The Sturgeon effect

The Sunday Times today gleefully reports that “support for the SNP, for Nicola Sturgeon and for Scottish independence has fallen sharply as the party’s crisis over transgender rights deepens” (£). A single poll doesn’t tell us much, of course. But there are occasions when a sharp change in polling is so closely associated with a particular issue, event or individual that denying the correlation just seems a bit silly. This would seem to be a casein point. If somebody wants to argue that the drop in support for both the SNP and Yes is not related to the ghastly Gender Recognition Reform Bill (GRR) then they are welcome to try. It’s not a task I envy. Look at this chart.

Sunday Times/YouGov

The right hand end of that graph so accurately reflects two factors that it is difficult to deny that on this occasion, correlation is causation. The first crossover, where Yes ‘soars’ and No plummets is immediately recognisable as the point at which the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) published its judgment on the draft Referendum Bill referred by the Lord Advocate at the First Minister’s urging. The second crossover reversing the first, coincides with the SNP/Scottish Government’s “crisis over transgender rights”.

Nothing will stop the SNP loyalists and apologists denying the correlation or apparent causation, of course. True to form, they insist we should dismiss such polling on no more grounds than the name of the polling company and/or the title of the publication commissioning the poll. Except when that polling firm/publication shows a ‘surge’ of support for the SNP and/or independence. Then, we have to take it seriously. This is all just the burbling of fools. No sensible political activist could disregard information of this kind. It doesn’t have to be 100% accurate to be disturbing. The volatility of Yes support is worrying regardless of which way it is moving at any given moment.

The only good news for Scotland’s cause is that there seems to be an unshakeable bedrock of support for Yes somewhere around the mid- to high-40s. It is this baseline that must rise before it can sensibly be claimed that support for independence is increasing. There is no increase in that base support to show for eight years of Sturgeon’s non-leadership of the independence campaign. No increase over a period when, by Sturgeon’s own account, the British government has been behaving in a way which greatly favours Scotland’s cause. If the SNP/Scottish Government can’t increase support for independence in the circumstances that have prevailed since 2014, then we are quite entitled to wonder if they have been trying to do so.

The fluctuations in polling above that persistent base support are not indicative of support for independence. What they show is public reaction to whatever is in the news at the time. They are useful to the independence campaign only insofar as they point us in the direction of the kind of things which drive support up and the kind of things that push support back down again. The job of the SNP/Scottish Government is to make sure that there are more things driving up than pushing down, as well as working to consolidate the increases and incorporate them into the base support. The SNP/Scottish Government has failed abysmally at all of this.

This failure has to be punished. More importantly, Scotland’s politicians have to know that it will be punished. That is problematic, because it is difficult to see a way of punishing the politicians for their failure without doing harm to Scotland’s cause. I should stress that I mean a realistic, credible way of punishing the nominally pro-independence parties without the independence campaign suffering collateral damage. There is no shortage of fantastical notions in this regard. Not so many serious suggestions.

It may be that it simply isn’t possible to give the Scottish parties a kicking without adversely impacting the fight to restore Scotland’s independence. It certainly isn’t possible to give them a kicking in elections without setting back our cause by years, if not decades. At the same time, it is evident that being deterred from chastising SNP, SGP and Alba politicians for fear of harming the cause is no answer as this is to allow the failure to continue. The task than becomes one of finding a way of delivering the hardest possible kicking with the least possible damage to Scotland’s cause. Or the most readily remediable damage. I remain convinced that the best way to pull off this trick is by means of direct action which is simultaneously both very evidently pro-independence whilst dissenting from the approach taken by the present crop of Scottish politicians.

I should make clear that I refer here to all the nominally pro-independence parties and not just the SNP. The fact is that none of them is offering a credible home for genuinely pro-independence voters. The Scottish Greens have been effectively captured by the SNP via the detestable gender cult that holds sway over both parties. And Alba is not the answer to any relevant question. Their eager embracing of the Section 30 process makes them no less unattractive to the committed independence supporter such as myself than the SNP.

As a pertinent aside, John Swinney has now lost my vote on account of his declared enthusiasm for compromising the sovereignty of Scotland’s people. He joins Pete Wishart, who lost my vote a while ago on account of him being a fuckwit. This nicely illustrates the dilemma facing independence supporters in Perth. How can I vote for either of these SNP politicians without compromising my own principles? How can I not vote for them without giving advantage to the British parties? In the past, this is a dilemma that has been resolved at the moment the pencil hits the ballot paper. Which is not the way I like to operate.

For the moment, the Yes movement needs to get its act together so as to put impressive numbers of people outside Holyrood and/or Bute House demanding bold, decisive action on the constitutional issue. If there is a silver lining to the whole GRR fiasco it is that it may have weakened Sturgeon to the point where it is possible she might be persuaded to rethink her her approach. It is certainly worth a try. What else is there for Yes activists to do this year?

If you find these articles interesting please consider a small donation to help support this site and my other activities on behalf of Scotland’s cause.

Buy me a Birra

46 thoughts on “The Sturgeon effect

  1. Agree entirely Peter, direct and decisive action within the precincts of OUR Holyrood Parliament MUST be the strategic approach taken.

    The demand that this Scottish Government address the inertia which has stalled the progress to Independence must be taken by the people to Sturgeons door.

    No longer can we tolerate the ‘burbling of fools’ that seeks to thwart every way other than that of their cheer leader Sturgeon. Scotland already has payed too heavy a price through this deliberate intransigence.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. It would seem like the public are less concerned about UK Supreme Court rulings and UK Government Section 35 ‘overrides’ than they are about crazed and irrational ideological gender identify dogma.

    Well who knew?


  3. The dilemma continues.

    I think the SNP have surrendered to the Greens over the gender issue, in view of the difference in what was stated in their manifestos. The Greens were much stronger on self ID. The SNP was more general. The Greens prevailed. Why was that I wonder?


  4. As Alf Baird writes in the “Protecting your baby” thread; “Anger – which is an emotion people develop once they realise they have been deceived and understand how”. That is what the anti-trans mob has to fear when the Scottish public realise, as they will, that they have been lied to, misinformed and taken for fools by them.

    Maybe the right wing unionist/media/bigot/”pro-indy (aye right) blogger” alliance and their campaign of deliberate misinformation has resulted in Indy support falling. That is not the SNP’s fault. The only ones on the Indy side of the independence issue who need to take a good long look at themselves are those that have put Indy aside in an attempt to destroy the pro-indy Scottish Govt by allying themselves with unionists and bigots.

    The question those who purport to support independence but have jumped on the anti-trans band-wagon is – “if we have to lie to and deliberately misinform people to win the argument; ignore the evidence that destroys our arguments while similarly ignoring the lack of evidence to back them; ignore actual science while citing “pub science”; ally ourselves with some of the most detestable right wing bigots in the UK and beyond; all to the detriment of the independence cause …. if we have to do all those things …. are we the baddies”?


    1. I have great faith in the Scottish people being able to come up with the correct answer to the question “What is a woman?”. Also in being able to answer the question “Is a double rapist a man?” without having to resort to statements like ‘I don’t have sufficient information’.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. That’s a shame. I thought better of you. Your glib statement fails to address any of the points I made while confirming the wilfull ignorance at the heart of the anti-trans argument.


          1. As has been described to you many times now lorncal, and is alluded to above, the willful denial of all the evidence that destroys your fearmongering. The denial that there is no evidence to back your fearmongering. The denial of actual science in favour of “stands to reason dunnit” pub science. The willful misrepresentation of the GRR bill as something it is not. The willful denial that the GRR bill is only a modification of already extant law, that has been in place for nearly 20 years, without ANY of your offensive predictions being realised. The willful claim that the GRR bill would allow access to same sex places when you know it was the UK Equalities Act 2010 that legislated had already legislated for that. The willful claim that every person claiming to be trans would be/is given unquestioning access to any same sex place by the GRR bill with no safeguards when the Equalities Act 2010 (which actually governs this) has safeguards inbuilt. The willful lie that the recent hysteria over trans sex offenders being housed in Scottish women’s prisons is a uniquely Scottish issue, triggered by the GRR bill, when it is a pan-UK issue created by the UK Equalities Act 2010. The willful lie that the recent cases in Scotland involving this issue were failures of the safeguards put in place by the Equalities Act 2010 (not the GRR bill) when they were actually examples of the safeguards in action and preventing the transfer of offenders. The willfully ludicrous claim that non-trans sex offenders will “use” the GRR bill to gain access to same sex places, such as toilets and changing rooms, when no one is required to carry paper work with them to gain access to these places as it is. The willfully bigoted use of the kind of, ahem, “scientific” papers used to demonise homosexuals, justify anti-semitism and prove “coloured races” were inferior to claim virtually all trans people were fetishists/deviants/sex offenders/mentally ill.

            The entire anti-trans lobby is based on lies, misinformation, bigotry, malice and opportunistic politicking. Those who promulgate it are, indeed, “the baddies”.


            1. You have lost the plot, MBP. Repeal the 2004 GRA. Strengthen the 2020 Equality Act. All biological men out of female spaces, services, rights, etc. NOW.

              Liked by 1 person

      2. The whole question could be resolved tomorrow by supporting the fact that men cannot ever be women. They can call themselves women, live as women., whatever that might mean as it has no recognised and universal application, but they do not get to enter female spaces, rights, sex-specific jobs, services, etc. Simple. Then, they get off their parasitical bahoochies and start campaigning for third spaces. In Italy, ‘transwomen’ or ‘trans’ identified men are never, but never, housed in the female prison estate. If the ‘trans community’, whatever that is, decides to protest, then it will have to explain why it is so important that it gets to access female spaces, etc. We know the answer, but it would be so refreshing to hear the truth instead of ‘trans’ lies. After that, we can concentrate on independence – all of us.

        Liked by 2 people

      1. The stuff I learned in College lorncal. The stuff that said the human species is so unfathomably complex and numerous that “the norm” is impossible to define. You know, Colleges and Universities, actual scientific establishments.

        In our Human Biology class we were told of some of the conditions etc that many human beings live with. After being given surprisingly large percentages of the population affected by these conditions we were perplexed. We asked “where were all these people if so many are affected”? The answer was simple, they’re all around us. You just couldn’t see most of the conditions and many presented as being “within the norm”. In the majority of those cases, those who had them were unaware of it.

        The human psyche is just as complex as the human body if not more so. It is as subject to “anomalies” as the body is. The human species developed a broadly “female psyche” and a broadly “male psyche”. Everyone has a mix of both to a greater or lesser extent. Sometimes to such an extent that the individual’s psyche does not sync up with their body. No amount of counselling, medication, surgery or violence can change that. No matter what your “handlers” tell you.


        1. If you mean intersex people, they are not ‘trans’. Stop using them as a prop for your delusions. If the psyche does not sync with the body, perhaps it is brain transplants we should be looking at. The fundamental problem with the wrong body nonsense is that someone else must have your body or someone else must have your brain, or no one has either your body or your brain and you have been allotted some kind of cosmic spares? Yes, there are females and there are males because… biology… because… reproduction? Gay people have never claimed to be ‘trans’, just gay. Hack off the TQ++++ and you are left with gay and ‘trans’, queer, etc. They are nothing to do with gay except inasmuch as they have parasitically infiltrated gay as much as they have infiltrated heterosexual. Be whatever you want to be, dress as you please, sleep with whomsoever you please, just stay OUT of female spaces, rights, etc. They are not yours and never will be yours. No, the GRR is not an extension of existing rights, but a huge departure from existing rights, which would give legal status to men larping as women, woman facing. You are MEN. You are a subset of MEN. You are not our problem. Campaign for your own, third spaces. Why not? We had to fight for ours and you are not getting them.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I never mentioned intersex people. They are just another example of the vast complexity of life, and it’s inherent mutability, leading to myriad “anomalies” in individuals. Though the fact you “appear” accepting of a physical blurring of the sexes makes your denial of a blurring of the psyches all the more “problematic”. Or is your seeming acceptance of intersex people only pragmatic with the intention of “sorting them out” once you’ve had the trans people dealt with?

            Whatever it is drives you, I’ll bookmark this thread, and dig out one of the threads where you describe your “Illuminati” trans theory of them attempting world domination and the enslavement of women for further bookmarking. So that I have something to show people when they want to see how utterly unhinged the anti-trans mob can be.

            “First they came for the trans people, and I did not speak out – because I was not trans ….. “


            1. Intersex people have a developmental problem, nothing to do with ‘trans’. There is no blurring of the sexes there. None. Intersex people are either male or female. I have no ambitions to sort anyone out, you daft person. I have a deep problem with people who larp and pretend to be what they are not. Here we go again, the genocide theory of ‘trans’. Do you even understand how insulting that is to people who have acyually suffered genocide? Do you? I doubt it as empathy is absent from most ‘trans’ witering I have heard. I have no illuminati ‘trans’ theory. I just have a fair knowledge of human nature, and, yes, you will take all women’s places, spaces, rights, services, etc., if allowed to do so – a) because you are men and many men believe they have that right; b) because you are after power, naked power to inflict your topsy-turvey view of the world on the rest of us; c) because women’s organisations in Ireland are reporting back that that is precisely what is happening over there. It is happening in America and Tranada, too. Your final line from Pastor Niemoller’s speech is utterly disgusting. Yes, transsexuals were put in re eduction and concentration camps. So were Catholic priests, gay people, trades unionists, Socialists, Communists, Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, many, many women and children. You are not special, mate, not one bit.


              1. Again, you appear unable to comprehend what has been written in as plain a language as possible. I will say again, “I never mentioned intersex people. They are just another example of the vast complexity of life, and it’s inherent mutability, leading to myriad “anomalies” in individuals. Though the fact you “appear” accepting of a physical blurring of the sexes makes your denial of a blurring of the psyches all the more “problematic”.

                For emphasis, every single aspect of life on Earth is subject to anomaly. Every single little thing. Gender does not have some extraordinary protection against it. That is indisputable scientific fact. Even attempting to rail against this indisputable fact discredits much of your argument.

                As to your claim “I have no illuminati ‘trans’ theory” …. your own posts are your enemy here. From the “Old thinking. New thinking” thread on this site;

                “I do believe that the SNP was singled out, though, as, a) being more susceptible to takeover because we were so happy to co-opt new members, b) because the SNP itself was a party in power in a small part of the UK. It is how the ‘woke’, specifically, ‘trans’ movement works – by radiating outwards from a centre point (the whole of the UK, especially England, being the ultimate prize)” …. “These people, or the ones behind them, really are even more sleekit and single-minded than even the British state apparatus, which is why it, too will fall to it unless it is very careful” …. “This is very much bigger than Scotland and much bigger than England. It is, essentially, an Anglosphere, Western phenomenon, and extremely dangerous” …. “I am also of the opinion that, if we defeat the ‘trans’ lobby, women will come out stronger and with a far greater understanding of the ways in which men seek to re-enslave us”.

                Damned by your own words.

                And your reflexly defensive reaction to the paraphrased Pastor Niemoller poem (not speech) speaks volumes, especially as you admit trans people were sent to the death camps. At least it indicates an awareness of the darkside to your stance. But then, maybe having that awareness but willfuly ignoring it is even worse.


        2. First, the avatar is of Antisthenes (c. 446—366 B.C.E.), not Socrates.

          “.. why have all the scare stories of sexual predation and erosion of women’s rights not manifested themselves when Gender Recognition Certificates and subsequent access to single sex spaces have been in place in the UK for decades?”

          They HAVE.

          But when is this is pointed out – with actual examples- to you and like minded apologists, they always reply along the lines that “they are isolated bad apples.”

          I hope that you will take the word of this man that I am no threat to women. But there is a good reason why I am excluded from their safe spaces: “bad apples”, whose invasive number you and the crackpot Scottish Parliament seems determined to multiply.

          When, in reply to an earlier post you were asked a simple question: “ where is the actual science?”

          Your reply was 205 words of flatulent gibberish- a mishmash of pseudo anthropology, psychobabble and creative word-salad containing nary a scintilla of SCIENCE anywhere.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Wow, I really packed a lot into those 205 words then.

            I stated the reality. The scientific evidence for it is stacked in row upon row of weighty tomes in every college and university library in the country, with contributions from Darwin to every expert in Biology active today. The undeniable fact (unless you’re a religious fundamentalist) is that absolutely every aspect of life on Earth is subject to change/mutation/anomaly. That includes the human psyche. To claim otherwise is …. “very brave” as Sir Humphrey would say.

            As to your “bad apple” claim, of course the use of individual cases as evidence of an “increase” in the committing of any crime is rejected. No one is claiming crimes are not committed, but the anti-trans claim is that offences will “increase”. There is no evidence of any increase of crimes against women in jurisdictions where GRC and/or self-id have been implemented. None.

            It turns out, those intent on committing hideous crimes, whether trans (a tiny minority) or non-trans (the massively overwhelming majority) are not put off by not having the correct paperwork in place beforehand. Especially when it is something that will never have to be shown to anyone before entering a public space. I cannot believe those pushing the anti-trans agenda don’t realise this. So when they continue to push it, they are deliberately misleading the public.


            1. “The scientific evidence for it is stacked in row upon row of weighty tomes in every college and university library in the country, with contributions from Darwin to every expert in Biology active today….”

              You are not doing any better. 227 words of turgid waffle trying to disguise the fact you have nothing to offer.

              Let me make it easier for you: produce a single, testable hypothesis to answer the question put to you.

              Here is a mischievous example: “ Dr Biotrans has established that the “Y” in the XY chromosome is really another form of “X”.

              That is obviously a load of rubbish that is easily exposed as such.

              But it is a SCIENTIFIC load of rubbish because it can be tested by observation and experiment and exposed for the nonsense it is.

              Now give me ONE testable statement that has withstood attempts at falsification by other scientists.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. Are you actually questioning the origin of species? Are you actually questioning the inherent mutability of every single aspect of all life? If so, how do you explain the progress from single cell species billions of years ago to the massively complex organisms, such as humans, today? How did sexual reproduction evolve from, but not replace, asexual reproduction? How did distinct male and female identities evolve from all that …. if the psyche is not just as mutable as every other aspect of life?

                I don’t have to produce evidence of the existence of evolution in the same way I don’t have to produce evidence the Earth revolves around the Sun. That you insist I do, when a simple Google will give you all the information …. you should not need …. to satisfy your curiosity, smacks of straw clutching.

                As to your “slam dunk” chromosome claim, the Y chromosome is a degenerative form of the X chromosome. Millions of years ago, it WAS a full X chromosome. It is considered to be continuing to degenerate and may disappear in a few million years. So, contrary to your “unscientific” conclusion, Y actually is “another form of X”.

                Science isn’t your thing is It?


                1. Well done, MBP. Biology does tell us that all human beings start life as female until the sex development kicks in after a few weeks (the sex of a foetus being decided by the male genes, otherwise we would all be clones) so sex depends on there being male humans. Quite different from the Eve out of Adam’s rib stuff, wouldn’t you agree? Of course, there is nothing to say that this will always be the case, but it is the case now. Dimorphism has evolved as the human condition and problems with sexual development do not alter that fundamental fact because all problems with sexual development still are contained within male and female. Sorry to burst your balloon.

                  Again, the sex development of the foetus can be traced back via any problems with the developed child. Evolution is evolution and species adapt and evolve to suit the prevailing conditions. If they do not adapt and evolve, they die off. Many, many species have died off naturally, usually because conditions changed rapidly and they could not adapt quickly enough or some other pressure was brought to bear with which they were unable to cope. However, it is unknown for any mammal to change sex in order to evolve or adapt. We are not talking about amoebas, or other species, we are talking about humans. Even on a biological predication, dimorphism will continue until, and if, it is no longer necessary for human survival and adaptation. We have not reached that point, if we ever will.


                  1. A wholly irrelevant post, lorncal, that reads as simply another attempt to deflect attention away from an undeniable truth.

                    The point you studiously refuse to acknowledge is that all aspects of life on this planet, in every single species that has ever existed, and that ever will, is prone to incessant anomaly. On the grand epoch spanning scale, that is the basis of evolution; on the day to day scale it results in millions of anomalies presenting themselves in millions of babies born every day. Most will go unnoticed, many will be fatal, some will confer a disadvantage, few will confer an advantage, others will allow the individual to live a life that will require compromises, etc, etc. This is the reality of all life on Earth. No biologist who wishes to retain a shred of credibility in their field disputes it. But the anti-trans lobby does …. because it is inconvenient …. it would require them to accept transgender as a reality …. and they can’t have that.


  5. ‘If there is a silver lining to the whole GRR fiasco it is that it may have weakened Sturgeon to the point where it is possible she might be persuaded to rethink her her approach. It is certainly worth a try. What else is there for Yes activists to do this year?’

    I share your despondency, Peter, but I am less sanguine that there is even this slimmest hope. There is no chance, zero, that La Sturgeon will be persuaded to actually do anything that would see Scotland departing from the ‘equal’ and ‘voluntary’ Treaty of Union. I cannot see thousands of protestors outside Holyrood and/or Bute house and even if there were to be, so what? Sturgeon has shown she will try to push through Self-ID in the face of the majority of Scotland. The SNP have lost touch with reality, or any purpose, save staying in Office as long as possible. Bags of carrots will materialise…

    Countries resile peacefully from International Treaties all the time. Scotland is a nation – much older than England. It would be absolutely normal and legally correct that Scotland exercise its Claim of Right, and its normal democratic right, just as any other country, to withdraw from this undemocratically engineered Treaty. The SNP have had a mandate for this for years now.

    So, I will put a five pound bet on with you that even your slim hope of a change of tack from Sturgeon and the SNP/Greens that will result in ‘…a rethink of her approach’, will not come about this year. She will hang on, face twitching, behind the reinforced doors of Bute House to the next election while promising her usual lies and hoping for enough votes to continue in the lifestyle she and her husband enjoy so much.

    Sara at Salvo may lead on to something positive. She is the only hope I have. Sorry for being so unsupportive – I know you are shaking your head like me at the state Scotland is in.


  6. “The job of the SNP/Scottish Government is to make sure that there are more things driving up than pushing down”

    One would think so, Peter, but we should not forget the Manichean nature of colonial society and “the desire of the young nationalist bourgeoisie at the decisive moment to reach for compromise within the colonial system”. This “signifies to the intellectual and economic elite of the colonized country that the (native) bourgeoisie has the same interests as them” (Frantz Fanon).

    A colonial administration run by the young nationalist bourgeoisie therefore has only its own interest and that of the colonizer and his institutions in mind, and the mass of impoverished natives hoping for national liberation can go whistle for all they care. Which brings us to the ‘rupture’ in the independence movement.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Peter

    Nicola Sturgeon has pretty much been a failure since she took over. Her record is as bad as any who have come before her from the unionist side. The SNP have been in power too long now in so many ways, they look tired, out of ideas, and bereft of talent. Nicola Sturgeon is a large part of that failure, if not the main cause since 2014. The SNP probably do need some time out of office now but it does hurt the independence cause, more than they have already. There are no easy answers, I don’t vote for them anymore and haven’t since 2017, I have voted Alba in Dundee West although I accept that Alba is a long-term project in many ways if they can keep going as it will take a lot of time for the party. I don’t have any answers, I wish I did, but I do think Nicola Sturgeon has to go now either way, Scotland, whatever happens as far as indy goes is beside the point, we can no longer afford her poor leadership and governance.

    Liked by 2 people

        1. Playground stuff lorncal. Then again, that is the intellectual level of the anti-trans argument.


          1. Says the believer in flat earthism, the sun revolves round the earthism, born in the wrong bodyism, people can actually change sexism, woman facing, larping. No, mate, you are the one with the intellectual black hole that pretends to be a brain. Absolutely not one scintilla of evidence cited. Not one. University? College? You mean, Queer Theory. Cultural Marxism. Pampered children of the pampered middle-class behaving like toddlers in a strop? When did university/college mean that? When did intellectualism become a vacuum where critical thinking became a crime? Oh, I know, when ‘trans’, the purveyors of their own individual and narcissistic truth based on falsehood and lies, where truth means whatever those in power claim it to mean appeared? The very definition of totalitarianism. Nah. ‘Trans’ are power grubbers. Dirty, sleazy power, MBP, larded over generously with sexual fetish. So spare me the moral lectures.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. “…. the intellectual level of the anti-trans argument.”

            And there was me thinking you were just another virtue signaling, self regarding progressive person who has been sold a pup.

            You obviously regard yourself as having a higher intellect than us lesser mortals who strive to think critically.

            And you may be right!

            The guff you posted (FEB 6, 2023 AT 15:11) reminds me of Orwell’s damning, “You’d have to be an intellectual to believe that. No ordinary man could be so stupid.”

            Liked by 2 people

            1. “You obviously regard yourself as having a higher intellect than us lesser mortals who strive to think critically”.

              That’s quite the accusation coming from some one calling themselves “cynicusinexile” and whose avatar appears to be a bust of Socrates.

              I do have a predilection for actual facts though. That is where I have a problem with your claim of “thinking critically”. There is no evidence of “critical thinking” in anything the anti-trans mob have ever claimed. It is all based on an “it’s aye been/stands to reason, dunnit” complete lack of critical thinking.

              If you were thinking critically, you’d be asking why should human psychology be uniquely immune to “anomaly” when every other feature of life on Earth is inherently subject to It? There would be no evolution without it.

              If you were thinking critically, you would be asking why have all the scare stories of sexual predation and erosion of women’s rights not manifested themselves when Gender Recognition Certificates and subsequent access to single sex spaces have been in place in the UK for decades? Why have they not manifested themselves in all the countries, states and jurisdictions around the World that have legislated for “self-id”?

              If you were thinking critically, you’d be asking why the anti-trans lobby has to rely on a campaign of unfounded fearmongering, deliberate misinformation and “pub science” to win the argument if their case is as strong as they claim?

              All I see on threads such as this is a thoughtless parroting of whatever the Rev or, unfortunately, Peter has put in their latest anti-trans blog. No sign of critical thinking or independent thought (apart from lorncal whose thoughts are, I would hope, very much her own). You described me as a “progressive person” as if it was an insult. If you were thinking critically, you would be asking yourself why you consider “progress” a bad thing and, while you were at it, consider what the opposite of progress is and whether you really want to support it. To again paraphrase Pastor Martin Niemöller as I did above;

              “First they came for the trans people, and I did not speak out – because I was not trans ….. “

              It is no coincidence the far right (including the Tory leadership) is “on your side”.


              1. There are literally (good ‘trans’ word, that, as in ‘you are literally killing me by using the wrong pronouns) hundreds of cases. Men larping as women to get out of going to male prison, self-IDed men who went on to murder, sometimes in the most horrible ways. You really don’t want to see the evidence, MBP, just as Nicola and her tribe of morons, self-seekers and venal hangers-on do not want to see it. The Rev does a great deal of digging as do many others: Graham Linehan, Genevieve Gluck, Karen Davis, Posie Parker, Jennifer Bilek, and many others. They have unearthed mountains of evidence to prove that the whole ‘trans’ nonsense is built on sexual lady feelz.

                Why don’t you all stop lying about your sexual motives, but you can never be forgiven what you have done to our youth and our children when you tried to make this a movement about rights – all of which you already have.

                ‘Trans’ identified men have used these innocents as a smokescreen for their own sexual pyrotechnics. I don’t hate ‘trans people because I do not believe they exist – albeit I believe that people with dysphoria exist (a minute number of the ‘trans’) – and I see only larping and sexually and misogynistically motivated men, driven insane by porn-sickness, displaying their fetishes in public, pretending all the while that they are the most marginalised and vulnerable group on the planet.

                Between 100 and 200 women were murdered in the UK last year, and, already, this year, we have seen more, including a beautiful young woman and her toddler girl. Men killed them. Just men. No ‘trans’ identified person was killed in the same time. None. However, ‘trans’ identified men are MEN, a subset of MEN, not women, so they do not get to access our spaces any more than any other MAN. We do not know who is, and who is not, a danger to us and/or our children. That is the whole point. Campaign for your own spaces and rights, services and sports, hospital wards and healthcare, etc.. LEAVE OURS ALONE.


                1. Am I supposed to be shocked that there are evil people within the trans community? No one is pretending every trans person is an angel. Here’s a thought for you; you may be able to cite “hundreds” of trans offenders, I can cite “hundreds of thousands” of non-trans offenders. Millions world-wide.

                  And, hard as you may find this to believe, not one of them found it necessary to have a piece of paper stuffed in a drawer, back at their house, before committing their crimes. Shockingly, as if committing some of the most despicable crimes on the planet wasn’t enough, they also ignore the fact they’re not allowed in women’s toilets ….. I know …. who knew!!?? …. oh yeah, anyone with the ability, and willingness, to see the obvious.

                  If a trans person wants to commit a crime, they have no need of a GRC in order to do it. If that’s what they want to do, they’re already doing it, with or without a GRC. Allowing trans people to self-id will not increase the threat to women from offenders. Obviously it won’t. The evidence from all over the World proves it doesn’t. That you willfuly ignore these obvious facts to continue your bigoted crusade against a tiny minority is …. disappointing.

                  As is your co-opting of the tragic deaths of women murdered by non-trans men as if it was evidence of the threat posed by trans people. Probably because you can’t find one committed by a trans person. It illustrates just how disingenuous and thin the anti-trans argument is.

                  There is so much more wrong, in a pathetic way, with your post here but this one is long enough already.


                  1. The ‘trans’ murdered by the Nazis were transvestites. Modern ‘trans’ claim to be born in the wrong body and other such nonsense, and they refute transvestism because it smacks of the enjoyment of wearing female clothes and accoutrements – i.e. sexual pleasure.

                    If you bothered to read the actual statistics – and the real reason behind changing how the police are changing male to female for ‘trans’ criminals is that they are more likely, not less likely, than the average male to commit a sex crime. Go and do your homework, MBP, before you castigate others.


                    1. Ignoring the offensive first paraqgraph;

                      “If you bothered to read the actual statistics – and the real reason behind changing how the police are changing male to female for ‘trans’ criminals is that they are more likely, not less likely, than the average male to commit a sex crime”.

                      Maybe they are “more likely”, but it is all relative. Trans people are a tiny minority. They could be 10x more likely to commit a crime than non trans and still be a barely registerable proportion of sex offenders. And, as I explained above, any trans person intent on committing a crime has no need of a GRC in order to commit it. Whether GRCs exist or not, sex offenders will continue to commit sex offences until caught. The existence, or not, of a piece of paper in a drawer, that does not need to be presented at any point before entering a public space, will have no effect on women’s safety. Simple demonstrable fact.


  8. Peter: you are right in that the politicians know that our revenge for their betrayal has to be muted if we don’t want to shoot ourselves in the head. I presume that is why they behave like tyrannical toddlers. Grown-up politics has been hi-jacked by these ‘woke’ children and we have few opportunities to put them to bed without any supper now, so we have to content ourselves with trying to find new ways of getting out of the mess we created by electing these narcissistic pompous, self-serving, venal creatures who have let us all down. Not all. Some have discovered that they do actually have a spine and a cranium atop it with a thing called a brain inside. Some of them, at least, are starting to show a bit of spirit again.

    Don’t be fooled, though, by the rest of them. The Greens have been conspicuously silent since their ambassador for female rights had to be removed, blond wig and tight-fitting leggings, et al from Cornton Vale. The Black Pampers and furries, who threatened peaceful women with death – at least on placards – were largely absent from George Square yesterday, and the fetishes were covered up, so they’ve cottoned on that overt displays of what would make most females physically sick has to be hidden out of sight for now.

    It is the calm before the storm because these people will not give up easily, and I fully expect a new front to open up very soon – which is why they have to be totally routed and consigned to history as a temporary form of social madness. Independence, I think, is going to be very difficult to achieve if they are allowed to carry on their merry way. Many seem to think they’re defeated. Nah. They are just reorganising. Had we dealt with them several years back, I think we would be well on the way to independence now. That is just one of the tragedies of this whole, sorry mess we are living through.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. “Had we dealt with them several years back ….. ”

      Words that should give all those sympathetic to the anti-trans argument pause for thought.


  9. Really? Why? Only someone as perverse as you could even think that it meant anything other than getting you all out of the SNP. You are all parasitical, infiltrating interlopers. By all means get out on the streets, but get out there and fight for your own spaces, services, etc. Stop your larping in female spaces, rights, and so on. Why is it so important to you to get access to female spaces, MBP? Do tell. Spoiling the sexual kicks, are we?


    1. Do you really want me to go through all the “troubling” things you’ve posted on this site alone? I have no evidence your desire to have trans people “dealt with” has anything other than sinister overtones.

      As illustrated by your definition of me as a “parasitical infiltrating interloper”. You appear to be pushing the idea I’m a trans person. I can only assume it’s to convince any casual reader of the thread my opinions can therefore be discounted as “well he would say that wouldn’t he”. Even if it were true, it would be balanced by the “well she would say that wouldn’t she” bigot vibe coming from you,

      Sorry, but I’m a happily married, recently retired, heterosexual male with no contact what-so-ever with any trans group or individuals. It’s just another thing you are catastrophically wrong about. So, so many things you are catastrophically wrong about.


      1. I couldn’t care less what you are. That’s the point. I really do not give two hoots whether you are straight, gay, ‘trans’ identified or a red and white striped hornet with a dragon’s tail. Just stop telling women who they must accept in their spaces and rights. They are not yours to give away, you sanctimonious person. Stay the hell out of female spaces, stop larping and stop woman facing. Campaign for third spaces. That is, be ‘trans’, as women are women. Have the courage of their convictions and go for broke as ‘trans’, not women. The vast majority of ‘trans’ identified men are autogynephiles, with relatively few being dysmorphic.. Look it up.

        Others are larping, woman facing, misogynists and men with sexual fetishes/paraphilias, and usually more than one. Rape and sexual assault and paedophilia are at the sharp end of fetishism, while things like filming women while they are peeing or undressed, or flashing or playing ‘girlie’ with sanitary towels, are at the other end, but all are inimical to women with sense and a modicum of dignity and sense of privacy, and, above all, with a sense of who we are as a sex class.

        That so many women support this bilge, and many of them mutilate themselves on the altar of adult men’s fetishistic behaviours is deplorable, but, then, it is women who cut away the sexual organs of girl children in other parts of the world, so self-mutilation and the mutilation of other females is not unknown to women. If this whole lark has taught me anything, it is that women are their own worst enemies.

        Quite why so many women appear to cause harm to other females, usually but not always at the behest of men, is probably a subject for long-term study in paradox. What does appear to be fairly evident with so-called ‘trans’ children is that mothers suffer from narcissistic personality disorder with Munchausen’s-by-proxy or they are terrified of losing their children to suicide, the blackmail of choice for these kids. If left alone, well over 90% will desist, most of them discovering belatedly that they are gay, with a very few choosing to ‘trans’ and the rest straight, but gender non-conforming.

        Every time we call a girl a ‘tomboy’ or a boy a ‘sissy’, we are harming them. They are simply children who do not conform to societal stereotypes, the kind of stereotypes that larping men and sexual fetishists, with their 1950s floozy look and trowelled-on make-up throughly revel in. That they very rarely, if ever, actually pass, is their tragedy, but women have no obligation in this life to validate men who are harming them and invading their spaces and rights.

        They are parasites because they have piggy-backed on women and on gays and on the SNP, and have all but destroyed that party. They need to get off their lardy backsides and fetch for themselves – all of them – although I’d bet my bottom dollar that, if all female spaces and rights were closed off to them, or if surgery became a prerequisite, they would dwindle away like snow off a wall, perhaps not to nothing, but to very few. The whole point in having a sexual fetish is to be able to flaunt it, a la porn world, in women’s spaces. Half the fun of a nice stiffie, is getting it in front of unwilling women – rather like the rapist, in fact, so perhaps the spectrum on which fetishes dwell is not really a spectrum at all, rather like genders. The greater the unwillingness, the greater the thrill, the greater the refusal to co-operate, the greater the escalation of aggression.

        Now, this is Peter’s blog and we are taking it up with this bilge. I won’t answer any more of your trolling comments, so you will be talking to yourself.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. “I couldn’t care less what you are. That’s the point. I really do not give two hoots whether you are straight, gay, ‘trans’ identified or a red and white striped hornet with a dragon’s tail”.

    The fact you made a point of emphasising my “trans identity”, as presumed by you, on several consecutive posts gives the lie to that statement. If you’re going to lie about stuff, don’t brazenly contradict yourself …. at least not in the very next post.

    As to the rest of your customary offensive “Colonel Blimp” response …. meh!


    1. Lorna comes across as an obsessive-cumpulsive old lady and has religious beliefs that smell like they were baked in her handbag in the latter quarter of the last century. Ditto the blogmaster. However, it is a reflection of a swathe of Scottish society. These are the people that kept homosexuality illegal for about the longest time anywhere in northern europe. (That’s right – you could be imprisoned for being a lesbian in 1980 in Scotland, and Scots were mostly in favour of that).

      The government’s tinkering with the GRA isn’t event law. People are havering about a law that was enacted in the distant past that was introduced with the lack of fanfare that it deserved. If you want bigoted right-wing reactionaries: Come to Scotland. We even do the national sport like that (and no homos, lezzers, or trannies play fitba in Scotland, and if they do they’re Catholics).

      The government blaring about this is a result of the scottish government’s lack of anything else – for example: The Scottish government don’t have an education policy. Never mind anything else. A bottle-refund refund scheme is way beyond their abilities. For years and years.

      In this case all they had to do was enact a law with the support of the parliament, and they can’t even do that right.


      1. Totally dishonest, of course. Lorna is more than capable of speaking for herself. But to suggest that I have ever supported the criminalisation of homosexuality is a lie born of profound ignorance and bitter malice. Having established that you are a lying bag of turds, why should we take anything you say seriously?

        Such lies don’t trouble me unduly. When you run a blogsite it’s all but inevitable that you’ll attract the attention of fuckwits such as yourself. I am not as prepared to tolerate abuse of other contributors. There is no heavy-handed moderation here. But there are lines that I will not have crossed by anyone. You may take this as your only warning.


  11. “…you could be imprisoned for being a lesbian in 1980 in Scotland….”


    Physical contact ( which I think you REALLY mean) between lesbians, unlike that between gay men, has never been illegal.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. @Me Bungo Pony FEB 9, 2023 AT 02:20

    Sorry – I have made 4 or 5 attempts, without success, to respond.

    My opening line was “Thank you, I have just won a £10 bet I made with myself”

    The remainder has seemingly vanished in the ether. If Peter comes across it he knows where to attach it.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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.