Scottish Greens

[DeeTillEhDeh]

The whole trans debate seems to be hijacked by extremists on both sides - when it really shouldn't be.

The almost deliberate polarising of the arguments does no-one any favours, particularly young people who are experiencing significant concern, confusion and distress about their gender.

Some people really need to grow up.

[invergowrie arab]

If I was getting Twitter high 5ed from bigots it would give me pause for thought.

Middle class PC folk are the most dangerous. You can't appeal to them as they simply refuse to accept their behaviour is harmful as they assert that they aren't racist, sexist or homophobic because they don't hate people whilst carrying on with behaviours which unintentionally perpetuate harm.

[NotThePars]

Slightly off topic, but isn’t finding an ethical way to navigate capitalism the best and only path for any of us?

It’s the only possible path as it stands and it’s why the world is doomed.

[G51]

There is no ethical consumption under capitalism.

Reminds me of one of the GOAT twitter posts though.

https://twitter.com/tristandross/status/1275753420285251584?s=20

 

[invergowrie arab]

1 minute ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

The whole trans debate seems to be hijacked by extremists on both sides - when it really shouldn't be.

The almost deliberate polarising of the arguments does no-one any favours, particularly young people who are experiencing significant concern, confusion and distress about their gender.

Some people really need to grow up.

What's the trans debate though? Even framing it as a debate is totally wrong ( not you personally just quoting you as a launch point for my rant , this is just how it's framed everywhere).

Trans people either have the same rights as you and I or they don't.

I'll agree the whole discourse has been poisoned though. Usually by useful idiots getting suckered in by astroturf groups like Women for Scotland who are linked to fundamentalist Christian organisations.

The drift from "legitimate concerns" to outright bigotry is as depressing as it is inevitable - look at the state of that guy who pretended to write Father Ted. You can't cede an inch to these people.

I know older lesbians who now say that trans folk shouldn't even get into LGBT bars and book clubs because being Gay and Trans are completely different things. It's going from fairy stories about changing rooms to brain worms about completely excluding trans people from LGBT spaces and having gay people parroting s.28 attack lines about trans education in schools.

Trans issues were gay issues when the trans lads were getting kicked to f**k by the polis in the stonewall riots though

 

[invergowrie arab]

4 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said:

What's the trans debate though? Even framing it as a debate is totally wrong ( not you personally just quoting you as a launch point for my rant , this is just how it's framed everywhere).

Trans people either have the same rights as you and I or they don't.

I'll agree the whole discourse has been poisoned though. Usually by useful idiots getting suckered in by astroturf groups like Women for Scotland who are linked to fundamentalist Christian organisations.

The drift from "legitimate concerns" to outright bigotry is as depressing as it is inevitable - look at the state of that guy who pretended to write Father Ted. You can't cede an inch to these people.

I know older lesbians who now say that trans folk shouldn't even get into LGBT bars and book clubs because being Gay and Trans are completely different things. It's going from fairy stories about changing rooms to brain worms about completely excluding trans people from LGBT spaces and having gay people parroting s.28 attack lines about trans education in schools.

Trans issues were gay issues when the trans lads were getting kicked to f**k by the polis in the stonewall riots though

 

It's black Friday and I'm already on my third whisky 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

What's the trans debate though? Even framing it as a debate is totally wrong ( not you personally just quoting you as a launch point for my rant , this is just how it's framed everywhere). Trans people either have the same rights as you and I or they don't. I'll agree the whole discourse has been poisoned though. Usually by useful idiots getting suckered in by astroturf groups like Women for Scotland who are linked to fundamentalist Christian organisations. The drift from "legitimate concerns" to outright bigotry is as depressing as it is inevitable - look at the state of that guy who pretended to write Father Ted. You can't cede an inch to these people. I know older lesbians who now say that trans folk shouldn't even get into LGBT bars and book clubs because being Gay and Trans are completely different things. It's going from fairy stories about changing rooms to brain worms about completely excluding trans people from LGBT spaces and having gay people parroting s.28 attack lines about trans education in schools. Trans issues were gay issues when the trans lads were getting kicked to f**k by the polis in the stonewall riots though  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Debate might not be the right word - a lot of this is over the practicalities not the principles but is very much about the principles if you know what I mean.  The arguments and debate still have to be made because we have legislators making half-arsed attempts at legislating trans issues - trying to make everything black and white when gender fluidity does not sit in a nice little box.    

 

 

It's ridiculously polarised, not just by fringe elements but by mainstream groups who should know better. I've heard some mainstream feminists say some really stupid things about trans issues. Arguments over toilets and other minutiae get us away from the real issue - that trans rights are not recognised.

 

Young people don't want to know about a lot of this bullshit - they want support, Iove and care during what can be a stressful time coping with bigotry and their own emotions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dunning1874]

I don't see either Wightman standing as an independent or the Greens as a party being poisoned by the issue the way the SNP have.

While there is a history in Green movements generally of effectively being Lib Dems with more concern about the environment, I reckon the Scottish Greens are firmly past this now with the membership largely being young and on the left. Obviously trans rights aren't a left/right issue, as someone like Wightman having this stance shows, but there's a significant generational difference in attitudes and I'd expect most people likely to put off by it wouldn't be voting Green in the first place.

Edited December 19, 2020 by Dunning1874

[NotThePars]

I would hope it doesn’t impact on the Greens numbers and if he was intransigent about it then I support Harvie and Slater fully in not giving in but Wightman is a massive loss to the parliament. I don’t care if I disagree with someone like Neil Findlay fundamentally on independence or Wightman on this those are two losses that I think will be detriments to their parties and the parliament at large.

[Detournement]

The vote over medical examinations for sexual assualt victims was fairly innocuous and if the Green Party can't allow diversity of opinion on that topic then he is as well leaving. 

[GordonS]

4 hours ago, invergowrie arab said:

What's the trans debate though? Even framing it as a debate is totally wrong ( not you personally just quoting you as a launch point for my rant , this is just how it's framed everywhere).

That's nail-on-head. The idea that "trans debate" is even a term in common use is mental. Imagine describing gender equality as the "women debate" or tackling antisemitism as the "Jewish debate".

2 hours ago, NotThePars said:

I would hope it doesn’t impact on the Greens numbers and if he was intransigent about it then I support Harvie and Slater fully in not giving in but Wightman is a massive loss to the parliament. I don’t care if I disagree with someone like Neil Findlay fundamentally on independence or Wightman on this those are two losses that I think will be detriments to their parties and the parliament at large.

There is not, and won't be, anyone remotely in his league on land and property issues. We used to have a lot of elected representatives who were specialists in a small number of issues, but that seems to have fallen away over the past few decades which is a shame.

His departure does open the way for Lorna Slater though, and I've found her pretty impressive.

1 hour ago, Detournement said:

The vote over medical examinations for sexual assualt victims was fairly innocuous and if the Green Party can't allow diversity of opinion on that topic then he is as well leaving. 

It wasn't innocuous, it was a dog whistle that you presumably didn't hear because you're not the kind of person to be excited about it. The amendment makes effectively no legal difference, and the purpose was to signal that trans women shouldn't be regarded as women. It was playing into the trope that trans women are a danger to cis women and that terfs are only trying to protect "real" women. That's why all the worst people loved it.

Fact is, if the person giving you an intimate examination looks like a woman, sounds like a woman and is dressed like a woman, what do her chromosomes and genitals have to do with anything?

[Detournement]

16 minutes ago, GordonS said:

 

It wasn't innocuous, it was a dog whistle that you presumably didn't hear because you're not the kind of person to be excited about it. The amendment makes effectively no legal difference, and the purpose was to signal that trans women shouldn't be regarded as women. It was playing into the trope that trans women are a danger to cis women and that terfs are only trying to protect "real" women. That's why all the worst people loved it.

Fact is, if the person giving you an intimate examination looks like a woman, sounds like a woman and is dressed like a woman, what do her chromosomes and genitals have to do with anything?

Not all Transwomen look and sound like ciswomen and they shouldn't have to. It obviously was a vote designed to send a message but that's what happens when you make sex vs gender an active issue, it's going to keep on popping up. The Greens have lost by far their best legislator over this hypothetical scenario which makes them look like ridiculous student activists.

I also don't think that the issue is entirely down to portraying transwomen as a danger, it's mainly a matter of principle about being able to define your identity and who you share that identity with. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by Detournement

[Detournement]

4 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

Sounding veeeeeery similar to when all those folk against gay marriage said it would undermine traditional marriage.

It's the opposite surely?

With gay marriage it was about the state recognising gay couples but Imams, Priests and Ministers are free not to. The crux of this controversy is that Trans activists want everyone to define man/woman by gender identity rather than sexual difference.

[Detournement]

11 hours ago, MixuFruit said:

The important detail is whatever it says on birth certificate

You don't have a gender identity on your birth certificate because gender identity doesn't form until a child has been socialised. Marriage is a legal status granted by the state, gender issues are abstract theoretical constructs that people can't be forced to acknowledge any more than you can force people to say they have a soul or that Labour Value Theory is correct. 

[Detournement]

14 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

Again I have to prod this a bit - the law doesn't make this distinction does it?

What distinction?

[Detournement]

14 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

Between gender and sex. The law just cares what letter is on your birth certificate. That's right isn't it?

That is the case at the moment and the state will change the sex on a person's birth certificate if they apply and meet the criteria. That's slightly farcical though as you can't change sex and any medical procedures will be conducted on the basis of existing sex but that is obviously outweighed by making life easier for trans people using their birth certificates or other IDs.

The problem is that the GRA people want gender to have primacy over sex in every setting including absurd stuff like the recent case of a transman giving birth to a baby then demanding not to be recorded as the mother on the birth certificate. There might be a day when society widely recognises that men and women can both be impregnated but we are a long way from it. 

[Detournement]

18 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

 

Prisons, sports, medical examination etc should all be handled on a case by case basis, not some blanket decree. 

I don't disagree but that view would get you kicked out the Greens.

The motherless birth certificate was handled on its own merits and the supreme court told the the guy to bolt. 

[Detournement]

53 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

Not sure I follow.

The Greens want GRA to be a blanket decree with usurps any case by case base for decisions. 

[vikingTON]

The real question here is why the Greens think that this is an existential issue that is worth losing one of their most prominent and effective advocates over: while no doubt elevating posturing losers like Greer in his place. Never mind one that requires any more political capital squandered on when - in case they haven't noticed - the economy is a complete fucking binfire and their environmental cause is not faring much better either.

They've got their priorities all wrong by letting this cause somehow suck in more political oxygen than it has already. 

 

[GordonS]

On 19/12/2020 at 14:17, Detournement said:

The Greens want GRA to be a blanket decree with usurps any case by case base for decisions. 

I haven't seen anything to suggest that's true.

What is true though is that those who claim to be concerned about prisons, sport etc made no attempt to offer amendments to the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, they just fought to scrap the whole thing.

As for what appears on documents, as Mixu said, who cares? What difference does it make to anything whether someone is registered on a birth certificate as mother or father? Why doesn't it just record parents anyway? Why do we have an M or F on a passport at all? Why do website forms routinely ask for titles and sex/gender when they're of no relevance?

And as an aside, why is it when sex/gender is asked, or titles provided in a drop-down menu, is the male option always first?