Quote Originally Posted by Fulmar View Post
But how are we (and I speak as a woman here) supposed to welcome the passing of a bad law that leaves many women so worried- especially on the issue of rape crisis/sexual abuse services in which the victim cannot now be guaranteed to be seen/supported by a woman only. I want things to be better and more accepting of transgender people but not at the expense of others and one groups rights should not put those of another group at risk. It seems to me that there are unintended consequences of this law and that is why there has been intervention.
You have summed up the dilemma posed by this legislation very well and I agree with the sentiments you have expressed. It's a horrible situation and there is no easy solution.

Firstly, you have a substantial section of society who have real and legitimate concerns about the unintended consquences of this bill. Secondly, there are the rights and concerns of those for whom this bill is supposed to provide legal protection. And then there is a constitional issue of huge significance for Scottish democracy. As I said in an earlier post I think this bill was conceived through good intention but hastily assembled and without sufficient thought for the wider consequences. I don't know how you can reconcile all of these issues given all that has happened recently.

The only thing I do know for sure is that HMG did not, no matter what they or the Daily Mail say, intervene to protect anyone's rights. They did it to prevent dual standards of equality in the UK, particularly since the bill made rUK look less equal than Scotland.