Spain and Scotland make gender self-identification easier

[MrFanti]

https://transgenderfeed.com/2023/01/23/spain-and-scotland-make-gender-self-identification-easier/

[christianxxx]

the guy who raped two women and then magically decided to transition so he could be put in a women's prison is kinda scary.

https://nypost.com/2023/01/27/transgender-rapist-isla-bryson-to-serve-sentence-in-male-prison/

[Stavros]

the guy who raped two women and then magically decided to transition so he could be put in a women's prison is kinda scary.

https://nypost.com/2023/01/27/transgender-rapist-isla-bryson-to-serve-sentence-in-male-prison/


And how common is it? And should it form the basis of the rejection of the Law of Scotland?

Gender Recognition Law: Scotland -vs- England (hungangels.com) (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?112328-Gender-Recognition-Law-Scotland-vs-England)

[filghy2]

And how common is it? And should it form the basis of the rejection of the Law of Scotland?

Even if something is rare that does not mean there should not be safeguards. Our lives are full of safeguards against risks that are statistically rare (eg terrorist attacks).

If we were just talking about self-identity this wouldn't matter, but when we are talking about access to female-only facilities there need to be some hurdles because others may be affected. Most people these days are tolerant of transsexuals, but having legal rights depend purely on self-identification is always likely to be problematic.

[Stavros]

Most people these days are tolerant of transsexuals, but having legal rights depend purely on self-identification is always likely to be problematic.


But is it problematic that the State, and only the State can define a person's gender? How many of the so-called Libertarians, and small-state Conservatives ranting on about vaccinations and masks, actually support the State against the individual in these cases?

One could argue that the definition, even by the State ought to be based on science, but people like Trump and De Santis, incapable and unwilling to understand science, take a different view -that their view is the right one, and the only one.

Whose choices -they are hardly judgments- do you prefer?

[filghy2]

But is it problematic that the State, and only the State can define a person's gender?

As long as we have things that are separated by gender (eg female prisons, toilets, sports) then the state or some other authority will need to define gender in some way. What alternative do you suggest?

The fact that some people try to milk an issue for political purposes does not mean there is not a legitimate concern that needs to be taken into account. Most policy issues involve balancing different considerations. In this case the rights of people to choose their own gender identity need to be balanced against the rights of genetic women to have their own space. If we insist that gender self-identification rights must always take precedence and ignore other concerns then we play into the hands of the transphobes.

[Stavros]

I don't disagree much with your post, but at the same time there are calls for the gender divisions in film awards to be abandoned, and some think sport should also give up its rigid categories. Not sure how any of this would pan out in practice, it would be difficult to nominate men and women for the same acting award, though maybe the solution is to abolish awards.

Again, while there is a 'crisis of categories' to some extent, I don't think we can just dismiss women's claims as if the rights of trans people were superior -if anything, we have a crisis because of the denial of legitimacy and equal rights to trans people, a crisis that can be resolved through the legal recognition of citizens who either have the same rights as everyone else, or must be in some way discriminated against because they are trans. I don't see the management of public spaces being so hard to achieve, as I once put it some time ago in a debate about public toilets.

There is room for everyone, and everyone in a democracy must have equal rights. There will always be troublemakers, contrarians and lunatics on the fringe, but I don't see why we can't re-arrange our laws and spaces to meet general demands that are also fair.