The Observer view on Scotland’s controversial proposed gender reforms | Observer editorial

submitted by bife_de_lomo from theguardian.com

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]ClassroomPast6178 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Ahh, calls for compromise, that’s always the first stop on the road to a volte face on an issue. The Observer is ahead of The Guardian on reading the room on the Trans issue and I think the argument is being won, people just need to hold their nerve and not agree to split the difference.

[–]bife_de_lomo[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I certainly hope so. It's time the madness ended!

[–]LordoftheFliesAmeri-kin 2.0. Pronouns: MegaWhite/SuperStraight/UltraPatriarchy 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Funny how often "compromise" with these people actually means "give me what I want, without question or complaint, and do so again when I decide that I want more later."

[–]ClassroomPast6178 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, that definition of compromise was my first suspicion but I actually think that the numbers of the nominal progressives, the type of people that generally support progressive causes (gay marriage etc) but aren’t radicalised and haven’t hung their life upon it in the way the danger hairs and TRAs have, are finding it harder and harder to ignore the incidents that provoke cognitive dissonance (Wi Spa, Loutoun County, rapists in women’s prisons etc). It might explain the sheer effort that has been put into playing down events like Wi Spa, loutoun county etc - they knew these were indefensible and blew their cause out of the water.

It’s happening in a large number of circumstances too. The reaction to the Ngozi Fulani/Lady SH incident wasn’t what the agitators wanted with a lot of people (including a sizeable contingent of British West Africans) instantly suspecting a stitch up even though the media were doing their best to spin the story into a race row - it may have backfired on Ngozi/Marlene/Mary as the Charity Commission investigate her dealings.

The recent stampede at the Afrobeats concert at the Brixton O2. The media didn’t even try to spin it racially - despite initially trying to pin it on non-existent police dogs, which for once the Met managed to hold a decent press conference and put that rumour to bed.

I don’t think it’s all going to return to a pre-2015 level of normalcy overnight, but I actually think we might be starting to move out of the worst of it and the power of the Critical Social Justice crowd might be waning. We might have to put up with a few more years of woke Hollywood and such, but I do think the likes of JKR et al are starting to have an effect.

[–]LordoftheFliesAmeri-kin 2.0. Pronouns: MegaWhite/SuperStraight/UltraPatriarchy 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Unfortunately, the knock-on effects of IdPol in politics are unlikely to ever go away. Those particular children have gotten entirely too used to their schoolyard bullshit, and don't strike me as the sort to want to go back to being adults again.

[–]LyingSpirit472 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not only that, but IdPol is engineered to keep going. Even if it loses some power, IdPol is tailor-made to keep going because it lures in all the groups: Whiny teenagers who are 14 and thus know everything about the world, whiny incels, whiny basics who want the law to codify that it, indeed, is all about them, personally... and those groups just so happen to be the biggest whiners on the planet who will whine about literally anything that doesn't go their way, and also the most spoiled, most entitled, most terminally online people in existence so you'll never get rid of them. They'll always be part of the discourse because if you don't give them what they want, the second they want it, they'll scream bloody murder and make it their mission to ruin your life.

[–]bife_de_lomo[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It is a reassuring step in the right direction that the mainstream UK Left press is starting to resist the unquestioning support of gender ideology, but the post has made me query things a little deeper.

The article recommends compromise, but I am struggling to see what rights people want in terms of their so-called gender identity that aren't already granted to them under sex-based protections under the UK Equality Act. Anything to do with presentation is covered, changing your name is a no-brainer, anyone can marry anyone else.

So can my fellow Saiditors halp me identify any good-faith reasons why "gender" should be a consideration at all? Why has The Observer stopped at a compromise, rather than coming to the conclusion that every other "peaked" person has?

[–]Datachost 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

but I am struggling to see what rights people want in terms of their so-called gender identity that aren't already granted to them under sex-based protections under the UK Equality Act. Anything to do with presentation is covered, changing your name is a no-brainer, anyone can marry anyone else.

Which is why the GRA needs removing entirely, rather than expanding. The GRA was initially passed on two grounds, firstly for privacy reasons (which are debatable, privacy ends the second it starts to affect other people) and the other as a workaround for same sex marriage not having recognition at the time. Since the passing of marriage equality it's become legislation that is unnecessary at best, downright obfuscating at worst since it clashes with the Equality Act as shown in the current debate in Scotland.

The whole thing is a farce anyway. The SNP have packed the courts (Lady Haldane who made the decision was personally recommended by Sturgeon for the position), they've forged an alliance with the Greens, giving them positions they shouldn't have in return for supporting their cause and they've packed the commission (which just goes to show why a separate house is the better method of legislative oversight).

I don't think the SNP even care about Self-ID they're just using it as a means to an end for independence. As things are now either their new law will clash with the Equality Act, which will lead to Westminster stepping in or the court decision gets pushed right to the Supreme Court. Either way the SNP gets to whine about poor wee Scotland getting trodden on by those bastard English again.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think the SNP even care about Self-ID they're just using it as a means to an end for independence. As things are now either their new law will clash with the Equality Act, which will lead to Westminster stepping in or the court decision gets pushed right to the Supreme Court. Either way the SNP gets to whine about poor wee Scotland getting trodden on by those bastard English again.

This can’t be stated enough. It seems that everything the SNP does is done to provoke a challenge either from Westminster or to the Supreme Court. Their reform of speech laws, which would criminalise speech in one’s own home, a massive overreach that would almost certainly lead to a SC challenge is another example.

[–]bife_de_lomo[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, I agree. Hopefully the momentum isn't lost in the current mess!

[–]oatcake 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think the SNP even care about Self-ID they're just using it as a means to an end for independence.

You have this completely back-to-front.

And, if allowed, they will keep whining about poor wee Scotland getting trodden on, forever and ever, achieving absolutely nothing (see the last 8 years for reference).