears repeating - I find it hilariously ironic that the GC groups name themselves 'Let Women Speak', 'Standing Up For Women', and 'Women won't Wheesht', when their members immediately screech at any woman with the temerity to express a contrary view to sit down, shut up, and wheesht.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Boo Khaki

[parsforlife]

4 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I accept your point but if the individual has not yet received a GRC certificate then surely the individual must be classed as male bearing in mind that the individual still has male genitalia and male sex chromosomes.

Guidance would be appreciated.

Here's some quick guidance for you. STFU.

[101]

I saw today the comparison of sexual assaults.

5 sexual assaults were committed by Trans people in women's prisons between 2010-20.

11 trans people were sexually assaulted in men's prisons in 2019.

I'm not holding my breath for the Tories and their followers to stand up against men rather than just pursuing a vulnerable group in the name of a culture war.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

Do the Tories believe that Adam Graham transitioned to become a woman just so he could be sent to a woman’s jail and rape more women?

The situation is a mess and has been handled very poorly by the SNP.

[TxRover]

5 hours ago, Benjamin_Nevis said:

Jesus christ. You're actually creaming yourself because you think a rapist has crashed and burned the GRA reforms. 

Where do you stand on predatory males' parents plying girls with drink so they are vulnerable to a barely consensual shag later on btw? 

Pretty sure that depends on their pronouns and party affiliation.

6 hours ago, J_Stewart said:

Americans and Tories are especially great at this while pointing to some level of degradation that currently exists under their exact reality and bemoaning how it's "exactly what communism / Corbyn in charge" would look like. Honestly, the stupidity makes me laugh every time.

Preface Americans with Rethuglican and you’re not wrong. The reality is a little better over here, but I suspect we’re about to see a few witch trials or such in Florida before this stupidity works it’s way through the system.

[vikingTON]

Quote

However Sturgeon also stressed that it was important “that we do not even inadvertently suggest that somehow trans women pose an inherent threat to women”. She added: “Predatory men, as has always been the case, are the risk to women.”

While the first part of Sturgeon's statement is undoubtedly true, that last sentence is deeply problematic. Leaving aside the reality of women sexually abusing other women, by genderising the threat you create a contradiction between self-ID principle and protection from harm. After all, if it is predatory men who are the risk to women, then surely anyone who has completed their transition to a female gender no longer represents that threat? 

This is of course a highly isolated and politicised case. But a government - far less the organisations that will have to act on laws -  cannot simply espouse the self-ID principle when it suits them and ditch it when it is inconvenient to do so. Some of the claims that it was merely an 'opportunistic' or insincere request by the vile criminal in question to change their gender is wild to peddle, without having overwhelming evidence to support it. 

Edited January 27, 2023 by vikingTON

[Boo Khaki]

38 minutes ago, virginton said:

While the first part of Sturgeon's statement is undoubtedly true, that last sentence is deeply problematic. Leaving aside the reality of women sexually abusing other women, by genderising the threat you create a contradiction between self-ID principle and protection from harm. After all, if it is predatory men who are the risk to women, then surely anyone who has completed their transition to a female gender no longer represents that threat? 

This is of course a highly isolated and politicised case. But a government - far less the organisations that will have to act on laws -  cannot simply espouse the self-ID principle when it suits them and ditch it when it is inconvenient to do so. Some of the claims that it was merely an 'opportunistic' or insincere request by the vile criminal in question to change their gender is wild to peddle, without having overwhelming evidence to support it. 

Essentially they can do exactly that, as the EA 2010 contains provisions for ignoring self-ID and excluding people on the basis of natal sex where and when it's necessary and reasonable. This is why, even under current legislation, I believe prisons would be perfectly legally able to rule that fully transitioned people who have committed sex offences, even those with ownership of a GRC, can be held in prisons of their own birth sex if it's believed they pose a risk to persons of the opposite sex. They are not just self-ID'ing, but legally someone of their acquired gender, and even then the exception can still be applied.

'Self-ID' was only ever intended to normalise situations whereby someone might want to use facilities normally associated with people of their acquired gender, but where there is no actual law that prevents this in any case, so using public toilets that match with your 'lived' gender etc. Contrary to what many people believe, there is absolutely no law that prevents anyone of any birth sex using any loo they like, it's merely social convention.