<iframe src="//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-K3L4M3" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden">

World

Labour is wrong: it’s not ‘hate speech’ to question trans rights

23 December 2022

12:24 AM

23 December 2022

12:24 AM

MSPs were up until the early hours last night at Holyrood debating amendments to the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland Bill). Make no mistake, this is an exceptionally bad piece of legislation in the making – though it might have been less bad had a few more of those amendments been accepted by Nicola Sturgeon’s government.

But the SNP weren’t the only party painting Scottish politics in a bad light. During the debate, Labour MSP, Mercedes Villalba, took it on herself to start policing the language of others in the chamber. Villalba aimed her fire at the SNP’s Kenny Gibson – for daring to say something that many people also believe: that trans women are not women.

‘Would the member like to clarify in what way the previous contribution demonstrated respect? From where I was sitting, it was extremely disrespectful and bordered on hate speech,’ said Villalba.

So, what had Gibson said? Despite the way his words were described by Villalba, the reality is rather mundane:


‘The inconvenient truth is that trans women are physically male and, as a group, present the same hazard that other men present—those who pretend to be trans, even more so. If a fox said it was a chicken, would you put it in a hen house? Of course not.’

Gibson was forthright, that much is certain. But he needed to be: this was an eleventh-hour plea to change a bad bill that many women are concerned about.

If Gibson was guilty of anything other than being direct, it was pointing out facts that Villalba was perhaps not used to hearing. The amendment being discussed was aimed at protecting women in prison – one of the most vulnerable groups in society. It stands to reason that, if men can self-identity themselves into the female sex, a sex offender might use that for their own warped purposes.

In four minutes, Gibson provided the evidence, discussed the problem, and called on his colleagues for support. He deserved praise. Instead he was pilloried.

In other places and at other times, Gibson’s words would have been universally considered to be a normal parliamentary contribution. But not in Holyrood in 2022. Villalba represents a younger generation that appears to think differently, or maybe feels differently. Because, despite her outburst, she actually voted for the amendment Gibson was speaking about. But to no avail, the Scottish government thought it unnecessary and it fell by 65 votes to 59.

Much has been said about the gender recognition reform debate, and the potential for a constitutional crisis, but this exchange exemplified something perhaps even more worrying. Being nice to trans people is a worthy aim, but the role of government is not to play Santa Claus – even at Christmas. Holyrood is set to vote through legislation that, in my view, further compromises women’s boundaries and undermines the safeguarding of children.

This is a battle between reason and emotion. At Holyrood, emotion has the upper hand.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.


Comments

Don't miss out

Join the conversation with other Spectator Australia readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Close