Scarf in Suffragette colours not allowed in Scottish Parliament.

Oreo

Can’t posters see that it doesn’t matter why the women were wearing scarves in those colours, they had a perfect right to wear any colours they wanted.What was the security manager afraid of, any ‘dissent’ ?Something you would expect from the KGB.

They were probably aware that there was a history of disruption by people wearing the suffragette colours.

What should they have done, if somebody had walked in carrying a tin pf paint and a glue gun? It's not illegal to walk around in public carrying them.

I was just catching up on my break when I came across a comment comparing a daft idiot guard, banning a scarf to the mass slaughter happening to women in Iran

And I just can't

I could cry

What the heck is this?

Can't read past that

I'm done

Can’t posters see that it doesn’t matter why the women were wearing scarves in those colours, they had a perfect right to wear any colours they wanted.What was the security manager afraid of, any ‘dissent’ ?Something you would expect from the KGB.

Lathyrus

Yes. But somewhere along the line he had been given guidance from someone above him, that made him believe this was what was required of him.

This.

Lucca

Yammy

volver

This thread, as well as being a trans thread as I said on page 1, has completely gone to pot. Away to watch Bake Off 😄.

I hope you're not participating you'll scorch them withe your tongue.
Give yourself a break and be pleasant for a change.

Illegitimi non carborundum…

Is that you Boris?

Lathyrus

Yes. But somewhere along the line he had been given guidance from someone above him, that made him believe this was what was required of him.

I have no idea what instructions (s)he was given. However, there was a history of people wearing "suffragette" colours disrupting a previous meeting. It must have been known that the subject being discussed was sensitive and there was a risk of its being disrupted.

Thanks for replying Doodledog

volver

^Both involve clothing being used to make a statement, and men telling women which statements are acceptable and which are not.^

Which men Doodledog? You assuming that the parliamentary official was a man?

How unreconstructed of you.

No, the report I read said he was, or any least attributed a male name to the relevant person. It does get confusing sometimes, as with Brian, the winner of the women's scholarship we discussed on another thread.

Yes. But somewhere along the line he had been given guidance from someone above him, that made him believe this was what was required of him.

Lathyrus

Parliament shouldnt be owned and managed by the Government in a Democracy.

That’s exactly why this incident is so very disturbing.

Clearly the overzealous “Official * (note the word) believed he was acting in accordance with the direction he had been given.

From whom?

According to the woman (Username: Obsolescence) who was banned, the colours showed up on the recorded video and the Security Manager ordered it.

Male violence is a problem but not just for women.
And because of that, are you saying that steps to protect females from males should not be allowed?
Oh dear trisher, that’s not a very nice point of view.

volver

Oh yes, sorry. I'd forgotten that only the chosen few are allowed to make points about gender.

(Yes, that's meant to be sarcasm)

And another tactic.

They’re all being rolled out this morning to try to cloud what actually happened 🙄

volver

Lathyrus

Parliament shouldnt be owned and managed by the Government in a Democracy.

That’s exactly why this incident is so very disturbing.

Clearly the overzealous “Official * (note the word) believed he was acting in accordance with the direction he had been given.

From whom?

He?

There's a lot disturbing about this but is nothing to do with the current Scottish Government.

Oh I think it is.

The Scottish Government has taken a very proactive stance on Transpeople and their entitlements.

And some believe, a very negative one on the concerns of gender constant females.

The actions of the official, clearly supported the stance of the Government, in requiring one set of colours to be removed but another set, supportive of the Government stance, to remain.

Oh yes, sorry. I'd forgotten that only the chosen few are allowed to make points about gender.

(Yes, that's meant to be sarcasm)

He?

That’s another tactic to cloud the debate😬

Smileless2012

Racial discrimination in any form is wrong Glorianny. Being aware that this happens in sport does not nullify the unfairness of trans women competing against women. Just because it isn't the only example of unfairness, doesn't mean it should be ignored or regarded as less important.

It’s whataboutery Smileless. An attempt to cloud or distract by bringing in other issues. Hoping someone will take the debate off at a tangent…….

Lathyrus

Parliament shouldnt be owned and managed by the Government in a Democracy.

That’s exactly why this incident is so very disturbing.

Clearly the overzealous “Official * (note the word) believed he was acting in accordance with the direction he had been given.

From whom?

He?

There's a lot disturbing about this but is nothing to do with the current Scottish Government.

Parliament shouldnt be owned and managed by the Government in a Democracy.

That’s exactly why this incident is so very disturbing.

Clearly the overzealous “Official * (note the word) believed he was acting in accordance with the direction he had been given.

From whom?

Racial discrimination in any form is wrong Glorianny. Being aware that this happens in sport does not nullify the unfairness of trans women competing against women. Just because it isn't the only example of unfairness, doesn't mean it should be ignored or regarded as less important.

Both involve clothing being used to make a statement, and men telling women which statements are acceptable and which are not.

Which men Doodledog? You assuming that the parliamentary official was a man?

How unreconstructed of you.

Lathyrus

It’s good that you remember that women were asked to leave a Parliamentary debate because, someone in authority decided that purple and green clothes they were wearing were a political statement that was not a view that the Givernment wanted.

But that the people who were wearing rainbow colours could stay because that was a political view in agreement with Government.

No. What I remember is that a Parliament Official was a overzealous in a committee about trans issues that had been disrupted before by people wearing contentious t-shirts. And that the Parliament isn't owned and managed by the Government, its the Parliament. Which is a different thing.

I'll also remember that it was seized on by another rather overzealous group who think it points to the way that the SNP brook no disagreement, that women are trodden underfoot and that everybody is out to get them. That they think that the wearing of certain colours is forbidden and its OK if you wear the rainbow colours, because that's men, who are taking over the world again.

Never mind that there was a woman in the chamber actually wearing the same colours on the same day, that all the women MSPs have been photographed together wearing the colours, and that you can actually buy suffragette sashes in the Parliament shop. Suffragette colours haven't been banned. That would be ridiculous and is directly opposed to what the Presiding Officer said and what we can see with our own eyes.

I find that it's the rabid over reaction and the jumping to inappropriate conclusions that make the whole debate about the GRR bill toxic and impossible to take part in without being branded a woman hating anti-feminist male patriarchy supporter.

If you're wrong about the scarf incident, what else are you wrong about?

But there are trans rights. No one's advocating taking away their rights, the objections are due to the rights they now want that either impinge on women's rights or are at the risk of eroding them.

Sadly most don't.

Really? On what are you basing that sweeping statement?

Women in Iran have been making a very brave stand against being told what to wear by men.

Yes, this case is different, but the roots are similar. Both involve clothing being used to make a statement, and men telling women which statements are acceptable and which are not.

As for the thread drift - this is inevitable on topics like this, and happens when people make patronising posts based on illogical premises, so that others feel compelled to reply.

Smileless2012

It isn't just about violence though is it Glorianny. It's about protecting the hard won rights of women. Protecting women from unfair competition in sports and as we've seen recently a beauty contest, where the prize for the winner was a female scholarship, and the winner was a trans woman called Brian.

The OP for this thread isn't about male violence. It's about a group of people, of women, being asked to remove an article of clothing because the colours are representative of the suffragette movement, while simultaneously allowing others to wear a lanyard that represents something else, in this case LGBTQ+.

Should they be able to wear that lanyard without fear of reprisals? Of course they should, just as those wearing the scarves should have been able to do.

An apology has been made but as far as I'm aware there's been no explanation as to why a member of staff thought it was reasonable and justified behaviour. The point is that for whatever reason, someone thought it was reasonable and justified, but didn't consider it to be reasonable or justified to do the same to those wearing rainbow lanyards.

Yes, this all has to do with carves volver and that although we constantly hear about equality for all, it appears that some are more equal than others.

Anyone who thins women's sports are fair at present without any trans women is labouring under a delusion. They aren't.As black women keep telling us!
I've expressed my views abut the colours if women knew what they really meant perhaps they should be able to wear them. Sadly most don't. I'd campaign for women's history to be taught and taught properly in schools. Some women have not been in favour of equality. Some women still aren't.