WHEN SOMEONE WANTS ALL THAT YOU HAVE (Guest Post by LornCal)

I would like to welcome the very first ever guest post on Grumpy Scottish Man Blog by LornCal. I will be approving the comments but not replying to them for this essay but please do feel free to comment and I am sure LornCal will be able to reply where appropriate.

WHEN SOMEONE WANTS ALL THAT YOU HAVE (Guest Post by LornCal)

SO MUCH human history is littered with the carcases of defeated and/or disappeared peoples, so much of the human backstory is strewn with the bones of peaceful ancestors who never made it, and who became just another dead end, a cul de sac to make way for the aggressive homo sapiens, the survivors of the long, long journey of our species to the present.

By the age of 13/14 or so, I was already a Scottish Nationalist, but I was starting to be aware of the exclusion of my sex from anything that seemed to matter in the wider world, as I viewed it from my own limited experience of that wider world. What I was experiencing was a parallel sense of consciousness of myself as both a female and a working-class Scot who spoke Scots every day, except in the classroom, that each was intrinsic to my sense of myself as a human being, and I was also becoming more aware of how each, in its own way, was secondary always to the ‘primary’ default male sex, on the one hand, and to the ‘primary’ cultural and linguistic norm of being British/English middle-class, both aspects of the not-me as exemplified by ‘The Four Marys’ in ‘Bunty’ comic. It was a gradual dawning, but always parallel for me.

When I look back on that time, and see the road already travelled and the fact that females are fighting yet again –our rights do appear to be a cyclical kind of achievement based entirely on the prevailing conditions for males, as THEY perceive them (and that is an important caveat) in any given time period – for basic recognition of their right to exist as equal but biologically different human beings from males, and Scotland, teetering on the brink of independence but having stepped back (or been actively pulled back by those who are meant to represent us on this issue) I see the parallels again, I see the same pressures being brought to bear to derail both females and Scots from achieving autonomy. I also see parallels that some would prefer not to see, or deny exist.

Some men reading this will harrumph and say that sexual politics is a distraction and far less important than the Scottish politics of independence, but they are wrong, I believe. Autonomy is never divisible. If you have rights and resources and someone wants to take them from you, there is no difference in the impact this has on you as a human being, whether as a Scot or as a female. Wise feminists never ever expected to don a male skin and claim that they were male in every way, when they fought for their rights: as half the human race, they expected parity for their own benefit, and especially to the benefit of their children, not to wrest men’s half of that parity from their fingers.

We have never experienced a time since human/civil rights were established in the UK when one group in society demanded that another group give up all of theirs in order to accommodate them. It has never happened before. That is why the trans issue is nothing like the gay issue, and it certainly has nothing whatsoever in common with the female fights of the past to gain even small advances: the trans lobby wants to move seamlessly into all female rights without a by-your-leave. That is colonialism in the raw.

The Union did not take everything from the Scots on union, and the Treaty of Union’s Articles laid out and still lays out, the rights that Scots have, if we would but have the backbone to exercise them. That is the crucial point: we simply acquiesce; we nod our wee heids like nodding doggies instead of screaming blue murder when Westminster transgresses and trespasses. Biological men, however, are demanding all female rights because that must be the logical conclusion of stating, in law that a “trans woman is a woman” and a “trans man is a man”: that all rights are up for grabs, but, because the female to male transition (FtM) shows no real sign of being obstructive to men’s continued hegemony, for very obvious biological reasons, only the MtF part of the trans equation will prove to be extremely contentious.

So with Scots’ rights and autonomy: there can be no other definition of the Internal Market legislation than that Scotland will have to be shorn of her devolved powers to the extent that they clash with Westminster’s writ. Eventually, that must come down to being all of them. The Tory One State Britishness calls. There can be no other end result than the total elimination of women as a sex class and it is utterly mendacious and irrational to state otherwise, and that, in itself, has implications and ramifications that go well beyond affording anyone his or her human and civil rights.

Just as a handful of corrupt and venal politicians and lairdies handed away the rights and autonomy of all Scots without ever once consulting them, it is biological men and their collaborator handmaids who are trying to steal women’s rights without the permission or consent of half the population in favour of what the trans lobby maintains is a tiny minority, but which, like migration into Scotland from the south will inevitably gain momentum and skew the figures in any future referendum.

We are not talking here about preventing men or women from wearing what they like, living as they please, being respected for their choices, from having the same rights as the rest of us, because they have those already: we are talking about men telling women (who, by dint of their sex, have not, as a sex class, fared particularly well at the hands of men) that they are women, too, and, as such, are entitled to biological women’s sex-based rights – rights that they never fought for, but which they wish to colonize, just as, at its most basic, Scotland has been colonized by the English-as-British cultural and political juggernaut from Westminster, enabled by the parvenu, sanctimonious virtue-signallers of the SNP/Greens who are proving a whole new scientific theory – rather like gender identity theory – that some people can function without a brain in their cranial cavity. The two situations are directly parallel. Anyone, male or female, who does not see the parallels between that which is happening to Scotland and that which is happening to women at one and the same time, does not deserve female support for independence because both Scotland and women are being shafted roundly by fraudsters and the brainless who support the fraudsters.

Why does Westminster want to keep hold of Scotland? Why do biological men want access to female spaces and rights? Why does Westminster want to change our maritime boundaries? Why do men, over 85% of who retain their male sexual organs, want to destroy females’, and children’s boundaries? Why does Westminster want to keep nuclear weapons in Scotland, well away from London and the Home Counties? Why do men who claim to be gender dysphoric, but who are actually sexually driven autogynephiles (AGP paraphilics/fetishists) shelter under the trans umbrella in order to gain access to female spaces and rights for purely sexual motives? Trans means ‘transition’ or it means nothing. The most blatant lies are being told.

What are the dangers to Scotland’s largest conurbation in the event of a nuclear accident, let alone a strike, and what would be the area of the fall-out? How many would survive long-term? If all males are able to enter female spaces and rights, is it impossible that males who are predators will take the opportunity to do so under the shelter of self-ID? Even if they don’t, what is the rationale for forcing females to confront all kinds of male paraphilia and fetish in their sex-based spaces, paraphilia and fetish, moreover, that the law prohibits in normal circumstances, in public? These questions need to be asked and answered without the wailing and gnashing of teeth: you are soooooo… trans phobic…. we are not AGPs. Fine, so let’s open up the debate. We can say that the Earth is flat, and believe it, but we have no right to enforce others to believe what is a provable unscientific nonsense, or to change the language to accommodate our delusions and narcissism. If there is no problem, let the trans lobby PROVE that there is no problem.

Is the undermining of Scots Law itself (around the constitution) and the undermining of sexual offences laws (within the wider body of Scots Criminal Law) being used to achieve similar goals: the destruction of all devolution boundaries to an all-encompassing ‘Britishness’ (Englishness, in reality, as it must be, given the numerical, and, therefore political, superiority); and the destruction of all boundaries against males enforcing their sexual motivations on females of all ages, and, of course, very young children of both sexes? It is the breaching of boundaries, not the fact that men claim to be women, that is the underlying and essential problem because of the history between males and females. If all males treated all females with respect and dignity at all times, there would be no problem, but they don’t and never have, hence the sexual offences laws and the single-sex spaces and rights.

The ultimate aim of ‘Britishness’ must, logically, be to eliminate ‘Scottishness’ as distinct from ‘Britishness’ or ‘Englishness’, which, de facto, are one and the same thing as no other nationality within the UK is able, numerically, to effect any real change on anything that purports to be ’British’. In Tory circles, ‘Britishness’ (really ‘Englishness’) is celebrated and pushed as the norm, and either ‘Scottishness’ conforms, or it is considered to be dissenting, regardless of how Scots actually view that imposition upon them. If that is not colonialism, it is only a whisker away from it, because it does not allow for a distinct ‘Scottishness’ to exist free from ‘Britishness’: the two, since Brexit, in particular, cannot sit side and side and co-exist; always, ‘Scottishness’ must give way to ‘Britishness’ (actually Englishness).

So it is the case, too, with women and trans women, where it is impossible, in the same way it is impossible to be both Scottish and British now, unless your ‘Scottishness’ is subservient to your ‘Britishness’, to be both a woman and a trans woman. Biological women must, therefore, be subservient to trans women as every aspect of their sexed existence, sense of self, language and biology is colonized. Even logically, you cannot be in any way ‘trans’ if you are claiming to actually BE a woman because no transition can be involved, ergo, trans women ARE women (TWAW) is both a logical and a biological impossibility, but, crucially, a necessity for the trans delusion to continue, or to exist at all. You may also believe that the Moon is made of cheese: in neither case is that true in reality, according to all known scientific and biological knowledge. It must, therefore, be both a delusion and a fiction, and, soon, if the Scottish government gets its way, a legal fiction that must, by extension, if it is to work, demolish all laws that, in any way whatsoever, conflict with that particular legal fiction: all prohibitive sexual offences laws, all statistical accounts, all data collection, NHS treatment by sex category, single-sex services such as rape crisis centres, etc.

If you cannot, logically or biologically BE a woman by any known measurable method of proof, your claims to access women’s sex-based rights disappear like snaw aff a dyke. So, we see WHY it is essential that men driven by a paraphilia and who want to access female rights (I am not going to call them ‘spaces’ because they actually want ALL our rights, and spaces are just a part of that whole, and, for their wider agenda, a necessary first step) must claim to BE women by gender rather than sex. The other aspect of TWAW that requires a female persona is the essential existence of the ‘trans child’ in order that the ‘trans child’ should grow into a trans woman – the whole “I was born in the wrong body” or “I have a female brain” in a man’s/boy’s body narrative. In order for this to make sense, you would, biologically require two sets of sex markers in one body because, ordinarily, all our cells, body and brain, contain our genetic sex make-up from conception, even in those with sexual development problems.

How do they get round this biological reality? They kick and scream and yell, “Terf!”, “Transphobe!” and shed crocodile tears in order to close the debate down. Shedding light could mean the truth being uncovered for all to see, and the delusion shattered. Transsexuals such as Dr Debbie Hayton, and others, admit that they are gender/body dysphoric MEN and that they may also be autogynephiles or not, but this group are not the ones who want to throw all women’s spaces and rights open to all-comers: those who do are the ones who probably are paraphilics or who cannot ever admit to themselves that they have a problem with their sex, and they are backed by extremely stupid, short-sighted and, often misogynistic and men’s rights/sexual rights activists. In any situation where some men are not floating on the top like cream, no matter how dense or ineffectual they are as individuals, it must be the fault of women. It is the same old trope in a new disguise.

Now, if you are quite happy to live your life as both a Scot and British (English, in reality) you will still have to do mental gymnastics in order to accommodate impositions like Brexit, nuclear weapons, the Supreme Court and its rulings, etc., which your mind knows perfectly well are impositions with lies attaching to them. You can claim that Scotland gets the best of both worlds, but human beings are hard-wired to be truthful to themselves, if to no one else, so those who live as both Scots and Brits must create a delusion in order to sustain their lies to themselves and the outside world. It is called Unionism, and, far from being some superior ideology, it is a brake on all things Scottish, on all societal decencies that Scots want for themselves, but do not have the powers to achieve without independence. Again, you can say that grass is a lovely shade of purple, but you cannot sustain the fiction unless you create the delusion to support it, and the delusion is that we are actually better off as part of the Union when the truth is that it is destroying many Scottish lives – probably not yours, if you are a Unionist; you’ll be relatively comfortable; and the people who are being destroyed don’t matter to you as long as your delusion sustains you, so you will attack the Scottish government on all fronts to justify to yourself that you really believe your own lies and delusion. You may actually have convinced yourself that you believe – at least in your conscious mind. The same is true of TWAW and women: TWAW will happily exist within their own created delusion as long as it is only women’s lives that are being destroyed, biological women being, according to the patriarchy to which the trans lobby adheres like a limpet on a seashore rock, an inferior breed of men, not quite human, an afterthought.

You have to believe in women’s natural inferiority for the patriarchy and your delusion to exist. If anyone believes that trans women (the specific group that demands access to all female rights as opposed to the group that does not so demand), actually envy women in a confirming way, as opposed to fearing and hating them with a total lack of empathy, he or she is also deluded. The fetishists who pretend to lactate, who pretend to menstruate, who simulate giving birth, do not want to BE women in any real world sense; the delusion, the performance is all, and the dress, the hair, the painted nails, the pout are the costume donned by the trans ‘actor’. Real womanhood would terrify these imposters and exploiters; real menstrual blood, real birth pangs. That is not to say that all men are misogynists and woman haters; it is to say that all men benefit from women’s having misogyny and sex-based stereotypes forced upon them, which is a different thing, but which scarcely encourages wholesale male support for complete female autonomy, and actually enables the trans lobby colonization of women’s rights.

Essentially, the autogynephiles and non-autogynephiles, the body dysphoric and non-body dysphoric who demand all female rights for themselves are men’s rights/men’s sexual rights activists in common with many other men who are not trans. They have actually combined the two for this latest assault on women’s rights and it is no coincidence that the trans issue has arisen now (after several decades of easy access to extreme pornography, reinforcing female subjugation and violence against women and the new form of slavery, sex trafficking, and the push-back all over the world against women’s rights) at the same time as Scottish independence is to the fore again. Many of these pseudo woke warriors inhabit the Scottish parliament and government, and are those who have put the brakes on independence in order to concentrate on their agenda which is to put Queer Theory into action. Their agenda is the real reason they joined the successful SNP, not to advance independence. No point in colonizing something that has no access to power or rights that you covet.

Just as Scots are experiencing a time in our history when we have never been so close to the possibility of independence (rather than the actuality of it), so there has never been a time when women were so close to full autonomy (at least in the West). In each case, the aspiration to reach full autonomy is being systematically crushed. It is also ironic and telling that in each case, it has been Scots themselves, and females, who have done so much to scupper the project for full autonomy. They are the handmaids or, worse, the Aunts. The similarities are so profound: that takes cold, calculating unenlightened self-interest in both groups of handmaids/Aunts, and a total lack of empathy for those they are betraying so callously, while spewing out the most sanctimonious, self-righteous, shallow, vacuous garbage imaginable. The Taliban is more honest about its motives.

That anyone actually swallows any of it is indicative of the lack of critical thinking in Scotland (and elsewhere) today. Never have we had so many young people stay on at school, attend college or university while, at the same time, we are witnessing such vacuous lack of critical thinking, essential in the past for any kind of education, and all the nonsense about being force fed education by rote in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s is a myth, by the way: critical thinking was positively encouraged and is the reason why so many thinkers emerged out of these periods. Places of learning have virtually abandoned critical thinking, now.

The Scots were ‘love-bombed’ in 2014, as women are being told how envious and desperate for their approval TWAW are – as if the Wolf was telling Little Red Riding Hood that, no, he hadn’t polished off Granny for supper and that he always had LRRH’s best interests at heart, that he was wearing Granny’s nightdress, and wrapped in a saltire shawl, because it was such a pretty shade of pink, and she, LRRH was not to worry her bonnie, wee heid about anything because nothing bad was going to happen. Those Scots who saw through the ‘love-bombing’ to the naked self-interest beneath were not fooled, and they knew bad things would happen, as, indeed, they have; just as women know bad things are going to happen if self-ID is pushed through at Holyrood.

It is way past the time for the pushback against this all-but-colonialist shadow Scotland and the GRA Reform, and, ultimately, the GRA itself. Mendacious, utterly self-interested liars are advancing both assaults. If independence-supporting men want women on board for an independent future, they would be well advised to back us and not throw us to the wolves, and if biological women want to retain their rights and those of their daughters and granddaughters, they had better get on board the independence bus now. They are mutually inclusive, and each depends on the other and has always depended on the other. This is a war on two fronts. The SNP foot-draggers and opportunists have always known that. They created it, with a little help from their friends in the south.

Advertisement
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to WHEN SOMEONE WANTS ALL THAT YOU HAVE (Guest Post by LornCal)

  1. twathater says:

    WOW Lorncal that is a bruiser with no holds barred and it needs repeated regularly , I am a long term reader and commenter on WOS and was disturbed by the amount of old Wingers who were quite dismissive when the subject was ever raised , what was even more surprising was there was quite a few females who REFUSED to see any downsides to the policy claiming that Nicla would shelve or remove it , some of those females have moved to WGD , It got so that when the rev concentrated on exposing the vileness which Sturgeon ignored many people heckled and attempted to bully Stuart into ignoring the subject but Stuart was relentless in his exposures and continued to do them

    I was and still am very vociferous in my objections and contempt to this lunacy and the purveyors of it , I have stated many times on different blogs that this is ONLY a spearhead into the real reason behind it , the establishment is well known for its predilection to PAEDOPHILIA with many politicians of all political parties and members of religion being involved in this vileness , alongside this perversion and depravity we have groups hiding their vileness under innocent sounding acronyms eg MAPs which is Minor Attracted Persons or PAEDOPHILES as we know them , with ********* grooming children

    • lorncal says:

      Human beings are always motivated by self-interest, twathater, but when that self-interest is unenlightened, it becomes oppressive of others, at best, and downright totalitarian/fascist, at worst. I believe that is what we are witnessing now in both independence and women’s rights: we are in the way on both counts. The BBC, for example, enabled Jimmy Savile, and they are enabling the same thing again, with their uncritical trans policies. If something cannot stand up to open and free debate, and critical analysis and thinking, it is not harmless; it is trying to hide something. This issue will destroy the BBC once and for all because they have learned nothing from the Savile affair.

  2. paulineso21@yahoo.co.uk says:

    Fantastic essay , thanks for your contribution Lorncal.

  3. duncanio says:

    Well that is some essay Lorncal.

    I am a male (biological) and, as such, my rights as that half of the species are not (as you mention) threatened by the proposed reform the GRA. However, as a human being I object not only to the madness of this ideology but also to its extreme aggressive intolerance.

    Apart from the very detailed points you have made and the cogent argument that you have advanced, self-identification of gender surely undermines those people who have in reality either transitioned, or are transitioned, from man to woman or vice versa. You know, people who have ACTUALLY CHANGED SEX (or are in process of doing so).

    The process of changing sex (I have little doubt) involves discussion and reflection, counselling and guidance, mental health assessment, hormone treatment and (ultimately) surgery undergone by those persons who feel imprisoned in their own body and moved to make the physical adjustments they feel are necessary for their own well-being.

    A torturous process I would have thought. And not one to subject oneself lightly.

    You have asked that those who argue for ‘trans rights’ PROVE that there is no problem. I agree that the provision of evidence from the transgender lobby must be robustly pursued. As part of this I would also ask those that support ‘trans rights’ why a man would wish to self-identify as woman – I’ll use the old-fashioned term here, for clarity – and not complete the transition? After all, transition – as you point out – is, by definition non-permanent, a bus stop on the way to the end of the journey.

    When I have posed this question to some seemingly rational and intellectual individuals who support gender self-id the mask slips, the red mist descends and the accusations fly about my question being ‘right-wing’, ‘peddling hate’ etc.

    As an aside I note that all the parties in the Scottish Parliament with the exception of the Tories are in favour of transgender rights and self-id. I note further that the Westminster government is not currently proposing to interfere with legislation that is going through Holyrood on GRA reform.

    These Tories might not be very bright but they are not completely stupid. Why interfere with your opponents when they are authoring their own political obituary?

    • panda paws says:

      “ACTUALLY CHANGED SEX”

      No human can change sex – it’s impossible. Transsexuals haven’t changed sex, they have had surgery so that they more closely resemble the opposite sex but they NEVER become the opposite sex. Debbie Hayton, who I greatly admire, has had their male genitalia removed but Debbie is still male. And as a Physics teacher she never denies this material reality.

      Transsexuals are the people for whom the GRA was originally formulated for. It was assumed trans was the tiny minority of people with gender dysphoria who would undergo full reassignment surgery. It gives them a LEGAL sex that does not match their BIOLOGICAL sex but they never actually change sex.

      • duncanio says:

        OK I take your point PP.

        My real point was, however, there are those who transition for valid reasons (i.e. those who wish to approximate to being female), on the one hand, and those that self-id and attempt no transition, on the other.

        We need to be putting the latter under pressure to explain they desire simply to dress as a woman and utilise rights long since designated to (biological) women only.

      • lorncal says:

        Spot on, PP. A few hundred spread throughout the UK was what was envisaged originally by the GRA. Now, that legislation has been hi-jacked as a springboard for all kinds of insanity that was never intended, and, unless it is repealed, will continue to take rights away from women. That is the ultimate aim of the trans lobby, and why so many non-trans men and cretinous women support it/them. I just don’t believe that anyone, male or female, has ever really understood what women could do if they are pushed too far.

        I see that Kathleen Stock’s union has thrown her under the bus. No one should be surprised: they never backed working-class people either when it came to the showdown, but, like everything else, were full of self-serving b******s.

    • lorncal says:

      Even if some men actually transition fully, duncanio, why should that qualify them to enter single SEX spaces and rights? What is the correlation? Because they are women? No, they are trans women. I have to say, though, that most fully transitioned males and many who are not, are in support of the retention of women’s spaces and rights.

      I would not ant any kind of backlash against anyone, not trans people or English residents in Scotland. That was not the point of writing the essay: it was to flag up the flaws in both sets of assumptions. There can be no correlation between moving to Scotland and denying Scots their independence in reality. The two are not mutually exclusive by some universal law, but simply because one group’s unenlightened selfishness and self-interest is given priority – and I use the word, given, judiciously, because that is the case.

      Likewise, having a condition that can be relieved only by taking steps to make yourself more feminine/womanly, should not be interpreted, again, by some universal law, that you have the right to take away all female rights. Why should it? We should stop worrying about offending the utterly selfish and unenlightened and start to press our own case. These people would trample us underfoot quite happily, so why ponder whether we are hurting their feelings? They have no feelings for our reality.

      You are right about the Tories. Johnson intends to introduce it in England, and Scotland is the laboratory – as per. Carrie was sent forth to signal that eventuality. They are as trustworthy as a pet black mamba that shares your bed, as are the anti independence and trans lobbies. We need to wise up and toughen up.

      • duncanio says:

        I am not suggesting, LornCal, that fully transitioned should be able to use women’s designated spaces. I was merely saying, as I think you were, that fully transitioned i.e. transexuals are not the problem.

        It is the self-id segment, and supporters of self-id, that represent the danger. It is these who should have to justify why they wish to simply take ownership of women’s rights on any days that a hemale feels like being a female.

  4. panda paws says:

    Brilliant Lorna! My only slight quibble is that the ones pushing this are more Aunt/Commander’s Wives than handmaids. Handmaids are the ones that most obviously suffer from this ideology (though the aunt/wives end up losing out too).

    Other than that it seems you are my internet opinion twin 🙂

    I would say though that those who were traditionally thought of as trans – the transsexuals are nearly all against self id and the colonising of women’s rights. A group of 15, including Debbie, wrote to the Times in support of Helen Stock who is currently being harassed and intimidated by TRAS at her university and has been advised by police to install security cameras at her house.

    How many of the SNP elected actually agree with TWAW? How many are cowed given what has happened to Joanna Cherry and Joan McAlpine (ex MSP)? Trans people deserve to live their lives free from abuse and discrimination. But with that right comes with the responsibly not to abuse or discriminate against others, even those they disagree with.

    Bravo Lorna!

    • lorncal says:

      Thank you, PP. Stupid, fawning females are, to my mind, worse than males because they know what is being done to them, but the sight of a man, even in lipstick, seems to send them into a biological spin. I’m too long in the tooth now to be fooled for long by lying, mendacious, self-serving cretins. Yes, I take your point about the handmaids in the novel, but, actually, all the females know and understand what is being done to them, how each set is being used. In the sequel, they all rebel, or some from each set rebel, and that is what happens in real life. Oppressors eventually have to pay, sometimes with their lives, when the strain just becomes too much for the oppressed, and this happens over and over in history, with one oppressor being replaced by another. These two oppressions, though, bear a powerful resemblance to what has happened on that long road to our present day, as I tried to highlight in the introductory para: whole peoples have disappeared; defeated peoples languish in misery; and, still, we learn nothing.

  5. panda paws says:

    Arrgghhh! Prof Kathleen Stock. It’s hard to keep track of the women being abused by TRAs. Helen Joyce is another cervix haver that has been deemed witch!

    • lorncal says:

      I know, and she is such a measured individual. If even very rational, decent and measured people like the Professor are going to be battered senseless, cancelled and accused for speaking out, then we have nothing to lose by standing up to both the trans bullies and the anti independence bullies. Poor Professor Robert Winston has had terrible slurs made against him involving the Holocaust, when he stated recognized and verified science on ‘Question Time’. Graham Linehan has suffered cancellation and terrible accusations, too. These people who do this are thoroughly wicked and evil, for want of better words.

  6. Jim Morris says:

    During the Cold War, the Soviets had one missile targetted on Scotland, with one warhead. However, that one war head had enough power to devastate a 50 mile radius of its target. It was aimed at the Wallace Monument in Stirling and measure where 50 miles in every direction as the crow flies gets you.

    • lorncal says:

      Yes, Jim, and I believe they are even more powerful now. Scotland would be wiped out more or less. The greater danger, though, lies in an accidental detonation by our own side, and I believe that this is the real reason why they are in Scotland. Another parallel: like females, Scots are expendable.

  7. xsticks says:

    Spot on Lorna. You have spelled out the parallels between the Gender Recognition and Scottish Independence quite neatly. They are both about occupying someone else’s space and can only be achieved through deception. Truth destroys the whole facade. Great piece of writing.

    • lorncal says:

      Indeed, they run parallel, but there will never be independence if women are betrayed. I am not prepared to pay the price of having my entire existence wiped out for someone else’s supposed benefit, although I believe passionately in independence and have since I was around 11 or 12 years old. In 2015, when it became apparent that the SNP had been hi-jacked by the pseudo woke warriors, that was the time to put the brakes on. Now, I think, just like independence, this will go to the wire. I say ‘pseudo’ because empathy and compassion and, indeed, any form of knowledge, are entirely absent from these middle-class (mainly) pampered wokists.

      They are so stupid that they don’t even seem to realize that they will have ditch their mobiles, computers, tablets, iphones, etc. They’ll have to learn to write, spell, think as individuals again instead of relying on the hive instinct and their typing finger. Even the sexual thrill of pretending to be a lactating and menstruating (yes…I know…at the same time…but they know absolutely nothing about biology or science either) whilst listening intently to women peeing in the next cubicle and w*****g themselves into a coma, will not compensate for a return to the stone age. All these issues need to be debated properly, using the very best knowledge we have if we are to save our planet and our species. Vacuous nonsense is not going to cut the mustard.

  8. nallyanders says:

    Outstanding piece of work Lorna.
    I can only reiterate Panda Paws comment. The problem is the conflatence of Gender Reassignment (which is your good old fashioned Transexual) and Gender Identity.
    The former is a protected characteristic in the Equalities Act 2010 and this is the group who would have been diagnosed with Gender Disphoria and gone through a sanctioned process under the 2004 Gender Recognition Act ( and as described by Duncanio) eventually leading to legal recognition of reassignment and permitted to change their birth certificate.
    These folk have been quietly getting on with their lives although it must be said, could still be legally excluded from single sex spaces (under permitted circumstances).
    Under Stonewall’s direction the Scottish Government, want to extend the Trans brand to include Gender Identity ( as listed in the Hate Crime Bill). This however is a whole different kettle of fish. It’s a social construct based entirely on ‘feelings’ and there are at least 100 different genders. All of whom appear to want access to women’s single sex spaces. No need to change appearance or take cross sex hormones etc. They just Self Identify. The Act states they must live in their ‘acquired’ gender for 6 months before qualifying for a GRCertificate. Exactly how you would quantify or define (under the law) living as a ‘two spirit’ person is beyond me.
    One ‘demigirl’, presenting as a bald, bearded biker ‘dude’ explained that he was a Transwoman who had no intention of transitioning and declaring himself to be a Lesbian. In other words, a straight guy, complete with penis, who would get access to women’s safe spaces simply by Self Declaring as ‘Trans’. Similarly this is why we already have males in women’s prisons, the Scottish Trans Alliance pushed this agenda which the SG and Prison Service was adopted without any ‘Impact Assessment’ on the women already housed in the female estate.
    It’s obvious to anyone who’s been around the block a few times that Self ID creates a significant deficit in safeguarding that abusive men will exploit.
    Meanwhile Sturgeon says women’s concerns are “not valid”.

    • lorncal says:

      It still leaves me reeling to think that normally rational and sensible people must have had their ‘lying, fraudulent toad’ device removed surgically. The implications right across the board for society are so dangerous and nonsensical that I am almost coming to believe that the politicians who push this stuff must have been taken aboard a space ship and lobotomised. Other people haven’t even been able to get their hip replaced or have a scan for cancer, but our politicians, many of them, must have arranged for brain surgery during the pandemic. It beggars belief.

    • lorncal says:

      Nally: Stonewall wants to eliminate the single-sex protections in the 2010 Equality Act. They have interpreted it in the way they want it to be interpreted – entirely in their favour. I am so fed up and nauseated by extremely silly people who try to justify this behaviour as if it was perfectly understandable. No, it isn’t, as I think we both know. Stonewall know what they are doing; they are bad actors here. They know that females will be put in danger; they know that puberty blockers will damage children; they know that their agenda is a catalogue of deluded nonsense. People who vote against our independence also know what they are doing. They know the harm it will cause, but their comfort and wants take centre stage. Utter selfishness and self-interest are at the root of both, and, personally, I refuse to pander to such deliberate deception masquerading as “for the greater good”. Absolute piffle. The Denton document, which they have followed to the letter, proves beyond any reasonable doubt that they are monsters of deception and mendacious pushers of nonsense. What i any government doing in actually paying for the services of a lobbying group? In the name of the wee man, this is probably illegal, just as it is illegal in international law to deliberately stymie the right of others to follow their own constitutional destiny. It is time that these bad actors were called out.

  9. panda paws says:

    I’ve mentioned Debbie Hayton above. Here is a 6 minute interview with Debbie on Rachel Johnson’s programme (yeah she’s his sister!). You tell them Debbie!

  10. lorncal says:

    PP, thanks for that. I hope that Rachel has some clout with her brother. Debbie Hayton says it straight.

  11. Moixx says:

    Thank you for this article, it is excellent, (and great btl comments too!). The interview with Debbie Hayton is so good – we need to be hearing much more like this, especially now that the issue is finally getting a bit more of a mainstream airing (I’m already seeing the ‘impartial’ BBC showing their ‘pro-trans’ bias).

    Been wondering if ‘self-id’ is a more specific term to use than ‘trans’? It seemed to be what Debbie was getting at in the interview – the fact that what has been the ‘social contract’ is being corrupted and broken, and the problem lies around the issues of safe-guarding and gatekeeping, specifically in relation to self-id. Should there be stronger language and messaging on the promotion of ‘self-id’ vs the safety of women and girls? “Self-id is violence against women” for example? And refer to the ‘self-id lobby’, rather than the ‘trans lobby’, and ‘men who self-identify as women’, rather than ‘trans women’ etc.

    Might be a bit clunky in usage, but the term ‘self-id’ doesn’t include men who have gone through the existing route to getting a GRC (like Debbie) so it’s easier than having to constantly differentiate between people who have transitioned under the existing criteria, and the men who will use self-id just to gain access to women’s rights. Gets more directly to the real problem we’re facing.

    ‘Safety’ is one of our most basic rights and is relevant to all women and girls – not just ‘safe spaces’ but much more generally. Exactly how can women be kept safe? How does a woman know that a man who self identifies as a woman isn’t actually a predatory man intent on doing her harm? I’ve never seen any explanation of how this policy is supposed to work in real life in terms of safety – it’d be good to see it become a question that is continually raised. (I’ve asked my MSPs and had no proper response on this – and they’re supposed to be voting on it).

    Really don’t know how best to do it, but yes, definitely feel the need to ‘press our own case’.

    • lorncal says:

      Moixx: when you get down to the very basics of this issue, there is no way round keeping males out of female spaces. Like that Monty Python film, where the women says: “Oh, I’m glad the meek are getting something at last” or word to that effect, give and inch and they’ll take a mile. Dr Debbie Hayton understands that women and girls cannot compromise. It must be third spaces for trans people or unigender/sex, maintaining male and female spaces. If trans people want to enter parliament, want to punt for jobs, they must do so as trans people and fight for their rights on all these fronts, as women had to do, as all other disadvantages groups have had to do, and not piggy-back on women’s rights. If they are allowed on to all-female short-lists, for example, we could end up with a situation where we have 100% male representation again.

      There is no such thing as Trans Women Are Women (TWAW). They are trans, full-stop. They are not women; they are not female. They are natal men who feel they are/claim to be women. How they know they are defies any kind of logic, since only natal women can know that they are women, and they don’t have to pontificate over it. So, either we keep males out of all female spaces and rights or we throw open the doors and calculate, like WW I generals, 100 miles from the front, just how many women and girls we are willing to sacrifice to the ideology.

      That this will go pear-shaped is not a supposition: it is a fact based on experience of how predatory and paraphilic men behave. Beware of Greeks bearing gifts. Self-ID is an open invitation. We really need to start asking questions, such as: why is it so essential for males to enter female spaces and rights if the trans lobby is not a veil for something dark? Why not live their lives as they wish and leave women and girls (and young children of both sexes, lesbians and gays)? It is the answer to that question that they need to provide. Screaming, ‘terf’ and ‘transphobe’ just makes us even more suspicious about their true motives and we dig our heels in deeper. Imitation might be the greatest tribute, but most women and girls want to keep their spaces and rights for the real McCoy as we see men’s rights groups, incel groups and me’s sexual rights groups all coalesce under the trans umbrella. Methinks something is rotten in the state of Scotland (and elsewhere).

  12. moixx says:

    The people behind all this (Stonewall, its funders and supporters) have been able to pretty much set the agenda, including deciding on the language to be used and what the terminology means. So, while it’s good that we’re finally hearing about it a bit more in the MSM, we really need many more voices actively taking back control of the narrative (eg not getting bogged down in endless arguments about ‘gender ideology’).

    The people doing this know ‘self-id’ is an idea which does not stand up to scrutiny. The answer to that has been for them to wrap it in confusion and complexity. When you cut through all the swathes of extraneous gibberish attached to the issue, it is the ‘self-id’ part of it that is the crux of the problem, and the need to retain all ‘sex-based’ exclusions. But that just describes the situation as it was before all this started, and I can’t see that situation coming back again somehow. And unfortunately anything else is going to be a compromise, whether we like it or not.

    For example, while I agree about the need for third spaces (female, male and unigender/sex), I actually see that as a compromise in itself. It would mean that we have given ground to those who insist that gender is a reality on a par with sex. So when you say ‘give them an inch and they’ll take a mile’ – perhaps ‘third spaces’ would be the ‘inch’ in itself. The principle would have been established, but then it would be easy to make those ‘third spaces’ a bit nicer to be in, eg a public toilet with more facilities in the third space and only one cubicle for the ‘women’s’ option. If the will was there (and it certainly seems to be) it could easily be manipulated.

    So really, for the third space option to work there would need to be an absolute commitment – in law – to provide and properly maintain all those spaces and to ensure that they are subject to sex-based exclusion. In the current climate that doesn’t seem likely.

    I do worry that so much of this mentality is already so entrenched that it will be made to look (to the general public) like the GRA legislation due here in Scotland is just the law ‘keeping up’ with what already exists in day to day life. So it really needs to be hammered home that ‘self-id’ is dangerous and must not happen.

    I also note how this is all happening at the same time as there are so many other areas of upheaval in the world. Generally, I get the feeling that we are being made to ‘firefight on as many fronts as possible’. Something rotten in the state of Scotland indeed (and what a state it’s in).

    • lorncal says:

      moixx: I agree with you. I get what you mean about third spaces, but I do think they might be the answer for fully transitioned trans people. The other point about them, which I believe is crucial, is that, if we keep banging on about them, it will show once and for all that the real agenda behind all this delusional nonsense is to access ALL female spaces and rights. I fully accept that there are people with gender/body dysphoria, but that it is a condition that invites treatment, whether that is to transition or to receive deep counselling, and that is up to the person concerned. I, personally, am utterly opposed to treatment of children except, perhaps, with counselling, and I believe anything else to be abuse of the most callous and cynical kind because I also believe that Stonewall and Mermaids have manufactured these children to a huge extent in order to justify their own ‘born in the wrong body’ anti science and biological c**p.

      When young girls suffered the mass delusion of anorexia, no doctor – no one – was telling them to starve themselves to death, yet that, too, was body dysphoria and recognized to be a mass delusion caused by a form of hysteria. The complete repeal of the 2004 GRA is the only answer to this because it has been, and will continue to be, used as a springboard for even greater incursions. Self-ID and access to female sex-based spaces and rights is not the end. They will not stop till all females are pushed back into the home and out of the public sphere right across the board. If they get away with this, I hope the first to go is Nicola Sturgeon, followed closely by Kirsty Blackman, as men shove them under the bus they helped to create – driven by a six foot seven trans woman with a three-day growth of beard and arms like a weightlifter’s thigh. How any woman could do this to other women is beyond understanding, but when you think that brain-dead women write love letters to mass murders and serial rapists in prison, maybe we shouldn’t be surprised.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.