WE know now how to frighten a politician. You need to ask questions about women, such as ‘What is a woman?’ or ‘Is a woman an adult human female?’
The donkeys that lead us writhe and kick as if stung by a hornet. Latest to be caught is Sir Keir Starmer, leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition, who was struck dumb by the complexity of Andrew Marr’s query ‘Is it transphobic to say only women have a cervix?’
Sir Keir looked to the ground. He paused. What to say? Who might I upset? Then he brayed, ‘It is something that shouldn’t be said. It is not right.’ So much for the workings of the forensic mind.
His feeble utterances came the weekend before the Labour party conference in Brighton, the prospect of which so intimidated Canterbury MP Rosie Duffield that she stayed away. Ms Duffield had incensed trans activists by declaring what we all know, viz that ‘only women have a cervix’; the outcome was that her comrades branded her a ‘transphobe’.
In an oleaginous display of faux paternalism Sir Keir explained to Andrew Marr that he ‘spoke to Rosie’, telling her she would be safe. Potty-mouthed Angela Rayner, deputy enforcer, promised ‘robust’ disciplinary action against any party member targeting Ms Duffield. Good to know when the fists and the size 13 stilettos start to fly.
Sir Keir’s response made clear that he is a man without principle, lacking any leadership qualities: in that, he is consistent with the majority of the political class. He has, in the past, taken the knee for Black Lives Matter but now runs for cover when asked to stand up for women and girls.
A trained legal mind, he stresses: ‘We need to have a mature, respectful debate about trans rights and we need to bear in mind that the trans community are amongst the most marginalised and abused communities, and wherever we’ve got to on the law, we need to go further.’ Waffle, avoid and dissemble.
Sajid Javid, Health Secretary and confirmed proponent, opposer and denier of Covid passports (perm any two of three) pushed through the door that Sir Keir had left ajar, accusing him of a ‘total denial of scientific fact’ and scoffed at the prospect of him running Our NHS. Who says irony is dead?
Anneliese Dodds, chair of the Labour Party and newly appointed shadow women and equalities minister, pledged to reform the Gender Recognition Act to allow people to self-identify with a gender different from that at their birth.
She bleated that ‘One in five LGBT+ (I think she omitted Q and I – there will be hell to pay) workers are the target of negative comments or conduct from colleagues at work and one in three trans people face the same.’ Negative comments from colleagues at work – grow up.
Usually, this standard denial of biological truth from socialists would be water off a duck’s back but the past few days have brought an unusually high number of assaults on womanhood that are noteworthy.
The Lancet, once a respected medical journal, joined the mass gender psychosis declaring on the front page of its current issue: ‘Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected.’
Such was the adverse reaction that Richard Horton, the editor-in-chief, was embarrassed into issuing an apology. Unfortunately it was the usual mealy-mouthed ‘I’m sorry if you are upset’ condescension.
I include his ‘apology’ in its entirety.
‘I would like to thank all those who have responded to the words on this week’s Lancet cover and understand the strength of feeling it has provoked. The Lancet strives for maximum inclusivity of all people in its vision for advancing health. In this instance, we have conveyed the impression that we have dehumanised and marginalised women. Those who read The Lancet regularly will understand that this would never have been our intention. I apologise to our readers who were offended by the cover quote and the use of those same words in the review. At the same time, I want to emphasise that transgender health is an important dimension of modern health care, but one that remains neglected. Trans people regularly face stigma, discrimination, exclusion, and poor health, often experiencing difficulties accessing appropriate health care. The exhibition review from which The Lancet cover quote was taken is a compelling call to empower women, together with non-binary, trans, and intersex people who have experienced menstruation, and to address the myths and taboos that surround menstruation. The review, like the exhibition, puts these myths and taboos into historical context. The review calls for greater efforts to overcome the lack of knowledge and stigma too often associated with menstruation. These are serious issues that demand serious actions. We encourage people to read the full review and support a growing movement against menstrual shame and period poverty.’
On September 24 the US House of Representatives approved the Women’s Health Protection Act, an innocuous-sounding piece of legislation to ‘protect abortion services and pre-empt many restrictions that Republican states have passed’.
The Democratic-controlled House voted along party lines and practising Catholic Nancy Pelosi celebrated the win. The latest figures on abortion in the US 2020 provided data from only 49 states for 2018 but showed 619,591 abortions. The actual annual figure is likely to be in excess of 1million. You can bet, despite what trans activists claim, that only women underwent those procedures.
Wednesday’s TCW Defending Freedom Talking Point covered the move by the United Nations Women’s Organisation to distance itself further from its richly funded core objective to ‘deliver for women and girls and seek equality for all’. It now seeks to ban ‘binary’ terms such as ‘women’ or ‘men’: female is taboo.
The organisation has long since been captured by woke extremists and is in danger of losing its way in thrall to transgender activists who claim priority over others.
In Scotland, the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill will introduce a new system for obtaining legal gender recognition. It will remove the requirement for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and permit men to access women’s safe spaces. It will compromise women’s existing sex-based rights.
If women, as a sex, can be negated and denied any historical, social, legal or biological distinction – then all of humanity is in deep trouble.