Readers' letters: Using 'old fashioned' words should not be a 'hate crime'

Historical accuracy now seems to carry little weight as a defence against accusations. Without actually being part of one or other of the minority groups that may or may not level the accusation of “hate crime” against oneself, how is one supposed to know exactly what language is acceptable?

We live in a society where one can buy soap powders with several different names, yet which do basically the same job when washing clothes. However the media pushed along by minority groups seem to want to change the meaning of traditional and well-understood words like “marriage” to now have totally different meanings, leading to confusion. Why aren’t we able to invent new words to match these new liaisons like “garriage”, “larriage”, trarriage, etc?

H Belda, Edinburgh

Open debate

Rather than “shutting the door on debate”, as Susan Smith wrote (Letters, 8 April), the Equality Network engaged publicly and at quite some length in the debate on the Hate Crime Bill back in 2021.

We opposed the amendment that Ms Smith mentioned (which was voted down by a large majority of MSPs). In our briefing on it for MSPs, we pointed out that it was unnecessary – misgendering someone would in any case not be a crime under the Bill (as recent events have confirmed). But we also said that by singling out the misgendering of trans people, and writing into the Bill “this particular thing is OK to do”, the amendment would have added onto the face of the Bill a specific encouragement to be offensive and unkind to trans people.

Imagine if it was proposed to pick one of the more offensive racist things that could be said without actually committing a crime, and then to pass a law that specifically said, “It is not a crime to say...”. That would not change what is and is not criminal, but it would be an unacceptable blot on the statute book, and might encourage more racism.

There is too much deliberate unpleasantness already, on these and other subjects. Rather than encourage it, it would be better to be a bit more generous towards other and diverse people.

Tim Hopkins, Edinburgh

Level playing field

It has taken many years to bring opportunity and credibility to sport for women and girls. All this progress can very quickly be undone if transgender women and girls are permitted to take part in female sport where there is timing, recording or prizes awarded.

Every transgender person included means a biological female has been excluded. This applies at all levels, not just for elite athletes. Every time this happens a big step backwards for women and girls sports occurs.

Physically a transgender woman can never be the same as a biological woman. They may appear to be a female but physically are still male.

Be transgender and live your life, but not at the expense of biological women and girls in sport. The not yet equal opportunity for women and girls has been so hard won .

Name and address supplied

Delayed discharge

The SNP are failing to meet their promise of eradicating delayed discharge from hospitals. The latest statistics show that more than 1,900 patients were delayed from being discharged in February, while almost 450,000 fewer operations have been carried out since the start of the pandemic.

The failure to eradicate delayed discharge only increases the risk of patients becoming ill, and these delays also have a significant impact on other frontline NHS services.

It has been nine years since the SNP promised to end delayed discharge. Health Secretary Neil Gray cannot fail to act on this alarming trend and must finally deliver on his party’s promises.

Cllr Alastair Redman, Port Charlotte, Argyll and Bute

Shop around

News that the new Uniqlo store on Princes Street will open shortly reminds me of a holiday trip a few years ago to Tokyo.

Visiting one of the main shopping streets in the city we came across a Uniqlo store and entered for a look around. It was a large store with a number of floors each accessed by escalator. As you reached the top of each escalator there was a notice giving the floor number and an indication of what was to be found on that level.

As we reached Floor 4 we were amused to read “Women Clean”. Our amusement was nothing compared to Floor 5 where apparently “Women’s Bottoms” were available.

Much to look forward to in the new store!

Graham Winchester, Edinburgh

Renewables hope

Ian Moir (Letters, 5 April), waits a long time to respond to my letter (2 March). He then attributes to me, in quotes, words I didn’t use about an energy source, wind farms, I didn’t mention. He says I made a claim about a section of society I didn’t mention. If we are to have debates in the letters pages it would be good to have them on the basis of what correspondents say, not invention.

What I did say of significance was: “Burning fossil fuels increases global temperatures; that brings flood, drought and fire as well as an onward march to ever more catastrophic environmental tipping points. Renewables offer the possibility of a liveable planet for us, our children and future generations.” I am happy to defend that comment.

Tom Ballantine, Edinburgh

Thin blue line

I am tired of hearing Scottish Government spokespeople saying that Police Scotland is receiving record funding and there are more police officers per head of population in Scotland than in England and Wales.

These comments seem irrelevant when we are told that the numbers of officers policing our streets are at a 15-year low. It’s little wonder that policing unions are warning of increases in organised crime and terrorism as the lack of contact between dwindling community officers and the public is leading to gaps in crucial intelligence gathering (Scotsman, 9 April).

The burach that former Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill left when he “reorganised” Scottish policing seems set to continue with the public at the receiving end of a reactive rather than proactive service. And this was the situation even before Humza Yousaf inflicted his confused and flawed Hate Crime Act on an unsuspecting public!

Bob MacDougall, Kippen, Stirling

Two’s plenty

SNP MP Alison Thewliss has called for an end to “unnecessary suffering” caused by the two-child benefit cap (Scotsman, 6 April). She is being devious.

There is no limit on the number of children parents and carers can claim for children born before 5 April 2017. Child benefit is now £25.60 a week for the eldest and £16.95 a week for each additional child. However, families with children born after 5 April 2017 were subject to the two-child limit.

Why should population growth be encouraged when we are told there is a climate emergency? People cause greenhouse gases. Why should taxpayers fund the lifestyle of those who have more children, many of whom do not work but get child benefit, Universal Credit and housing benefits? Alison Thewliss should be told “two is plenty”.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow, West Lothian

Joining the jet set

It is not only “Air Miles Angus” Robertson of the SNP who helps pollute our precious atmosphere with unnecessary long distance flights to conduct “business” that could quite easily have been done by Zoom. And at far less cost to us all, in every sense.

Now the Scottish Parliament’s Presiding Officer has jumped on the jumbo jet bandwagon. She had with her several others from Holyrood, who appeared happy to board a carbon-disgorging gravy train flight for their turn at the endless trough of goodies in the Big Apple during Tartan Week and elsewhere, all paid for by Scottish taxpayers on top of their movie-star salaries. Not much restraint to set as an example in a cash crisis there.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh

National disgrace

The Grand National three-day meeting starts tomorrow: an event which has claimed the lives of 63 horses since 2000. The famous Grand National race on Saturday is notoriously dangerous; 16 horses have been killed in this race since 2000.

Whilst many punters go home having had a “fun day out”, many horses will be going “home” with traumatic injuries, or not going home at all. Those horses “lucky”enough to survive, can face an uncertain and bleak future. Currently, on average, around £130 is allocated for the aftercare of each horse leaving racing, meaning that brutal “disposal” methods of these beautiful animals are common – countless horses spend their last moments alive enduring the horrors of the slaughterhouse.

Nina Copleston-Hawkens, Animal Aid, Tonbridge, Kent

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.