The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The rights of women

Posted on March 08, 2019 by

Today is International Women’s Day, and we wouldn’t normally pay much attention to that fact because this is a Scottish politics website, not a feminist one. But the Scottish Government is currently putting itself at odds with women in a way it would have been hard to imagine when Nicola Sturgeon became First Minister, and since what Wings does specialise in is hard data – and at the request of a lot of women – we thought it was worth putting some solid numbers on a few things in our latest poll.

There wasn’t much ambiguity about them.

Some of the most celebrated female sportswomen of all time – including nine times Wimbledon winner Martina Navratilova (a gay woman and campaigner who employed a transgender coach) and double Olympic gold medallist Dame Kelly Holmes – have recently been subjected to appalling abuse and intimidation over their opposition to biological males competing in professional women’s sport.

In our poll, Scottish women overwhelmingly backed Navratilova and Holmes’ position, with fewer than one in six agreeing that transwomen should be allowed to compete against biological women. The view crossed party lines, with voters of all persuasions comprehensively opposed – even Lib Dems, who were the most inclined to let men compete against women, were almost 2:1 against, with SNP voters at more than 3:1 against and Labour supporters at almost 4:1 against.

Scottish women are fiercely against the idea that being a woman is a mere state of mind. Once again, less than one in six backed the Scottish Government’s proposals for “self-ID”, by which people could legally change their sex simply by declaring that they felt themselves to be male or female.

Interestingly, however, only 27% of women felt that people changing sex was totally impossible. A majority agreed that someone who underwent surgery to outwardly match their gender identity should be considered to have adopted their preferred sex.

We can only speculate as to the reasons, but it doesn’t seem a wildly outlandish guess to suggest that men who’ve had surgery to remove/alter their genitalia are more likely to be accepted by biological women because they no longer present a threat of rape.

None of this appears to carry much weight with the Scottish Government, which appears determined to push ahead with self-ID despite the massive public opposition. So far only a solitary SNP MSP has stuck her head above the trans parapet – Joan McAlpine, who posted a thread last week on the subject of the 2021 census which prompted an outpouring of pent-up relief and appreciation from thousands of women.

But while this site can testify that her views are privately shared by many more women M/SPs, others are too scared of abusive and violently threatening trans extremists of the sort who attacked Navratilova and Holmes to say so in public. And perhaps as a result, Scots are much more confused about the meanings of sex and gender.

This is somewhat ironic, as the fact that sex and gender are entirely different things is just about all that the two sides of the debate agree on. (Indeed, the word “gender” is now effectively meaningless as nobody can agree on a definition of it. Estimates of how many genders there are range from two to over 70.)

But what IS absolutely clear from these results is that as far as Scottish women (and Scottish men too) are concerned, if you’ve got a penis you’re definitely out of the club.

It remains to be seen whether the SNP leadership will press ahead and alienate a huge swathe of its own female voters at a time when it’s already under pressure over a number of unpopular policy choices and facing the loss of the pro-independence majority at Holyrood, but such is the current death-grip of identity politics on any sort of scientific reality or public opinion that nothing can be ruled out.

So have a happy International Women’s Day, everyone, and look forward to Scotland’s first ever participation in the Women’s World Cup this summer. It might be one of your last chances to see women’s sporting titles actually being won by women.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 08 03 19 11:56

      The rights of women | speymouth

    214 to “The rights of women”

    1. George Gordon says:

      I note that Nicola Sturgeon retweeted Laura Bicker’s tweet about the Mash Report thing.
      I think she’s smart enough to know what #clitterati means.

    2. Dr Jim says:

      You’ve done it now Rev, down this road lies the madness of self identification, self sexual preference, self worth, self help, self self self self madness of importance that you can’t keep up with without offending faux or otherwise everybody who considers themselves more self than somebody else’s self

      I for one am offended at this offence

    3. handclapping says:

      That has got to be transphobic. You never even used “spectrum” once

    4. Albaman says:

      Count me out of this discussion Rev,
      I’m too old to be bothered !.

    5. CameronB Brodie says:

      This has something to do with science, yes?

      @Scottish government.
      You are adopting a radical stance that will undermine the social position of women and the normative value of human rights. Stop this anti-scientific madness now!

      Sex, Gender, and Epistemology

      Abstract

      It has been argued by Buss (1975) and others that psychology as a discipline tends to alternate between two basic paradigms explaining the relationship between humans and their environment. These two basic conceptual paradigms are: (1) reality constructs the person, and (2) the person constructs reality. Paradigm (1) postulates a model of a reality that is stable, irreversible, and deterministic.

      It further postulates that this reality is discoverable through the proper application of scientific methodology and that individual differences are a result of the impingement of that reality on the developing organism. This deep structure underlies such diverse schools of thought as behaviorism, psychoanalysis, and sociobiology. These theoretical frameworks do not question that reality exists. They differ merely on the aspects of reality they stress as having the most impact on individual behavior.

      Keywords
      Social Reality Social Constructionist Physical Attractiveness Experimental Social Psychology Feminist Scholar

      https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4612-3588-0_2

      On cultural transformations of sexuality and gender in recent decades
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2703209/

      An epistemology of gender or gender as a tool of analysis
      http://archeologia.women.it/user/quarta/workshops/re-figuring3/szapuova.htm

    6. SilverDarling says:

      Thank you for asking these questions and at last some rebuttal to the idea that the SNP woke brigade are in tune with the electorate on this issue.

      No doubt it will be interpreted by some that we need ‘educating’ and the SNP know best – a notion that pervades many topics here.

      On this, the promoted view on social media and from the SNP is simply wrong and dangerously so, dangerous for the women they claim to represent and dangerous for their own prospects of being re-elected. it is a strange hill to die on.

    7. Socrates MacSporran says:

      I don’t get all this trans stuff. Down here in darkest Ayrshire the way you tell the men from the women is: the women take their pipes out of their mouths to spit. And they wear white crimplene outfits with lacy hats, rather than dark suits, brown brogues and bowler hats, during the Marching Saason. Simples.

    8. Capella says:

      Identity politics is another American import. It diverts people from thinking about and acting on real politics and funnels us down a futile pathway to political oblivion.

      Let’s curtail this dead end asap. I’m with Joan McAlpine. I have already completed a response to the consultation and hope the issue can be settled by protecting women’s rights to privacy and equality.

      Obviously, an education effort is required on basic biology, given the confusion evident in the response to your poll. Well done on including the question BTW. A bold move.

      By “real politics” I mean the fight for self-determination in Scotland.

    9. starlaw says:

      Im puzzled by this one, does it mean that any wee boy at a secondary school can decide he is now female and is entitled to use the girls changing room, If this is the case I expect the murder rate to rise.

    10. Athanasius says:

      The whole “identity” thing just poisons everything.

    11. CameronB Brodie says:

      It is profoundly anti-science to conflate sex with gender. To do so is an act of unvarnished totalitarian misogyny.

      Conceptions of Sex Equality and Human Biology in Modem Political Theory

      Abstract

      The theme of human biology recurs continually both in feminist and in anti-ferminist literature. Reflection on human biology has seemed to promise answers to the urgent questions of why women everywhere are subordinated and whether and how that subordination can be ended. Invariably, anti-feminists have justified women’s subordination in terms of perceived biological differences between the sexes, and feminists have responded to their claims in a variety of ways. In this paper, I want to look critically at the ways in which feminists in the liberal and Marxist traditions have responded to the biologically based challenges of anti-feminism, and to suggest an alternative way of conceptualising the relation between human biology and the social status of women.

      Keywords
      Analytic Philosophy Conference Proceedings Continental Philosophy History of Philosophy Gender Equity Human Biology

      https://philpapers.org/rec/JAGCOS

    12. CameronB Brodie says:

      @Scottish government.
      Are you being advised by HMG civil servants or Stonewall UK, as you appear determined to undermine Scottish democracy?

      They Know it When They See it: The UK Gender Recognition Act 2004

      Abstract

      This article is a critical feminist analysis of the UK Gender Recognition Act of 2004. This Act is radical in enabling transgenders to gain certificates recognising their new ‘acquired gender’ without undergoing hormonal or surgical treatment. The Act has considerable implications for marriage, for motherhood and fatherhood, for women who are the partners of men or women who ‘transition’ and for ‘women-only’ spaces. It is based on confusing and contradictory notions of the difference between sex and gender. As such it should be of great interest to feminists but there has been a dearth of feminist commentary. The understandings of sex and gender and of the importance of the Act will be explored here through analysis of the parliamentary debates and public responses.

      Keywords feminism, transsexualism, transgenderism, women

      https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-856x.2007.00293.x

    13. Jim says:

      Maybe we should have cisgender or terf sports, that will confuse the transexuals.

    14. Suzanne K says:

      Starlaw, yes that’s exactly what it means. It’s already happening and the Trans Alliance advice to the SG includes not informing the parents if they’re considered ‘unsupportive’.

      The reason so many folk are confused by the Sex/Gender question is that many establishments including the SG, schools etc have replaced the sex question on official forms with gender, whilst still asking ‘Male or Female’. It’s an insidious creep of language reformatting.

    15. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Sex, Gender, and Epistemology”

      What all normal people just read: ARGLE BARGLE WARGLE FLARGLE.

    16. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Im puzzled by this one, does it mean that any wee boy at a secondary school can decide he is now female and is entitled to use the girls changing room”

      Yes it does mean that, and is already happening in many schools.

    17. Jim says:

      So what is there now to stop a pedophile identifying as a ten year old?

    18. CameronB Brodie says:

      “What all normal people just read: ARGLE BARGLE WARGLE FLARGLE.”

      I can’t help it if this subject needs de-mystifying.

      Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science
      https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-epistemology/

    19. Sarah says:

      Capella at 11.23 refers to a consultation by Scot Gov but it is no longer on the Holyrood website as a current consultation.

      I will email my MSPs about it in case a vote is in the offing. I feel sorry for Joan McAlpine all on her own standing up for truth.

      A petition to Holyrood is an option?

    20. Jim says:

      It’s coming across as a huge social experiment where the truth is whatever they say it is.

    21. winifred mccartney says:

      This is political correctness gone mad and if it continues it will mean the end of womens sport.

      It is the sex you are at puberty that is the determinant in your body, male puberty will mean a bigger heart, bigger lungs and longer bones. No matter what you do about testosterone levels this can never be changed and so we have the ridiculous cycling in Norway where a transgender female much taller than the women has won the race and a recent picture of a netball team with a transgender female head and shoulders above the rest.

      It would appear now that in order for transgender women to have rights other women must lose their rights eg to a private womens only changing room or toilets etc If as a women you object to transgender women in women only spaces you are the one to be moved and found to be in the wrong. This must be stopped because as usual women are the ones who will be failed.

    22. Martin says:

      I’m all for treating everyone with respect and dignity. However, we’re really at risk of defining women out of existence here and anyone with even the basest of understandings around endocrinology could tell you that the testosterone levels of a 25 year old transwoman are irrelevant in comparison to the 10 years of muacle and skeleton development with normal male levels. The inclusion of transwomen in women’s sport is one of those idealogical things that seems to make sense ubtil the reality (mediocre male sportsmen find an easy route to success) hits. Women need to be given their own space for sport. And actually physical spaces too. Eff this, men have been giving women a raw deal for centuries, our turn to step up.

    23. HandandShrimp says:

      We spent years testing East German athletes for testosterone because it was deemed cheating. I’m not sure much has changed. Why not have a third category of competition.

      Also, anyone one who threatens a lesbian, feminist ora biological woman with their dick is a dick full stop.

    24. galamcennalath says:

      Suddenly, well suddenly for me, this whole issue has appeared from not where.

      For decades people have felt they were different and underwent difficult and lengthy sexual transitions. I have to admire their bravery.

      However now we seem to be seeing something quite different. I smell the shite of agendas here. Some of it no doubt driven by the far right (especially with the US religious types). Plus some ‘men’ pushing things too far. Is it all designed as a distraction from the many other challenges?

    25. Airchie says:

      Could this not be resolved (from a sports POV) by drug testing? Trans women will still generate a lot of testosterone which can be measured and a threshold set.

    26. mike cassidy says:

      I presume on such a day this will come up on BBC’s Any Questions tonight.

      Madras College at 6.45pm

      Radio Four at 8.00pm

      Panel: Kirsty Blackman, Lord Forsyth, Hilary Benn, Merryn Somerset Webb (me neither)

      Surely Billy Mitchell will be there ranting on about how its all the SNP’s fault we have genitalia!

    27. Jim says:

      Not to mention the severe risk Women are put at by some rapey bugger that claims he’s a Woman but wants to keep his sexual organs intact, you know, the ones that claim they are lesbians with a lady cock.

      The world is fucked.

    28. Capella says:

      @ Sarah – the consultation was months ago, can’t remember when. Possibly c Sep 2018. A women’s campaign group circulated a sample response and all I had to do was endorse it. Will look for a reference and post back if I find it.

    29. Jim says:

      @ Airchie

      It’s not just about the testosterone levels though, it also about the physical advantages of growing up as a male, skeletal, muscular and organ.

    30. CameronB Brodie says:

      Epistemology = the science of how we understand the world

      Sexual epistemology = the lived experience of the biological being

      Gender as an ‘Interplay of Rules’: Detecting Epistemic Interplay of Medical and Legal Discourse with Sex and Gender Classification in Four Editions of the Dewey Decimal Classification
      dc.uwm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1877&context=etd

      GENDER AND FEMINISMS: THEORETICAL-EPISTEMOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODOLOGICAL IMPACT
      http://www.scielo.br/pdf/psoc/v25nspe/03.pdf

      Ontological Commitments, Sex and Gender
      https://philpapers.org/rec/MIKOCS

    31. mike cassidy says:

      And the ultimate irony of all this.

      The South African athlete Castor Semenya is finding it hard to prove she is NOT a man taking part in women’s races.

      If she simply said she was a man identifying as a woman

      She would have no problem at all.

    32. heraldnomore says:

      I was involved in discussions, many, many years ago, on the question of eligibility for the married man’s income tax allowance (long since gone). There had been a sex change, rare in those days, male to female, though the couple continued to live together.

      The ruling came back that sex was established at birth, and thus the claimant continued to be entitled to the allowance, living as she was with her wife.

    33. David Smith says:

      Sorry.

      If you have a cock, you are not a woman. If you undergo the necessary reassignment surgery then I’m quite prepared to accept the change.
      If not, no.

      I’m not prepared to waste energy over-thinking this matter; I’m tied up over-thinking virtually everything else so geeza break!

    34. Kelly Jones says:

      I’m a woman and have left the SNP for this reason.

      I consider myself politically homeless now, I want independence so I may continue to vote for them.
      But their far left misogynistic stance is angering me. And many others!

    35. Derick fae Yell says:

      That polling needed done and the conclusions must be listened to.

      The trigger for me personally is seeing the extreme misogyny that a section of TRA activists exhibit. Same old woman-hating shite and male entitlement. Eventually you can’t ignore it any more.

      This SNP member is fully behind the sentiments expressed by Joan McAlpine MSP

    36. Bob Mack says:

      “A man’s a man for aw that”.

      Burns consigned to the loft I suppose. I have decided my left side is male , and my right side is female. Makes it kind of hard to pick clothes in the morning.

      I think the world is becoming too complicated for an old guy,

      (Sorry) I meant human entity.
      ,

    37. panda paws says:

      “Interestingly, however, only 27% of women felt that people changing sex was totally impossible.”

      depends what you mean by changing sex?? It is impossible to change that fact you have XY or XX chromosomes (yes I know about chromosomal disorders but I’m leaving that to the side – its also impossible to change being XXY etc). It’s impossible to change your anatomy – if you have a male pelvis you’ll always have a male pelvis.

      However it is possible to undergo reassignment surgery where a transwoman has their male genitalia removed/refashioned into female resembling genitalia. It doesn’t give them a cervix but I’m happy to treat that person as a woman because I don’t think somebody undergoes such treatment lightly and indeed isn’t allowed too by medical professionals.

      However, someone who puts a dress on and thinks saying they “identify” as a woman and so they can wave their willy in a female only changing room can, well, do one.

      Someone says they “identify” as woman on a Wednesday and thinks they can be appointed to female only posts is… Well I think the technical term is – at it. (True story – saw that one on twitter).

      If there is history of violence towards women when the person presented as male, no they shouldn’t get moved to a women’s person just because they’ve now decided they “identify” as a woman when there is no previous indication of such identification.

      These cases are not only insulting to so-called cis-woman but also insulting to transwoman and thank you to those of the latter who have called out the aggressive behaviour of the “chancers”

      All of the above has been about transwomen because it’s amazing how few transmen have decided to abuse, insult and threaten so called cis-males. I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that XX people are generally physically weaker than XY and they might just get their head in their hands to play with.

      Sorry for the length of this post but this issue really concerns me.

    38. Charlie says:

      Thank you for this valuable service. Seriously, I’m not kidding, you are providing us with informative, up-to-date numbers we can use to refute the nonsense claim that opposition to self-id is a minority view of “transphobic bigots”.

      This claim is continually made, especially about women like me now campaigning against self-id. As in that laughable letter circulated to all female MSPs prior to the Stage 1 Census Bill Debate.

      Angela Haggerty actually went on STV’s Scotland Tonight to defend it. A woman advocating for abolishing women’s rights and having a sex question on the census with three options! Can you imagine believing that humans have a third sex? Or worse still, defending a policy that states that any traumatised woman, who objects to a male (including those presenting as men who just say they “feel like a woman”) being put into their female-only refuge, should be re-educated out of their distress just like a racist or homophobe? And yet, AH did so. On TV!

      Thanks to surveys like yours we can show the claim that most women are ok with self-id has no credibility (I’ve not met a single woman or man who agrees with it). And yet it keeps on being repeated over and over again. Survey after survey shows we are utterly opposed to giving up our rights and our spaces to any man on his say so, and yet all parties ignore us on this.

      I’ve now been to see all but one of my MSPs (except the Green Party dude, who is woker than woke) and not a single one of them had an actual clue what they are doing by pushing for crossdressers to have a right to access women’s spaces, sports and services. Not one.

      Thanks to women organising in a new grassroots movement though, the Scottish Government is now facing some serious challenges on this whole issue. We’ve got quite a few new women’s rights groups doing all the heavy lifting on this now.

      As with the report published by Women and Girls in Scotland (WGS). Apparently, when it comes to trans issues, all of our normal rules, regulations and procedures go out the window, so nobody actually did any impact assessments before adopting new policies that allow males access to female-only spaces (as in school changing rooms, hospital wards and prisons).

      So WGS wrote the first Children’s Rights Impact Assessment. 51 pages showing that LGBT Youth Scotland Transgender Guidance given to all schools in the country, funded and endorsed by the Scottish Government, breaks at least 11 of the articles of the UN Convention on the Rights of Children, as well as the rights of girls under the Equality Act.

      The Children’s Commissioner accepted that assessment as correct and asked the Scottish Government to stop using the LGBT trans guidance and to do their own impact assessments (which they should have done BEFORE putting them into schools).

      The Scottish Government’s response to being shown a comprehensive, well researched legal assessment that found schools following this guidance are discriminating against girls and breaching their rights under international AND domestic law was:

      WE DON’T CARE. WE STILL FULLY SUPPORT THE GUIDANCE.

      When it comes to this subject, it seems that common sense goes out the window, it’s fine to ignore the law and even the SNP (otherwise quite clued up on equality issues) has suspended their critical thinking skills.

    39. Jim says:

      Yes, Derick, also the fact they want to shut down any debate on the matter, even to the point of trying to and sometimes succeding in getting people sacked or removed from certain positions.

      Kelly Holmes is the latest target to try and get her sponsors to drop her.

    40. ClanDonald says:

      the SNP will wipe itself out if it proceeds with this nonsense. The leadership completely underestimates the strength of feelings among the grass roots and have spent too much time listening to the opinions of a few key advisers who are pushing their own agendas.

      I’ll cancel my membership without hesitation if they move this crap into law. I know for a fact there will be many more like me.

    41. Capella says:

      The Scottish Government report on their consultation. Perhaps not worth spending a lot of time on except to note that they say 60% or respondents were in favour:

      Reforming the legal gender recognition system in Scotland

      4. The majority of respondents, 60% of those answering the question, agreed with the proposal to introduce a self-declaratory system for legal gender recognition.

      Maybe people with a desire for change were more likely to answer the question.

      https://www.gov.scot/publications/review-gender-recognition-act-2004-analysis-responses-public-consultation-exercise-report/pages/1/

    42. CameronB Brodie says:

      re. Angela Haggerty. Her ego definitely appears larger than her intellect.

    43. msean says:

      This is complete madness,I don’t even know what all these terms mean. Stuff used to be normal :).

      Probably has a solution in separate toilet/changing facilities/events. Around 70 versions of every type of event at the olympics lol.

      Just wondering what the sports authorities are going to do about this though,I wouldn’t want their jobs right now. Do people changing gender need hormones or something like it? Are they then allowed to compete as women? Like those East German olympic athletes of old?

      The questions on the census for instance must actually focus on reality.It’s about future planning.

      Anyone,I guess,can self ID.Just like to know why any government needs to recognise it beyond what is biological norms.

    44. geeo says:

      Airchie@11.59am

      Already happening to South African athlete Caster Semenya.

      She has been subjected to humiliation by the athletics governing bodies for a few years now, including being subjected to a sex/gender test to see if she is ‘really’ a woman. (Her BIRTH CERTIFICATE says FEMALE) and now, she is being subjected to being forced to medically reduce her testosterone levels to a more ‘normal’ ‘female’ level to reduce her naturally occuring advantage.

      That is disgusting treatment of a WOMAN and one BORN female.

      She has abnormally high testosterone levels, and as a result has a high muscle mass as a result of that and the training involved in athletics, but legally and medically, SHE IS A WOMAN.

      Yet here she is, being discriminated against just because she has an advantage of birth.

      On that basis, swimmer Michael Phelps should have had his big ass freaky feet trimmed as they gave him an advantage, and other ‘freaks of nature sports stars’ natural advantage should also be curtailed by intervention to reduce their sporting advantage.

      As for the trans gender in Sport discussion, organise and hold a transgender games, as is done for disabled sportspeople.

      Nobody suggests disabled sportspeople should be forced to compete at a disadvantage v Able bodied sportspeople, and infact, the paralympics for example, categorises your disability so that you are competing against a similair or same level of disability.

      It need not be the minefield it is being made to be, an outbreak of common sense is required.

    45. Davie Oga says:

      Male transsexuals deserve support and assistance in coping with their gender dysphoria. They don’t have the right to undermine what women have struggled for centuries to achieve and to violate their fundamental human rights in the process. Scotgov policy on this is mental.

    46. Republicofscotland says:

      Oh this topics way, way out of my depth, anything outside of women who are women and men who are men is my limit I’m afraid.

      I guess I’m too old.

    47. Tackety Beets says:

      I find this a minefield & have seen the twitter stuff but felt best to keep out.
      I feel that a body born male cannot be accepted in sport as female?
      Equally a body born female cannot be accepted in sport as female?
      However by the time I type the above I’m questioning, so are they to excluded from sport?

      Its all very difficult as there will, I assume, be a body born with a penis but in every other aspect female….. jeepers this its an absolute minefield even trying to think about it. I say this as there will be so many of these people simply trying to feel right by matching body & mind. They need us to support them as they struggle thro’ life. We need to let them be who they are.

      I should add for those new to the site, my youngest daughter in P7 spoke to me about being “demi gender” It was a conversation I had anticipated since VERY early on in her life.
      For those who no longer have school aged children, I’ll add a bit of detail.

      When my daughter arrived in S1 ( the big school ) she asked to be able to go to the LGBT social event after school, naturally I agreed.
      You need to understand like many that age its sometime like drawin’ teeth. Eventually we got a moment when she was chatty and I asked how things went at the LGBT , “OK” I asked “was there not many there?” ….. “Yes there were a few, about 50 or 60” she replied
      Now, for any one of my generation (P1 in 1960) can you imagine the turn out at an LGBT event?

      We have come a long way in making such matters so very much more acceptable to us and society, but clearly we have a bit to go yet. I feel we have arrived at the station where some questions are really very hard & people like me will need time to come round to seeing the way forward.

    48. shiregirl says:

      So to celebrate International Women’s Day, Aberdeen Uni has invited a transgender actor who plays a transgender character to give a keynote speech.
      https://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/12722/

    49. Tony Hay says:

      This proposed policy is a potential vote loser in some important polls which may not be to far away.

    50. geeo says:

      ClanDonald@12.17pm

      Will ye, Aye ?

      As Karen Dunbar’s character in chewin’ the fat says: “ah smell shite”!!

    51. CameronB Brodie says:

      Charlie
      It is the right of every man to defend the rights of women against totalitarian misogyny. No, it’s their duty! Women’s rights are human rights, which we all need to nourish and protect for the benefit of all.

      Sex, Gender and the Trans Debate

      ….What lies behind the apparent deadlock in debate between transgender activists and ‘gender critical’ feminists? On the one hand, there is the perfectly proper concern of trans people to have access to a legal process of gender recognition which they do not experience as invasive, cumbersome, and pathologizing. On the other, there are misgivings expressed by some in the feminist community that a legal regime of gender recognition, understood as ‘self-declaration’ and operating in various forms in Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Denmark, Ireland, Malta and Norway, will weaken the hard-won gains of decades of feminist activism particularly with regard to securing women’s access to safe sex-segregated spaces such as rape crisis centres and women’s refuges.

      The fact that existing equality legislation already provides a level of protection allowing same-sex service providers to deny access to transgender individuals where they can show this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (for example, a counselling service might reasonably be concerned that sexually abused women will be less likely to attend group counselling if ‘male-bodied’ trans women are also in attendance)[1] does not seem to have allayed these concerns, though surely they should, particularly as the Government has made clear that they have no plans to change equality law.
      https://legalresearch.blogs.bris.ac.uk/2018/12/sex-gender-and-the-trans-debate/

      Critical Cultural Approaches to Gender and Sex
      http://oxfordre.com/communication/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-74

      Gender and Law
      http://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/research/research-themes/gender-and-law/

    52. I hate identity politics. It perpetuates a kind of individualism that declines into narcissism and solipsism, and is clearly related to the fact that most folks these days are so intimately ensconced in their devices that they have no immediate relation with actual reality.
      I also detest binary thinking for perpetuating the idea that all matters must be judged and experienced as one thing or another, thereby obscuring the more complex truth of things, which is not revealed in some mythical spectrum between binary and entirely analytical categories, but in the vast diversity that emerges having rid all thought, common opinion and scientific practice of all things binary.
      The many issues of gender self identification must then be more complex than is yet accounted for in any law. As Scotland is one of the first in the world to introduce such a law, it will experience the anomalies of reality and will have to be tweaked with provisos and caveats.
      Despite the obvious idiocy of children being allowed on a whim to become the other gender/sex, the obvious ignorance of common consciousness about the distinction between sex and gender, despite the serious error of judgement on the part of those who allowed a convicted rapist to crossdress into a women’s prison, the law seems to me to be a step in the right direction.
      Many people are extremely uncomfortable in their assigned gender, and for them surely it is important they be given legal recognition. The next step in the right direction would be to allow people to refuse categorisation as either one or the other, but to remain neutral/neuter, polysexual, infinitely variable or private.
      I don’t think I’m arguing with any other opinion here, just ventilating from a different place. Happy Friday.

    53. Terry says:

      My mate is a woman. Went through the op when she said ta ta to being a man. Kindest nicest person there is. Totally agree if you want to trans then you have to go the whole hog. Otherwise stick with Reality.

      At the end of the day the Snp will be making fools of themselves with this. And there’s the small but very real danger that some people will use this to abuse women. Well done Joan McAlpine for speaking up and speaking sense. I say all this as a female by the way.

    54. Corrado Mella says:

      I do not give a flying fcuk about someone’s gender.
      It does NOT define the person.

      Biological sex is not a discriminant for sports either, only physiology in sports where superior force, resilience, stamina or weight give an advantage.

      And we already have that sorted. Boxing has weight categories. Apply these categories in all sports where it matters, and you cannot have a transgender 6’3″ cyclist winning a women competition whose average leg length is 3/4 of the transgender winner’s leg.

      It’s about fairness.

    55. Capella says:

      @ galamcennalath 11.58 – yes, I think identity politics is a distraction from the struggle for democracy. Also, I do think it is imported from America where every means of keeping people distracted is employed.

      I listened to a discussion between Chris Hedges and David Harvey on Neo-Liberalism, in the “On Contact” programme gratis Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin backed broadcasting corporation. Identity politics was one of the methods they identified of keeping people busy talking about something that won’t change anything. Only in this case it will undermine women’s rights after hundreds of years of hard won struggle.

    56. Ron Maclean says:

      Dear Nicola

      I would like to self-identify as an independent sovereign Scot. I hope you’re not too busy to help.

      Regards
      Ron

    57. Bobp says:

      This is all a load of b****cks, or not as the case may be.

    58. Former vegan god says:

      Precisely the BS that caused me to cancel my SNP membership a few weeks ago. I explained my reasons in an email to Peter Murrell. I received a stock response thanking me for my contribution. They don’t care. Party had been infiltrated by pussy hat wearing, left leaning virtue signallers. The party is screwed. They will get my vote but that’s all until independence.

    59. TD says:

      The sex of a human being is determined at conception. Everyone inherits an X chromosome from their mother and either an X chromosome or a Y chromosome from their father. If the person is XX she is female and if the person is XY he is male. There can be rare exceptions to this biological rule – but they are rare. The chromosomes a person inherits at conception cannot be altered – no amount of surgical intervention or hormone treatment can alter the basic biology. So a male who undergoes hormone treatment and/or surgery to remove his male genitalia may start to appear like a woman and develop some of the characteristics of a female body, but he remains genetically a male and he always will.

      That then takes us on to how should people who are transgender be treated in society. My answer is with compassion and understanding, but lets not pretend that men are women or vice versa. So should men who identify as women be allowed to play women’s sport? No – they are men. Should they be allowed to use women’s toilets? I think so, because I don’t know how you are going to police this if some men have the outward appearance of women. And how are men going to feel if someone who appears to be female (but is actually male) uses male toilets? Of course there is a different debate to be had about whether toilets should be gender specific at all, but as long as the current system prevails, I think a little common sense should be applied. If you are male but have altered your appearance to look female, use the female toilets and be discreet about your maleness. If you are female and you think that another user of the toilets is actually male, be understanding and recognise that although that person might be male, he identifies as female and is more comfortable behaving as a female.

      A little less outrage and a little more empathy will go a long way.

    60. Artyhetty says:

      Re; Capella@11.23am

      This has been and is a great distraction as you say, from actual real politics and as galamcennalath@11.58am says, ‘is it all designed as a distraction from the many other challenges?’

      It’s certainly released a swathe of confusion, it’s like the cat amongst the pigeons, or rather, cats in great numbers because it’s not going away anytime soon. Had a conversation about this recently, at Uni staff now have to refer to students as ‘they’ not she or he.

      I walked into loos at an art preview a while ago, and discovered they were ‘unisex’, the guys seemed as mortified as me, and er, just generally it’s silly, and not necessary, who wants to see lots of men at urinals when needing the bloody loo! Argh!!! It’s crazy.

      Sports, well, there could be a third, or loads of category’s, why just ‘men’ and ‘womens’ sports?

      Wholly reject Scotgov on self ID, but couldn’t see the consultation on their site either.

      The world’s gone completely crazy, UK is about to be made even more of a basket case, billionaire Brexiters leaving everyone else to what could well be a horrible violent, dystopian, nasty, cesspit UK.
      ‘Escape from New York’? It’ll be escape from UK more like!

      International Women’s day today, it’s for a reason.

      Have a good day ALL at WOS.

    61. HeehawBaws says:

      This is what comes of allowing males to breed with females. Obviously the progeny is going to be something inbetween.

    62. CameronB Brodie says:

      Sorry for all the science and philosophy Rev. That’s me for now, so you could perhaps release my response to Charlie? Pretty please. 🙂

    63. johnj says:

      Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
      8 March, 2019 at 11:44 am
      “Im puzzled by this one, does it mean that any wee boy at a secondary school can decide he is now female and is entitled to use the girls changing room”
      Yes it does mean that, and is already happening in many schools.

      Dammit! I was born about 60 years too late.

    64. mountain shadow says:

      If being a man or woman is determined by someone’s mind or will, it means that there’s no such thing as true maleness or femaleness. Both become just a construct based on cultural stereotypes. We would be unable to tell a young boy that he’s really a boy. We would be unable to tell a young girl that her father’s unique responses to her as a father is anything objective or real.

    65. Robert Louis says:

      REVSTU,

      Bravo for posting this. It needed said.

    66. Abulhaq says:

      EXACTLY! The heich heid yins in the SNP need to get their heads and minds above the collective waist line and concentrate on THE issue. That one spelt I N D E P E N D E N C E……
      In my more cynical moods I envisage Madame S walking away from this Brexit cock-up and landing a nice gender and identity shoo-in with some non-accountable international outfit.
      This nonsense is potentially, as the Rev implies, a monster vote loser. SNP, Scotland’s Numpty party? Come on guys, pigs don’t fly!

    67. SilverDarling says:

      The media often focus on the ‘predatory male’ for sensationalist headlines – men having access to women’s bodies and safe spaces because they identify as women. They exist, that is true, but in small numbers.

      However, let’s look at what is fundamentally going on here.

      It is misrepresenting yourself to gain something you believe females have that you as a male want.

      It is already OK for men to speak for and on behalf of women because they identify as women. Shortlists for women’s representation could be all men identifying as women.
      Where does 50-50 stand on that?

      Women’s health and screening services will have to accommodate MTF identifying whether appropriate or not, funding will reflect that. Men being able to speak as women to design services for women?

      The thing is MTF trans outnumber FTM – there is never any outcry about Sport or access on those lines, why? It is because men are not threatened. How many females, identifying as a man, are elected to speak on behalf of men only? Yet our media is littered with men speaking as women.

      A real example, a care home for the elderly near me gives all residents the dignity of asking them whether they want to be toileted and cleaned by carers on the basis of sex, not gender. Most don’t mind but a few elderly ladies are mortified at the thought of a man or someone who has the appearance, build, demeanour and behaviour of a man doing these tasks. Nothing to do with predatory behaviour.

      A self-identifying female could put their rights over those of the frail and vulnerable. Is that right?

    68. liz says:

      I’m actually surprised that anyone thinks you can change sex. I think the deliberate conflating of gender/sex has confused people.

      Much praise to Joan McAlpine for actually listening to what people are saying.
      Some very loyal SNP members and supporters have said they will leave the party if Self ID goes ahead.

      They then get accused of being Yoon plants but I know some of these people personally.

    69. Meindevon says:

      Last week on holiday I was speaking to a very interesting German lady who had been an top (Olympic) athlete in her day, and is now a Doctor of all things to do with sports medicines. She was also on the board (?) of the IAAF.

      We talked a bit about transgenders in sport and she said it was going to be a big issue. She was pretty much against it as you would expect. She said she was attending an IAAF meeting in the next few weeks where they would be discussing this subject.

      Maybe some rules will come about from that meeting.

    70. orri says:

      It’s really fucking simple.

      There are two predominant sexes, Male and Female. Intersex individuals are those who are genetically/biologically one whilst displaying the attributes of the other. In general due to the way gestation works most intersex people will be genetically male whilst appearing fully female.

      The gender thing is man/woman. Any claim that trans rights are non-binary is bullshit. By it’s very nature it insists on a definition of womanhood based on appearance and other visible/audible cues. Wear a dress and speak in an “effeminate way” then you’re a woman. Butch lesbians who insist on wearing dungarees are the stereotypical antithesis of what some insist a woman is.

      Trans activist get really pissed off at feminists because they concentrate on female rights based on their sex and the biological consequences of it.

      The NHS seems to have started a small push back at rampant trans-activism because it is really important to know the genetic sex of someone when treating them. Not only that but some of the actions of these activists borders on sociopathy and delusion. Pandering to them may very well be in breech of the Hippocratic Oath. Before anyone starts, I’m not saying being trans is a mental deficiency just as I wouldn’t say being homosexual is.

      As to any hormone treatment prior to puberty. That’s really a step too far. If some of the theories about what gives rise to homosexuality are correct then in some instances it may very well be a phase. Only time will tell. Medical intervention is simply defining children as having a condition that needs treatment. It’s an assault based on the idea that exhibiting early signs of being gay must mean a child is trans rather than homosexual. Think Allan Turing being force fed female hormones.

    71. David Mills says:

      I feel this peice has conflated two separate issues

    72. Auld Rock says:

      Excuse me for being thick and not wishing to offend anyone so let me be frank, I never studied biology or any life science for that matter, just physics. To me being totally simplistic and without going into minute detail I grew-up in a world where there were boys (with boy bits), there were girls (with girl bits) and as we are all animals it sometimes happens in the animal world that ‘mutations’ occur. I’m also aware that there is a group of people though outwardly male/female feel that they are in the wrong body now whether this is a proven medical fact or a matter of nurture I do not know but I do know that as a parent I would have been extremely unhappy if a ‘male’ claiming he was a girl was allowed in my daughters toilets/changing-rooms.

      I have great sympathy with males/females who find themselves in this predicament but for males (who claim/state feminine feelings) they should definitely not be allowed to compete against females especially where strength comes into play. I’m sure we of a certain age will remember wondering about the ‘true gender’ of some Soviet Bloc athletes, shot-putters, hammer throwers etc who we often remarked that they looked more ‘male’ than ‘female’.

      Finally, I believe that medicine should keep-out of this apart from offering surgical and physiatric support when deemed necessary for the persons mental state. As for the rest of us, we should treat these people with total RESPECT and support when asked for.

    73. CameronB Brodie says:

      OK, I’m done with the science and philosophy. Here’s some legal and human rights thought. 🙂

      Special Issue: Human Rights, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity
      https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/18918131.2015.1126446

      Critical Identity Theory
      https://www.law.uci.edu/centers/clsc/images-pdfs/2_gustafson_winter.pdf

      Governing Legal Embodiment: On the Limits of Self-Declaration
      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10691-018-9373-4

    74. orri says:

      That said Self-Id might be OK as long as it’s verifiable. As in a genuine state of mind rather than just claiming to be a man/woman.

    75. Breastplate says:

      Although I confess not to know much about this subject, it greatly concerns me and makes me wonder if the Earth is actually flat and not, I am inclined to believe that it is actually triangular in shape and by sheer will of thought can make it reality.

    76. CameronB Brodie says:

      Breastplate
      I empathise with your desire to re-shape empirical reality to suite the ideological comitment to the empowerment of empathetic reality.

      Yarbles!

    77. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Capella @ 11:23:

      Identity politics […] diverts people from thinking about and acting on real politics and funnels us down a futile pathway to political oblivion.

      Amen to that. This is exactly the kind of activist social engineering that has brought the term “liberal” into such disrepute in the US, and turned the meaning of the word completely on its head.

      This is where displacement activity gets you. Twiddling away on diversionary “do-goodery” that ordinary people don’t understand and really don’t like. (And which shouldn’t need a poll to understand either.)

      Sure as hell people won’t vote for an independent country that promises to be a glorified interfering nanny state.

      The SG and the SNP have just one big job to do, and they should be effing getting on with it.

    78. galamcennalath says:

      Capella says:

      identity politics is a distraction from the struggle for democracy … it is imported from America where every means of keeping people distracted is employed.

      Democracy is a threat to, and at odds with, concentrated power and privilege. In the US the all powerful oil/gas/fracking industry needs to keep people’s minds off climate issues, among other things. They can’t win debates so the solution is to avoid debates on the BIG issues and give the population some alternatives to be concerned about.

      We must be suspicious about much fire and fury on any topic which doesn’t effect big corporations and their activities. It may be an engineered distraction!

    79. CameronB Brodie says:

      Please don’t conflate identity politics with trans-activism. Martin Luther King Jnr. was heavily invested in identity politics. You could say the suffragettes were that way inclined, as well.

    80. Breeks says:

      The issue doesn’t appear in my headlights very often, so at the risk of saying something inappropriately clumsy or offensive to transgender folks, I would only say this…

      If you are transgender, that’s fine, I don’t have any problem with it, but if you don’t find anything wrong competing toe to toe against a women while you have all the biological fortitude of a male body and musculature, it’s maybe not your perceived entitlement that’s the issue, but your grasp of what sport actually is.

      If I was to play rugby against 10 year olds, I rather suspect I would win, hopefully I wouldn’t put too many of them in hospital, but it wouldn’t exactly be a festival sport, and nor would my inevitable victory be much of an accolade to put in the trophy cabinet.

    81. sassenach says:

      Sad to say, but the two recent articles “Back down the slide” and the present one have severely depressed me!

      Indy is starting to look a long way off, and if the SNP are going for this ‘self id’ business then I despair.

    82. ClanDonald says:

      @geeo, yes I will actually, you’d better believe it. In fact I even know some women who will then vote for any party who promises to revoke it.

      The fallout from this legislation will be way worse than the offensive behaviour at football fiasco, the opposition parties and press will have a field day, in fact they’re probably keeping their fingers crossed that the SNP will push ahead with it.

      If you don’t realise this is a major problem for the snp then quite frankly you don’t know anything.

    83. Proud Cybernat says:

      Over 70 genders?

      Seriously – we’re gonnae disappear up our own backsides any day now!

    84. Craig P says:

      The drive to allow biological men to ogle women’s bodies in private female spaces has a woke whiff of the paedophile information exchange about it, a sex-with-kids pressure group that had some political traction back in the 70s and 80s. (I wish I was kidding but if you don’t think your ISP will put you on a nonce list, go look it up and prepare to be flabbergasted).

      Self ID seems to make a mockery of the hard surgical, emotional and hormonal upheaval of the genuine transitioner.

    85. Ellie says:

      Personally the SNP’s stance on this has (among a few other issues) severely tested my loyalty when it comes to voting. If there was another viable alternative to the SNP who supported Independence I’d be voting for them, but since there isn’t I will continue to vote for the SNP up until either we achieve independence or the viable alternative presents itself.

      After independence however I will be voting for another party. I have lost a lot of respect for several SNP politicians over this, Nicola Sturgeon in particular (I’ll be honest, I don’t particularly like her but I have until recently at least always respected her).

    86. CameronB Brodie says:

      Sorry, I posted this on the wrong thread.

      The Gender Selectivities of the State A Critical Realist Analysis
      eprints.lancs.ac.uk/207/1/E_2004_cr_gender.pdf

    87. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      My afternoon curiosity led me to Google “C.H.I. number”, because although I know mine, I didn’t know what CHI stands for. I do now.

      “Definition
      The Community Health Index (CHI) is a population register, which is used in Scotland for health care purposes. The CHI number uniquely identifies a person on the index.

      Recording Rules
      At present the CHI number is being added to local Master Patient Indexes. As it becomes more widely used, it will be an important step in preserving confidentiality by making names on data less important than they are now. The first digit of the CHI number will be 3 or less.

      The current CHI number consists of the 6 digit Date of Birth (DDMMYY) followed by a 3 digit sequence number and a check digit. The ninth digit is always even for females and odd for males.” (My emboldening.)

      That’s from:-
      https://www.ndc.scot.nhs.uk/Data-Dictionary/SMR-Datasets/Patient-Identification-and-Demographic-Information/Community-Health-Index-Number/

      I still have the original card that was issued shortly after my birth, with the last four digits 0092. This shows that at the time of issuing, I was male. I’m guessing that if I decided to self-identify as female, my CHI number would gie the guff awa’…

    88. Marcia says:

      Maybe it is an age thing as I have had no real thoughts about it. I think it is getting a couple of issues mixed up.

    89. frogesque says:

      Important point an I hope SG takes note:

      Pick the battles you can win. This one is lost whichever side they back. Please get a fucking grip!

      This gender/sex thing is a nonsense. If you have penis you are a man, man boobs optional. If you were born with a fully functioning reproductive system then you are a woman. Fpor an extremely small percentage of the population there may be chromosomal issues and your sex may be debatable.

      A guy and it seems to be mostly guys and exguys who makes a lot of noise about whether it wants to be in women’s prisons, bogs, or sporting events then there are test that can be made to determine if that is possible. For the fist two, removal of appendages should be sufficient, for sports strict hormonal levels, well within the normal female range would be the absolute minimum criteria and there may well be a case for bone mass, heart/lung function to also be considered.

      One has to look at motives as well, is it about a simple desire to participate or is it about winning due to unfair advantage? Basically any trans who has had NHS or SNHS treatment for psycological and gender realignment would be better spending their time helping others on their pathway than abusing natural born women who have worked bloody hard to get their sports recognised AND put in the physical and mental effort to excel in their chosen sport.

      Puts head back down below parapet.

    90. Robert Peffers says:

      Now I’m getting on a bit but wisna sex whit they yaised tae deliver coal in?

      Or wis it no whit totty howkers yaised tae pit totties in?

    91. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Brian Doonthetoon @ 14:56,

      I never knew any of that. And sure enough, there it all is on mine. You learn something on WoS every day! =grin=

    92. laukat says:

      RE: Section 30 – is there any reason that the scottish government couldn’t run a referendum asking “Do you agree that the UK Government should grant the Scottish Government the Section 30 powers to hold a Scottish Independence Referendum?” – Don’t see how that breaches legislative competence, it would probably get a clear majority from the scottish public and it would deliver a mandate beyond reproach?

    93. Eck says:

      I really getting fed up with everybody thinking they are, or wanting to be a special case. Maybe I’m feeling left out cause I’m a 65 year old white Scottish male, married, two kids. Average really. I’m content with average. I’m content. I don’t feel a need to jostle for position to grab my wee bit of lime light. I’m confused as well about things we are allowed to say and not say and who we are allowed to say them to. All the time you hear Americans talking about “people of color”. Amber Rudd creates a big stooshie by referring to Dianne Abbott as a “coloured woman”.What’s the difference? How is one offensive and the other is not? Who decided this? You hear black Americans talking to each other in films and documentaries and the odd rap song using the highly offensive “N” word. It’s ok for them, but not for us. It is all confusing to an old codger like me. It seems everybody wants to subdivide and subdivide themselves into some sort unique niche ethnicity so that they are now something exotic. I suppose I’m jealous really. I’m just boring old Scottish. I really should do a DNA test to check my ancestory to see if my origins are something more exotic. Hell, I could be Viking Scots or Spanish or French or even Hungarian Scots. Who Knows? Does it really matter? Do I need to be different? Na. Are we any different? Well, if we believe science we are all descended from a couple of ape like creatures in Africa a very long time ago. So I guess if I am allowed to venture that far back I am really African Scots. I could go roon an roon in circles with this and I probably have, but really, ulimately,are we no content to be HUMAN? No offence!

    94. Abulhaq says:

      @CameronB Brodie
      Identity in the new politics is perceived to be primarily individual and personal. A collective identity as represented by Scottish, Welsh or Catalan ethno-cultural nationalism is deemed under the same system to be ‘threatening’ and reactionary ie ‘fascistic’.
      It explains why liberal newspapers can praise one and execrate the other.
      I rather think it is the bedroom ideologues in the SNP who conflate the two resulting in the current unhelpful mash-up. Kraft-Ebbing and Freud might have been fascinated by this example of the idée fixe ‘genitalis’.

    95. Cubby says:

      Laukat@3.46pm

      I agree that your proposal does not breach legislative competence. But it will annoy people.

      Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country? This doesn’t breach legislative competence either. There already is a mandate beyond reproach. Why have a referendum to have a referendum? This will just annoy people.

    96. yesindyref2 says:

      I’m on the side of common sense and dare I say, morality and even biology. That’s the 62%, the 82% and the 53%. As far as Q19 is concerned my response would be “stupid question”, and I’m not talking about the opinion poll question itself.

    97. ronnie anderson says:

      Robert Peffers Naw Robert your gitting confuddled wie Sax & rhythm of Johhny Dankworth lol

    98. yesindyref2 says:

      As far as the SNP getting involved is concerned they shouldn’t. There really is no need for Scotland to “lead the world” in every stupid thing going. And there’s still a load of caveman sexism and misogyny around, as witnessed by the professor thread in the Herald. Stick to the relatively simple, leave the rest until it gets settled by others.

    99. Cubby says:

      Robert Peffers@3.34pm

      That was only in Morningside where Alastair Darling would get his sex of coal.

    100. SilverDarling says:

      No one denies Trans individuals have many struggles to cope with but lived experience of discrimination as a woman is something most men cannot understand fully and it is women’s rights, not men’s rights, at stake here. Competitive sport is just the most obvious example where even after reassignment, biological advantage persists.

      When MTF Trans deny their biological and lived advantage and insist on diminishing the hard-earned rights of women who have had to bear the burden of discrimination based on their biology, that is what is in question. I am not even going to start on what is happening to children who express confusion about their gender. It is illuminating how many here haven’t realised what a huge issue this is. The SNP are about to find out.

      Joan McAlpine is the voice of sanity in all of this.

    101. Stoker says:

      Ron Maclean wrote on 8 March, 2019 at 12:44 pm:

      “Dear Nicola I would like to self-identify as an independent sovereign Scot. I hope you’re not too busy to help.Regards Ron”

      Well said Ron!

      I hereby add my name to the above statement and sentiments.

    102. CameronB Brodie says:

      Critical Feminist Legal Theory and Social and Legal Studies can help demistype this emotive issue, IMHO. That and the demolition of sexist stereotypes that TRAs appear to conceive as foundational to their notion of sex.

      Feminist Legal Theories

      ….A third group of scholars rejected the preoccupation with reconciling similarities and differences between men and women. The sameness/difference debate seemed, to them, to stem from the structures of law and society that used men as the starting point for analysis.

      It is only an unstated male norm that makes maternity leave seem to be special treatment for employees. The focus on similarities and differences between men and women also failed to draw attention to the varieties of women, who differ along the lines of race, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, class, and religion, and other potential lines. Some in this third group explicitly embrace postmodernist challenges to the very category of “woman.”

      It is a mistake, say these feminists, to treat women as all having the same interests, identities, needs, and values, especially since doing so tends to privilege the preferences and viewpoints of privileged white women. Instead, feminist analysis should focus on the intersections of gender, race, class, and sexual orientation and their treatment by law; or the gender performances or the production of gender through cultural symbols and practices; or the on multiple perspectives and social positions occupied by different women at the same time and the same woman at different times.

      Others seek policies or modes of analysis that use both men and women, of all kinds of background, as the starting point of analysis, and design rules for workplaces, families, politics, and society that are fully inclusive.

      https://cyber.harvard.edu/bridge/CriticalTheory/critical3.htm

      Looking Back, Looking Forward: Feminist Legal Scholarship in SLS
      https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0964663917724867

      Socio-Legal Perspectives on Gender, Sexuality and Law: Editorial
      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10991-010-9069-6

    103. CameronB Brodie says:

      re. Legal theory and stuff.

      A critique of the gender recognition act 2004
      https://philpapers.org/rec/SHAACO

      Feminism and the Gender Recognition Act 2004
      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10691-005-1456-3

      Reforming Legal Gender Identity: A Socio-Legal Evaluation
      https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FP008968%2F1

    104. Stoker says:

      Should have added to my previous post:

      Self-ID is laced with all sorts of inherent dangers & i’m one of the larger percentage who do not support the SNP on this issue.

      What on earth possessed them to even look at this subject never mind touch it?

      I’ll continue to vote for them however until we achieve indy coz that’s all that matters to me. I’d advise angry individuals to keep voting for them also, withdraw your membership as a way of protest if you like but please keep voting for them.

      Independence first, tackling the big issues second.

    105. CameronB Brodie says:

      More legal theory.

      If the state decertified gender, what might happen to its meaning and value?
      openaccess.city.ac.uk/15397/1/Decertifying%20gender.JLS.pdf

      Pre-Consultation Equality Impact Assessment for the Gender
      Recognition Act 2004

      https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/721659/GRA-PSED-Assessment.pdf

      The Conditions for Obtaining Legal Gender Recognition:
      A Human Rights Evaluation

      http://www.tara.tcd.ie/bitstream/handle/2262/84084/PETER%20DUNNE%20-%20THESIS.pdf?sequence=1

    106. ephemeraldeception says:

      I it weren’t true reading th earticle and comments would make me think I’d entered the Twilight Zone.

      So…poor joke alert.

      Picture this: Your teenage daughter comes home. ‘How was School’?

      ‘We had a laugh after P.E. today. One of the girls got a Boner in the shower’!

      What?

      ‘Aye, Sandy got a serious hard-on and was holding the towel with no hands, Jill noticed and freaked out. Some laughed, some were mortified and wee Fiona wanted to take advantage of the sudden opportunity!’

      ‘Sandy says she still identifies as a Women…but must be bi-sexual.’ So, need to be careful not to drop the soap…’

      😮
      =========
      End of joke. Seriously though, this is not going to end well.

    107. Sledger says:

      Whatever your views on the position of the SNP or the views of Navratalova, the questions posted are flawed and loaded.

      Person 1 (expert in their field) disagrees with x because of y & z.
      What do you think?

      Would you consider a similarly loaded question designed to get a balanced, perhaps even informed response?

      The former Prime Minister Tony Blair recently expressed the view that ‘Scotland’ – a partner in the United Kingdom – should not be independent because of their disadvantageous geography, economic weakness and dependency on trade with their closest partner.
      What is your opinion?

    108. Robert Louis says:

      Bravo Joan Macalpine!

      This is a long comments so you might want to skip it, unless really keen on the subject. Just having my tuppence worth.

      As a gay man, who can remember when being gay was illegal, I have watched on in horror at some of the utter tripe getting posted on ‘social’ media about transgender matters. I am not on social media, so haven’t commented on this subject, but I have long been of the opinion, that THIS issue could easily be what destroys the current SNP government – in that it will turn voters against them.

      When I read some of the so-called ‘information’ on gender issues, all I see is absolute unfounded tripe, masquerading as ‘fact’. Like we have gone through the looking glass, where right is wrong, up is down and black is white. It seems to me that the extremist trans campaigners, have been creating all these ideas, in their own echo chamber for years, then when the public starts to hear them, and says ‘hang on, but this is unadulterated claptrap of the very highest order’, all we hear are shouts of ‘transphobe’ and the frankly bizarre insult of ‘TERF’, whatever that means.

      Transgender folks should be supported, but not to the point where other peoples right to dignity and womens rights in particular are being eroded.

      But above all else what really concerns me, is the wholly unwarranted and extremely aggressive abuse that has been, and is currently, being aimed at Lesbians in particular.

      Lesbians are shouted down – as evidenced by the wholly disgraceful insults hurled at Martina Navratilova, amongst others. And it needs pointed out, that Martina is one of those very, very, very brave lesbians who stood up in public for the rights of gay people – at a time when such rights did NOT exist. She is an absolute hero of the gay rights movement.

      Let me just say again, I wholly support transgender people being able to live their lives in peace, and unhindered.

      It took decades of debate, argument and campaigning, for gay rights to become accepted. It didn’t happen overnight. It took time to dispel wholly untrue lies and myths. Those who wish to champion transgender people, should learn from that. Shouting people down and refusing to even discuss things will achieve nothing, except rejection. You cannot legislate acceptance, no matter how loud you shout.

      Their is a real need for a proper debate and discussion of the facts associated with transgender rights. So far that has not happened, because the extremist ‘trans’ campaigners will not allow it. The government really needs to take a step back, and show leadership (which it hasn’t so far), and insist on open, full and frank debate, without the insults and the social media fruitcakes (who really are a pretty hateful, pig-ignorant, bunch).

      Their should be a way to find a solution, but a rushed through ‘consultation’ and badly written laws just doesn’t cut it.

    109. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Stoker @ 16:30,

      Being non-aligned myself, it’s probably not my place to say, but I would simply observe that it is inadvisable for people to quit the SNP over this issue, since all it would presumably achieve is cede the PC zealots more influence…

    110. ronnie anderson says:

      If U put ah Newt in ah Cheap Suit diz it stop being ah Amphibian , naw but the Suit shrinks .

    111. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Jesus Christ it’s the creepy trannies again. And whadyaknow, EXTREMELY conspicuous alignment from the proof that the Infinite Monkey Theorem might not take that long: Mr brain-damage Brodie, the grandiloquent retard. But hey, you pay peanuts…
      I agree about the absurdity of the slippery tranny slope, Stuart, but it’s really suspicious when someone who so carefully treads the PC line and wouldn’t say boo to the folks who hud your…I mean ‘their’ gimp leash, strays from the rainbow path.
      All it says to me is that this is something the SNP really want to dump in the sea but pretend they don’t. Because there’s no way you’d be so vocal about it otherwise.

      Cut.

    112. euan0709 says:

      I know its O/T….Tom Gordon in todays Herald claims that the “Wings” Poll is a BLOW to the Yes Campaign.
      Followed by many, many comments, which I couldn’t be bothered reading !

    113. Alastair says:

      Coud someone advise how many Trans Men are excelling in elete sports.

    114. Weechid says:

      If people can self identify on the grounds of sex then why not on nationality? Then all the EU citizens facing having to complete residency forms can just slef ID as Scottish. Problem solved. I now want to self ID as being a 66 year old woman instead of being just 60. Now give me my f*****g pension.

    115. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Weechid @ 17:06,

      Brilliant on all counts! =laugh=

    116. SilverDarling says:

      @Robert Louis

      Well said.

      If I had a daughter who was confused about their sexuality, not even their gender, I would be extremely worried about them being discriminated against or even pushed into transitioning. There seems a very right-wing misogynistic homophobic influence at play out there and Lesbians are being especially targeted.

      We tend to avoid these issues on this site with much of the discussion stuck in 1314 or thereabouts.

      But this is the real world and if the SNP want to engage properly now is the time otherwise, they are in trouble. I will still vote for them but they are making it really difficult.

      I have seldom seen normally placid women friends and colleagues so angry about a topic.

    117. Confused says:

      jeezo REV – tilt at windmills much?

      deep down, this is just a power play (psychological warfare, social control) – its o’brien in room 101 giving you the

      “reality is whatever we say it is”

      – don’t try that facts and logic, science, “biology” shite on us – we will kill you – 2 minute TERF hate now!

      if you acquiesce to this nonsense, you are signalling your obedience – and if you don’t, then the lynch mobs will appear, and we’ll take yer joab – we will destroy you

      I have no sympathy for the feminists – its actually hilarious – because THEY started denying scientific facts at least 25 years ago, now its bit them in the arse

      on a deep level, this is what happens when postmodernist bullshit takes over the world

      – ultimately it comes down to foucault, derrida etc – peddlers of obscurantist logorrhea – pseudo drivel used to browbeat the intellectually compromised (- this is where all your identity politics/ “new left” originates)

      – you know this stuff is utter crap because – it cannot be satirised – see the Sokal hoax and related stunts

      BTW cameron brodie seems a nice fella – but he don’t half post a lot of shite at times (the links, not his own thoughts and opinions) – 90+% of it is drivel
      BUT – his links are actually at the “more sane” end of the spectrum … you don’t want to go thru the looking glass

      bad ideas lead to bad outcomes in the real world – if these philoso-fraudsters are meant to be at the forefront of western thought and its all just nonsense, what flows down from their ivory towers, 10, 20, 30 years later is absolutely destructive

      – the youth are mostly gullible idiots who simply don’t know enough to, ahem, “deconstruct” this BS – they act like brainwashed red guards turning on their parents and teachers in mao’s cultural revolution – they spout slogans mindlessly, then attack you physically if you resist
      – in practical terms, most folks just need to keep their heads down, enjoy the ride

      TBH DGAF – this is popcorn and feetup time : “welcome to clown world”
      – and where is the midget with the custard pie?

      it is worrying, at times, how easily the SNP will acquiesce to whatever fashionable nonsense is around – they are almost as bad as the GREENS – BTW, the idea of electoral deals with the Greens for tactical voting might only serve to poison SNP support as most folks think they are nutters

    118. CameronB Brodie says:

      More Social and Legal Studies perspectives. Like it or not, identity is central to the political process. Like it or not, public policy that refutes science can not be anything else other than illiberal, i.e. authoritarian.

      Beyond the People
      Social Imaginary and Constituent Imagination

      Oxford Constitutional Theory

      Critically examines how we, both inside and outside the academy, conceive of ‘the people’ in political and legal debates

      Offers a pioneering reinterpretation of the ‘vocabularies’ of popular sovereignty: self-determination, constituent power, foundational authority, constitutional self-government and sovereign equality, and a unique account of how their mutual relationship hinges on imaginative choices that are irreducible to disciplinary perspectives

      Systematically surveys the images and allegories that theorists and politicians use when they invoke the name of the people, offering a novel methodology for analysing the dramaturgical, visual, affective, polemical, and practical aspects of theoretical imaginations

      Offers a new scholarly agenda that goes ‘beyond the people’ through an ongoing critical engagement with Kenneth Burke, Carl Schmitt, Hans Kelsen, Cornelius Castoriadis, Ernst Cassirer, Claude Lefort, Charles Taylor, Paul Ricoeur, and Mark Johnson, among others

      https://global.oup.com/academic/product/beyond-the-people-9780198799092?cc=gb&lang=en&

      Toleration, decency and self-determination in The Law of Peoples
      https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0191453714567736

      (Trans)Forming Gender: Social Change and Transgender Citizenship
      http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/1/hines.html

      P.S. Is it right to bring about radical social transformation in order to privilege an already privileged minority?

    119. galamcennalath says:

      Brexit ….

      ” The European Union is ready to give Britain the unilateral right to leave the bloc’s customs union….Britain would still need to honour its commitment to preserve a border free of controls between EU member Ireland and the British province of Northern Ireland – something that in previous negotiations led to proposals to place a customs border “in the Irish Sea”, between the island of Britain and its province.”

      https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-barnier/eus-barnier-offers-britain-unilateral-exit-from-customs-union-after-brexit-idUSKCN1QP1X0

      Which, by my reckoning is back to the situation which the DUP and hardcore BritNats objected to and resulted in the UK proposing the Backstop which the EU accepted!

      This is back to the pre Dec 2017 position!

    120. CameronB Brodie says:

      Confused
      “on a deep level, this is what happens when postmodernist bullshit takes over the world”

      Post-modernism and post-structralism are essential for removing old-skool positivist assumptions and logic from the study of social space. They helps us to plan better to meet social needs and so are certainly not bullshit.

      TRAs simply don’t understand the practical boundaries of radical science. It is not possible to function effectively in the empirical world if you deny empirical reality, e.g. the binary nature of biological sex.

    121. twathater says:

      I am with many on here , I believe that the SNP SG should put this matter to one side and concentrate on independence and their good governance , this is not a matter to be IMPOSED on citizens , this has ENORMOUS implications associated with it

      As has been asserted there have been many discussions in relation to the subject but from my very limited knowledge and experience of these matters , mainly through various twatter threads there appears to be a VERY vociferous and aggressive grouping who are driving their opinions very forcibly due to their self interest

      I am a great believer in referenda , I believe that ANYTHING which has a life changing impact on citizens lives should be determined by the majority of citizens ,( obviously having the TRUTH of the subject matter explained properly and the implications set out HONESTLY )( unlike brexshit )

      It is not for politicians who do not and cannot know everyone’s opinion , to impose their beliefs whether with good intentions or otherwise without consulting widely and publicly people’s opinions , IMO this has not been done properly or widely enough

      As I say I believe the SG should place this subject aside until independence and therafter hold a proper referendum with the implication and impact on people to ascertain the people’s opinion

    122. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      galamcennalath @ 17:24,

      An “Irish Sea” customs border breaks the Treaty of Union.

    123. galamcennalath says:

      Robert J. Sutherland says:

      An “Irish Sea” customs border breaks the Treaty of Union.

      Indeed. That favoured status for NI would be in direct breach of ToU.

      Never have I seen someone who bounds from one rock-and-hard-place to another so often as TMay.

    124. Cactus says:

      Have an excellent International Women’s Day… bonnie lassies.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drGx7JkFSp4

      On yerselves sisters.

    125. Capella says:

      @ Confused 5.17 –

      I have no sympathy for the feminists – its actually hilarious – because THEY started denying scientific facts at least 25 years ago, now its bit them in the arse.

      As someone who’s been a feminist since the 1960s I would be interested to hear how feminists have been denying scientific facts for 25 years.
      Evidence?

    126. CameronB Brodie says:

      Sorry for being a smartypants. It’s just I’ve already covered this ground, a long, long time ago. Well, the turn of the 80s/90s anyway.

      Feminism and Postcolonialism: (En)gendering Encounters

      Postcolonialism and feminism as critical discourses have enriched the understanding and explanatory potential of international relations. One could argue that in the last two decades these two theoretical approaches have grown exponentially in their capacity to embrace the diversity and unpredictability of global political and social life.

      They stand resolutely in support of subversion and change in the political, cultural and social landscape; not just to bridge the distance between the centre and the margins but also to bring the knowledge of and from the margins to the centre. As Leela Gandhi notes, it is the encounter with feminism that encourages postcolonialism to ‘produce a more critical and self reflexive account of cultural nationalism’.11

      On the other hand, postcolonialism offers feminism the conceptual tool box to see multiple sites of oppression and to reject universalisms around gendered experiences of both men and women…..

      https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13688790.2016.1317388

    127. Sharny Dubs says:

      Rev yer nae feirt are ye!!

      Have a feeling I’m walking in a mine field here but, hay oh ….

      I went to an all boys boarding school (it was a good one, approved!!) and there was a “chap” who was in no way a “chap”, lovely person and everyone knew his, shall we call it condition (don’t really like the term but what else? hope I have not offended anyone with my lack of current correctness) as far as I know he never had any problems, he liked to keep himself “private” but that was about it. He was never victimised or anything, just another school kid. Hope he’s doing well.

      However this topic does kind of open up a can of worms. What of gender equality? Is that equality of opportunities or of outcome? If outcome, where will it all end? Will we be just opening the door to debates such as the likes of Jordan Peterson, Karen Straughan and Bettina Arndt who currently seem to lead the march against “toxic femininity”?

      Now I don’t give a monkeys about MGTOW or whatever, but Westminster would just love to use these avenues to cause mayhem in the yes movement. The old divide and rule.

      Just saying, forewarned and all the rest.

    128. CameronB Brodie says:

      Sharny Dubs
      This does smell a bit of divide and rule Sharny but trans-activism is a global phenomena. Some post-colonial, feminist, epistemology.

      FEMINIST EPISTEMOLOGY AND REPRESENTATION: THE IMPACT OF POSTMODERNISM AND POST-COLONIALISM

      Introduction

      The issue of representation is a significant and important one for research as well as for political activity. In the South African context representation involves issues such as who can speak for whom at conferences, who can do research
      about whom and what are the power relations involved in the research process.

      In the gender context the suggestions for ways in which these issues should be resolved have led to stark divisions among feminists. These divisions have serious implications for a feminist praxis of women doing collaborative research….

      archive.lib.msu.edu/DMC/African%20Journals/pdfs/transformation/tran030/tran030005.pdf

    129. Capella says:

      The British Foreign Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, is still in Scotland. Visiting Aberdeen. I wonder why.

      “The oil and gas industry is absolutely essential to the British economy – 300,000 jobs, one third of which are on Scotland. Aberdeen is central to that.”

      quotes the P&J.

      What surprises me is that only a third of oil and gas jobs are in Scotland. Since all the oil is in Scotland, it comes ashore in Scotland and is processed in Scotland, what are the other 200,000 people doing? Selling oil futures in The City?

    130. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Whatever your views on the position of the SNP or the views of Navratalova, the questions posted are flawed and loaded.

      Person 1 (expert in their field) disagrees with x because of y & z.
      What do you think?”

      Oh do fuck off with this pish. Firstly, I said “Former tennis player”, not “World-renowned expert” or even “Former tennis champion”. An entirely neutral description. I said she’d expressed an opinion, which she had, told people what it was, and asked whether they agreed with it or not.

      “The former Prime Minister Tony Blair recently expressed the view that ‘Scotland’ – a partner in the United Kingdom – should not be independent because of their disadvantageous geography, economic weakness and dependency on trade with their closest partner.
      What is your opinion?”

      My opinion is that I disagree with him, and I wouldn’t find it the least bit difficult to tick the “disagree” box if that question was asked in an opinion poll, because I’m not a fucking imbecile.

    131. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      This “stuff” is a classic case of extreme madness, there is too much madness about at the moment.

    132. Essexexile says:

      Ben Shapiro is worth listening to on this subject. I certainly don’t hold his views on everything but he tends to cut through the BS whenever he’s confronted by some self absorbed millennial during his Q&A sessions.
      Like most people I really couldn’t give a toss either way (or 70 ways). And again, like most people, I find it a very strange vanity project for the SNP to be bothering itself with at the most important moment in the party’s history.
      Out of touch?

    133. Republicofscotland says:

      O/T.

      I’m absolutely sick to back teeth of unionist news channels in Scotland knocking our NHS. The latest is STV news in where a snap inspection of the Southern General hospital (QEUH name forced on us by unionist executives).

      In which a few small matters cropped up including some grime on the hinge of a toilet seat, which STV news put across in a manner, as a outbreak of bubonic plague. However not once did STV news mention that the snap inspection report rated the hospitals cleanliness good.

      Only in Scotland do we suffer from this nonsense.

    134. mike cassidy says:

      Just a question.

      Does anybody know whether women identifying as men are having any problems?

    135. Hamish100 says:

      OT

      Looks like Swinney has backed down with the EIS.

      Bad deal for the taxpayer.

      Wonder how a care worker on basic pays feels working with folk who have dementia, double incontinence etc. 20 days leave a year doesn’t look so attractive.

      No more bleating from the EIS I hope– but I doubt it

    136. Sharny Dubs says:

      CameronB Brodiie 06.01

      I agree wholeheartedly, but just because, like the anti-feminist movement, it’s a global trend, does not make it any less real or dangerous for that matter.

    137. Hamish100 says:

      Saw a pro nuclear councillor -Tom Marshall promoting Nuclear Power at Hunterston North Ayrshire which has hundreds of cracks in bricks supposedly protecting the radioactive core.
      Marshall is a leading Tory councillor (omitted by the BBC) and once got into trouble for wanting Prestwick Airport to shut down permanently. Jamie Greene MSP was mighty annoyed. His concerns for jobs is therefore rather shallow.

      Labour conference in Dundee- the lighTs are switched off so you cant work out how empty it is. Nice close up camera work by the BBC to help.

    138. What if pedophiles start to identify as children?

    139. Shug says:

      Full marks to the bbc reports on the labour branch conference
      All shots were close cropped, no panni g views of the hall or audience. I could almost believe they had over 100 attending

    140. ephemeraldeception says:

      Capella,

      You can see the breakdown of oil related jobs in the Oil & Gas uk website.

      about 90000 jobs are in SE England/ Grater London. Head offices / insurance etc. Many of these would be in Scotland if we had independence but this is not factored into Gers or anything else.

      However, the facts have been in the public domain for decades.

      No nation on the planet, afaik, is so willfully ignorant as Scotland. In Scotland and especially the MSM, self harm is considered a benefit and in Westminster harming Scotland to SE Englands advantage is considered benevolence and Good Governance.

      There is nothing anti-English about this viewpiont, just a simple conclusion from basic demonstrable facts.

    141. Ken500 says:

      This affects .0000000001 % of the population, A tiny, tinny group of people. There are common access to premises without any problem with a bit of respect and renegotiation. A total storm In a teacup. A mountain out of a mole hole. Most of the problem could be sorted out with a bit of civil communication and a bit of sympathy and empathy. Beyond belief.

    142. yesindyref2 says:

      I’m not convinced people have thought about the importance of this question – for Indy. It’s twofold.

      The first is in conjunction with the Holyrood voting intentions, SNP + Greens would NOT have a majority to get an Indy Ref 2 after 2021. From the looks of it, if the SNP continue with this as a policy, their vote will go down further, perhaps way down. They could lose another half dozen seats, and if the Greens supported it, well, I doubt they’d gain teh SNP losses. So that would be a post 2021 Indy Ref 2 fecked.

      The second is that if an SNP attempt to legislate on this required them to push Westminster to make changes in the law, that would similarly, by the looks of it, convince some, perhaps many, to vote NO rather than YES. So that’s a pre-2021 Indy Ref 2 actually taking place fecked. It would be a NO.

      And a bit more, from the looks of it, with the female vote – and that could get worse.

      So the questions are directly relevant to Independence.

    143. Robert Peffers says:

      @ronnie anderson says: 8 March, 2019 at 4:04 pm:

      Robert Peffers Naw Robert your gitting confuddled wie Sax & rhythm of Johhny Dankworth lol”

      Naw! John wisna bad mind, bit his auld lady wiz a richt class act.

    144. Ken500 says:

      Leave folk alone who might not conform to the norm. They have rights too. Give them a bit sympathy for diversity.

    145. yesindyref2 says:

      The escape route for the SNP is very easy. Someone suggested a referendum would be needed. I’d go further than that. This is such a sensitive issue it should be on the manifesto the SNP were voted in on.

      It wasn’t, so they have no mandate for it, and they’d have to put it in their 2021 manifesto and try to be voted in on that manifesto. From the looks of it they’d lose, and lose heavily.

    146. Ken500 says:

      Folk are more worried about football. Sorting out the chaos around the game in parts of Scotland.

      Than a netball player in Brazil. Maybe Brazil are more enlighten just let everyone in on a game. They are not obsessed with winning. Like multimillionaire Olympician and world class tax evading players who feel their income might be threaten by a few million supplied by taxpayers.

      It’s only a game. Let everyone have a shot. It might be a bit more fun.

    147. Gary45% says:

      All this “Trans” Bollocks(excuse the pun) is a non story.
      Where will it end? the extinction of the term gender/ race? its happening with skin.. am I allowed to mention the word colour etc without backlash.
      Man is Man,
      Woman is Woman.
      Get Fucking Over IT.
      If you are male and are shite at competing against other MALES, take up Subbuteo or spend the rest of your life eating curly wurlys.

    148. Capella says:

      @ ephemerldeception – not willfully ignorant but deliberately misled IMO. Thx for the info.

      Here’s a Hitler meme from 2017 I only just discovered:
      Hitler finds out the Scottish people want Indyref#2

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dzWoHpk1UA

    149. Sinky says:

      Agree with Rev Stu on this.
      Watching Channel Four News and Aaron Banks involvement with Labour Leave in breaking election spending rules . Nine mins after 7 pm disgraced Labour MP Nigel Griffiths who still has a Westminster pass has been inplimentated.

    150. yesindyref2 says:

      @Hamish100
      What the EIS and other unions asked for was 10% THIS year. What they got was 3% THIS year amd 7% NEXT year, with a further 3% the YEAR AFTER.

      And yes, those are the facts. I checked them out before, took hours. But I wanted to know the truth of it.

      So it was a full compromise, both sides giving way.

      The media seem to hate teachers even more than the SNP, hence the very poor, inaccurate and biased reporting.

    151. yesindyref2 says:

      And when I say this year, I mean April 2018 – April 2019 i.e. this current budget year, not calendar year.

    152. CameronB Brodie says:

      OK, time to consult the High Priestess of third wave-feminism, Judith Butler. Remember, from a Critical Philosophy perspective, performativety can be considered a repackaging of neo-liberalism. And from a sociological perspective, performativety is detached from the ‘structural conditioning’ of society on human psychology (or something).

      Gender Performance: The TransAdvocate interviews Judith Butler
      https://www.transadvocate.com/gender-performance-the-transadvocate-interviews-judith-butler_n_13652.htm

      The silencing of feminists silences survivors
      https://womansplaceuk.org/the-silencing-of-feminists-silences-survivors/

      The New Patriarchy: How Trans Radicalism Hurts Women, Children—and Trans People Themselves
      https://quillette.com/2018/12/04/the-new-patriarchy-how-trans-radicalism-hurts-women-children-and-trans-people-themselves/

    153. Robert Peffers says:

      @Cubby says: 8 March, 2019 at 4:05 pm:

      ” … That was only in Morningside where Alastair Darling would get his sex of coal.”

      No! No! It was the same in Cimbly Benk and Corsterhpeen, as well.

      Now I’ve told this one on wings before and it is absolutely true.

      When I attended school in Leith we got a new geography teacher who hailed from Morningside. During one class she asked the question, “Name the main ports in Belgium?”.

      Now apparently the answers she got did not satisfy her and after several attempts to get the correct answers that she wanted she got rather frustrated and, stamping her foot said, “Children, Children Ostend”. As one the whole class rose to it’s feet.

    154. Ken500 says:

      Federer and Williams (top classed) played in the mixed double. There was much excitement surrounding the Event. Billed as the ‘match of the century’ in some quarters. Serena is better than some of the men. (Wimps -joke) Plenty of sponsorship and expectation of participation. Everyone had a great time by all accounts.

      Lighten up. For goodness sake. Everyone knows what real or not. They can judge for themselves. If anyone is offended or agitated don’t watch it. Men’s Tennis gets more sponsorship and audience figures. That’s just sport and people choice. The women do really well as well. Plenty of remuneration. It’s only a sport. Big business but still only a game.

      They are not jousting each other to death.

    155. Hamish100 says:

      yesindyref re pay. Teachers More than care workers who have worse working conditions

    156. robbo says:

      Well its awe a load of fannybaws if you ask me. Couldn’t care less.

      Am still reeling fae the PC brigade getting rid of the term ‘black board’. What fecking is it if its not a black board? Its black and its a board.

      Fecking hate awe this PC crap.

    157. Mike Cassidy says:

      Robert Peffers 7 07

      I’m sure Cleo Laine will be most disappointed to learn that she is no longer a class act!

    158. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Some of us have friends and family who get extremely frustrated when we go on about indy, Tories and politics generally. Then we get angry with them for being lazy and selfish. We don’t understand why they don’t care and they despise us as naive holier-than-thou know-it-alls because we do. Irresistible force + immovable object = total waste of time and energy.

      This ‘debate’ makes me sympathise with those non-indy friends and family, albeit fleetingly.

      🙁

    159. Robert Peffers says:

      @Stoker says: 8 March, 2019 at 4:30 pm:

      … Should have added to my previous post:
      Self-ID is laced with all sorts of inherent dangers & i’m one of the larger percentage who do not support the SNP on this issue.
      What on earth possessed them to even look at this subject never mind touch it?

      Have a thought before jumping in with both feet. The SNP does not work as most people, including a great many card carrying members. The hierarchy do not make party policy. Indeed they cannot do so. Go read the rule book.

      Only the delegates at national conference can do so and the delegates do NOT speak for themselves and dare not. They carry the motions that have been passed in the branches since the last national conference.

      So there it is – do not blame Nicola and the other elected party officials. They have no choice. To have got a motion passed as party policy it must have been proposed, seconded and either been unopposed or been voted on by a branch, gone on to national conference and been either unopposed or voted through by conference.

      So I ask you all – why are people here on Wings debating why the SNP hierarchy have chosen this unpopular policy? There is no way they could have done so.

    160. ben madigan says:

      for the day that’s in it
      Enjoy!
      Recognize your sister, wife, girlfriend,daughter, mother,granny?

      https://eurofree3.wordpress.com/2019/03/08/international-womens-day-8th-march-2019/

    161. yesindyref2 says:

      @Hamish100
      You may have an opinion on that with the care workers, but my point is that the result was a compromise, it wasn’t a case of “Swinney has backed down with the EIS

      or indeed

      Bad deal for the taxpayer“.

      And contrary to popular and totally incorrect opinion, teachers do not have an easy time of it. Hence this from Flanagan, which starts to address the real issue – stress, unpaid overtime, having to do 6 or more different level reading groups with all the unpaid preparation, and change nappies and help with toilets, teachers leaving the profession AND teachers leaving teacher training after, for instance, just one year when they hear what’s going on:

      Throughout the campaign it became increasingly clear that, in addition to pay, teachers also have serious concerns about issues such as the recruitment and retention of teachers, professional development, workload and the level of support for pupils with additional support needs. These issues then became a factor in the ongoing discussions

      Swinney has it seems agreed with this. I certainly hope so, teachers start the future of Scotland’s kids, and hence Scotland’s future.

      And teaching isn’t remotely like it was 10 years ago or even 5.

    162. Liz g says:

      Ian Brotherhood @ 7.43
      Too true…..
      I’d rather fascinate people with the Constitution 🙂

    163. Tom Busza says:

      I’m sorry but all this talk about sex and gender doesn’t do anything for me.

      However, talking about gender does remind me of my schooldays way back in the late 50s/early 60s. It didn’t bother me about the use of masculine/feminine genders whilst learning French at grammar school (yes, I was educated in England) as my mother language was/is Italian. But it was fun witnessing the rows in class about why (e.g.) a house is feminine but a roof is masculine. (house = la casa (It.), la maison (Fr.), la casa (Sp.) / roof = il tetto (It.), le toit (Fr.) el techo (Sp.)).

      The spanner was thrown in the works when we started German in the second year and the neuter gender was introduced. (house = das Haus, roof = das Dach).

      So there we have it – masculine/feminine/neuter.

      No wonder so many kids these days think that learning foreign languages at school is too difficult, but that’s another topic.

    164. CameronB Brodie says:

      What about some Critical Psychiatry, in defense of womanhood?

      Questioning Gender and Sexual Identity: Dynamic Links Over Time
      https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225748244_Questioning_Gender_and_Sexual_Identity_Dynamic_Links_Over_Time

      Rapid-onset gender dysphoria in adolescents and young adults: A study of parental reports
      https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202330

      Sex and Gender in Psychiatry: A View from History
      https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6188/e1b2b263f83ff4f32d9ba8adca664718aa1a.pdf

      CRACKED IT! WHY TRANSGENDERISM IS NOT REALLY ‘A THING’
      https://www.objectnow.org/news/2019/1/4/cracked-it-why-transgenderism-is-not-really-a-thing

    165. Hypocritical Michael Forsyth on Any Questions just now on BBC R4, from St. andrews, saying that it is important that the EU
      ‘ gives us back our independence and allows us to make our own laws’ och aye, but we can’t let Scotland have her independence back and allow her to make her own laws.

      What a shower of hypocrites.

    166. forgot to say that they have rolled out Ms. Somerset-Webb again. Presumably Ms. Oakshott was too busy. Somerset-webb saying that the backstop is actually a good thing…

      Hilary Benn, and Kirsty Blackmann

    167. CameronB Brodie says:

      For once I’m very much on topic, so I’ll not feel pushy.

      Gender is a problematic concept but it is essential to political science and stuff. Its’ use has helped improve the social position of women. All of that will be undone in order that we empathise with disordered minds, and change our public policy to suite their radical perception of reality.

      That certainly doesn’t appear rational to me.

    168. Mike Cassidy says:

      Meg Merrillees

      No sign of Billy Mitchell yet?!

    169. Ken500 says:

      In Iran women do not have to wear hijads. They wear scarfs over their heads outside. Colourful, loose scarfs. They wear colourful, modern clothes and go on motors bikes to get about. They work and study and have professional jobs. They can go aboard to study and get a good education, They do have a more traditional society. Like many countries. It is a beautiful country. Many foreigners work there including Oil workers from Scotland. They work all over the Middle East. Sometimes for years with there families in tow. Good education, High living standards often better than the UK. They work all over the world. Russia, China, Eygpt, Australia,US, the former Russian states. Anywhere there is Oil basically. With few problems. A good life style. Many good people,

    170. Somerset-Webb saying there isn’t actually a mandate for a Scottish indy ref and it’s not undemocratic it’s just not going to happen! ( saying 65%/70% want it then it should happen but it’s just nOT going to happen)
      Hilary Benn saying nicoal is not going to call it.

      Forsyth saying education has sunk, SG abysmal performance in Scotland.

    171. Ken500 says:

      In an open air swimming pool and many others. People are not allowed to take photographs. If people want to take photos of their families and friends. They have to sign declaration giving their name address etc. To identify themselves. Even on their photos, That is within family groups. The same at many school events. People are quite protective of the children. They can only buy videos of the event taken by the school authorities to recognised family members. They are quite strict about it.

    172. yesindyref2 says:

      OT
      Good grief. Did we know about this?

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/17488382.arc-of-prosperity-and-phyls-blog-independence-supporters-fleeing-scotland-due-to-brexit/

      Arc of Prosperity and Phyl’s Blog independence supporters ‘fleeing’ Scotland due to Brexit

    173. Petra says:

      O/T

      ‘EIS Council Recommends Acceptance of New Teacher Pay Offer.’

      ..”Mr Flanagan continued, “The new proposed offer outlined in today’s letter from the Scottish Government represents a positive attempt to address these issues. It offers a 3-year pay settlement of 3% from April 2018, 7% from April 2019, and 3% from April 2020, for a compounded total increase of 13.51% over three years.”…

      http://www.eis.org.uk/Value-Education-Value-Teachers/NewPayOffer

    174. Ken500 says:

      @ even in their phones. A member of staff comes along and they have to sign a firm and identify themselves. Maybe they check up the electoral roll. Or keep the information in case of trouble.

    175. CameronB Brodie says:

      How’s about some holism and the biopsychosocial view of health?

      Remember, British nationalism undermines Scotland’s public health, as lack of AGENCY undermines human well-being.

      The Bio-Psycho-Social Model of Human Behavior
      http://www.mhsso.org/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=41559&cn=8

      [Biopsychosocial understanding of human sexuality. Prerequisite for diagnostics and treatment in sexual medicine].
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16830127

      A biopsychosocial approach to women’s sexual function and dysfunction at midlife: A narrative review
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4808247/ (sorry ladies 🙂 )

    176. Ken500 says:

      That’s fine for the Teachers and the Gov doing a great job. A pity the Unionist Councils did not give them more support. Instead of borrowing and squandering taxpayers money on rubbish no one wants. Empty offices and shops costing £Millions and sitting empty for years. Unneeded.

      Well done for the teachers. Doing a marvellous job.

    177. alistair x says:

      “All forms of government destroy themselves, by carrying their basic principles to excess.
      Democracies become to free in politics, in morals, even in literature and are, until at last, even dogs in our houses rise on their hind legs and demand their rights.
      Disorder grows to such a point that society will then abandon all its liberty to anyone who can restore order”
      Cicero, Roman senator and philosopher.
      Just a sign of the times?

    178. Ken500 says:

      Deutschland 86 Retro

    179. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi ronnie anderson at 4:04 pm.

      You typed,
      “Robert Peffers Naw Robert your gitting confuddled wie Sax & rhythm of Johhny Dankworth lol”

      O/T but Ronnie started it. Surely you meant one of Dundee’s infamous sons, Johnny DUCKWORTH?

      https://sites.google.com/site/webgaffer/home/text-documents-01

      True history is everything…

    180. george wood says:

      The idea that men can be lesbians shows how warped this whole thing is.

      If you challenge this kind of thinking online, then your twitter or facebook accounts are in danger of being closed and in England you might get a vist from the police to encourage you to change your views.

      As regards the SNP, if they persist with crazy policies like this and the parking tax then they will get my vote up until Independence, but after that I’ll just spoil my ballot papers because there is nobody worth voting for.

    181. Gfaetheblock says:

      Gary 45% at 17.16

      It is hard to work out if you are a bigot or just not funny.

      If your comment was a joke it was not funny. If you believe that people go through gender realignment purely to be better at sport then you are and ignorant fool.

      I hope you are just not funny.

    182. handclapping says:

      The trouble is there are no penalties for self-identifying for trivial or criminal causes. I missed the Scottish consultation but in the later English one I suggested that the GRC Gender Recognition Certificate should come in two parts = the first a sworn declaration of intent and the second proof of the lived life.

      The advantage of the “easy” first part is that you can make it law that you dont get help from the NHS or into opposite sex facilities without a GRC Pt1 and if you do and you misbehave you get done for perjury.

      The second part GRC would continue to fulfill its present role as the authority to change your birth certificate.

      The main problem with this is that of the child who wants to be the other. I dont have an answer for this but I do think that no child or person on behalf of a child should be allowed to make such a momentous decision

    183. Sharny Dubs says:

      Robert Peffers @7:26

      At a dentist practice in Glasgow a patient gets into the chair, the dental assistant asks “cumfie?” The patent replies “Govan”

    184. Cubby says:

      O/T it’s funny how none of the Britnat parties raised the growing problem of hooliganism at football matches in Scotland at FMQ’s at Holyrood over recent weeks.

      More problems at Hibs v Rangers tonight. These Britnats who repealed the Offensive behavior at football act have a lot to answer for. So do their little helpers the Greens. They were warned that it was sending the wrong signal. I think the Britnats knew fine well that this would happen. The Greens were just green about it – useful idiots.

      These MSPS are supposed to be at Holyrood to improve Scottish society not encourage hooliganism. If they had any sense of shame they would be apologising right now. Well Patrick Harvie – have you?

    185. Sinky says:

      Cubby this is right on. OBFA act was opposed by son of Celtic chairman who thinks that it shouldn’t apply to their morons who are only marginally less worse than the orange bigots at Ibrox then supported by Tories and Lib Dems who don’t regularly go to football matches

    186. Suzanne K says:

      Ken500, I wholeheartedly agree that we should be smashing ‘gender norms’.
      However, I’m sure the 12 and 10 year old girls who were assaulted and filmed without consent in a changing room in Kirkcaldy by a 19 year old Male who ‘identified’ as a woman wanted to be ‘left alone in peace’ too. As did the women who were raped by Karen White, another Male who identified as a woman and was moved to the female estate despite being a serial rapist.
      Men’s Rights to a ‘gender identity’ that erases the Rights of Females is not progressive. It certainly doesn’t allow females that need safety and privacy away from Male bodied humans any peace or understanding.

    187. Suzanne K says:

      Oh and ClanDonald is correct in their assertion that many women are deserting the SNP. Some are now even going as far as to be voting No when they were Yes.
      The SNP dismiss their voices at their peril.

    188. Gary45% says:

      Gfaetheblock@9.10
      Certainly not trying to be funny or a bigot.
      To simply even discuss the subject, your answer says it all.

    189. Cubby says:

      Suzanne K@11.29pm

      Why would any sensible person change their mind on the need to remove Scotland from this horrendous union based on what ………..

    190. wull says:

      This is a very important post, raising a very important issue. Thank you, Rev. Stuart, for having had the courage to bring it to everyone’s attention. I hope the leadership of the SNP, who I am sure look with interest at this blog, take careful note.

      Parliamentary acts cannot change biological facts. Politicians are not magicians who can create absolutely everything anew, as if from scratch.

      There are many things which they can influence for the better, and in regard to which they can and indeed should be promoting positive action. In order to bring about positive change in society. But there are other things which are simply givens. There are simple facts which they cannot change even if they want to. They should not mislead the populations they serve into thinking they have some magical power over facts of that kind, when they simply don’t.

      Politicians must indeed propose changing (in whatever way they think best) the things they can change, but they must also respect the things they can’t change, and over which they actually have no power. And, above all, they must know the difference, and be able to distinguish these different kinds of things.

      If they don’t, instead of upholding reality they will soon be subverting it, and instead of promoting the true good – everyone’s good – they will soon be undermining it.

      That way lies totalitarianism. We don’t need to go far to find examples. The history of the 20th Century is littered with them. All the totalitarian regimes started with a denial of some aspect of reality, which they then tried to impose by force on whole populations. Thus were created ideologies which had no basis whatsoever in any real or true science – that is, radically false ideologies. Based on whim, not authentic knowledge. Ideologies which imposed themselves as the new and supposedly true science, that would liberate by substituting themselves for reality, and which then went on to ravage the humanity and the societies they pretended to serve.

      Some of the posts above suggest that some people are already being subjected to subtle forms of discrimination for not complying with an ideology which has no basis in fact or reality, and which flies in the face of any proper science. That’s how it starts – and from there, it just gets worse, as the flight from reality becomes increasingly entrenched in politicians who have over-reached themselves, going beyond the boundaries of their powers and competence.

      I am not saying without any qualification that that is happening. But I am saying it always could happen, anywhere in the world, including our own country, and we had better exercise vigilance to make sure it doesn’t. That is why political power always needs to be reigned in: it has the capacity to flee from reality and, even in the name of some supposed good, to impose great harm.

      It has to be said, loud and clear, that there is nothing known to humanity, or to science, which can turn a biological man into a biological woman, or vice-versa. That remains true no matter what anyone ‘feels’ about it. And it would remain true even if there was a consultation about the matter, and the whole population voted against it. Voting against reality does not make reality disappear. All it does is to make politics unreal, and very dangerously so.

      It is only with better science that you can overturn science. Politicians can’t overturn scientific realities simply on account of their will to do so. The ‘triumph of the will’ in such circumstances is the victory of illusion. Think of Nazi Germany.

      Nor can politicians overturn scientific facts simply on account of their, or anyone else’s, feelings about these facts. Nor do they have the ability to invalidate science just because they don’t like its findings. Nor can they overcome the limitations of science by dictating what they think it should say when it has, in fact, no grounds on which to say it.

      Politicians can’t decide that women should be able to become men, and men women, just because that’s what they think SHOULD be possible, when in fact it isn’t. When there is no known way to make something happen, they should not deceive people into thinking that they can bring that thing about, simply by passing a law about it in a parliament.

      As Germaine Greer said on a radio programme a couple of months ago: ‘Just because I think I am a cocker spaniel, it doesn’t mean I am one’. To which we may add that even if an act of parliament said you can become one if you want to, it still won’t mean that when you decide to do so you will actually become one. No matter how sincere or laudable your aspirations to become one might be, it still won’t happen if there is no way of making it happen. Even if you have the illusion that it has happened, it still won’t have happened. An illusion is just that – illusory. It is not a reality.

      When governments start telling biologists what to teach and say and think about biology, or do likewise to any scientist or expert in any given field, we are on the slippery slope towards unfreedom. Totalitarianism, even. And people will end up being persecuted for not believing in the false belief that the government is intent on promoting.

      If the Party that was founded to regain Scotland’s freedom ends up sleepwalking its way down that road, it will do so at its own and our peril. To the huge detriment of the cause for which it was founded.

      The SNP should free itself from all such unfreedom very quickly indeed, and concentrate instead on the primary purpose for which it exists. The Yes movement is far greater than the SNP, and although it expects the SNP to provide leadership to the cause it will not thank the SNP for tying Scotland’s freedom to any secondary agenda. Especially one which most consider dubious, alien, mistaken, unfounded or simply wrong.

      We need a free and independent Scotland bolstered, and safeguarded, by a sound constitution which will keep our political leaders focused on reality. A constitution that will save them and us from the many perils of unfounded illusion.

    191. defo says:

      PC gawn mad I tell ya
      WTF would dear old Mary Whitehouse make of it all!

      I blame neo-liberalism, ergo it’s ‘Lady’ T’s, & her “greatest achievement” Blairs baby.

      The fracturing of society, through the relentless promotion of selfishness has led to the identity crisis’ all around us, not just this absurd, empathy free minority of a minority, who seem to be having fun with their 15 minutes that the internet has enabled.
      Twenty years ago, you’d be laughing your cock off at this nonsense.

    192. Betty Boop says:

      ClanDonald, 8/03/19, 8:17pm

      the SNP will wipe itself out if it proceeds with this nonsense.

      That may well be the intention.

      The leadership completely underestimates the strength of feelings among the grass roots and have spent too much time listening to the opinions of a few key advisers who are pushing their own agendas.

      The loyalty of some advisers should be investigated, not just their competence.

    193. yesbot says:

      Serious question:

      Has any bonafide Winger actually met R Peffers?

      One to one conversation? Fascinating to know. xx

    194. Petra says:

      @ Sharny Dubs says at 9:26 pm … ”At a dentist practice in Glasgow a patient gets into the chair, the dental assistant asks “cumfie?” The patient replies “Govan”

      ………………..

      That reminds me of a Court case that I was involved in when one of the test cases was asked where he came from. He replied ”Halfway.” He was then asked repeatedly (as he constantly said Halfway) … ”halfway to where?” The test case (who was rejected later) just stood there google-eyed not knowing what to say next. As you can imagine we Scots on the benches just fell about laughing. Good example, imo, of Court cases involving English people who don’t have a clue about the Scots or Scotland. Different people, different cultures and all of that. Another wee example that tells us that it’s time to get out.

    195. yesindyref2 says:

      @yesbot
      An R Peffers exists in the same details as described by the one on Wings. An R Peffers has posted on the Herald and maybe the Grun in the past (I forget) with similar posts about the Treaty of Union etc. And possibly before that on the NatConv online forums back in 2007/8 (wouldn’t surprise me). He’s also been identified as AuldBob from soc.culture.scottish and I’ve seen him (crossed swords even as he incorrectly corrected me even back then) there around 2000 or so. Same contradictory grumpy old bastard even back then. Met face to face? No.

    196. Petra says:

      @ yesbot says at 12:50 am … ”Serious question: Has any bonafide Winger actually met R Peffers? One to one conversation? Fascinating to know. xx”

      Serious question and quite fascinating to know right enough?! Is that of any relevance when most of the people on here (over 300,000 thousand people who visit this site) haven’t actually met each other at all. I for one haven’t met any Wingers face to face. I haven’t met Stu Campbell either. So where are you going with this YESBOT? Is Robert Peffers, out of 300,000 people, of some particular interest to you and if so why so? Why pluck him out? Let’s just guess why, why don’t we? Join the wee, but ever increasing, club of ”let’s all wear Robert Peffers right down (elderly, sick and disabled but more than anything highly influential to the Independence cause) and get rid of him.”

      And, eh, who is actually a bonavide Winger YESBOT? Do you know? You might find if you delved a little deeper that some of the (many, imo) ”bonefide Wingers” don’t actually support Independence at all. Focus on them why don’t you. And just to help you out, save you some time and give you a little clue, lol, just focus on the very people that continually castigate Robert Peffers.

      Robert Peffers actually uses his own name on here. Who are you SCOTBUT? Is that your real name? Mr or Mrs SCOTBUT? Who are you? Where do you come from? Tell me as I would be seriously fascinated to know.

      Oh and eh big XX from me too to soften the blow. Soften us up. The Scots ain’t daft, SCOTBUT. Not as the myth goes .. Scots being too stupid and all of that. We’re FAR from it.

    197. yesindyref2 says:

      Cop a clue, use google and cut and paste the whole line:

      “yesbot says:” site:wingsoverscotland.com

    198. CameronB Brodie says:

      wull
      Though I agree with the sentiment of your post, “constructivism” is an important element REAL science.

      Philosophy of Science Lecture #6: Constructivism
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgwRVUmAVKM (intro ends @1:19)

    199. CameronB Brodie says:

      ….an important element of REAL science.

      Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science

      Abstract

      Social constructivists maintain that we invent the properties of the world rather than discover them. Is reality constructed by our own activity? Or, more provocatively, are scientific facts–is everything –constructed? Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science is a clear assessment of this critical and increasingly important debate.

      Andre Kukla presents a comprehensive discussion of the philosophical issues involved and analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of a range of constructivist arguments, illustrating the divide between the sociology and the philosophy of science through examples as varied as laboratory science, time, and criminality. He argues that current philosophical objections to constructivism are drastically inconclusive, while offering and developing new objections. Throughout, Kukla distinguishes between the social causes of scientific beliefs and the view that all ascertainable facts are constructed.

      Keywords
      Science Philosophy Constructivism (Philosophy)

      https://philpapers.org/rec/KUKSCA

    200. grafter says:

      Meanwhile deep in the bowels of Whitehall…..

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0dzWoHpk1UA

    201. wull says:

      Many thanks, CameronB Brodie, for your helpful comment and post at 3.00 a.m.

      I do agree that ‘constructivism’ is an important concept which has to be acknowledged and properly grasped. That includes understanding it properly. This requires us to distinguish carefully between the given elements of reality and those aspects of belief and behaviour that we build, or ‘construct’, around these givens.

      This is what seems to be lacking in the ill thought out policies which the SNP / Scottish Government seem to be developing – and are now clumsily imposing – in regard to the issues arising from the notion of ‘trans-gender’. They have been too easily taken in, or indeed taken over, by certain lobbyists who are determined to spread a specific and, in my view, dangerously mistaken view of the same. They have not taken the time to listen sufficiently to genuine expertise, and authentic science, before deciding what to do about these issues.

      This results in politicians failing to distinguish between, on the one hand, social constructs which they can challenge and maybe should seek to change and, on the other hand, those ‘given realities’ which they and their laws can’t change anyway, no matter how hard they try to impose such change. And the harder they try to impose change on realities that cannot be changed by human law, the more totalitarian they and their laws will eventually become.

      Flight from reality of this kind ended up not only in the political worship of the gods of Unreality in the 20th Century, but also in the imposition death camps, mass exterminations, gulags and cultural revolutions. All carried out in the name of high-sounding but flawed ideologies that were founded on lies – flight from reality – and aimed at bringing about the unattainable. Because no matter how hard you try to impose it, and no matter how draconian the laws you invent to implement it, something that is Unreal simply cannot be achieved.

      There are ‘given realities’ that are not subject to change, which politicians (like everyone else) must simply accept. Changing these realities is not within the power of politicians, and not what politics is about. Such realities are a matter for scientific inquiry, in order to understand them better, not political decision to transform them into something they are not, and cannot become.

      Yet there are also social constructs and conventions built around these given realities, which previous generations have passed on to us and which we ourselves choose either to continue, or to abolish or to modify. The UK is just such a construct, and most of us on this sight want to abolish it, and bring Scotland’s independent nationhood back into existence. this will require political action, in order to achieve this justifiable political end. though we must also admit that other people who do not wish to see this happen are entitled to take just political means to stop it, or invent some new kind of UK instead.

      It is precisely in regard to such purely man-made social constructs that the domain of politics arises. Legitimate political authority may and indeed often must be wielded over them, in order to bring about improvements in society, based on better or improved social constructs.

      Being invented by humans, and not simply being ‘given realities’ that people receive, our social constructs can and may and often should be altered. This is done by people themselves, usually through their governing authorities. Alterations to the social arrangements we have invented or customarily practice are often justly encouraged and carried through by the governments whom the people have chosen to rule them, by means of passing and enforcing new and what are perceived to be better laws.

      This is especially important when existing laws are found to be unjust. But no law passed in a parliament can force the moon to shine more brightly, or the sun less so. King Canute, in all his glory, when he ordered the tide turn backwards. He knew he wouldn’t, of course. He was only demonstrating to his subjects that they should not ask him to change the things that it was not in his power to change, but only those things that he could change. By so doing, he was also demonstrating that he knew the difference between given realities and social constructs.

      Would that our own politicians were so wise.

      Especially on this trans-gender issue which Rev. Stu Campbell has so rightly raised here. The re-creation of Scotland as an independent nation, a social construct which is indeed attainable and within our grasp, should not be allowed to founder on the rocks of an illusion.

      Let politicians concentrate on changing the things they can change, and not waste their time pretending to themselves and others that they have power over realities which they cannot change. No one has the capacity to turn a man into a woman, and no one the power to turn a woman into a man. We simply do not know how to do that kind of thing.

      Anyone who thinks they have done it – for instance, by simply making some surface ( i.e. superficial) changes to their body – is living an illusion. At bottom, in reality, if he is a ‘he’ he will remain what he is, a man. And if she’s a ‘she’, she will likewise remain a woman.

      It is not the job of governments, or politicians, to endorse or encourage our illusions.

      Any man who would like to be a woman has my sympathy, but that does not make him a woman. Likewise with with any woman who would like to be a man.

      Time for the SNP to get real – and get down to their real work of gaining our independence. Without letting any red herring impede or obscure that end, which surely remains its founding and paramount objective. The SNP have generally been very good at that, at least up till now. I, for one, am grateful. But this is certainly not the moment for them to get waylaid, just when the goal is within our grasp.

      There is a bit of a squall going on, for sure, but the ship is coming near port, and – look! – the harbour is in sight. Get rid of all the unnecessary ballast, Captain, and bring us home. Without any further delay, and no distractions … As fast as you possibly can.

    202. wull says:

      PS to above post: It can be envisaged that a day could come when science will finally discover a way to transform a man into a fully-fledged woman, and a woman into a fully-fledged man. If that ever happened there would then be political (and indeed ethical) decisions to be taken about whether to allow that, and if so under what circumstances and within which conditions. Or, indeed, whether to ban and prevent it from happening – after all, there are plenty of things which human beings can potentially do, but which governments legislate against.

      At that point, if or when such fully-fledged change becomes a genuine possibility, there would be political decisions to be made. But we are not there – indeed we are nowhere near there – at the moment. At the present time such a possibility exists only in the realms of science fiction; in terms of real science, it remains impossible – something that lies outside our knowledge and beyond our capacities.

      Governments have to legislate for the real world, as it currently exists. However much politicians might enjoy fiction, as a preferred and indeed honourable recreation, they cannot and mustn’t legislate for an imaginary or fictitious world which does not yet exist. They have to keep their feet on the ground, and pass laws that apply to the real world, not a fantasy-land of imagined or illusory futures.

    203. Mark says:

      I’m a long-time wings reader and tend to come here for the dissection of political nonsense spouted, but I don’t much care for the lop-sided commentary on trans issues.

      I have a couple of trans friends and am wholly supportive of people choosing their own gender and living however the hell they want to — all of the scaremongering regarding ‘biological males’ assuming female gender and then committing crimes is fear-mongering. While you get the odd case like the one quoted, it is clearly not the norm. The person in question was a rapist. Putting a rapist in a woman’s prison and not supervising them properly is incompetent, but it shouldn’t cause a mass knee-jerk when it comes to trans issues.

      Let’s run the figures: in 2017, there were 7,436 prisoners in Scottish jails. 17 of these (0.2%) were identified as transgender (source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42221629).

      The number of MTF prisoners will be a subset of these 17 people, and the number of sexual offenders even smaller still (we’re likely talking about low single digits).

      I.e. there’s plenty that could’ve been done to prevent it without infringing on the rights of people who are already marginalised.

      It’s basically what gay people went through when I was growing up — they were painted as weird & unnatural.

      Regarding public support for some of these issues: people are genuinely confused about it — that much is clear. But again, back to the column inches about trans issues: they’re broadly filled with sensationalist stuff, with the odd article about self-harm & increased suicide rates. It’s like wondering why Daily Mail readers worry about foreigners when nothing good is said about immigrants in their paper.

      Also, sometimes a government is brave for taking a decision that the electorate does not support. Would you welcome a volte-face from the Russian government on gay rights, or should they listen to their voters?

      Onto the sport issue: Despite being wholly supportive of trans people in all other areas, I initially went with the flow — my _assumption_ was that trans folk who were born as males and transition to women will have certain biological advantages after going through male puberty (such as increased bone density, bone size and so on), and that these will yield a definitive performance advantage in their chosen sport, even when testosterone-suppressants are in taken for multiple years.

      However, where’s the evidence for this? There’s not really much evidence out there, as the sample size is very small. It may be the case that suppressing testosterone is all you need to do, and the other (largely irreversible) physical traits are not relevant in a lot of sports.

      We should be doing the science to find out whether a ban is justified. At the moment, none of us know the answer; we’re just making assumptions. Assumptions are often reasonable-sounding but wrong.

    204. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I have a couple of trans friends and am wholly supportive of people choosing their own gender and living however the hell they want to”

      Absolutely everyone is in favour of that.

      “While you get the odd case like the one quoted, it is clearly not the norm. The person in question was a rapist. Putting a rapist in a woman’s prison and not supervising them properly is incompetent,”

      Obviously. Which is why you shouldn’t do it EVEN IF THEY PRETEND TO BE A WOMAN. Because the fact is they aren’t a woman, and are therefore still a danger to women who are locked up with them. Reality has to trump feelings when the two come into conflict, which is all anyone is advocating.

      “I.e. there’s plenty that could’ve been done to prevent it without infringing on the rights of people who are already marginalised.”

      Hang on, who’s infringing on anyone’s rights here? How does ensuring a male rapist is put in a male prison infringe on anyone’s rights? Which rights precisely are we talking about?

      “However, where’s the evidence for this? There’s not really much evidence out there, as the sample size is very small”

      Um, no it isn’t, because the sample is all male athletes and all female athletes. If you study those groups it’s just MIND-NUMBINGLY obvious that males have a huge advantage across a wide range of physical factors, and since men who’ve reduced their testosterone are still males, they plainly retain the vast bulk of that advantage.

      Ask yourself the simplest question: why are there numerous examples of transwomen who were mediocre against males suddenly turning into champions when they compete against females, but absolutely no examples of transmen magically getting better when they compete against biological men? It’s because all the testosterone in the world can’t recreate 15 years of male physiology in lung capacity, bone density, musculature, heart strength and all the rest.

      “We should be doing the science to find out whether a ban is justified.”

      The science has been done a million times over. Men are intrinsically genetically stronger, harder and faster than women, by a very large margin. Every year, hundreds of teenage boys – children halfway through puberty – beat women’s athletic world records that have stood for three decades. You seriously think suppressing testosterone in a 35-year-old adult for 12 months can undo that sort of advantage? Sober up.

    205. Essexexile says:

      Just wondering how likely it would be that TM could offer NS the opportunity to lead a UK wide, but clearly Scottish inspired, crusade on individual rights to gender determination in exchange for remaining ‘on message’ re Scotland’s approach to Brexit (ie do nothing).
      Might sound ridiculous but from TM’s point of view it’s a shot to nothing and a test of Nicola’s mettle.
      Just wondering. They’ll try anything, remember.

    206. yesbot says:

      Petra @ 9 March, 2019 at 2:02 am
      —————–
      Petra

      Your assertions are completely off the mark. Contrary in fact. Damaging and distorting.

      Please explain how the post you replied to, could possibly have been construed to justify your extremely odious and hectoring response?

      Who is SCOTBUT?

    207. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Yesbot.

      Long time no see! Whaura yibin?

      8=)

    208. Cubby says:

      Dr Doom@7.16 pm

      “…. re Scotlands approach to Brexit (i.e. do nothing).”

      Another sneaky Britnat post proving your Britnat credentials once again Dr Doom. I’ll tel you what is doomed – your precious Union.

    209. Essexexile says:

      Oh for God’s sake Cubby. Have you nothing better to do than stalk me?
      Please stay out of my life.

    210. Mark says:

      > Hang on, who’s infringing on anyone’s rights here? How does ensuring a male rapist is put in a male prison infringe on anyone’s rights? Which rights precisely are we talking about?

      We’ve got a group of people who are far more likely to harm themselves than others being broadly painted as a risk to women (in the case of MTF trans women). However, the amount of column inches dedicated to this vs. risk to women is lopsided. Yes, we absolutely should protect women, but I’m fed up of framing this as some sort of battle between trans people and women (again, we’re probably talking about single digit figures for MTF trans prisoners in Scottish jails — I’m sure we can come to a reasonable solution whereby women are protected and trans prisoners are fairly treated, too).

      The rest of your reply is basically saying “biological males are faster/stronger at a base level so even if they take a testosterone suppressant, it’ll still be unfair, and the evidence is so obvious that it’s everywhere”.

      You assert that it’s an obvious fact that MTF trans women with testosterone suppressants will perform better than a cis women, but don’t bother showing any evidence for it. It’s an intuitive argument, but that doesn’t mean it’s actually true (I used to hold exactly the same opinion until I examined the issue more). There’s a chance that it doesn’t hold, or doesn’t confer a noticeable advantage for certain sports.

      Evidence-wise, there’s not really much out there. Here’s a passage from one of the few papers I found (not cherry-picked, literally one of the first results for “MTF trans women sport performance fairness”):

      > Given the paucity of relevant research and the likely im-pact of decisions relating to transgender and intersex athletes, there is now an urgent need to determine not only
      what physical advantages transgender women carry after HRT but also what effect these advantages may have on transgender women competing against cisgender women in a variety of different sports. Properly designed intervention studies are required to investigate the effect of the transition (both MTF and FTM transitions) on trainability and performance as well as the effects of HRT on performance in intersex individuals. Such studies would allow sex differences in performance to be determined such as disentangling hormonal influences from the unresolved issue of ‘muscle memory’
      [1]

      Similarly, even fairplayforwomen.com (which leans heavily on one side — advocating a ban on MTF trans women in women’s sport) contains the quote:

      But there is currently no evidence that lowering Testosterone to normal female levels can fully remove male-competitive advantage. [2]

      The phrasing is deliberate, but the quote is extremely lackluster when it comes to supporting their cause (otherwise they’d say something like, “there is evidence to show that lowering testosterone to normal female levels does not fully remove male-competitive advantage”.)

      We should give it a bit of time and make a choice based on evidence rather than gut feel. I’m on the fence at the moment, and am genuinely curious to see what the answer is.

      [1] – https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310050064_Beyond_Fairness_The_Biology_of_Inclusion_for_Transgender_and_Intersex_Athletes

      [2] – https://fairplayforwomen.com/tw_in_sports/

    211. yesbot says:

      Good to hear from you BDTT

      I’m disheartened to be honest, I hope to God there is a plan??

      Gutted to have missed the Wings do last week.

      Y’all changed the date, so missed the highlight of my year, cos committed to skiing wi’ nae sna!!

      I read it was a great success. xx

    212. Charlie says:

      Mark

      Males who identify as trans commit crime at the exact same rate as all other males. This includes sexual offences against females.

      There are 22 males who identify as trans in the female estate in Scotland. There are just over 400 women in the female estate. While women can and do commit the most heinous of crimes, the vast majority of our female prisoners are not incarcerated for violent offences. Most have been victims of far worse crimes than they themselves have committed and 65% have suffered brain damage as a consequence of male violence.

      The same is not true for male offenders, the vast majority of whom are locked up for violent offences. Examples of males who identify as trans who were placed in the female prison estate in Scotland include brutal murderers and sexual offenders. And just one male prisoner transferred into the female estate causes huge amounts of damage and setbacks to the rehabilitation and recovery of female prisoners.

      Put them into separate wings in the male estate. That way they are safe from all the other males and the female prisoners are not forced to share their space with violent males.

      This debate isn’t about trans violence and it isn’t about portraying males who identify as trans as a particular danger to females. This is about MALE violence and the fact that males who identify as trans are, of course, male and therefore pose the same risk to females as all other males.

      They display the same pattern of criminality, commit sexual offences against women at the same rate and exhibit male pattern sexuality. Considering that 80 to 95% of males who identify as trans in the UK’s have made no changes to their bodies whatsoever and that the vast majority are straight or bisexual, that they should commit sexual offences against women at the same rate as all other males is therefore not a surprise. Karen White is just one example of many hundreds of males identifying as trans committing violent and sexual offences against women. Again, not a surprise.

      Most men do not commit crimes, but some do.

      We cannot distinguish one from the other by looking, they don’t wear a sign emblazoned upon their forehead that says violent. To put it bluntly, based on the empirical data that we have collected worldwide, in many decades worth of crime statistics, we know that males as a class pose a risk to females as a class.

      Every 30 hours a woman in the UK is murdered by a man. Every thirty hours. Thousands raped every year. Hundreds of thousands sexually and physically assaulted. That’s our reality.

      Women have fought for many decades to create female-only spaces that are free from males and therefore safer for us. (Police reports last year showed that unequivocally, the risk of sexual harassment and assault for women and girls in mixed-sex changing rooms for instance was 900% higher than in female-only facilities.)

      There is no evidence that identifying as trans renders any given male harmless to females. There is evidence that they commit crimes at the same rate as all other males.

      Hence we want to continue to keep ALL males out of a very limited number of female-only spaces.

      And no, males who identify as trans are not at higher risk of harm than females. Again, the hard data shows that just isn’t true. More UK males who identify as trans have become murderers in the last ten years than become murder victims. Their risk of being murdered is lower than that of females. It’s also lower than that of all other males. This isn’t Brazil. Trans people have equal rights here.

      Furthermore, the attacks they do experience are committed by other males. Not females. But we are not human shields for males to hide behind. YOU make space for gender-non-conforming men in the man box. You sort out the problem. It’s male violence that is the issue here. So you start tackling it to keep your fellow males and us females safe, however we all identify. Carve out safe spaces for males identifying as trans in male spaces. Or, since we can’t solve the problem of male violence all that quickly, let’s create third spaces where they be safe.

      In the meantime, I will continue to campaign to retain our female spaces and our sex-based rights that protect them. Together with the many thousands of women who like me have started fighting for our rights again just in the last 18 months.

      We’re not going to agree to give up our rights and we’re not going to shut up about it either. Not even if you tell us we’re transphobic or hateful or bigoted if we don’t prioritise the feelings of males over our safety and our rights.

    213. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Yesbot.

      There’ll probably be another get-together at the same venue by the summer. Going by what my ears picked up onnyhoo…

    214. Charlie says:

      Correction to the above: a woman is murdered by a man in the UK every 60 hours not 30.

      IIRC the latter refers to Argentina. No idea how I mixed them up.



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top