Jump to content

General Politics Thread


Granny Danger

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, 101 said:

Then I will file your opinion in the bin. 

You can do whatever you want. Statistically, in actual reality, your friend is at least if not more safe here than any other country in the world. Assuming she is trans, and even if she's not.

Those are just the facts of the matter. So if she doesn't feel safe here, she's an idiot. That's just the way it is, if it sounds impolite that's cause there's no other way to put it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 101 said:

I'm not Trans so I'm not going to speak for them but I can imagine in a country where you already have a vast majority of Trans people being verbally assaulted and over a third physically assaulted that a bill that removed protection from Trans identity it will add to the hostile feeling that is already wide spread.

So it's your contention that there are only 120 trans folk in Scotland?

There were 41 charges reported in 2019-20 with an aggravation of transgender identity, compared to 40 in 2018-19.

https://www.copfs.gov.uk/media-site-news-from-copfs/1887-hate-crime-in-scotland-2019-20

Trans folk are still in a protected group, that's unchanged.

https://beta.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/hate-crime-and-public-order-scotland-bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Baxter Parp said:

So it's your contention that there are only 120 trans folk in Scotland?

There were 41 charges reported in 2019-20 with an aggravation of transgender identity, compared to 40 in 2018-19.

https://www.copfs.gov.uk/media-site-news-from-copfs/1887-hate-crime-in-scotland-2019-20

Trans folk are still in a protected group, that's unchanged.

https://beta.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/hate-crime-and-public-order-scotland-bill

You are conflating reported crime with actual crime. But I apologise I should have said those stats were UK wide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/trans_stats.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiIj5_l8rzuAhXXEcAKHY80CeEQFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw2qsK2TsNshR1mW8_OF06b1

Trans people are protected but now their identity is not, well it won't be if that amendment passes, why single one group out to have their identity open for often unfounded criticism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 101 said:

Trans people are protected but now their identity is not, well it won't be if that amendment passes, why single one group out to have their identity open for often unfounded criticism. 

Can you explain what you mean by unfounded criticism of  a trans person's identity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Can you explain what you mean by unfounded criticism of  a trans person's identity?

The amendment is seeking to continue to allow criticism of Trans identity. The only criticism aimed at Trans people that I have ever seen has been that they are some how sexual deviants this is obviously unfounded and abusive. 

I have never seem a criticism aimed at an entire groups identity that hasn't been lazy, harmful and abusive. I don't know if you have different experience but that is my experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 101 said:

The amendment is seeking to continue to allow criticism of Trans identity. The only criticism aimed at Trans people that I have ever seen has been that they are some how sexual deviants this is obviously unfounded and abusive. 

And therefore illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Baxter Parp said:

And therefore illegal.

I would then argue why isn't the entire section being removed rather than just the trans element? 

I would also be concerned that the Trans community are preying on young people to "turn them trans" as far as I know no one has been prosecuted over having a view like that and about the age of consent to use medicine to correct gender dysphoria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 101 said:

I would then argue why isn't the entire section being removed rather than just the trans element? 

I would also be concerned that the Trans community are preying on young people to "turn them trans" as far as I know no one has been prosecuted over having a view like that and about the age of consent to use medicine to correct gender dysphoria.

This is hysterical, I'm sorry but it is. Here is an observer from another country giving his first impressions, see if this makes sense to you

That's not a tenable situation in a democratic society, it just isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 101 said:

I would then argue why isn't the entire section being removed rather than just the trans element? 

It's an insertion not a removal.

9 minutes ago, 101 said:

I would also be concerned that the Trans community are preying on young people to "turn them trans" as far as I know no one has been prosecuted over having a view like that and about the age of consent to use medicine to correct gender dysphoria.

You'll need to clarify this bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

It's an insertion not a removal.

You'll need to clarify this bit.

You're right apologies, okay why isn't it explicitly permitting criticism of Ethnic Minority identity? Or Gay identity? Or identity of men?

I really wish there was no need for this law or legislation around what people can and can't say but until we live in a better world I'm afraid it's a necessary evil.

I'm not going to clarify it as the views are abhorrent and fairly prominent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 101 said:

You're right apologies, okay why isn't it explicitly permitting criticism of Ethnic Minority identity? Or Gay identity? Or identity of men?

Well, those things aren't protected either, so I guess it's an addition at the recommendation of the Justice Committee.

9 minutes ago, 101 said:

I really wish there was no need for this law or legislation around what people can and can't say but until we live in a better world I'm afraid it's a necessary evil.

Absolutely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Well, those things aren't protected either, so I guess it's an addition at the recommendation of the Justice Committee.

Absolutely.

It seems to me to be playing to a crowd to have Yousafs amendment in and it's not a crowd I'm comfortable Scotland playing to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...