Nicola Sturgeon’s handling of controversial gender reform laws has put the first minister under the microscope.
The long-running debate split public and political opinion on protecting the rights of trans people.
Critics including Harry Potter author JK Rowling led an outcry over what the reforms would mean for women’s existing rights.
And there was a furious reaction when a rapist who self-identified as a trans women – Isla Bryson, charged while living as a man called Adam Graham – was sent to Cornton Vale instead of a men’s prison.
At the weekend, the Scottish Government was forced in to a U-turn on trans prisoners after blocking the transfer of Fife thug Tiffany Scott, convicted of stalking a 13-year-old girl from prison while living as a man known as Andrew Burns before going on to assault jail staff.
Readers of The Courier have had their say on the controversy.
Nicola Sturgeon damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t in eyes of public
We have become inured to the daily poisonous hatred directed against our first minister.
However, such unfettered bile seems to have reached new levels since the recent Court of Session judgment, a high-profile rape case and, significantly, the gender recognition legislation.
I say “significantly” because it was debated and passed by MSPs across all parties after a lengthy consultative process.
In many instances, it seems (to me) that the first minister is damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t – particularly as evidenced by the high-profile case concerning the convicted rapist.
The bile regarding that particular case continues unabated. I can think of no better person to lead our nation into independence. She is a decent, hardworking person with significant intellectual horsepower. Importantly, after so long in office, there has never been any evidence of malice or dishonesty.
Yes, she is human – and with the benefit of hindsight I am sure she would have done a few things differently. Quite frankly, I cannot think of a single person on the Scottish – or indeed UK – political scene who has anything like her ability to govern.
To those narrow-minded keyboard warriors, who presumably must all be of a unionist persuasion and therefore supporters of Westminster, can I draw their attention to the following examples from our Teflon-coated government which must surely provide a happy hunting ground for them:
1. A government minister [Dominic Raab] who is subject to (at least) 24 separate bullying allegations. He is still working, and I cannot imagine what it must be like for staff going in to work every day.
2. A former government minister [Nadhim Zahawi] – in charge of our money – who has admitted “carelessly” omitting to pay HMRC several million pounds.
3. A prime minister [Rishi Sunak] who promised to be “open, transparent and honest” and (whose wife took out non-dom) status to avoid paying UK tax. He has been issued with two fixed penalty notices thus far.
4. A home secretary [Suella Braverman] excited about the prospect of sending aircraft to Rwanda, who was recently found to have used her personal mobile phone to communicate sensitive government information.
5. The previous home secretary [Priti Patel] who bullied staff to the extent that the government was obliged to make a payment of a significant six-figure sum to a civil servant.
Can you imagine if the first minister did any of the above?
Of course, they are all Tories so nothing to see – move along. If that is not enough to be going on with, I could mention previous ministers and prime ministers in future correspondence.
Stewart Falconer. Glenisla View, Alyth.
Bill could see trans women sue over prison placement
Ian Wallace (January 27) once again is economical with the facts.
The women’s rights groups that he refers to as opposing the UK Government’s blocking of the Gender Recognition Reform Bill (GRR) are all funded by the Scottish Government.
The women’s groups who are against the Bill (For Women Scotland, Scottish Feminist Network, Frontline Feminists Scotland) receive no funding and have to rely on donations.
Their evidence to the committee tasked with scrutinising this dreadful Bill was included only as an afterthought, while trans groups were front and centre advising the government about it.
Mr Wallace then speaks about the funded groups’ “years of detailed analysis” on the impact of the GRR on UK-wide law, yet offers no examples.
He also highlights Rape Crisis Scotland without including the information that the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre is run by a trans-identified man who has suggested that “bigoted” victims of sexual violence should be “challenged on their prejudices” and that “therapy is political”.
Indeed, JK Rowling has recently opened a rape crisis centre for women only, the biological kind, as many sexual assault victims in Edinburgh feel they can no longer use the existing facility.
Finally, it’s not for the UK Government to explain itself to a devolved administration. The Scottish Government received lots of warnings about the GRR, and concerned voices, even from SNP MSPs and MPs, were dismissed by Nicola Sturgeon as “not valid”.
The fiasco currently playing out with rapists and sexual predators being transferred to Scotland’s women’s prison is just one such area of concern.
Had the GRR been on the statute books, these men would have applied for and no doubt been waved through with a gender recognition certificate on their say-so alone. As a result of the recent judgment by Lady Haldane, they would then be treated as women “for all legal purposes” and could sue the Scottish Government if not placed immediately in a women’s prison.
The first minister’s U-turn on the suitability of having such men incarcerated seems to indicate she now thinks the concerns of the majority of Scots might have been valid after all – and, although this might be stretching it a bit, that the Scottish secretary was correct to intervene.
Dr Elizabeth Robertson. Perth Road, Dundee.
Lifestyle choice or a biological fact?
It is bad enough that Scottish official statistics will henceforth be distorted by the failure of the botched census in 2022.
To add to that, we have the distortion of statistics by the confusion between sex and gender. How can anyone trust figures relating to male and female mortality, criminality, patterns of health and disease and much more if people are allowed to choose and change their gender?
This is an issue not only for historians, but also for service planners in various areas – for example, community medicine.
Above all, altering a birth certificate retrospectively is historical vandalism.
Sex is biologically determined and immutable.
Pretending that biological males who choose to present as female require screening for conditions such as cervical cancer is not only a waste of our money, but is also nonsensical.
Yet official Scotland has been captured by the Stonewall organisation and pays homage to it by obeying its prescriptions.
These amount to what Alex Massie has rightly called “gender woo-woo”.
Gender, outside the grammar books, is a subjective designation.
A mature, secular society needs to be governed by scientific fact rather than belief.
By all means, allow people to live the life they want to, calling themselves what they choose and wearing what they prefer.
We should all treat each other with respect and allow each other equal dignity.
But it is time that the Equality Act was altered to be based on the fact of biological sex, not on what is a lifestyle choice.
Jill Stephenson. Corstorphine, Edinburgh.
Gender Bill requires an urgent rethink
Until a few days ago, a trans woman was a woman – full stop.
Anyone who thought differently was a transphobe, according to the first minister.
Now a trans woman with “a history of violence” facing prison will be treated as a man and sent to a male prison.
In other words, only some trans women are women, or some trans women are men sometimes.
Does Scotland’s First Minister believe all trans women are women?
Scottish Gov has just implemented an effective ban on trans prisoners who’ve committed sexual & violent crimes against women being moved to a women-only prison. @itvnews pic.twitter.com/DRbvItHZ3i
— Peter A Smith (@PeterAdamSmith) January 30, 2023
Either the first minister and her government are now transphobes, or maybe, just maybe, they have had to face the reality that there are important contexts in which an individual cannot change his or her sex at will.
This makes a nonsense of the GRR legislation, and a responsible government would now recall it for an urgent rethink.
Linda Holt. Dreel House, Pittenweem.
FM needs dictionary
Nicola Sturgeon’s childish tantrum included an accusation anyone who did not share her opinion was a bigot.
I suggest our benighted first minister add a dictionary to the reading list she proudly shares with the public.
Hamish Hossick. Strathern Road, Broughty Ferry.
Conversation