DEVIOUS Tory politicians, aided and abetted by many in the mainstream media, have misleadingly conflated two essentially separate issues around the current gender recognition reform debate. Furthermore, they have attempted to scurrilously cast blame for the seeming controversy around these complex issues exclusively at the First Minister and the SNP.
Across the UK, rape crimes are not only vastly under-reported, but convictions are a fraction of what they apparently should be. In addition, as highlighted recently by the admittance of an accused rapist to Edinburgh University, there is a challenging balance to be struck in managing the rights of those accused prior to judgement with not endangering women in the interim.
The recent early release on probation of a prisoner in England who went on to kill a young woman demonstrates that we still do not have foolproof answers, irrespective of political allegiances, to many of the problems facing a progressive society today.
READ MORE: Trans prisoners with violent history 'won't be housed in women's jail'
The Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill was supported with by a cross-party majority in the Scottish Parliament but is now blocked by a remote individual in a remote parliament. This blocked bill did not cause a convicted rapist to be temporarily held for prison assessment in segregated accommodation at Cornton Vale.
In spite of the different party votes it seems most would agree that convicted rapists should not be incarcerated among women prisoners. It also seems logical that those best placed to assess the dangers around this particular issue are prison authorities with access to all the relevant information, not those attempting to exploit a marginalised minority for their own political ends. That said, most of the general public would probably approve of a change in legislation compelling authorities to have convicted rapists serve their sentences in a prison consistent with their physical gender at the time the crime was committed.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
WHEN India Willoughby remarkably states that “nobody is coming to the rescue” of the trans “community” apart from Nicola Sturgeon, shouldn’t she be asking why (India Willoughby praises Nicola Sturgeon for supporting trans community, thenational.scot, Jan 29)?
Could it be because the fundamentals of the GRR are a bridge too far for a society concerned about the bill’s impact on the sex status of women? Or too far by removing the importance of medical evaluation and counselling in the process to ensure best practice? Too far perhaps by increasing the speed at which these life-changing decisions can be made? Even too far by reducing the age to engage in the process to when young people are easily confused, impressionable and vulnerable to vested-interest external influences?
Or is it simply because of the vociferous and intransigent lobby who denigrated anyone venturing contrary argument and labelled them "terfs" or some other equally disgusting and abusive label?
READ MORE: When will the SNP start causing a rumpus over the referendum block?
Perhaps the antipathy generated by the clearly overwhelming media coverage of the pro-trans argument, at the expense of those who oppose it, stifled the depth of debate that should have existed?
Personally, I’d just like to understand why Sturgeon has driven this debate at this time and wish she had pursued independence with the same zeal; because that’s where I believe her focus should have been, and which the whole of Scottish society could have benefited from.
Jim Taylor
Edinburgh
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel