Scots pro-trans group launches bizarre defence of ‘men who can BREASTFEED'
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
A TRANS lobby group funded by the Scottish Government has been blasted for moaning that the rights of males 'who are able to breastfeed' are at risk after the Supreme Court ruling on gender.
Scottish Trans has raised concerns over the protections available to those who have transitioned seeking pregnancy and maternity support.
1
Scottish Trans has complained that the EHRC's consultation threatens the rights of men "who are able to breastfeed"
Credit: Getty
The charity's complaints came in a response to watchdog the Equality and Human Rights Commission's consultation on a new code of practice for interpreting the law.
But Susan Smith, from For Women Scotland, blasted the controversial practice of men who have transitioned to women breastfeeding.
The campaigner said: 'Men who do this should be investigated for putting the health of a baby at risk.'
Scottish Trans, part of the Equality Network, has received hundreds of thousands of pounds of Scottish Government funding in the past decade.
The charity said they 'strongly disagree' with EHRC's statement that the explanation of the legal rights and responsibilities set out in the new content defining sex at birth is clear.
It has published a response, complaining that there is 'now significant uncertainty following the ruling on whether trans women who are able to breastfeed can access pregnancy and maternity protection if they experience discrimination.
'We think that if they are unable to access these protections as a result of the ruling, that this is a further significant impact on trans people's equality and protection from discrimination, that the Commission has a statutory duty to highlight.'
The group added: 'In addition, there is now significant uncertainty, following the Supreme Court ruling, on whether trans women who are able to breastfeed can access protection under section 13(6)(a) of the Equality Act if they experience discrimination because of this.
'We think that if they are unable to, as a result of the ruling, that this is a further significant negative impact on trans people's equality and protection from discrimination, that the Commission has a statutory duty to highlight.'
Transgender women claim to be able to breastfeed, a process known as induced lactation, through therapy that mimics the hormonal changes of pregnancy.
Man, 39, dies in hospital after 'major incident' in Scots town as cops lock down street & arrest suspect
Medications such as estrogen and progesterone are often used to stimulate breast tissue development, followed by a transition to a medication called domperidone and a reduction in estrogen, to trigger milk production.
But activists have voiced safety and nutrition concerns over trans women breastfeeding.
Ms Smith said: 'Scottish Trans didn't seem worried when the Scottish Government lawyers argued that pregnant women who identified as men should lose all legal protection to maternity rights, but they have sprung into action to defend men who want to feed drug-induced discharge to babies.
'Women are routinely told that they should avoid alcohol and medication while breastfeeding, so far from being encouraged and protected, men who do this should be investigated for putting the health of a baby at risk.'
Scottish Tory shadow minister for equalities, Tess White MSP, said: 'This is absolutely ludicrous. The Supreme Court's ruling in April couldn't be clearer; sex is based on biology.
'It's simply a matter of common sense that only women can become pregnant and breastfeed healthy milk to a baby. Health and Safety are paramount.
'It is vital John Swinney and his Ministers ensure that public bodies are upholding the law rather than bowing to irrational gender self-ID zealotry.'
In April, Supreme Court judges clarified that sex in equality law is based on biological sex — not whatever gender a person says they are.
It came after a challenge by feminist group For Women Scotland, who defeated the Scottish Government in court.
SNP ministers had argued that anyone with a gender recognition certificate should be treated as the sex they say they are, for all purposes.
New guidance related to the ruling and how organisations should act is now being drawn up by the EHRC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Welsh Government ‘disobeying Supreme Court trans ruling'
The Welsh Government has been accused of disobeying the Supreme Court gender judgment. A human resources document for the devolved administration on 'trans inclusion' continues to claim 'trans women are women'. That is despite the country's highest court ruling in April that transgender women are not legally women. The Supreme Court ruled that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act refers only to biological sex, not to a person's gender identity. But in the document, the Welsh Government said: 'The Welsh government's policy position is that trans women are women, trans men are men, and non-binary identities are valid. 'As an employer, the Welsh government civil service aims to be an inclusive and diverse workplace where everyone feels able to be their true selves.' The document, which was published before the judgment but remains in use, was branded 'clearly unlawful' by gender-critical campaigners. Cathy Larkman, lead for the Women's Rights Network in Wales, told The Telegraph: 'We are aware of this clearly unlawful policy, which reflects the long-held and deeply entrenched position of Welsh Government. 'We have long pointed out to them that their ideological approach has harmful impacts on the rights of women and girls in Wales.' Darren Millar, leader of the Welsh Conservatives, said: 'Biological sex is a clear and important legal concept that must be respected. That the Welsh Labour Government appears to be ignoring the Supreme Court's ruling is totally unacceptable. 'A government that cannot properly distinguish between men and women, and fails to uphold the law, has no place running our public services. 'It is clearer than ever that Wales needs a new government that will protect women's rights, take action on single-sex spaces, women-only sports and fairness in employment policies and practices.' The Welsh Government has maintained that it was still 'considering' the Supreme Court judgment despite almost three months having passed since it was given. Elsewhere in the document, the government commits to editing 'all' transgender staff records to match their transgender identity – even when they do not have a gender recognition certificate (GRC) and therefore have not formally changed gender. 'A person does not require a GRC to live in their affirmed gender – the GRA [Gender Recognition Act] only confers legal recognition of that gender in certain areas,' it reads. The document later adds: 'The Welsh Government will amend all records to match an employee's affirmed gender although HMRC and Pension provisions may only be changed following the receipt of a GRC.' The document also says that non-binary staff who are required to wear workwear will be given male and female versions. 'Where gendered items are part of the uniform, staff can mix and match as they wish,' the document reads. 'Where non-binary staff require both a 'uniform A' and 'uniform B', this will be provided.' Maya Forstater, chief executive of Sex Matters, said: 'This is a ticking time bomb for the Welsh Government. It's as if the For Women Scotland judgment hasn't happened. It ignores the established legal position that 'woman' and 'man' are defined by biological sex. 'Non-binary identities are certainly not recognised in law. This nonsensical policy would not withstand a legal challenge.' A spokesman for the Welsh Government said: 'The document referred to predates the Supreme Court ruling. 'As an employer, we are working to understand the implications of the ruling on our policies and practices and will be guided by the revised statutory EHRC Code of Practice once it is published.'
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Hate crime probe as migrant effigies burned on loyalist bonfire
There has been widespread condemnation from politicians and church leaders to the display on the bonfire in Moygashel, County Tyrone, which was set alight on Thursday night. The boat on top of the pyre contained more than a dozen life-sized mannequins wearing life jackets, while below it were placards saying 'stop the boats' and 'veterans before refugees'. Amnesty International's Northern Ireland director Patrick Corrigan said: 'It is shameful that the authorities allowed this despicable display of hate to go ahead. READ MORE: BBC issues correction after Scottish Government driving tests claim 'What a shocking message to send to local migrant families. 'It is just weeks since migrant families were forced to flee for their lives when their homes were attacked and set on fire – a chilling pattern of escalating hostility. 'The authorities must treat this as a hate crime, conduct a full investigation and ensure those responsible are held to account.' Corrigan added: 'Racism, xenophobia, and hate have no place here – and that must be made unmistakably clear.' Police said on Thursday they had received a number of reports regarding the bonfire in Moygashel and the material on it. A spokesperson said: 'Police are investigating this hate incident. 'Police are here to help those who are or who feel vulnerable, to keep people safe. 'We do this by working with local communities, partners, elected representatives and other stakeholders to deliver local solutions to local problems, building confidence in policing and supporting a safe environment for people to live, work, visit and invest in Northern Ireland, but we can only do so within the legislative framework that exists.' Colm Gildernew called the effigy burning 'abhorrent' (Image: Supplied) Sinn Fein MLA Colm Gildernew said the bonfire 'was clearly intended to dehumanise people who come to our island seeking a better life'. He added: 'The effigies and displays were abhorrent, driven by vile, far-right and racist attitudes. 'I welcome that police are treating this as a hate incident. It's vital those responsible are held accountable for their disgusting actions. 'Diversity, inclusion and equality must always triumph over xenophobia and hate.' The Moygashel bonfire has become well known in recent years for contentious displays. Last year, a mock police car was burnt on the top of the bonfire and in 2023 a boat designed to represent the post-Brexit Irish Sea economic border was torched. Earlier this week, prominent loyalist activist Jamie Bryson said the bonfire was a form of 'artistic protest'. 'Every year Moygashel bonfire combines artistic protest with their cultural celebration,' he posted on social media. 'Their yearly art has itself become a tradition. This year the focus is on the scandal of mass illegal immigration.'
The Herald Scotland
5 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Scottish Greens at the crossroads – principle or pragmatism?
Fergus Ewing, the former SNP Minister, previously dismissed them as 'wine-bar revolutionaries'. To each and every taunt, Green politicians tend to respond with a gentle, faintly supercilious smile. Read More: In truth, the most fervent advocates of Greenery can occasionally seem a mite smug. Like religious adherents, they can sometimes give the impression that their path is the way to truth, while others are self-deluded. Only very occasionally, mind. And they mean well. They genuinely believe, as they set out in their 2024 election manifesto, that 'we are hurtling towards climate hell.' Such a conclusion tends to lessen the scope for nuanced politics. But, alongside that, there is also an intriguing conundrum confronting the Scottish Greens right now as they elect their next leaders and contemplate the pending Holyrood elections. Are they content to be, principally, a party of voluble protest? Or is there pragmatism too – an opportunity to cut deals with other parties, such as the SNP or Labour, in pursuit of interim Green objectives? As The Herald has ably chronicled, there are those in the party who argue that the Greens must present a fully radical agenda, who distrust Holyrood compromise, including the Bute House pact previously struck by the retiring leadership. Equally, though, there are prominent Greens who lampoon such talk as 'heroic Bolshevik insurgency' – which achieves precisely nothing for the people of Scotland. Politics is frequently a question of balancing principle, pragmatism and power. Just ask those Labour MPs who found it impossible to back their leader's demands for welfare cuts. Again, commonly, that balance becomes trickier as a party gains more salience. It is relatively easy to be pure of thought when what you say and do is immaterial. That tends to change when there is the prospect that your contribution could alter Parliamentary arithmetic, could advance or thwart legislation, could sustain or oust a government. Then you have to choose. To compromise. You have to acknowledge that you cannot implement every line of your manifesto. Not least because the people did not vote for you in sufficient numbers. Be clear. The Greens will not abandon principle. They will still, on occasion, sport that knowing smile. But perhaps they may once more seek a mandate to enter negotiations with others. Is that feasible? Are the Greens not burned by Humza Yousaf's abrupt decision as First Minister to end the Bute House pact and kick them out of government? Seems not. One senior source dismissed the notion that they were 'nursing some raw fury at the SNP.' I was told that there is a good 'transactional' relationship with Team Swinney, as evidenced by the negotiations over the Scottish Government budget. The Greens know that John Swinney does not share their overall outlook. For example, he believes firmly in pursuing GDP economic growth while they do not, insisting that was excluded from the Bute House deal. First Minister John Swinney (Image: PA) And, yes, perhaps the relationship with Nicola Sturgeon was deeper. She is arguably closer to the Green perspective. After all, in a lecture, she previously set out the concept of assessing 'well-being', rather than simply economic wealth. But it seems the Greens could still work with John Swinney, where necessary. There is, I was told, 'sufficient mutual trust and respect.' There could also be a deal with Labour, arithmetically. But core Labour policies might be problematic – not least their eager advocacy of nuclear power. For now, the SNP seem more likely partners. After all, both parties support Scottish independence. Albeit with differing degrees of vigour. Frankly, I do not believe that Green politicians get up in the morning with the first thought that they must end the Union. Their waking focus is on the environment and climate change. Still, the Greens insist that they back independence, placing it in the context of those environmental aims. They say that an independent Scotland would be better placed to alter energy policy and tackle the climate crisis. And there is another thought lurking at the back of Green minds. They note that John Swinney has faced a degree of internal SNP criticism from those who believe he is not sufficiently fervent in pursuing independence. One source suggested to me that this might present an opportunity for the Greens to highlight their independence credentials. Frankly, to prise votes from the SNP. However, as with Mr Swinney, it seems the Greens want to get away from discourse over the independence process. To build support instead for the proclaimed advantages of the notion. Again, though, the Greens will not shed their iconoclastic image. They will continue to position themselves as challenging the wealthy establishment. An opportunity to do that presents itself with President Trump's possible Scottish visit. Many leading politicians will be torn between mounting protests and arguing Scotland's interests, if given a chance. No such dilemma confronts the Greens – who will be firmly behind the barricades. But, still, there is the lure of pragmatism. I expect the Greens to enter the next Holyrood elections with a litany of claimed achievements and a taste of what more could be feasible, if they are granted influence. Always a degree of grandiloquence on the climate. But a focus on cutting costs for working families. Rent controls, free bus travel for young people, secured by the Greens in partnership with the SNP. This leadership election will determine who is primarily making that case. Patrick Harvie is standing down as co-convener. Lorna Slater is seeking re-election. As I write, MSPs Ross Greer and Gillian Mackay are also in the frame. Others may emerge. En passant, I should note that the winners will not necessarily be one woman, one man, as in the past. That reflects revised equality guidance. But political balance will still be at the core of this contest. What direction will the Scottish Greens pursue? And could it lead them back to shared power at Holyrood? Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre – and Dundee United FC
