Sam Fowles has been repeatedly and justly criticised for misrepresenting equalities law. You cannot be unaware of that. Why are you quoting him?
The lawyers to whom you should and could have spoken are Naomi Cunningham KC, Peter Daly, Akua Reindorf KC, and Anya Palmer. They have actually been involved in the relevant cases.
The percentage of sex crimes committed by trans women prisoners are readily available from the statistics published by the Home Office. Their offending rates are as bad if not in fact worse than male prisoners. Women prisoners are terrified of them for good reason.
There are documented cases of women patients being raped in hospitals by male patients. Of trans women patients abusing and intimidating women patients and staff. Where have you been?
Pips Bunce, a trans woman, was allowed onto a public board as part of the required female representation. Maya Forstater's criticism of that cost her her job. Again, where have you been that you don't know this? The FWS case was brought precisely to prevent that happening again in Scotland.
You ask rhetorically "So if all this could already be done, what was this decision about and why have people like JK Rowling celebrated so vehemently?"
I would be very happy to answer that question for you in detail if you would like to have me on your podcast.
It makes no sense to me how Helena Kennedy can go on at some length about the importance of biology to women's liberation struggles, then turn right round and maintain that stripping off/sharing intimate space with (non biological) 'transwomen' is surely no issue to any sensible lady?
I understand that 'Jane' in your example is meant to be super-nice and ladylike herself but not all 'transwomen' are - there have been plenty of examples to the contrary on recent public demonstrations against the SC ruling, and indeed as Baroness Falkner remembered in pain in Westminster yesterday, against the EHRC.
There is, it doesn't take long to observe, a definite penchant amongst the older 'transwoman' in particular for miniskirts, babydoll dresses, high heels and fishnets - even girls' school uniform!
Are you sure you're happy to allow these ladies access to your young daughter's or elderly mother's changing rooms/sports teams/hospital wards etc?
But how could you reasonably enforce a dress code . . ?
And how can you spend half an hour discussing this SC ruling, only talk about 'trans people' and not actually ask why FWS brought the case in the first place?
What are you afraid of learning from them and their thousands of supporters?
Sam Fowles has been repeatedly and justly criticised for misrepresenting equalities law. You cannot be unaware of that. Why are you quoting him?
The lawyers to whom you should and could have spoken are Naomi Cunningham KC, Peter Daly, Akua Reindorf KC, and Anya Palmer. They have actually been involved in the relevant cases.
The percentage of sex crimes committed by trans women prisoners are readily available from the statistics published by the Home Office. Their offending rates are as bad if not in fact worse than male prisoners. Women prisoners are terrified of them for good reason.
There are documented cases of women patients being raped in hospitals by male patients. Of trans women patients abusing and intimidating women patients and staff. Where have you been?
Pips Bunce, a trans woman, was allowed onto a public board as part of the required female representation. Maya Forstater's criticism of that cost her her job. Again, where have you been that you don't know this? The FWS case was brought precisely to prevent that happening again in Scotland.
You ask rhetorically "So if all this could already be done, what was this decision about and why have people like JK Rowling celebrated so vehemently?"
I would be very happy to answer that question for you in detail if you would like to have me on your podcast.
PS Thank you for the promotion Gladiatrix, but I'm not a KC!
It makes no sense to me how Helena Kennedy can go on at some length about the importance of biology to women's liberation struggles, then turn right round and maintain that stripping off/sharing intimate space with (non biological) 'transwomen' is surely no issue to any sensible lady?
I understand that 'Jane' in your example is meant to be super-nice and ladylike herself but not all 'transwomen' are - there have been plenty of examples to the contrary on recent public demonstrations against the SC ruling, and indeed as Baroness Falkner remembered in pain in Westminster yesterday, against the EHRC.
There is, it doesn't take long to observe, a definite penchant amongst the older 'transwoman' in particular for miniskirts, babydoll dresses, high heels and fishnets - even girls' school uniform!
Are you sure you're happy to allow these ladies access to your young daughter's or elderly mother's changing rooms/sports teams/hospital wards etc?
But how could you reasonably enforce a dress code . . ?
And how can you spend half an hour discussing this SC ruling, only talk about 'trans people' and not actually ask why FWS brought the case in the first place?
What are you afraid of learning from them and their thousands of supporters?
I thought this was a fascinating and really useful note on the case. Thank you for sharing it.