FWS Response to SNP Manifesto

As published in our Twitter thread:

Today @theSNP released their manifesto and, on the Gender Recognition Act, it was as bad as feared. Yes, there is obfuscation to mask intent, but intent is crystal clear. Especially if we judge the SNP by their record and all the things they have failed – and continued to fail – to address.

The manifesto commits to reforming the GRA while ensuring that it will not affect the rights or protections women enjoy under the Equality Act. But what, in reality, does that mean?

Currently, we are fighting the Scottish Government in the courts for their determination to redefine “woman” (EA2010 – female of any age) to include anyone and everyone who uses female pronouns who has a female name – whatever that might mean.

The SNP, laughably, would have us believe that it doesn’t affect women to define us as anything other than a nebulous collection of outdated offensive stereotypes. Indeed an MP is currently arguing on Twitter that it has “literally no impact”.

If @NicolaSturgeon means what she says, she would offer a commitment to the EA2010, she would #axetheact (GRPB), and she would save the money of thousands of ordinary Scottish women who are having to fund this action. Sadly, we don’t believe she will.

If @NicolaSturgeon meant what she says, she would commit to ensure there were no financial disincentives for those seeking gov funding for women’s services who wish to invoke single sex exceptions. Sadly, we don’t believe she will.

If @NicolaSturgeon meant what she says, she would explain how the Scot Gov policy that transwomen are women unless prevented by law came into being, & why, in light of that policy, she fought so hard against #sixwords, pretending that a legally explicit amendment made no odds.

Ms Sturgeon’s government & funded lobbyists have no respect for Equality Act. Women’s orgs in scotland openly advertise positions citing schedule 9 of the Act, but state they are open to transwomen. A transwoman without a GRC holds a senior post at RCS.

We are tired of the gaslighting and the dishonesty. So, Ms Sturgeon, cards on the table.
We are seeking clarity on the manifesto and on comments reported here by @wornoutmumhack:

When you say that you will convene meetings with women, who exactly, do you mean? The groups funded by your government who are already signed up to your agenda or the grassroots organisations with whom you have failed to engage and who challenge you?

Do you mean to address this openly in Parliament and committee, or do you intend to stitch this up – yet again – by appointing unaccountable working groups stuffed with lobbyists with a preordained agenda to preempt conclusions?

When you talk of “international best practice” what do you mean? Your preferred partners in government the SGP have pledged to incorporate Yogyakarta in Scots Law. Can you be honest and address if this is your aim? If so, you should read this article:

Direct link to article: https://archive.ph/CNi5Q

When you say “we also have to reassure any woman who thinks that making life better for trans people is a threat to women’s rights” do you mean to tell us that our well-evidenced fears are nonsense and that you know better?

You also, disgracefully, frame women as being opposed to making “life better” for trans people. Feminists have, for decades, supported minority groups. We will continue to do so, but not if it means sacrificing everything our mothers fought for.

.@NicolaSturgeon, #womenwontwheesht. This dishonest framing is an insult. We do not object to “making life better” for anyone, but we do object to vulnerable women’s lives being made evidentially worse.

Women, men and transsexuals are alert to this. Last year, there were meetings at parliament featuring senior, expert, individuals: medics, lawyers, women’s rights activists, and transsexuals who were all, rightly, worried about your policy. You attended none of them.

We have spent past years begging for scraps from Scot Gov. We fought – as have MSPs – to change badly conceived, illiberal, anti-women law in the teeth of opposition from your government. We have raised £150,000 from ordinary women in Scotland to stop you snatching our rights.

If you want a Scotland where women feel “safe and valued” you would have met us last year, you would meet us now. A “feminist to [her] fingertips” would have done so.

A “feminist to [her] fingertips” would have prioritised the tidal wave of hate against women in Scotland. She would have condemned the appalling abuse of her own MPs and MSPs by angry young men, which shockingly, included death threats.

This would have been a priority in Hate Crime legislation. A feminist would have worked with incredible women like @johannlamont on the sex characteristic. The speeches of Johann, @1_elainesmith, @JennyMarra@JoanMcAlpine were those of feminists. Your gov voted them down.

If you believe your case is strong, you can argue it. If we are ignorant, misguided or bigoted, then face us and expose us. Skewer the weakness in our argument – reassure us if necessary. We don’t think you will and that is to your detriment and to Scotland’s.

If you want to talk, we will talk. If you want to fight, we will continue to fight for women and we will never give up.

To use that suffragette phrase, #DeedsNotWords. The deeds have failed to match the words, but, to be blunt, both are lacking.

6 thoughts on “FWS Response to SNP Manifesto

  1. This issue needs to be tackled now as a human rights issue because that is what it is. Did human rights (UN and European) intend that one group’s rights should eclipse another’s? I do not believe so, but that is what is happening.

    We must also start to question – since the extension of the trans umbrella into queer theory and other sexual philosophies, just what we re up against. Is it a simple and humane desire for body dysphoric trans women to feel safe, to feel validated and to access the same rights as natal women?

    Or is it the case that what we are really dealing with here is men trying to impose their sexual fantasies, fetishes, Paraphilias on to the women’s movement. I think that is what this is, and, if that is, indeed, what this is, we are gong to be in deep, deep trouble if this stuff gets through on a nod. I make no apologies for saying that our children are also on the front line, and not just as victims of misplaced youth transgenderism, but of much worse.

    Women just cannot conceive of the infinite variety of the male libido. When I was a teenager, my strict dad used to say, when I complained: “You have no idea what some men are capable of, the lengths to which they will go… ” I confess that I didn’t really get it, and blamed him for being too strict.

    I think we are just beginning to get an idea of how far these men will go to indulge their completely alien sexual preferences. They have hi-jacked a whole movement that was based on the rights of body dysphoric people and turned it into a pornography site. That their paraphilias might revolve around getting their rocks off in seeing themselves as women, as babies, as toddlers, etc. is being used to cement their ‘right’ to access female spaces and rights as, somehow, a good thing and based on equality.

    Equality? It is based on pornography, and everyone knows that the vast majority of pornography is male-based and centred, where women and children are extras in a world in which they have no point except to serve as ciphers for the male libido in its many-faceted fantasy.

    What is the reason for this stuff gaining ground so quickly and so comprehensively? Could it be that many men – by no means all, by any stretch of the imagination – actually recognize and understand the underlying facets? Are there politicians, lawyers, civil servants, big businessmen and others completely au fait with this dark side of the male libido? I rather think that is the case.

    I do not wish to be pushy, but I don’t believe FWS can win an appeal based around the question of what a woman is, anymore. The law already accepts that a trans woman IS a woman, and, therefore, there can be no legitimate grounds for banning him/her from boards or any other female representative medium.

    What needs to happen is to challenge whether trans women can, in reality and in law, represent natal women’s life experience, being natal men, and natal men being kept out, by law, from women’s spaces and rights. You will need proof that: a) many of the trans lobby are sexual fetishists, not body dysphoric; b) that women’s whole biological life journey involves matters that no man, with the best will in the world, can possibly understand in the context of legislation, politics, society; and c) can one vulnerable group legitimately, via human rights, usurp the human rights of another group without ultimately damaging the efficacy of that other group’s human rights, or, can women, distinct under the UN Charter, escape damage as a distinct vulnerable group by allowing trans women into their spaces and rights, and how can they escape damage in the long-term to all female-only spaces and rights?

    The SNPG and the trans lobby must be forced into providing answers – and not obfuscations and fudges. They must be cornered and forced into providing EVIDENCE that women and girls will NOT be adversely affected by this, given their human rights under both the UN and European human rights (healthcare, women removing themselves from sports, women removing themselves from women-only prizes, from changing rooms and toilets, etc.) and under alienation from some men’s (trans women’s paraphilias, eg. male-bodied persons wearing nappies in a female space).

    Ask the courts to rule that a model for NON-DAMAGE be created and evaluated before any changes to any of the legislation goes ahead, and that neutral witnesses that are not beholden to the SNPG or to Stonewall be the ones to carry out the task. As an extra stiletto under the ribs, pose the question of how people in positions of power might be subject to any or many of these paraphilias themselves, and how we can all be reassured that they will be neutral in any situation. Undoubtedly, many politicians, members of the judiciary, lawyers, big businessmen, civil service, etc., will be subject to such paraphilias.

  2. You removed my comment? Okay. I imagine you must have had a good reason. It would be a pity, though, wouldn’t it, to spend more money on an appeal on the same lines as the case? I think that, if women are going to win on this issue, we need to be much more ruthless. We are much too kind to the trans lobby, and it will be our undoing.

    Yes, there are genuine body dysphoric people, a tiny minority, who would never dream of trespassing on women’s safe spaces and rights, but just want to live their lives in peace. We need to keep stressing that fact.

    Then, there are the vicious trans warriors who represent an entirely different facet of the trans movement – and that side of it is almost entirely steeped in the paraphilia spectrum, and will prove to be a massive threat to women’s existence because the only way that they can come out into the light and indulge their paraphilias openly – which they want to do – is by occupying women’s spaces, as women. It is also their Achilles heel.

    • Sorry Lorna, I didn’t remove your comment – just slow to hit the approve button for it to be published. Ironically due to the amount of porn links I have to wade though as spam comments!

      • Apologies. Porn links? Dear God, is that another tactic. Why can’t people see how sick this lot really are?

  3. Pingback: Who’s getting our X – and why? – #WomenVotingWithOurFeet

  4. Pingback: Election 2021 Guide - For Women ScotlandFor Women Scotland

Comments are closed.