CATRIONA Stewart's column on the Jessica/Jonathan Yaniv waxing case was excellent ("Bikini wax dispute raises trans issues SNP can’t ignore", The Herald, May 26). When I invited the Canadian feminist, Meghan Murphy, to speak in the Scottish Parliament in May, I was attacked for "giving a platform to a transphobe who was banned from Twitter". Meghan's ban was for "misgendering" and exposing the already notorious Yaniv. As Ms Stewart demonstrated, in Canada a person with a penis believes they can demand female beauticians handle male genitalia, even if they offer women-only services. Yaniv is also subject to serious allegations about online interactions with young girls and a bizarre obsession with menstruation. But despite all this, we are told Yaniv must be treated as a woman.
Trans lobbyists here want us to emulate Canada as an example of "international best practice". These same campaigners say the self-identification of sex must be accepted "without exception" and want all medical diagnosis and gatekeeping removed from the current process of changing legal sex. This is what the campaign to reform the Gender Recognition Act is about. It will mean trans becomes undefinable because anyone can become trans. Instead of the act protecting a small number of people (mainly transexuals), it will broaden out to allow any man to "become a woman" based on a subjective feeling which is never tested, measured nor defined.
Most people still don't realise that around 80 per cent of those identifying as transwomen retain male genitalia. They have lived as men, well into middle age. Some may have offended against women. But to question their womanhood is, we are told, "transphobic" or "anti-trans". Religious denominations do not impose their beliefs on our secular society and neither should those pushing a ideology that denies the existence of biological sex. Scotland must learn lessons from Canada, so I thank Ms Stewart and The Herald for highlighting them.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel