Gender Reform – an MSP’s view (final)

Unfortunately, I have little to add to my previous postings as, not surprisingly, I have had no further reply. However, I do have some further comments about my MSP.

Her reply to my first email made two points, GRR was in the manifesto (self-id wasn’t) and it was the “right” thing to do (opinions vary on that).

The SNP line has consistently been that the changes are just administrative and don’t affect the position of women. They have said that perverts, paedophiles and rapists will do their perverting, paedophiling and raping anyway and they don’t need to pretend to be women to do it. Of course, they came to that view by refusing to speak to women’s groups and by ignoring all evidence to the contrary presented to them. It’s easy to ‘know’ you’re right when you ignore all evidence that shows you’re wrong.

My MSP is Clare Haughey, who is Minister for Children and Young People in the Scottish Government, having previously worked in the SNHS as a mental health nurse.

How can anyone with a background in medicine come to the view that the simple act of putting on a dress and a bit of lippy changes a man into a woman?

How can anyone with a background in mental health come to the view that a man who thinks he’s actually a woman has anything other than a mental health condition?

How can anyone with responsibility for children and young people come to the view that it’s in their best interests to pass a law that allows perverts, paedophiles and rapists free access to children and young people?

And that’s before we take into account the absolute insanity of the Scottish Government discussing proposals to allow children as young as six to make life-changing decisions about their bodies, leading to a life of drug-dependency, infertility and mental and physical illness without having any discussion with a medical or psychological professional.

And that’s before we take into account the absolute insanity of the Scottish Government discussing proposals to turn any discussion with a child or young person about this into a crime. Parents who only want the best for their child become criminals and can have the child removed. Doctors who point out the implications of the child’s decision become criminals and can perhaps have their licence removed. If a girl says she wants to be a boy or a boy says he wants to be a girl, then that’s fixed for life and nothing can be done except to encourage and affirm this ‘decision’. Any other discussion would be considered conversion therapy and would be illegal and ‘perpetrators’ become criminals.

You don’t believe this? Read the report from the Expert Advisory Group on Ending Conversion Practices on the Scottish Government website, a group appointed by the Scottish Government to get the answer they got. Read it here.

So why would someone with Clare Haughey’s responsibilities and background do this? The answer is, of course, is going to be money. She wants to keep her job and her salary and to do that she can’t disagree with her ‘glorious leader’. To disagree means being cast out into the back benches, being deprived of her ministerial salary and, likely, being deselected for the next Holyrood election. So, compared to that, what does it matter if a couple of million people get disadvantaged or even harmed.

It’s amazing what you can persuade yourself of when your income may be affected.

8 thoughts on “Gender Reform – an MSP’s view (final)

    1. The SNP are no longer a political party. They’re simply a money making scheme which promises riches to all those who agree to suspend critical thinking for the duration of their term of employment. Sturgeon is just doing what she thinks will make her the most money and improve her chances of a post-SNP high profile sinecure. She has no longer the slightest interest (if she ever did) in independence, in Scotland or in the Scottish people.

      Liked by 4 people

  1. When the Scottish gov asked for feedback on Gender Reform they opened the feedback up to the whole world. This meant that it was not possible to distinguish between what the people of Scotland want and what the world wants. For a wee country that desires independence it seems a strange thing to do? Almost as if we wanted our wishes to be drowned out?

    Liked by 6 people

    1. They knew they would a load of responses from American lunatics to justify their nasty ideas and they made sure of massive support by ignoring natal women with contrary views. As Sturgeon said, “women’s views are not valid”.

      In 2021, we didn’t elect a government, we elected a paedophile ring.

      Liked by 5 people

  2. Her “it’s only a Admin change” fell to pieces after the Haldane Ruling on the GRPB Act, only 2weeks before the final vote.
    She says “sex is no longer defined as biological or birth sex” but now includes those with a GRC.
    This changes the operation of the reserved Equality Act 2010. How can service providers maintain single sex spaces for women, when ‘Sex’ now includes biological males’?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. We’ve now got the new story from SNPers for whom NS can do no wrong that the bill was deliberately introduced to create division with Westminster and so increase support for independence, just like the reference to the Supreme Court. You can believe that if you like.

      Is it all just designed to create Sturgeon’s place in history? If so, it may not be the place she planned.

      Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s