Sorry if this upsets Arabian_ian but....

..This law that Nicola Sturgeon and her devolved Scottish Govt want to pass is being blocked by Parliament. Now regardless of whether anyone agrees with it or not, I cannot help but think that her tantrum describing is as disgusting and outrageous that the UK Parliament are blocking it and it is an affront to democracy is somewhat 'one sided' and another attempt to make an argument for independence and that the UK parliament is trampling on their right to 'govern'...
The point is that a devolved Govt that she is leader of, of governing a population smaller than Yorkshire, is trying to pass a law that impacts the whole of the UK (notwithstanding many consider would impact on women's rights not just in Scotland but all 4 nations that make up the UK) This then becomes a case of the 'tail wagging the dog'.
The Scottish parliament is devolved Govt and only if /when they gain full independence and become an independent country can they then pass whatever laws they like. Until such time, they should accept that any law that conflicts with laws in the UK is not acceptable. I see another protacted legal action by the SNP wasting millions and shifting focus from what the SNP should be doing...sorting out domestic issues rather than grandstanding.
I can't help but think this is a blatant attempt to paint Westminster as the villain and make it yet another justification (in her World) for independence.

 

I can see both sides to some extent.

But, without trying to find out, I guess the legal side of it will be tested as certain powers were divolved. Does it include stuff like this, I've no idea. But parliament do hold reserved powers over some stuff.

 

Haven't got a clue what Ian thinks and why would it upset him. ?
A straw poll in scotland says the majority of the public are against it. I also think 16 is too young to make such a life changing decision.

 

But you're fine to have a kid? That's considerably more life changing, and not just for the person involved.

This is just culture war nonsense from the tories, yet again. Dog whistling because they've run out of ways to convince people that anything they're offering will actually improve people's lives. From talking to borderline unionists in Scotland, though, I think they may have underestimated the potential backlash here...

 

More life changing.? I think I'll have to agree to disagree.
The consensual age for sex is 16. Not a go ahead to have kids. And options are available palatable or not. and I don't see it as a sole political standpoint. Cross party agreement. Supported by labour

 

You think that having a kid is less life changing that deciding you want to live and be treated as a different gender?

 

And yeah, don't think that Keir's craven attitude on this hasn't been noted. Another one to add to the list.

 

You have options. That are not life changing. But possibly heart searching. I'm not against the choice but 16 is too young for me.

Abortion
Adoption
Safe sex
Morning after pill.

 

. It's a personal opinion that he deems the right thing. Why are you et up abart it.

 

With the greatest of respect, I think you're missing my point! It's not like they're trying to put walk-in surgical reassignment clinics on every high street.

 

No. but thet are giving them the right to go through the process and going ahead too early imho.

 

As far as I'm aware the bill in question doesn't do that.

 

Having a kid is fine, but changing M to F on your passport or vice versa is apparently too drastic.

 

They have to be shown to be living as an opposite gender for 6 months at the age of 16 or 17 to apply. Hopefully that application is a long drawn out process for em. To come to a final decision.
But I still disagree which is a more life changing. Decision. the child one has options. obviously if you decide to keep the child it is life changing. But there are still options if you can't cope.

 

Not sure what to think.
At 16 does someone know something is not right within themselves? I knew I was and felt male at 16.
My daughter is a teacher and she has pupils almost deciding daily to change their names as to how to be referred to.
I actually spoke to someone yesterday who is actually going through trans and to ask her of her opinions on it as imo she would have more insight into it all.
Her answer was basically it’s a very complicated situation and 16 possibly far too young for anyone to make this life changing choice.
For me it’s the thin edge of the wedge for Westminster to be able to just cast aside any laws the Scottish govt make and to lessen the powers we have.
The tories have never been happy with devolution and would just love to have us under their thumb.

 

With respect ian was the age part of the legislation part of the manifesto. It quite clearly said GRC's would be on the agenda. Lots of scots are against the bill from what I gathered on the news this morning. But i don't know the numbers. A representative poll of Scots would be interesting to see.

 

I really think you need to look at the content of the bill again.

As for why I'm getting so "het up" about this - for a start I don't know a single person IRL who's trans or feminist (or both!) and who objects to it, and personally I think that counts for a lot. It's a relatively minor change that will improve the general quality of life of a lot of people, and I think it's important to call out the considerable amount of misinformation that's being spread about it.

 

Hooky it’s not a political thing but how people feel about it.
The Scottish parliament has passed a law but rightly or wrongly and Westminster just decided we will not allow it coz we know better.
Like I said earlier it’s the thin edge of the wedge. So we have a Scottish parliament but it means nothing.
That’s no way to help Scottish/English relations.

 

I agree with much of that, but........

What if the Supreme Court decides - as a factual matter - that the Equality Act 2010 would not be compromised because, let's say, the granting of a GRC would not automatically guarantee entry for transitioned men to enter women-only spaces due to the fact that the usual safeguarding checks would still apply?

 

If I misunderstand I apologise. But in my head obtaining a GRC. Gives the recipient opportunity to go ahead and seek all that it entails. I'm aware there still would be long conversations to be had for those wishing to transgender.