Watch your backs, women! And mind what you say, too!

Recent­ly, we’ve all wit­nessed the devel­op­ment of a rather strange phe­nom­e­non in the world of the oh-so-enlight­ened West. That phe­nom­e­non stems from the rather per­verse deci­sion of a num­ber of states to pay for peo­ple with men­tal dis­or­ders to have their bod­ies pumped full of hor­mones before allow­ing extreme­ly spe­cialised sur­geons to lop bits off and sew dif­fer­ent bits on. Yes, the seem­ing­ly unstop­pable fad of allow­ing an infin­i­tes­i­mal­ly micro­scop­ic speck of a nanoscop­ic, titchy group of soci­ety to dic­tate what the rest of us should feel, think, and most impor­tant­ly, say about one of the small­est groups to be found in soci­ety, has changed soci­eties locat­ed to the West of us in ways which would have been hard to pre­dict even just a few years ago​.Now, obvi­ous­ly, the deci­sion to fund the ver­i­ta­ble vol­un­tary van­dal­iza­tion of someone’s body has led to the cre­ation of Christ alone knows how many mon­sters à la Franken­stein, but put that dis­turb­ing thought to one side for now, for­get the amount of mon­ey that is being poured down the drain as a result of the pop­u­lar­i­ty of this con­cept in the West, and con­sid­er things from a slight­ly dif­fer­ent angle.

In the UK ear­li­er this year, there was a cer­tain amount of entire­ly pre­dictable media ker­fuf­fle as a result of an instruc­tion giv­en to mid­wives at an NHS hos­pi­tal to stop using terms such as “breast­feed­ing” and “breast­milk”, as these terms had been judged to be dis­crim­i­na­to­ry to trans­gen­der women. In place of “breast­feed­ing” and “breast­milk” alter­na­tives were sug­gest­ed: “chest­feed­ing” and “chest­milk”. Fur­ther, the word “moth­er” was seen to be a poten­tial cause of offence for those who didn’t real­ly fit the tra­di­tion­al idea of moth­ers (i.e. men with alter­ations), and so “birthing par­ent” was offered as a replacement.

Of course, the whole mess was due to a woke do-good­er, not a trans­gen­der per­son them­selves, but some­one who had under­tak­en to fight the good fight on their behalf, stick­ing their nose in where it was nei­ther want­ed nor required, and caus­ing a ver­i­ta­ble tsuna­mi of aggres­sive out­rage to form against trans­gen­der peo­ple in gen­er­al. Some sort of iron­ic con­grat­u­la­tions has sure­ly got to be offered to the dick­wit who thought that their plan of revised vocab­u­lary terms was going to be a run­away success.

That per­son needs to be removed from the deci­sion-mak­ing team until their brain matures to a social­ly accept­able level.

What is most dis­turb­ing about the whole affair is, how­ev­er, not the fact that some­one man­aged to pick up the wrong end of the stick in such a tru­ly spec­tac­u­lar fash­ion, caus­ing out­rage and anger in one fell swoop, but that as a result of this car crash of a deci­sion, women were, once more, pushed fur­ther out of the picture.

And it’s not only the case in the UK. Over in the US, specif­i­cal­ly in Cal­i­for­nia, sur­pris­ing news has been flow­ing in regard­ing a change in prison reg­u­la­tions. With the com­ing into effect of leg­is­la­tion SB 132 on Jan 1, trans­gen­der, inter­sex, and non-bina­ry inmates have now been afford­ed the right, irre­spec­tive of their anato­my, to choose where they want to be incarcerated.

By the begin­ning of April, 261 trans­fer requests had been reg­is­tered. All of them from inmates who want to be moved from male to female pris­ons. Not one request for some­one to trans­fer from a women’s prison to a male prison has been logged. Although sta­tis­tics do indi­cate that trans­gen­der, inter­sex, and non-bina­ry groups are exposed to exces­sive vio­lence in prison, sure­ly the answer isn’t to move a tiny frac­tion of the prison pop­u­la­tion into the women’s sec­tion, is it? That seems to be a tad sim­plis­tic. Move the prob­lem rather than solve the problem.And with the relo­ca­tion of these inmates, will we not see the devel­op­ment of anoth­er type of prob­lem? As we can see, in the West­ern world, the con­di­tion of claim­ing trans­gen­der seems to con­vey all sorts of ben­e­fits. Recent­ly a trans­gen­der neo-Nazi was spared incar­cer­a­tion due to the judge being of the opin­ion that they’d suf­fered enough as a result of grow­ing up transgender.

So, take a group of men who might well want to get out of one vio­lent insti­tu­tion where they might feel vul­ner­a­ble, and allow them to estab­lish them­selves in a less vio­lent insti­tu­tion where they will be able, at the very least, to phys­i­cal­ly dom­i­nate those around them. Sure­ly this idea hasn’t been con­sid­ered thoroughly.

A group of men who either con­sid­er them­selves to be women or some­thing oth­er than that which their anato­my sug­gests are on the verge of receiv­ing pro­tec­tion from the US gov­ern­ment, at the expense of…yes, women who were born women. That seems a lit­tle unfair, doesn’t it?

Whilst demand­ing respect for their rights,

“I won’t be around preda­to­ry men and I won’t be around staff that frown upon trans women.“

these men are deter­mined to tram­ple all over the appar­ent­ly less-wor­thy rights of female pris­on­ers. As one female pris­on­er suc­cinct­ly put it:

“I do think they should be safe, but it infringes on my right to be safe as well.”

Quite.

But, leav­ing what is, after all, a minor­i­ty prob­lem, we find that women face attacks in Europe as well. This time, the attacks are being launched from a rather unex­pect­ed, new ene­my: Women.

Spokes­woman for the Swedish Green Par­ty, Mär­ta Stenevi, who is cur­rent­ly, some­what iron­i­cal­ly, also the min­is­ter for gen­der equal­i­ty and hous­ing, recent­ly sug­gest­ed that native, white Swedish women should stand aside to allow for­eign minor­i­ty women bet­ter access to posi­tions of pow­er. Yes, that’s right: a Swedish woman is rec­om­mend­ing that her own coun­try­women now vol­un­tar­i­ly step back, step down, and tod­dle off home to cook for their hus­bands pure­ly to allow immi­grants to step into their shoes. That’s noth­ing short of insane, to say noth­ing of the insult­ing nature of the suggestion.

I need hard­ly state that Stenevi has opt­ed to not fol­low her own advice. This advice is for oth­ers to fol­low, not her. Stenevi is of the opin­ion that men in Swe­den are begin­ning to move to the Right as a result of believ­ing that their coun­try is already a bea­con of equal­i­ty. Quite what the con­nec­tion might be between the way Swedish men view the soci­ety they live in, and her sug­gest­ed solu­tion of reduc­ing the worth of Swedish women by ele­vat­ing immi­grant women is unclear. In the inter­view in which she espoused her rather star­tling views, one quote stands out as encap­su­lat­ing what the Greens pre­sum­ably expect of Swedish women:

“If for­eign-born women are to gain pow­er, white, domes­ti­cal­ly born women will have to move.”

That’s noth­ing short of inflam­ma­to­ry. A Swedish woman, a Swedish politi­cian is offer­ing up a sac­ri­fice to the Gods of Swedish pol­i­tics in the form of her Swedish-born Swedish sis­ters, a group of peo­ple she finds less attrac­tive and wor­thy than for­eign women who hap­pen to be present­ly locat­ed in the coun­try. Insanity.

Were it not enough that her cred­i­bil­i­ty as a woman, as far as oth­er women are con­cerned, has tak­en an obvi­ous knock, the spokeswoman’s hyp­o­crit­i­cal stance extends beyond mere­ly sell­ing her sis­ters down the riv­er. Stenevi, spokes­woman for the Greens has invest­ments in funds which include large oil com­pa­nies. She seems to have missed the mark on two counts: as a woman, and as a ‘green’ politician.

So, as we cast a weary eye over the world’s news, what we see is that women, far from being able to feel secure with the rights they secured for them­selves over the course of the 20^th cen­tu­ry, are now, more than ever, being exposed to being left by the way­side as the fol­low­ers of fads regard­ing sex­u­al­i­ty and gen­der become ever more vocif­er­ous in their cam­paign to push their twist­ed agenda.

Soci­ety as a whole, no doubt, will suf­fer, but at the moment it’s women who are pay­ing the high­est price. Hav­ing fought for the right to equal­i­ty, all over the world some who tra­di­tion­al­ly enjoyed advan­tages over women (men) are now ‘jump­ing ship’ and try­ing to ‘out-woman’ nat­ur­al women. Were this not enough, then we have the oh-so-lib­er­al women who seem deter­mined to force native women’s rights down the agen­da so that oth­er, immi­grant women can rise above them.

And yet, hope springs eter­nal. The world will stop lis­ten­ing so deter­mined­ly to a man­ic micro-minor­i­ty, vocab­u­lary will cease to become a test­ing ground for new, fash­ion­able con­fig­u­ra­tions of word pow­er, and things will, no doubt, return to a more nor­mal rhythm. Until then, women should just make sure that they watch their backs – there seem to be plen­ty of peo­ple lin­ing up to push them down.

Source: kon​tra​.hu / Gav Duncan