AT SNP conference last weekend the party elected, amidst some tension, a new Women’s Convenor.
It’s not necessary to offer an assessment of the suitability of any of the candidates to observe that many votes appear to have been cast with only one issue in mind, that of the reaction to the proposed Gender Recognition Act, and to express concern at this.
The remit of Women’s Convenor extends far beyond this issue, which unfortunately remains unresolved by the result. I hope that the new convenor will reach out to those who feel they’ve lost a battle with her election and engage them in positive debate, because the discussion up to now has been characterised by appalling behaviour on both sides.
READ MORE: Candidates for SNP Women’s Convener offered 'protection' advice
I hesitate to call it a debate, as many of the tactics used have been designed precisely to stifle debate. I’m fed up with seeing that video of some Canadian masturbating in a public toilet posted online as if it is incontrovertible evidence of the harm self-ID will wreak on our society. Exposing yourself in public won’t suddenly become legal as a result of self-ID, for anyone, trans or not. The person in this video is not representative of any group other than creeps, and to suggest otherwise is bigoted. Trans people are an incredibly vulnerable minority, who, it shouldn’t need to be said, overwhelmingly don’t masturbate in public places; it is time they received some attention from activists and legislators. Those seeking to improve their situation are not misogynists, because this isn’t a choice between women and trans people.
The pro-self-ID squad are unfortunately behaving just as dimly as their opponents. Simply shouting “transwomen are women” isn’t the zinger of an argument many of them think it is; it is, at best, a football chant, designed to galvanise those already in agreement whilst drowning out opponents. Smearing people as transphobes for simply asking questions of a piece of legislation is lazy and unfair too.
READ MORE: Cherry interested in ‘leadership role’ in independent Scotland
Both sides issued pledges for candidates to sign, as flags to rally round and blunt instruments to batter opponents with. I stood for NEC but refused to sign either. Signing or not signing marked you out as a transphobe or a misogynist and it was an unfair position to put people in. The veiled threats towards those who didn’t sign absolutely appalled me and amounted to nothing more than another attempt to stifle debate and dehumanise opponents.
I could go on listing the examples of smear and bullying I’ve seen from both sides but people involved in the independence movement should, frankly, know better. Every time you’ve been called a Nazi, or accused of hating the English, you are subject to the same tactics from Unionist opponents as both sides are using in this debate. No reasonable person is obliged to listen to a Nazi, or a misogynist or a transphobe; these people are beyond the pale and they don’t deserve a hearing or a debate, we can cast their views aside. It’s easier to dehumanise and delegitimise our opponents than engage with their concerns, and often this behaviour masks our unwillingness, or inability, to compromise or respect opposing views.
The GRA has been popped off for consultation, and for all its importance I am glad if we can have a break from it for a while. Both sides should use this time for some self-reflection and consider how they will seek to bring opponents along with them. I don’t envy the new Woman’s Convenor, and if we view this election as a victory for some and a defeat for others then we are doomed to continue attacking each other and we will let women and trans people down in the process. The GRA has, rightly or wrongly, triggered a wider-ranging debate than its own provisions deal with, and to do it justice we all must be prepared to listen, to compromise and to approach our opponents with patience and positive regard. In short, it’s time for both sides to wind their necks in.
David Tam McDonald
Glasgow
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here