Speaking of threatening our rights
The riddle is “how are feminists like racists and anti-Semites?” and the answer is they’re not.
Feminists who fear [that] a radical overhaul of transgender laws in Scotland will threaten their rights and safety have been compared to racists and anti-Semites by a minister in Nicola Sturgeon’s government.
A woman, at that.
Lorna Slater, who was handed a ministerial post last year under the SNP’s coalition pact with the Greens, was accused of making “grossly offensive” remarks as she appeared to demand that media organisations censor critics of the Scottish Government plans.
In remarks about the trans rights debate published on Sunday, she said the BBC had “only recently stopped putting on climate deniers because they required balance”. She added: “We wouldn’t put balance on the question of racism or anti-Semitism, but we allow this fictional notion of balance when it comes to anti-trans [views]. The whole thing is disgusting.”
The views are not “anti-trans.” Gender critical feminists don’t want to harm trans people. We dispute the ideology about sex and gender that tells people how to think about people who say they are the opposite sex.
The SNP/Green Government at Holyrood recently published legislation that would allow anyone aged 16 or over born or resident in Scotland to change their legal sex by self-identification, removing the need for a medical diagnosis or doctor’s approval.
It seems to me if you think about it really hard for 30 seconds or so you can see how that arrangement could damage some rights of women.
Ms Slater’s comments, to The Herald on Sunday, came after Shona Robison, the SNP minister steering the legislation through Holyrood, called for a “respectful” debate without “offensive or abusive” comments on either side.
However, Ms Slater, who is entitled to a salary of £98,000 in her role as biodiversity minister, said a perceived backlash against the trans community was “hideous” and that she feared for the safety of trans women standing as Green candidates in the council elections.
“These gentle, hardworking women are being portrayed as if they’re inherently dangerous,” she said. “It couldn’t be further from the truth.”
Interesting choice of words. “Gentle.” I guess that’s supposed to cancel our awareness that they’re men? But that’s the problem, see – we don’t want that awareness canceled. Our safety depends on it, and so do some of our rights. I understand that that’s painful to some men who identify as trans, but I still think we get to defend our safety and rights all the same.
Correction, Ms. Slater. We are not treating them as if they specifically are inherently dangerous. We’re treating them as if they are men, with full understanding that a certain percentage of men are dangerous and we don’t know which ones they are just by looking.
I think it’s great that Scotland has someone whose responsibility is biodiversity, but have my doubts about the person who’s been given this job. If she believes that humans can change sex, I fear that she’s going to be squandering precious time and resources because she’s likely to be spending a disproportionate amount of energy protecting unicorns and gryphons.
It’s an abusive tactic, plain and simple. It’s designed to reduce women’s ability to perceive danger.
My brain read that initially as “bloodthirsty minister.”
Nobody should be able to lie about their sex on legal documents. Leave the “sex” category alone. Update your photo to show what you look like, possibly add a “gender identity” category, if you insist, e.g., “transgender,” to explain unconventional appearance.