Councillors vote to condemn women’s rights.
Edinburgh councillors have voted to condemn guidance from the EHRC as “discriminatory against trans people”.
A motion put forward by the Scottish Greens at Thursday’s council meeting was supported by the Liberal Democrats and SNP.
Yes how dare women have rights?
Councillor Alex Staniforth remarked: “Human rights associations across the board have condemned the EHRC guidance … it didn’t have to be this way. As much as I have my issues with the Supreme Court decision of the For Women Scotland case, they made it clear that their judgment should not be considered as a case of one side winning over another.
“We do have a voice and it is our duty to raise that voice in solidarity with all trangender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people that live in and visit our city.”
But not women. Never women. Good god no.
There will be some women among the approved trangender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people, perhaps, but the solidarity is not for their womanness but for their trangender, non-binary, and gender non-conformingness. Just plain women without any genderish bells and whistles are worthless and evil. Make a note of it.
The updated Equality Act Code of Practice was drafted by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and responds to recent legal decisions related to sex and gender.
Progressive groups have criticised parts of the code they say is discriminatory against transgender people, while some women’s rights campaigners have said it protects female-only spaces.
Oh look what The Herald did there – they framed women as a category separate from progressive groups – in other words women are reactionary as opposed to progressive. All women; women as such; women who dare to defend women’s rights instead of the purported rights of people who want to eradicate women’s rights. Reactionary bitches R us.
For example, paragraph 12.66 of the code states: “The Act permits associations of any size or character, other than political parties, to restrict their membership to persons who share a protected characteristic.”
As such, under the guidance, it would be lawful to prohibit a trans woman from joining a woman-only association.
Yes, because trans women are men, so they don’t belong to, and don’t have any right to belong to, women-only associations.
Councillor Fiona Bennett added: “I was so upset this morning to listen to what I found to be extremely emotional and powerful equations. I was even more upset to see the cold responses from the Conservative and Labour parties. How could you not be moved by what was being said?
“Is the safety and dignity of trans people less important than yours? Two things can exist at the same time, the vulnerability of one group does not erase that of another.”
Well. The vulnerability of “trans people” does not erase that of women, is what you mean. But what about the other way around? You in fact think that mentioning the vulnerability of women does erase the purported vulnerability of men who call themselves women. That’s why you keep attacking women defending our rights.
Commenting on the motion prior to the vote, campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS) said the Greens were “once again” engaging in “performative stunts”.
“The arguments here are as tired as they are cliched, and betray a lack of knowledge of law and practice. They are deluded if they believe that withdrawing the guidance will make any difference to law,” the group remarked.
“All it will do is ensure that businesses and organisations have to take individual legal advice at great cost. This is petulant sixth-form politics and as legally illiterate as it is futile.”
I’m on team Those Women.
Leave a Reply