Scottish survey on gender recognition bill update

Stop pretending that people on the other side are the enemy who want to deny your right to speak. Stop making on that the people on the other side are wicked conspiracists out to deny women their rights. Have a grown up debate about it.

Like this do you mean volver?

‘Police did nothing’: Trans activists ‘manhandle’ lone woman 20/05/2022

Sky News host Rita Panahi says a group of trans activists – including a group of men in balaclavas – have attacked a lone woman during a protest at the statue of a suffragette leader in Manchester.

Ms Panahi said Police were present and watched the event happen.

“They saw a woman being manhandled by men, including by men in balaclavas, and then they did nothing to stop that,” Ms Panahi said.

“But they did appear later to go and have a stern word to the victim.”

Ms Panahi discussed the issue with author Douglas Murray.

“When you’re at the position of claiming that you’re standing up for minority rights and you hijack a statue of a suffragette, and you dress as black ninjas, and you’re men, and you attack women – maybe you’re the bad guys,” Mr Murray said.

Well said Mr. Murray a great example of common sense.

Hope you had an enjoyable time Chewbacca.

Or perhaps you mean this kind of wicked conspiracists out to deny women their rights?

Last night I attended a meeting by Woman’s Place UK held at the Mechanics Institute in Manchester. The title was “The importance and future of single-sex service provision in policy and law’. I tweeted liberally from the meeting in support of the speakers, as many others did. This morning I woke up to find the hashtag #WPUKManchester was trending at No7 and I was pleased because obviously women had amplified other women’s voices effectively. As I began to engage with other Twitter users about the event I was abruptly locked out of my account and given a 12-hour ban. A man had reported me for inciting violence and harassment. The sick irony of this is not lost on women.

A protest was organised against the meeting. As I entered it, I was expecting to be confronted by trans activists who had declared on a poster, “Let’s show them they’re not welcome here!’ The “them” being “TERFS”, or as they are more commonly known, women. Surprisingly no protesters were at the door and I entered, hugging women I knew and took my seat. As the Chair Emma Hilton began the event, shockingly loud chants began booming behind her head, broadcast from a sound system outside, and she looked briefly unsettled before continuing. The protest had now arrived.

Fuck TERFs” was shouted repeatedly, amongst many other misogynist and hateful things. Women in the room were brave and carried on speaking, attempting to be heard above the outside mob, but many of us were of course scared because we knew that the potential for being hurt by protesters as we left was significant. Many of us are survivors of male violence; loved ones had sent messages about our safety, worrying about us.

Watching our phones to see what was happening, and judge the threat, we realised that the protesters were large in number and they looked and sounded incredibly angry and threatening. Greater Manchester Police had escorted this angry crowd of threatening men, and some women, through the City Centre to the doors of a meeting where women were speaking about their rights; a meeting they were legally entitled to hold.

We began to appeal to the police from our Twitter accounts to ensure our safety and to act to move on the angry protesters. Women who ventured outside to see what was happening were asked by police to return inside so that they didn’t “inflame things”. The mirror with women being abused in a domestic setting and trying not to “wind up” the abuser is stark.

The really eerie moment was at 9.20pm when the mob went suddenly silent. Women who have been abused know to fear the moment when an abuser goes suddenly quiet. They know to brace for what is coming.

Ah well. One brief moment of common sense, quickly subsumed in cut and paste examples of how they're all out to get us.

Keep fighting the good fight sisters. Us quiet little mousey types will just keep quiet in case the men see us, and we'll let you look after our futures for us.

Time for us to act like adults

Like these?

Footage from a feminist event in the U.K. is going viral today after a trans activist was caught on film physically assaulting a woman. The assailant was part of a black-clad gang preventing feminists from getting near a statue of suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst.

Manchester Speakers’ Corner hosted a pro-woman demonstration today led by vocal gender critical feminist Kellie-Jay Keen, also known as Posie Parker. The event, a peaceful demonstration of women and feminist allies in support of women’s sex-based rights, was quickly derailed by activist group Manchester Trans Rise Up.

The organization sent a number of black-clad ‘security’ guards to vandalize the nearby statue of suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst, draping it in trans-colored ribbons and flags, and also prevented feminist activists from going near it.

At one point during the event, a lone feminist approached the statue, seemingly with the intention of placing a flag baring the colors of the suffragette movement near it. But footage taken shows the woman being physically handled by the trans activists, with a male roughly grabbing her.

Women have NOTHING to fear from trans have they? No loss of rights? No loss of freedom to speak? No loss of female only spaces? And certainly no loss of safety from abuse, violence or physical and verbal attacks? Oh good! We can all rest easy. Just wimmin being hysterical again, I suppose?

Us quiet little mousey types will just keep quiet in case the men see us, and we'll let you look after our futures for us.

Perhaps that's for the best.

Page after page of discussion about gender identity. But apparently it can all be boiled down to the question, "What is a woman". In fact, its worth exposing the country to the worst government any of us have ever seen, because the other guy "doesn't know what a woman is".

Time for that other GN staple. I despair.

Chewbacca

^Us quiet little mousey types will just keep quiet in case the men see us, and we'll let you look after our futures for us.^

Perhaps that's for the best.

Yeah. Clearly never met me.

Thank the Lord for that!

Well that's mutual.

This bill is an adjustment of an earlier Act. The original required those who wanted to "change their sex" to undertake to do (as near as possible) just that if they wished the "change of sex" to replace their birth sex on all their paperwork and for them to be legally that sex in all respects. - The requirement was for them to take active steps toward being the sex which they craved (through taking medication to alter their hormone production and/ot to have surgery to alter their genitalia. They were also expected to have a "dry run" of two years of living in their desired sex before their application for a legal change was considered.

This proposed update does indeed ease those requirements, removing the medical input and shortening the "dry run" to three months. - so far, so good, at least for the trans people - but it does mean that someoneof 18 can leap into legally changing their definition into the opposite sex ^without demonstrating that being in what they feel is the wrong category is causing them such mental and psychological distress that transition is the only way forward. The proposal to lower that age to 16 will mean that even more young people, with even less experience of the adult world, will take a precipitate decision that they could regret bitterly.

There is much in this that is inaccurate. There is no requirement of medical treatment. The act states
^The Standard Application track for a Gender Recognition Certificate requires applicants to
demonstrate that:^
• They have, or have had, gender dysphoria
• They have lived fully for the last two years in their acquired gender and continue to do so;
• They intend to live permanently in their acquired gender until death.
Two medical certificates are required but these do not have to show any treatment only a diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

A very chilling account Chewbacca in your post @15.22. Hard to believe that this is happening in the UK in 2022.

The proposal to lower that age to 16 will mean that even more young people, with even less experience of the adult world, will take a precipitate decision that they could regret bitterly.

Given that there is no need to medical intervention, if they decide they have taken the wrong path, can't they change back?

It kind of demolishes the argument that trans rights takes nothing away from women doesn't it Smileless. Women have lost their safe spaces in refuges, prisons, hospital bed and changing rooms. They've now lost their right to speak publicly, and behind closed doors and must expect to be verbally and physically assaulted if they do so. I'm expecting that, before too long, the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst will be demolished because it will be seen as a figure of hate and division. But I'm assured that they mean us no harm.......

But we're not paranoid, no of course not.

Expect to be verbally assaulted indeed. Lost the right to speak publicly This is the over reaction I was talking about earlier. It takes away from valid discussion, but I expect I'm saying that because I hate women and I'm trying to shut them down.

volver

^The proposal to lower that age to 16 will mean that even more young people, with even less experience of the adult world, will take a precipitate decision that they could regret bitterly.^

Given that there is no need to medical intervention, if they decide they have taken the wrong path, can't they change back?

Anyone able to answer?

volver

Ah well. One brief moment of common sense, quickly subsumed in cut and paste examples of how they're all out to get us.

Keep fighting the good fight sisters. Us quiet little mousey types will just keep quiet in case the men see us, and we'll let you look after our futures for us.

Good grief! And you say you are being patronised.

Page after page of discussion about gender identity. But apparently it can all be boiled down to the question, "What is a woman". In fact, its worth exposing the country to the worst government any of us have ever seen, because the other guy "doesn't know what a woman is".

I'm not sure what you mean by the first half of this post. Yes, there is discussion about gender identity. That is what this is about. What did you expect to see? A discussion of jam making or trombones?

As to whether it's worth exposing the country to more Tory misrule, I don't know the answer to that one. It's Hobson's choice for me. The last thing I want is to keep this lot in power, but equally, I don't want to vote for a party that won't stand up for women. Of course they all know what a woman is. The fact that they (the LP, the Greens, the Lib Dems and the SNP) pretend that it's complicated just means that they have bought into the Stonewall doctrine, and that they will allow the fear of being accused of transphobia to stop them from defending women if they come to power.

Time for that other GN staple. I despair. Well, yes.

Just because there is no need for medical intervention doesn't mean that it wont be asked for and taken in the form of medication to block puberty volver, and what damage may have been caused before a decision is taken to change back?

I'm certainly not paranoid volver but then again I haven't felt patronised on this thread. You on the other hand seem to think that your seen as hating women and trying to shut them down in addition to being patronised by sanctimonious posters.

A total demolition of their argument from what I can see Chewbacca.

What I mean Doodledog, is that we often see people on here saying that they will never vote for anyone who "doesn't know what a woman is". I think it has been said on this thread.

So are the people who say that just talking in shorthand? Is it valid to reduce such an important and detailed subject to "He doesn't know what a woman is". Because that is how it comes across.

Reading this thread, I surmise that we are meant to be alarmed by the stories of women being attacked, hounded, whatever by TRAs. Of course we should be alarmed by stories of women being attacked, but they are presented as proof of the fact that we have to stand up against Self ID at all costs. Consequently the threat from the TRAs is the biggest thing facing us right now. Isn't that what the stories are for? Well I'm alarmed by people who try to boil down their voting intentions to "he doesn't know what a woman is." Which, whether they like it or not, translates into "so let's allow the lying, misogynistic charlatans in again."

You on the other hand seem to think that your seen as hating women and trying to shut them down in addition to being patronised by sanctimonious posters.

Well this is how it appears to anyone who disagrees with the sisters.

Glad to have the opportunity to educate you.

But we're not paranoid, no of course not.

Paranoia now? So the women in prisons, hospitals and refuges who have been sexually assaulted by men, who claim to be women, are simply paranoid are they? Same as the women attending a meeting behind closed doors, who are besieged at all exits by transactivists who verbally and physically threaten them, simply because they don't want them to speak? And I suppose Kathleen Stock, Alison Bailey, Maya Forstater et al are all similarly paranoid too. Aye right!

There is no winning this argument.

I'm going for a beer.

People are entitled to vote how they wish volver, and if some decide they wont vote for a party only because they're unwilling or unable to say what a woman is, that's their choice.

Hobson's choice for me too Doodledog, having a party in government that's afraid to stand up to Stonewall and TRAs is a very frightening prospect.

volver

^The proposal to lower that age to 16 will mean that even more young people, with even less experience of the adult world, will take a precipitate decision that they could regret bitterly.^

Given that there is no need to medical intervention, if they decide they have taken the wrong path, can't they change back?

They may well have undergone some medical intervention, if not to get the certificate, then for cosmetic "improvements", taking hormones ( prescribed or bought over the internet) to enlarge their man-boobs into a feminine bust and round-out their hips, or to make equivalent alterations to their female shape to make them look more masculine. If they are post-puberty, I don't know whether or not these changes would be reversible.

These improvements may well be made too by those younger than 16 and not yet eligible for a certificate even under the proposed alterations to the Act. Online hormone sellers may not check the age of their customers.

The younger the person, the more likely it is that large doses of strong hormones or other drugs are to interfere with the development of their sexual bodies and cause sterility. They can also cause osteopenia and osteoporosis. This is one reason why the use of puberty blockers is not approved by most paediatricians.

I wouldn't say you've educated me volver although that did make me laugh, but you've certainly reinforced the opinions I hold.

Enjoy your beer.