Friday, 27 August 2010

Today's Non-Story




The Law Society of Scotland is looking at creating an affiliated group for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) members.

Several members have shown an interest in such a group and research recently conducted by the Society suggests that between 3 and 4% of all members consider themselves to be gay, lesbian or bisexual and 4% currently live and work in the opposite gender to that assigned to them at birth.

Research conducted on behalf of the Law Society of England and Wales (LSEW) has recommended that a semi-anonymous group for gay and lesbian lawyers should be set up or endorsed by LSEW. This is partly in response to conclusion that there still exists considerable overt and covert discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the legal profession.

Neil Stevenson of the Society:

...In particular, we are asking if there is a need for such a group, what kind of support should be provided by the Society and what the remit of the group should be? For example, should it be simply a social grouping or should it be supported to campaign and promote?”


Campaign and promote? Do they consider promoting the legal profession as having an LGBT group will encourage young people of become lawyers? Doesn't this show that 4 or 5 years of university education doesn't necessarily provide anyone with a modicum of common sense.

As long as both societies pay for these groups from member subscriptions and not some form of government funding I have no complaint. In fact I don't have the slightest interest.

If you want to read a dramatic account of the report from a Scottish daily tabloid, you can do so here. It just as uninteresting. Why can't the LGBT members of our society accept nobody is interested in their 'plight' these days, because there is no 'plight'. Others won the battles long before them.

15 comments:

RMcGeddon said...

Surely there are already enough bent lawyers in Scotland without this nonsense.

" 4 or 5 years of university education doesn't necessarily provide anyone with a modicum of common sense."

" Common sense" is now an oxymoron.

subrosa said...

Indeed it is an oxymoron RM, much to my dismay.

Joe Public said...

1. "4% currently live and work in the opposite gender to that assigned to them at birth."

That seems a very high percentage. Have they a source from amongst their menbers to substantiate that claim?

2. Presumably the 92% - 93% of straight members could also create an affiliated group of normal lawyers?

Elaine said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Elaine said...

Joe Public said...
1. "4% currently live and work in the opposite gender to that assigned to them at birth."
.
Statistics Joe, they can say anything I think in this case the actual figure will be -3-4% are lgbt and 3-4% of the lgbt members currently live and work in the opposite gender to that assigned to them at birth."

selsey.steve said...

I like the idea of a list of the benders, stabbers and rug-munchers. I'll know who to avoid.

Joe Public said...

Hi Elaine

The press report states "....while another four per cent were transsexuals."

i.e. on top of the 3% to 4% LBBT.

Sorry, but I do not believe 1 in 25 is 'wrongly designated'. I think someone's pulling someone else's plonker, to coin a phrase. [Or maybe they tried to, but couldn't find it.]

Witterings From Witney said...

SR, surely you realise that all these 'minority' equality groups get these 'queer' ideas, so why the surprise?

Wise up young lady - it is all part of the 'bureaucratic subservient plan' that that section of society has dreamed up to ensure their continued employment!

As an aside, I do trust you will accept the compliment of 'young lady' from one who considers himself a 'young man'? Do let us dream together - please?!

subrosa said...

There could have been a blind questionnaire Joe but I've no idea how they find out such personal details. Does it make them better lawyers, that's the question.

subrosa said...

My filing cabinet is full of more interesting paper steve. ;)

subrosa said...

I'm not surprised WFW. That's why it's entitled a non-story. It has no interest for the greater majority. Why do they need this publicity is one question.

WFW, we can dream together anytime. :)

Joe Public said...

SR 23:06 "Does it make them better lawyers, that's the question."

Not necesarily, but it might indicate up to 4% are liars.

subrosa said...

Maybe you should have said 'at least 4% are liars' Joe. Over the years I've had promises from lawyers which have never seen the light of day.

strapworld said...

Subrosa, I do think this should be encouraged. I also am of the view that different groupings should wear wigs of particular colours, so that we can identify them easily.

Obviously Gay and Lesbian should wear Pink. Hetrosexuals could wear Blue tinted wigs and Transexuals could have a Pink with Blue tinted wig.

Such an arrangement would liven up the dour courtrooms and bring a little mirth into judicial matters.

Clerks would not be allowed to display their particular leanings as people may believe they would be in league with the counsel!

Judges must dress a little more flamboyantly, Large multi coloured wigs -to show they are truly independent-A wonderful robe, just like Joseph's technicolour robe!!

Goodness, Subrosa, you have made the prospect of Justice becoming show business.

Perhaps the jury could be a resident choir, wearing purple cassocks and multi coloured ruffles!!

The start of all sessions could be opened by a musical rendation of 'Here comes the judge'

subrosa said...

What a wonderful thought strapworld.

Just a wee point - isn't Justice already show business? Seems like it to me. :)

Related Posts with Thumbnails