|
|
Post by nickr on Jan 27, 2023 11:21:02 GMT
1. I agree but worry that the child (afaik a 16 year old is still legally a child) may not be best placed to make that decision. That's why I have doubts about the age 16 set by the Scots. 2. You are right about the cubs.
Mick
In Scotland, a person of 16 years of age can vote in Scottish Parliament elections and Scottish local council elections. You can vote in a Scottish referenda. In some areas you can vote or stand as a candidate in Community Council elections. You can marry at 16. You have the right to choose your own religion at 16. You can, if you have a 'positive destination', leave school at 16. While there are things you're not allowed to do at 16, (drink, smoke, buy scissors) you are allowed and indeed in some cases encouraged to make some pretty important decisions. I am firmly of the belief that you should be allowed to decide who you are. And I've a lot of sympathy with that point of view, too. Couldn't agree more. |
|
|
|
Post by kate on Jan 27, 2023 12:05:03 GMT
Frankly, at 16 years old I wouldn't have had a clue. It is an age when peer pressure can be forceful so is that influence beneficial to the person concerned? It could be because I am old, but I think 16 is too early. I feel medical advice and quiet discussions as to the reason someone might want to choose their gender at that age, is essential. Their reasons could be ones influenced by bullies or online influences, so I feel it is necessary to find out their reason why. Will we have those same conversations with every child? Whilst some clearly know something is amiss others are so culturally shaped to perhaps deny their identity. Being cishet isn't some default from which some deviate. We normalise cishet status in everything, from toys, tv shows, stories etc. without saying the kids are too young to think about that. Why is it society only wants to intervene when someone realises they aren't cishet? To be fair, that's not addressed at you, just more of an open question. I feel you are muddying the situation citing cultural norms. Those norms are/have fast disappeared I think. Perhaps they have more of an influence in other countries, but in the West, I think the lines are well and truly blurred as to what is expected of a female or male re clothes, toys, ambitions, partners or lifestyle. This is why I feel it is essential to ascertain the reason the child has chosen a route of changing their gender. Their reason, not someone else's. |
|
|
|
Post by willien on Jan 27, 2023 13:27:53 GMT
Since the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 male rape (man on man) has been included in the act of rape. The act no longer requires a penis and vagina. Thanks for the update Gezza. In my defence the last time (other than a speeding ticket) I had anything to do with Scots Criminal Law was in the early 70s. |
|
|
|
Post by mick on Jan 27, 2023 13:43:45 GMT
1. I agree but worry that the child (afaik a 16 year old is still legally a child) may not be best placed to make that decision. That's why I have doubts about the age 16 set by the Scots. 2. You are right about the cubs.
Mick
In Scotland, a person of 16 years of age can vote in Scottish Parliament elections and Scottish local council elections. You can vote in a Scottish referenda. In some areas you can vote or stand as a candidate in Community Council elections. You can marry at 16. You have the right to choose your own religion at 16. You can, if you have a 'positive destination', leave school at 16. While there are things you're not allowed to do at 16, (drink, smoke, buy scissors) you are allowed and indeed in some cases encouraged to make some pretty important decisions. I am firmly of the belief that you should be allowed to decide who you are. I'm aware of the 'trans rapist' story and for what it's worth, it doesn't make me change my mind. This person is a danger to others. Whether they identify as male or female they are a danger to others. If they'd been told 'you are not allowed to declare yourself female you must live your life as a man' they would still be a danger to others. Let's be honest in this case, to women. But there are women who are a danger to women as well. Do they get put in a men's prison? I mean I work quite hard at avoiding prison because for the most part it doesn't appeal. My understanding is that it's not a nice place to be and can be dangerous because it tends to be full of the less than lovely sort. I'm not saying anyone in prison deserves to be attacked/raped/murdered but it happens and it doesn't much seem to matter whether it's a male prison or a female one. In theory, anyone going into any prison ought at the very least be kept safe. It strikes me that if a trans woman can't be put into a female prison because they might (probably do) still want to rape women then the story is more about why we can't keep the intended victims for this person safe when they're all in prison. If you can't keep an eye on people there what hope is there for the outside? Also, this person isn't a rapist because they are trans. They're just a rapist. The story has conveniently preyed on a lot of unfounded fears, that all trans women are a potential threat to the safety of cis women. It's just not true. Sorry for my ignorance of Scottish law. I accept your points.
Pity that you included the 'trans-rapist' issue in the same reply. Made me think that I'd been posting while under the influence!! However I haven't commented on that issue and don't intend to.
Thanks for your first bit.
Mick
|
|
|
|
Post by petrochemist on Jan 27, 2023 13:50:24 GMT
In Scotland, a person of 16 years of age can vote in Scottish Parliament elections and Scottish local council elections. You can vote in a Scottish referenda. In some areas you can vote or stand as a candidate in Community Council elections. You can marry at 16. You have the right to choose your own religion at 16. You can, if you have a 'positive destination', leave school at 16. While there are things you're not allowed to do at 16, (drink, smoke, buy scissors) you are allowed and indeed in some cases encouraged to make some pretty important decisions. I am firmly of the belief that you should be allowed to decide who you are. I'm aware of the 'trans rapist' story and for what it's worth, it doesn't make me change my mind. This person is a danger to others. Whether they identify as male or female they are a danger to others. If they'd been told 'you are not allowed to declare yourself female you must live your life as a man' they would still be a danger to others. Let's be honest in this case, to women. But there are women who are a danger to women as well. Do they get put in a men's prison? I mean I work quite hard at avoiding prison because for the most part it doesn't appeal. My understanding is that it's not a nice place to be and can be dangerous because it tends to be full of the less than lovely sort. I'm not saying anyone in prison deserves to be attacked/raped/murdered but it happens and it doesn't much seem to matter whether it's a male prison or a female one. In theory, anyone going into any prison ought at the very least be kept safe. It strikes me that if a trans woman can't be put into a female prison because they might (probably do) still want to rape women then the story is more about why we can't keep the intended victims for this person safe when they're all in prison. If you can't keep an eye on people there what hope is there for the outside? Also, this person isn't a rapist because they are trans. They're just a rapist. The story has conveniently preyed on a lot of unfounded fears, that all trans women are a potential threat to the safety of cis women. It's just not true. The consequences of choosing wrong in any of those options are not life changing (the voting might be but only if enough others vote the same way) Marriage is often (and quite easily) reversed these days... A sex change is a bit more drastic & having to consider it for a few more years, or at least get expert agreement of your case seems fully appropriate to me, especially when the law still considers you too young to buy scissors. in the case of the trans rapist I rather suspect the guy decided to transition as a way of getting out of the consequences of what he'd done. His transition only started after the rape. Locking them up in a women's prison could be their idea of heaven! Definitely not right. Locking them up in a men's prison might put them at risk, but I'd see that as poetic justice. Much better a rapist is at risk than those around them, who have no way of keeping away. Yes reasonable steps should be taken to reduce the risk, carefully considering appropriate cell mates etc. FWIW the little reporting of the case I've seen didn't seem to suggest they were a risk from being trans, just that old male/female procedures had set up a situation that was blatantly wrong. Society needs to think long & hard about how to treat trans cases in all walks of life. We're splitting away from the natural order that's been near universal for millennia and this will take time. |
|
eightbittony
Full Member
[insert witty status message here]
Posts: 111
|
Post by eightbittony on Jan 27, 2023 18:23:55 GMT
I don't need to write anything because Kath described exactly how I feel on this issue. |
|
|
|
Post by MJB on Jan 27, 2023 18:47:15 GMT
Useful information here: www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/It really isn't as simple as saying "I wanna be a girl!" and suddenly getting invited for non-reversible treatment. Realistically for a 16 year old it will take years to get to the position of making a decision for gender reassignment treatment. |
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Jan 27, 2023 19:38:35 GMT
I don't need to write anything because Kath described exactly how I feel on this issue. No surprise, Tony. Kath is always spot-on. Did you know that - a little while ago (in the ol' AP forum days) - I asked Kath to be Prime Minister? IIRC, she accepted - but sadly, it hasn't actually happened yet. I'm still hoping. 
I think Kate was also going to be involved in the new government - which is as it should be. The job is far too important to be left to the *men..... who ALWAYS f*** it up.
*Yes, I know that Thatcher and May also f***ed it up, but that's only two (out of 57  ). |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Jan 27, 2023 20:03:51 GMT
Useful information here: www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/It really isn't as simple as saying "I wanna be a girl!" and suddenly getting invited for non-reversible treatment. Realistically for a 16 year old it will take years to get to the position of making a decision for gender reassignment treatment. Indeed. Out of the three I've known only one had had irreversible surgery. Although it's down to two I've known now as one is back to being a he. |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Jan 27, 2023 20:05:28 GMT
I don't need to write anything because Kath described exactly how I feel on this issue. No surprise, Tony. Kath is always spot-on. Did you know that - a little while ago (in the ol' AP forum days) - I asked Kath to be Prime Minister? IIRC, she accepted - but sadly, it hasn't actually happened yet. I'm still hoping.
I think Kate was also going to be involved in the new government - which is as it should be. The job is far too important to be left to the *men..... who ALWAYS f*** it up.
*Yes, I know that Thatcher and May also f***ed it up, but that's only two (out of 57 ). You forgot Truss. Apologies for the reminder. |
|
|
|
Post by Ivor E Tower on Jan 27, 2023 20:25:29 GMT
The gander is usually noticeably larger than the goose.  You beat me to it, I was going to ask if geese were allowed to discuss gander recognition ..... |
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Jan 27, 2023 20:51:04 GMT
You forgot Truss. Apologies for the reminder. Yes, thanks Andy..... you're right, of course.
I was trying to forget her. I probably don't need to explain why. |
|
|
|
Post by JohnY on Jan 27, 2023 21:04:26 GMT
Useful information here: www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/It really isn't as simple as saying "I wanna be a girl!" and suddenly getting invited for non-reversible treatment. Realistically for a 16 year old it will take years to get to the position of making a decision for gender reassignment treatment. Gender reassignment does not change the sex of the patient. Presently the concern seems to be about sad men who want to be women. This is because of the potential risk that they might present to women. Numerically more girls than boys are at risk of damaging treatment by drugs and surgery. I take the view that gender-dysphoria is a severe form of body dysphoria. Body dysphoria is a genuine mental condition and its sufferers deserve compassion, support and treatment. Gender reassignment is about as humane as FGM. i.e. not humane at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by willien on Jan 27, 2023 21:52:03 GMT
No surprise, Tony. Kath is always spot-on. Did you know that - a little while ago (in the ol' AP forum days) - I asked Kath to be Prime Minister? IIRC, she accepted - but sadly, it hasn't actually happened yet. I'm still hoping.
I think Kate was also going to be involved in the new government - which is as it should be. The job is far too important to be left to the *men..... who ALWAYS f*** it up.
*Yes, I know that Thatcher and May also f***ed it up, but that's only two (out of 57 ). You forgot Truss. Apologies for the reminder. To be fair Truss is eminently forgetable. |
|
|
|
Post by steveandthedogs on Jan 27, 2023 23:15:40 GMT
You forgot Truss. Apologies for the reminder. Yes, thanks Andy..... you're right, of course.
I was trying to forget her. I probably don't need to explain why. You forgot Thatcher and May as well.
S
|
|
).
