The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

Just now, Neil said:

perhaps read the wings i linked to - to understand how your govt voted.

I understand fine, Neil. I certainly don't need the Bishops of Bath & Bristol to help me.

[Neil]

37 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

That's absolute bollocks

not bollocks for how many of the SG voted last night.

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, LJS said:

I understand fine, Neil. I certainly don't need the Bishops of Bath & Bristol to help me.

if you understand you should understand the disgrace.

[LJS]

5 minutes ago, Neil said:

if you understand you should understand the disgrace.

I am genuinely surprised & disappointed in you, Neil.

[Neil]

19 minutes ago, LJS said:

I am genuinely surprised & disappointed in you, Neil.

Why? Do you think the sex offenders should have a right of access to women only spaces 

[LJS]

4 minutes ago, Neil said:

Why? Do you think the sex offenders should have a right of access to women only spaces 

No. I thought you would be sympathetic to the rights of trans people.

[Neil]

6 minutes ago, LJS said:

No. I thought you would be sympathetic to the rights of trans people.

I'm also sympathetic to the rights of women (which would have been undermined by the SG's proposals.) which is something I've helped campaign for. I'm happy for greater trans rights but there's some issues around the edges which no one has good answers for.

[LJS]

17 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Says a man...

While lots of women are trying to get a voice and say it very much is a concern for them.  As a father to two girls it concerns me.  

One thing that I always notice with the whole trans fight for "rights".  Its always men who are living as women who are the very vocal ones.  Screaming for the right to enter spaces which where traditionally for women only.

Men can't even let women be women without trying to take that away as well and encroaching on it.

Sorry if that isn't PC enough for you.  I don't mind if Dave wants to live as Sally now.  I do question their right to be changing next to my daughters though.

 

7 minutes ago, Neil said:

I'm also sympathetic to the rights of women (which would have been undermined by the SG's proposals.) which is something I've helped campaign for. I'm happy for greater trans rights but there's some issues around the edges which no one has good answers for.

OK. here's a woman...

 

The primary purpose of this bill is to demedicalise the process of securing a gender recognition certificate. There are 13 countries that already use self-identification; Scotland will soon be the 14th. The populations of these countries total 350 million people. That is one hell of a data set from which to find a pattern of the law being abused by predatory men. Yet as Victor Madrigal-Borloz said on Friday: “There are no administrative or judicial findings that validate the idea that the risk of abuse is a material one.”

Madrigal-Borloz’s opinion matters because he is the UN independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

 

https://twitter.com/Nancy_M_K/status/1604750363977998336?s=20&t=5NjMUhYXQ8Ka80oxQd8JqA

[kaosmark2]

22 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Says a man...

While lots of women are trying to get a voice and say it very much is a concern for them.  As a father to two girls it concerns me.  

One thing that I always notice with the whole trans fight for "rights".  Its always men who are living as women who are the very vocal ones.  Screaming for the right to enter spaces which where traditionally for women only.

Men can't even let women be women without trying to take that away as well and encroaching on it.

Sorry if that isn't PC enough for you.  I don't mind if Dave wants to live as Sally now.  I do question their right to be changing next to my daughters though.

No, that's bullshit. Trans women are not a threat to cis women. The vast majority of issues with trans people are bullshit. As a whole, trans-women don't try to "infiltrate" women only spaces. The UK is more transphobic than Texas.

The threat to women is male violence and male ego. Not trans women. There isn't a middle ground, there isn't a "in between space". There is a desire for genocide against trans people, and there is humanity. Trans women are not a threat, they are people who are victims of a patriarchal society. 

Edge cases are not an excuse to bully trans women (and trans women are constantly portrayed as the problem, despite the fact that trans men are more populous than trans women). Edge cases are a reason to discuss the nuances of patriarchal oppression.

[LJS]

4 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

But we can't have the debate can we...  There is never the opportunity to discuss the concerns and find out if they are valid or not.  As soon as someone shows anything other than total and complete acceptance of people who are born men being given full "rights" as a women there is a nasty and bitter backlash.  Calls to the cancel them and worse.

Its a pretty toxic subject matter.  

There are a lot of issues to resolve around the subject.  From access to traditional safe spaces for women to competition within sport.  

And while I totally accept the vast majority (if not all) transgender people are no threat whatsoever...  we have to have conversation around how do we stop the people who would take advantage of the situation.  Just pretending there isn't an issue, like the people above, its stupid at best.

We have had 6 years of conversation in Scotland and 2 separate consultations. Holyrood is sitting for hours debating dozens fo amendments. If it is such a threat to women why can the opponents not show examples of this in the many countries who already have similar provisions in place.

 

[LJS]

2 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Says you... but what makes you right ?  

Self awareness is a wonderful thing, Barry.

[kaosmark2]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

Says you... but what makes you right ?   Straight away we are into "that's bullshit" arena.  No space for the debate. 

There are increased safe guarding issues.  I think about the gym I go to which opens 24 hours a day.  You need a pin code to get in the changing rooms after a certain time.  My code won't work on the ladies changing rooms.  Its done for a reason.  I could declare myself a women tomoz and gain access...  how do we deal with this ?  what check and balances do we put in ? 

These are the debates I think we need to have.  Its not bullying and in the end it protects the true transgender person as well.  But this automatic right given with no challenge is a concern.

You might not give a shit as a man but you better believe there are a lot of women who are worried about this - and thats ok.

Trans people are automatically labelled criminals, perverts, and pedophiles before any engagement. At present, trans people (including trans men), are at much bigger threat from cis men than cis women are from trans women. Once we stop living in a bullying, transphobic society, we can address the 1 in 20000 isolated nuance circumstances that are worthy of debate. Until then, stop bullying trans people and pretending they're a greater threat to society than cis men. 

[kaosmark2]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

I haven't ever heard anyone do this.   

That's what the media does. The very fact that you talk about how trans women are a threat shows this. MET police officers are statistically more of a threat to cis women than trans women.

[kaosmark2]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

Stop telling me I am doing something I am not.  I never made any of the claims you just said.  You are better than that...

This happens with every debate on the subject.

The UK media publishes the most transphobic articles per population in the world. Our society is actively attacking trans people and making them out to be perpetrators and sex offenders. If you parrot this rhetoric, you are part of it.

There are nuances about things like women's sport, rape support groups etc, which should be discussed, but those very few valid discussions are used to attack trans people in the same way as absolute bullshit is, and until that bullshit stops, those nuances are not as important as the advocation of anti-trans genocide.

[kaosmark2]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

If you actually take time to understand my point instead of defaulting to the nut job twitter debates on the subject you will see I am more concerned about what new opportunities it opens for offenders to take advantage and what checks and balances we bring in place to stop it.  

Being a man you don't need to worry about this stuff while you stroke your chin.

This isn't defaulting to nutjob twitter debates. This is saying that the nuances are not an excuse to advocate for genocide. That's the level we're at. One of the richest women in UK history advocates for genocide of trans women and perpetuates a level of hateful rhetoric on par with Tommy Robinson's portrayal of Muslims, while being massively supported by the UK media and both major political parties. This is not OK. The fact that there are a few nuanced exceptional circumstances where womens rights and trans rights do conflict, is not an excuse to advocate for the eradication or bullying of trans people.

Call out bullying, call out violence, and call out male violence and patriarchal oppression. Calling out the fucking police and failing court system is of bigger importance to stopping abuse of women than attacking trans people.

[kaosmark2]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

And you are being extreme and dogmatic...  just as much as the transphobic types who hate on them... 

Saying people have a right to live as themselves is not being extreme and dogmatic.

[Neil]

31 minutes ago, LJS said:

 

OK. here's a woman...

 

The primary purpose of this bill is to demedicalise the process of securing a gender recognition certificate. There are 13 countries that already use self-identification; Scotland will soon be the 14th. The populations of these countries total 350 million people. That is one hell of a data set from which to find a pattern of the law being abused by predatory men. Yet as Victor Madrigal-Borloz said on Friday: “There are no administrative or judicial findings that validate the idea that the risk of abuse is a material one.”

Madrigal-Borloz’s opinion matters because he is the UN independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

 

https://twitter.com/Nancy_M_K/status/1604750363977998336?s=20&t=5NjMUhYXQ8Ka80oxQd8Jq

The risk of abuse must be there when convicted abusers would be given a right of acess to women only spaces, spaces that only exist because of abuse in mixed spaces. 

[kaosmark2]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

Sure it is...  You just don't see it as you are being extreme and dogmatic..  People who are like this just can't handle alternative view points.  So you start labeling and getting nasty.

I think people should have the right to live as themselves as much as possible but there has been checks and balances and other peoples rights are just as important.

"Jews have a right to live as themselves, except when they steal the blood of Christian children."

[Neil]

27 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

No, that's bullshit. Trans women are not a threat to cis women.

That cannot be true in all circumstances. I'm aware of atleast one trans woman who has a conviction for abuse of cis women, the abuse predates the trans part. But becoming trans is not a cure for abusers. 

 

 

27 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

The vast majority of issues with trans people are bullshit. As a whole, trans-women don't try to "infiltrate" women only spaces. The UK is more transphobic than Texas.

The threat to women is male violence and male ego. Not trans women. There isn't a middle ground, there isn't a "in between space". There is a desire for genocide against trans people, and there is humanity. Trans women are not a threat, they are people who are victims of a patriarchal society. 

Edge cases are not an excuse to bully trans women (and trans women are constantly portrayed as the problem, despite the fact that trans men are more populous than trans women). Edge cases are a reason to discuss the nuances of patriarchal oppression.

Men are a proven  threat. 

[LJS]

7 minutes ago, Neil said:

The risk of abuse must be there when convicted abusers would be given a right of acess to women only spaces, spaces that only exist because of abuse in mixed spaces. 

Strange how Rape Crisis Scotland, who I suspect may know more on the subject than you, me & Barry combined, support the legislation

[Neil]

Just now, Neil said:

That cannot be true in all circumstances. I'm aware of atleast one trans woman who has a conviction for abuse of cis women, the abuse predates the trans part. But becoming trans is not a cure for abusers. 

 

 

Men are a proven  threat. 

And women want to be able to continue to manage that threat. 

[Neil]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

Strange how Rape Crisis Scotland, who I suspect may know more on the subject than you, me & Barry combined, support the legislation

The msps didn't support the legislation, and those who did have been labelled a disgrace. 

[LJS]

Just now, Neil said:

The msps didn't support the legislation,

Errr, yes they did.

Just now, Neil said:

and those who did have been labelled a disgrace. 

What by you, JK Rowling & Stuart Campbell?

[LJS]

16 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I don't think anyone here is looking or attempting to bully anyone.

I agree. But trans folk are bullied and the current campaign will only serve to increase that.

[LJS]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

What campaign ? 

The anti GRA campaign. You know the one JK Rowling & now Wings is running. As supported by his new friend, Neil.