Scottish Social Attitudes 2025: attitudes to discrimination and positive action

7. Discussion and conclusions

Since the last SSA discrimination report was published in 2015, two issues have been at the forefront of media coverage on equality for minority groups: firstly, the level of immigration to the UK, and appropriate responses to tackle irregular migration^[35]; and secondly, understanding trans rights. The campaign to leave the European Union in 2016 emphasised taking back control of the UK’s borders. The expectation of many who voted to leave the EU was that immigration to the UK would fall, however, while immigration from EU countries has fallen, immigration from outside the EU has risen since 2016. The need for inward migration to Scotland has been seen to be crucial in order to maintain or increase Scotland’s working age population^[36] and offset the challenges which will arise from an otherwise ageing and shrinking population. Although, as this report has shown, the population of Scotland remains divided in its opinions on immigration.

At the same time as legal migration has increased, there has also been an increase in the number of individuals seeking asylum. While this may have more of a direct effect on the south of England, pressures on the asylum system, and debate around UK government policy to deal with this, all have an impact on Scotland.

The issue of trans rights has been perhaps more divisive than that of immigration, as it has been portrayed by some as an erosion of women’s rights. The Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill was introduced in March 2022 with the intention of making legal gender recognition more accessible. There was cross-party support for the Bill in the Scottish Parliament, with the reforms being framed in terms of human rights for trans people. The Bill was passed in December 2022 but was blocked from receiving royal assent by the UK Government, who argued the Bill would adversely affect UK-wide equality law.

Concerns have been raised by some groups about the potential impact of trans rights on women’s single sex spaces. In April 2025 the UK Supreme Court ruled that, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, the words ‘woman’, ‘man’, and ‘sex’ refer to biological woman, biological man, and biological sex. While this has been hailed as a victory by some women’s rights groups, it has been seen as a significant setback by trans advocates which risks increased discrimination for trans people.

The last time that Scottish Social Attitudes explored discrimination in 2015 showed that the predominant trend since 2010 was of a decline in discriminatory attitudes towards a range of minority groups across different contexts. The largest changes between 2010 and 2015 were for those groups who had been subject to the most discrimination in 2010, namely people who cross-dressed, people who had undergone gender reassignment surgery, and gay and lesbian people. The SSA 2025 findings have shown a more complex picture as it has recorded increased levels of acceptability of prejudice, and both increased levels of discrimination against some groups, and a continued decline in levels of discrimination against other groups, which vary depending on the context. For example, LGB+ people saw less discrimination overall, while Gypsy/Travellers saw less discrimination in a work context, but not in terms of relationships. Trans people saw increased discrimination at work.

Acceptability of prejudice

Findings from the 2025 survey show that people were more willing to accept that there may be reasons to be prejudiced than they were in 2015. The proportion of people who said that ‘sometimes there is good reason for people to be prejudiced against certain groups’ increased from 22% in 2015 to 31% in 2025. This is perhaps not surprising, given the media debates around important issues that have highlighted both sides of the argument for and against immigration, and the potential conflict between trans rights and women’s rights.

At the same time, however, there was no real change in attitudes to diversity and attitudes to immigration. A third of people said they would prefer to live in an area where most people are similar to them, and just under half preferred to live in an area with lots of different kinds of people. Two in five agreed that people from outside Britain who come to live in Scotland make the country a better place, while less than one in five disagreed, similar to the figures in 2015.

Who is most at risk of discrimination?

Four groups were identified as being at particular risk of discrimination in 2025: trans people, Gypsy/Travellers, people with severe and enduring mental illness, and older people. Around three in ten people said they would be unhappy if a close relative married or formed a long-term relationship with a trans person, with a Gypsy/Traveller, or with someone who experienced schizophrenia which was under the control of medication. A quarter said they believed a trans person or a Gypsy/Traveller was unsuitable to be a primary school teacher, while a third said someone aged 70 was unsuitable.

Discussion and awareness around gender and sexuality have increased since 2015, allowing a change in wording on specific questions. In 2015, questions were asked about people who had undergone gender reassignment surgery, and also about people who cross-dressed. The term ‘trans’ is now much more widely understood, so in 2025 questions were asked about trans people, but for the purpose of comparisons, this was equated to responses about people who had undergone gender reassignment surgery in earlier years of SSA. In 2025, trans people appeared to face more discrimination than they did in 2015, although less than in 2010. The same pattern was seen for someone aged 70, in terms of their suitability as a primary school teacher.

In both 2010 and 2015, Gypsy/Travellers had been deemed the most unsuitable as a primary school teacher, but by 2025 they were facing less discrimination in this context. However, compared with 2015, far fewer people said they would be happy for a close relative to marry or be in a long-term relationship with a Gypsy/Traveller, although the increase was in those who reported that they would be ‘neither happy nor unhappy’, whereas the proportion being ‘unhappy’ remained the same. As discussed in Chapter 3, there was a general increase in the more neutral ‘neither happy nor unhappy’ category, although the reason for this is not clear.

Other groups were facing similar levels of, or perhaps slightly less, discrimination than they were in 2015, and certainly less than in 2010. Only a small number of cases of discriminatory attitudes towards Black and Asian people were recorded in SSA 2025, but that does not mean that discrimination against this group is no longer an issue. Many White people indicated they would rather live in an area where people are similar to themselves. Discrimination against Muslims as well as discrimination against immigrants also remained evident, although this is not necessarily based on race.

There are also multiple levels of discrimination highlighted by the survey. Muslims, Jewish people, people who experience depression, and gay, lesbian or bisexual people were all facing less direct discrimination than in 2010, especially the last group. However, at the same time, fewer people in Scotland were happy that a close family member married or formed a long-term relationship with each of these groups in 2025 than they were in 2010, with a large rise in the proportion reporting they would be ‘neither happy nor unhappy’ across the same time period. For example, while 15% of people in 2025 said they would be unhappy if a close relative married or formed a long-term relationship with a Muslim, down from 23%, only 37% said they would be happy, down from 47%, with a large rise in the neutral position.

Different contexts

SSA 2025 examined discriminatory attitudes in a variety of contexts: family, work, local area, and Scotland as whole. Comparable questions in the context of family and work suggested that in the more personal, family situation, people had a greater tendency to exhibit discriminatory attitudes, although there was a very strong association between attitudes towards the same groups across different contexts. More people said that they would be unhappy if a trans person, a Gypsy/Traveller, a Muslim or a Black or Asian person married into the family or formed a long-term relationship with a close family member than said that such a person would be unsuitable as a primary school teacher.

Within the employment context, respondents differentiated between a range of different situations, showing that they were thinking about specifics, rather than demonstrating fixed beliefs about particular groups. For example, far more people felt that someone aged 70 would be unsuitable as a primary school teacher than thought older people should be forced to retire from work.

There was also differentiation in terms of approaches to support under-represented groups in the workplace. While the majority thought it fair to provide additional opportunities for training and qualifications for particular groups that might help them progress in their careers, a much lower proportion thought it fair to give an automatic interview to a disabled job applicant.

A further example of workplace interventions was additional paid leave for mothers and fathers to take when their young child was unwell. While slightly more people were in favour of this for mothers rather than fathers, support was near universal for both.

Attitudes towards immigration also showed a level of complexity, with some respondents clearly differentiating between immigration and immigrants. Almost half thought that immigration to Scotland should be reduced. In contrast, only one in six disagreed that people coming to live in Scotland from outside the UK make the country a better place. Regression analysis showed that feelings about the contribution of immigrants was a very strong predictor of feelings about immigration.

Different attitudes

There are three different groups of people identified in SSA in terms of the extent to which they hold discriminatory attitudes. One group demonstrates discriminatory attitudes towards a range of different minorities, across different contexts. They tend to prefer to live in areas with people similar to themselves, to be negative about the impact of immigration, to show concern about different minority groups both in a work and a family context. They also feel that there is sometimes good reason to be prejudiced. They are more likely to be male, older, heterosexual, and have a religious identity. Societal and cultural norms can reinforce such attitudes, particularly where there is a lack of diversity. One thing that is clear from the SSA data is that people who know someone from a minority group are less likely to demonstrate prejudice against that group.

A second group holds very few discriminatory attitudes. They are largely in favour of immigration, of positive action in the workplace, like to live in diverse areas, and would be happy to be related to all sorts of people or have someone from a minority group teaching their children. They are more likely to be younger, female, not religious and gay, lesbian or bisexual.

The majority of people fall into the third group, who demonstrate some discriminatory attitudes. They may have particular concerns in specific situations or about specific groups. However, these are less likely to be as deep rooted as they might be for the first group. Many of these people agree that Scotland should do all it can to eliminate prejudice, hence they may be willing to adjust their own behaviour and attitudes.