Forum Topic

SCOTS TRANS

Wouldn't it be ironic if the trigger for Scotland's eventual independence was not a  dispute over  a fundamental constitutional issue affecting government but a London-Edinburgh wrangle over male/female gender. The situation has echoes of the 18th century War Over Jenkins' Ear between Spain and Britain. By the way, there are persuasive indications from a former senior UK judge that the Scots government is likely to be onto a loser if it goes to court on the trans matter.

Alexander MacLeod ● 879d16 Comments

I grew up with the binary system and I find the notion of gender as a spectrum invigorating. Most interestingly, masculinity as a container for power is challenged by these empowered alternatives inclusive of Trans!

Miles Thompson ● 868d

The loss of urinals can create a flow throughput problem as well :-) Still some cafes have only ever had one unisex loo ...

Michael Ixer ● 868d

Yes it's bad enough using toilets when your out, let alone having mixed toilets. What about germs. It's very difficult for a woman to wee and not sit down.

Barbara Stevens ● 868d

These culture changes take time; how many years has it taken since limited legalisation of gay sex to marriage? Yes, younger people are more accepting of gender fluidity, but they're not the only ones, there's many older people who accept not everyone can be pigeonholed as straight M or F. I suppose if one's had it drummed into you for six or seven decades that the world is a binary black and white perhaps it's difficult to accept that better understanding means it's really an analogue spectrum of colours with blurred boundaries around the primary spikes?

Michael Ixer ● 868d

Oh I accept that this is the majority opinion, but it may vary over time and from country to country. I'd assume that, over time, the increase in the number of gender-neutral toilets, alongside the traditional single-sex toilets, will take some of the heat out of this debate.

David Ainsworth ● 868d

Mr ThompsonI would dispute that this 'blurring' is a primary feature of our current culture, indicating to you I assume a major acceptance.I would claim however that the issue has gained more prominence in the media today - more than it deserves in terms of overall societal acceptance of what it stands for.It is a fad topic for the Guardian reading class and the under 25s.

John Hawkes ● 868d

Mr AinsworthGetting a bit metaphysical here wot !Do you agree that most people have a common accepted understanding of the meanings and attributes of male and female ?On that basis they wish there to be separate facilities and services based on these.Do you ?

John Hawkes ● 868d

The blurring of all gendered boundaries and guidelines which is a primary feature of our culture in the new millennium needs to be acknowledged. To list one example - the increasing number of gender neutral toilets!

Miles Thompson ● 868d

"All I am saying is that in many circumstances most people do not wish the subjective claims of some to override the factual, longstanding and generally accepted rights of others ie males using female facilities."But are "longstanding and generally accepted rights" factual?

David Ainsworth ● 868d

Mr ThompsonI am sure it is quite possible and true to talk about gender and sexuality as both being on a spectrum.(Spectrum seems to be a very fashionable and popular term these days to avoid committing to many observable and undeniable facts). But I believe that gender is in the main subjective where as sexuality is factual.All I am saying is that in many circumstances most people do not wish the subjective claims of some to override the factual, longstanding and generally accepted rights of others ie males using female facilities.

John Hawkes ● 868d

'...talking about gender, sexuality, etc as a spectrum'..The notion of gender on a broad spectrum is indeed the key to these matters. Also see Judith Butler's seminal text Gender Trouble. (1990)

Miles Thompson ● 869d

Mr ThompsonI would have thought it impossible to avoid one's own or another's gender.One definition of gender states - 'Gender describes how you understand yourself as a man (masculine), a woman (feminine), a mixture of the two, or something else entirely' - which seems to make gender a very much subjective attribute of which there would be a vast range.Sex however is scientifically defined according to your biology (male or female chromosomal makeup, hormones, and/or anatomy).In the main the vast majority would  hence unequivocally place themselves and others in one of the two categories - male or female (though in a very small number of cases this is not so clear cut).In most cases one's gender and sex seem to correspond according to the above definitions - male/masculine; female/feminine without any issues. The practical problem as I see it however is that some people self-define their gender and some even their sex in a different manner to that above.Hence we have males claiming to be females which is totally at variance with their true sex, by making their gender the key to describing in this sexual context who/what they are. They then wish to use gender to gain privileges of space and  services that have traditionally been set up based on sex and are accepted as such.And many (most ?) users of these services and space happen to agree and are happy with their having being defined in this manner.Hence they quite understandably it seems to me, object to the claims they should now be defined by gender.They don't like males/men encroaching on female/women's turf !

John Hawkes ● 869d

In the second millennium all gendered categories are seen to be increasingly unstable. As the radical performance artist David Hoyle says when first addressing his audience, 'Ladies & Gentlemen and those who have been clever enough to have avoided gender...'

Miles Thompson ● 871d

Mr Hawkes. I realise that the UK/Scottish disagreement is around gender rather than biological sex. However, I've heard several discussions around this where people (some who probably should know better) start by stating categorically there are two biological sexes, and the fact that intersex people exist renders that a completely inaccurate statement so I would therefore suspect any argument they base on that false assumption. Yes, most of us fall into a standard M or F category but we should make provision and respect the rights of intersex people who, as you say, may have different chromosome variations within that group (and, as you say, that may result in anatomical differences -  which can also lead to a wrong categorisation at birth). I believe others working in this field also attribute some variances across all biological sexes to chemical and hormonal differences but I'd admit that's out of my sphere of detailed knowledge. My point was (or was meant to be) that this is an area where many of us may lack information because it is an area where new knowledge is being gathered in what is a complex area once one considers sex, gender, sexuality, etc. It's also an area where acceptance of changing attitudes meets resistance from vested interest or entrenched views - a similar example being gay marriage and religious institutions? Hence, a sensible, grown up discussion to try and reach an agreement rather using existing legislation against each other and going to court would seem preferable? I also wonder if talking about gender, sexuality, etc as a spectrum - essentially a two dimensional model - is inappropriate, perhaps a mult-dimensional view is needed? This description of the subject is quite interesting: https://www.genderbread.org/ One would have thought that as a number of countries - Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Ecuador, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Portugal, Switzerland and Uruguay (ref: Wikipedia) - have introduced gender self identification there should now be some data to assess the effect it has on societies?  I'm not claiming to have a solution to this, I don't know enough about it, but just interested in views on it if it does create a constitutional crisis!

Michael Ixer ● 875d

Mr IxerHow many biological sexes do you think there are ?My understanding is that the vast majority of the population fall into one of two categories of sex - male or female - each having distinct physiological and biological characteristics that are assigned at birth.There are people whose anatomy is a variation of these characteristics and might be called intersexual; apparently about 1% of the population.But can every variation be individually named ?On the other hand the UK government defines gender as:'a social construction relating to behaviours and attributes based on labels of masculinity and femininity; gender identity is a personal, internal perception of oneself and so the gender category someone identifies with may not match the sex they were assigned at birth.'The issue that many people feel arises from this are the social consequences of self-definition of gender and the claim that this takes precedence over that person's sex.The impact of a male claiming to be female imposing himself on traditional female-only spaces is obvious.That is why the right to transition should not be allowed lightly.But I concede the 'space problem' does pose problems for genuinely intersex people.

John Hawkes ● 875d

It does seem an interesting issue to risk a constitutional crisis about rather than sit down and an have a sensible discussion and learn more;my understanding is there are different views across all parties, aren't there? After all, aside from gender, there seems to be a misunderstanding that there are only two biological sexes, isn't that rather insulating to intersex people? At least the Germans seem to have sorted that out: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41912754 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46727611 And US passports now allow a sex of X as well as M or F [interesting as my ESTA application only allowed an M or F option :-)] https://www.npr.org/2022/04/11/1092000203/gender-x-us-passport-applications I can see that the new Scottish law might create inconsistencies with existing UK laws but surely this shouldn't be a political issue, shouldn't both parties work out a compromise to bring both the UK and Scotland in line changing whichever laws need to be modified? If nothing else shouldn't UK laws at least, as a first step, recognise the reality of intersex people as other countries like Germany, etc do?

Michael Ixer ● 878d