I NOTE Glenda Burns, relentless and stern critic of the Scottish Government and all its works, has joined in the current gender recognition controversy (Letters, Feb 8).

As my knowledge of “trans issues” and the gender recognition legislation is limited, I have no intention of becoming involved in that particular “debate”.

However, I must respond to some “bigger picture” type comments from Ms Burns.

Firstly, the claim that the “gender issue has set back the independence cause by years”; wishful thinking I would suggest.

I recall previous Holyrood legislation which would allegedly damage the SNP and therefore independence.

READ MORE: Isla Bryson case review finds women were 'at no point at risk of harm'

Amongst these legislative acts was the smoking ban in pubs and cafes, minimum pricing on alcohol and a ban on bulk buying of booze at discount prices.

We also had the repeal of Clause 28, which concerned a “gay rights” issue. The repeal proposal caused borderline hysteria among some, with a multi-millionaire funding a referendum to halt the proposal – he lost.

Regarding the suggestion that the whole gender brouhaha is the fault of the SNP/greens alone, Ms Burns seems unaware, or chooses to ignore, that Labour, Liberal Democrats and some Tories supported the legislation.

Of course the “it’s all the SNP/Greens’ fault” misconception is possibly due to the coverage from the BBC and the usual press suspects, while Labour’s Scottish spokesperson, that nice Mr Sarwar, appears to have just simply disappeared.

Malcolm Cordell
Dundee

THE GRR bill was intended to bring an enlightened attitude that would make life better for a minority who so often have a hard time of it. In recent weeks its effect has been blown out of all proportion. I strive to see why some people are so agitated about something that they are unlikely ever to be affected by (as opposed to how badly trans people can be currently!) Why are individuals (probably with little experience of the issues) shouting so aggressively and adamantly at one another? Fears get hysterical!

What these objectors need to learn and understand is the difference between sex and gender: they are not the same thing. Sex is decided at birth, whereas living in another gender can be chosen. (I often wonder just how many people longed to do so but felt unable to, in our bigoted past!)

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon warns Douglas Ross over 'gotcha' trans questioning

When our children were little we had two boys and two girls. Now all four are adult we find ourselves with three sons and one daughter: one of the girls was aware all along of having been born into the wrong body. This meant a mega decision, both for him and also for us as a family, given the huge implications involved: certainly not something done on a whim!

I don’t see why strangers not affected by this should get so upset? How he chooses to live his life doesn’t impinge on other people’s rights. In any case of criminality actually affecting others’ rights, the law deals with such and this law has been carefully screened (as critics might learn if they were to study it, rather than blast off about it!)

READ MORE: Do protests in the gallery really work if they happen at every FMQs?

Today, anyone meeting our family for the first time could never guess which of our sons started out differently from the other two. True, it is not possible for him to be a genetic father, but as he said, “that doesn’t stop me from being a good parent.” Hopefully we all share a balance of traits that can be considered male (eg strong) and female (eg gentle). Indeed, the world might be a better place if we did!

I am horrified at how prurient some people can be. What his physical body now is like is a private matter for him and his wife. He won’t ever have the original sexual body of a man born a boy, but does that matter if he can live his life as he always wanted? Now a gendered male, he feels sure this is right for him. He is very happy and fulfilled (and highly regarded!) with a confidence that he never had until he transitioned from female to male.

Name and address supplied

I DO not believe the Tory government, whichever one you choose over the last five leaderships, has or had the ability to negotiate with trade union disputes. Coming from a background of private school and the likes of an Oxford University education, plus having families of extraordinary wealth, has deprived them of any experience of the normal “common or garden” world the rest of us live in. Which is why we rely on our trade unions to represent us with our employers and, when necessary, governments.

Such is the current situation with the service-industry trade unions and the UK Government – unlike the Scottish and Welsh governments, which have been able to negotiate those two countries’ current trade union problems to some success. So much so, it would seem that the impending UK General Election will be a defeat for the Tory MPs in all three countries of this sunken United Kingdom.

READ MORE: Firefighters postpone strike plans following new pay offer

Alister “Union” Jack continues to refuse to discuss why he used Section 35 to put an unnecessary halt to the Scottish Government’s GRR Bill. He also refuses discuss any possible amendments. He knows fine well he will soon be unemployed as an MP and so Secretary of State for Scotland.

His only job for the Tory government is to create trouble and problems for Scotland and its government. Having done so, and possibly more over his remaining months, he will probably earn himself a place in the House of Lords.

Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife

THE new deputy chairman of the Conservative Party is suggesting that we bring back the death penalty. “Nobody has ever committed a crime after being executed,” he says. Will he extend this to include tax-dodgers?

Watson Crawford
Melrose