Mobilization of payroll

For anyone hoping for an outbreak of sanity and decency, this is a bad sign.

Rape Crisis Scotland, which depends almost entirely on the Scottish government for funding, has decided tonight to enter the debate on the wording of a new law designed to reduce the trauma of people (almost all women) who have been raped. We can only speculate on whether they were forced to do so, but the intervention seems likely to just pour gasoline on the fire.

We wholeheartedly agree with the Scot’s tweet attributed to the organization’s chief executive Sandy Brindley – the “gender dispute” shouldn’t stand in the way of the wholly laudable goals of the new law. The best way to do this is for the Scottish Government to do what its own committee has recommended and replace the word “gender” with the word “gender”.

So we’re not sure why Brindley is having an argument about it.

If there is one thing that the transgender cult and the “gender sensitive” lobby absolutely agree on – and there is probably only one – it is that the words “gender” and “gender” do NOT mean the same thing, so the penultimate sentence a is dangerous nonsense.

(“Gender” is indeed a word that has no actual meaning at all in the law. Official ID documents only record gender. If you ask 1000 transactivists to define “gender”, you will get 2000 different responses and 950 death threats with the Picture below in them.)

But of course, if Brindley’s argument were true, there would be even less reason to object to the change made. Why complain about swapping one “interchangeable” word for another? The whole point of interchangeable things is that they can be safely exchanged. So why not just kill the whole row stone instantly?

The above reminds us more of Peter Murrell’s comments this morning that he is not currently a WhatsApp user. But again – if there are no trans women examiners in Scotland, nothing will be lost by changing the wording. No one will hurt their feelings, and victims will have peace of mind that on a terrible day in their life that hopefully never will come, they will never risk being unexpectedly confronted with a guy in a skirt who wants to poke around in their private lives .

The fact that Brindley showed up two days before the vote on this utterly pointless article is a worrying indicator that the Scottish Government is planning to hold onto its guns and reject Johann Lamont’s amendment to the recommendation of its own committee for no apparent reason other than bare pig-headed excitement.

(With the exception of Kenny Gibson, who we understand voted for the amendment, all readers who contact their SNP MSPs appear to have received automated or no responses: “Your email is important to us.)

Scotland’s rape victims deserve better.

Print kindly

Related Articles