The law does need a definition of male and female

And it does rather need to be binary: simply because we’ve only got male and female prisons.

A transgender woman has been remanded to a male prison after being found guilty of raping a teenage girl when she was a man.
A jury convicted Davina Ayrton, who changed her name from David three years ago, of the sexual attack on a 15-year-old girl in the autumn of 2004 following a week-long trial at Portsmouth Crown Court.
Following conviction, Judge Ian Pearson remanded Ayrton into custody for her own safety and said it was likely she would be held at the male prison in Winchester, Hampshire, until sentencing on March 4.

So why that decision?

Ayrton told the court in her evidence that she had not undergone any physical modifications or taken any medication as part of her gender swap.

Fully functional male junk? Male then.

Sure, let’s agree that the distinction isn’t, in all its glories, entirely binary. But when the decision has to be narrowed down to one of two choices, what should it be?

Oh, Hi! Bruce, good to see you.

47 thoughts on “The law does need a definition of male and female”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    And it does rather need to be binary: simply because we’ve only got male and female prisons.

    Well we could have male, female and “other” prisons if we wanted. There is no technical difficulty. The problem is that there are so few “others”. There are only about 2000 in the whole of the UK. How many of them will be in jail at any one time? Add in the usual attempt to keep them near their families, assuming they have any, and we have a problem.

  2. We already segregate nonces, don’t we? So the mechanism exists to segregate blokes who want to pretend they’re birds.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    Roue le Jour – “We already segregate nonces, don’t we? So the mechanism exists to segregate blokes who want to pretend they’re birds.”

    Who is going to protect the nonces – and the young and feeble who are placed in Seg for their own protection – from the violent and dangerous rapists who think they are women?

    You want to bet that most prison rape takes place in Segregation?

  4. Slightly on topic, but I was made aware today of something called the Selective Service System in the US which requires all males of fighting age to register with the government. Then we get this:

    FEMALES & REGISTRATION: While there has been talk recently about women in combat, there has been NO decision to require females to register with Selective Service, or be subject to a future military draft. Selective Service continues to register only men, ages 18 through 25.

    Funny how this equality works, isn’t it? Women get the right to executive salaries and middle class jobs in air conditioned offices. They also fight for the right to serve in elite combat units. But in the event of a draft, why it’s the men who have to go and fight.

    Tell me, do these women expect their menfolk to go and fight for them when what we saw in Cologne last weekend becomes commonplace? I’m veering towards thinking the lefty feminists and the adherent to the religion of peace deserve each other.

  5. If he still has a dick attached he is a he and (no pun intended) bollocks to his mental aberrations.

    Likewise with toilets. Gear whacked off–Ladies. DIck still attached Gents. Regardless of outerwear.

    The chop at least shows some commitment. Otherwise it is just talk–or worse the possible scheming of villains wanting better access to women they can attack etc.

  6. Also sickening is the PC shite of calling the bloke “her”. A Tory paper. Bullshit.

    The time for fire and the sword on cultural Marxist scum is approaching.

  7. Butch women and pre-op FtM transsexuals are quite happy to go to women’s prisons – one might even suspect they are overrepresented there. If an “other” prison existed, it would be almost exclusively used for MtF prisoners. Both of them.

  8. Hmmm.. I feel they should have let him have his way, and incarcerate him in a female prison.

    He may “identify” as female, but push come to shove, the female inmates will see a bloke who’s In for rape of a female.

    Any bets he’ll still have his junk past the first week inside?

  9. He may “identify” as female, but push come to shove, the female inmates will see a bloke who’s In for rape of a female.

    Hell no. Women love criminals, especially violent ones and even more especially men on death row. Rapists certainly wouldn’t induce revulsion in a women’s prison. When Scott Peterson was jailed for killing his wife he arrived on death row to a sack of fan mail already waiting for him. Dig around and you’ll find forums of women who are dating men on death row they’ve never met. It’s also the reason why so many female prison guards engage in sexual relations with the inmates, something which the authorities don’t seem to mind.

  10. Dependency management is hard. Ayrton should be kept wherever his/her presence causes the least aggro for the prison system, which has some duty to potect inmates from violence. That’s why we have women’s prisons.

    Can’t see Ayrton, being physiologically male, causing more disruption than any other male kiddie fiddler. Certainly less than sticking him in women’s prison. But if the prison service says otherwise, or decides a non-binary gender prison is a worthwhile thing to have, that’s their call to make (usual caveats about govt mismanagement, overspending, incompetence etc).

    Ayrton’s gender issues are irrelevant beyond those practical concerns, though I suppose it’s worth a few column inches if it gives some other trans person an extra reason to keep his/her hands to themselves. Sure, a fraction of a fraction of the population, so probably not.

  11. The question does arise as to why we segregate. Why separate women’s and mens showers and other ablutional facilities? What is the actual purpose of such segregation?

  12. “There is no technical difficulty. The problem is that there are so few “others”. There are only about 2000 in the whole of the UK.”

    There are 81,158 men in prison and 3,792 women. Catering to small groups clearly isn’t a problem. You could have a special unit sited in a separate building inside another prison of either category.

    As you say, the problem only applies to a tiny handful, for who special arrangements can easily be made. From the point of view of society as a whole, it’s a non-problem. Just an excuse for a few outrage-generating newspaper headlines and for the haters to have another go at trans people.

    “You want to bet that most prison rape takes place in Segregation?”

    That it happens at all is something all too few seem to care about. Why would you worry any more about the couple of transgender rapists than the hundreds of cisgender rapists? Which group would you categorise as the bigger problem?

    “Tell me, do these women expect their menfolk to go and fight for them when what we saw in Cologne last weekend becomes commonplace?”

    I doubt very much that it is the women in charge of who gets drafted. I expect most women hate it, having their partners sent off to war, leaving them to cope on their own, especially the ones who are widowed or get their menfolk back crippled and broken. It’s not usually the women who start all the wars.

    As for the women in Cologne, I suspect that if you gave them a few guns and the training to use them, they could manage the problem without any support from the men. Nevertheless, it’s not about the fairness of men’s ‘obligation’ to fight in defence of women, it’s about everyone fighting for everybody else’s liberty with all the abilities they have. Men have an ‘unfair’ advantage when it comes to fighting. If you can fix that and give women the ability to fight more effectively for themselves, that would be even better.

    Best, of course, would be to remove the need for them to fight. Interestingly, I did once read of a proposal to do exactly that. If you gave all women the right mix of hormones during pregnancy, male brains would develop along the female non-aggressive pattern, and wars and crime would end. It was set as one of those moral philosophy questions – if you had the power to end war and violence, would you?

    And it would have the interesting side effect (in the context of this discussion) of making transgender ‘normal’ and cisgender the aberration. In such a world, how tolerant would you want society to be of you cisgender ‘freaks’?

    “The chop at least shows some commitment. Otherwise it is just talk”

    Whether one gets ‘the chop’ is not about one’s degree of ‘commitment’, it’s about whether the dysphoria is bad enough that it’s really necessary – whether the benefit to a patient’s ability to cope mentally outweighs the multitude of extra physical difficulties it causes. It’s an imperfect technology as yet.

    “Also sickening is the PC shite of calling the bloke “her”. A Tory paper. Bullshit.”

    Why would it be any better to call it “him”? I wouldn’t really want that sort of person being associated with us men, either.

    If you don’t want people to be able to tell you what pronouns you’ve got to use, then you don’t get to tell Tory newspapers what pronouns they can choose to use. That’s sickening political correctness, too. It’s just being done at the other end of the ‘political’ spectrum.

  13. Why separate women’s and mens showers and other ablutional facilities? What is the actual purpose of such segregation?

    Because society, in order to function, has to organise itself so that men do something useful rather than shagging, wanking, or walking around with a distracting hard-on. Each man differs, and probably men differ between cultures, but if a man needs to accomplish a task he needs *some degree* of distance between himself and sex. I know a French guy who can’t work in the same room as one of our Russian girls, he gets all distracted. In Dubai, I saw Bangaldeshi and Pakistani men who got all distracted by the presence of any white women. They’re on the more extreme end of the curve, and they’d do well to learn a bit more self control. But even the most disciplined man would struggle to go about getting something done if he had just come out of a shower with a bunch of 25 year old women, or – worse – knew that instead of doing that calculation he could go to “have a shower” and spend the rest of the afternoon wanking. I’m not advocating a Puritan or Saudi society when I say that it’s probably a good thing that society puts in place *some*’basic steps to stop us all getting horny and spending all day shagging and wanking.

  14. Sorry NiV, there is just so much utter bullshit (e.g. men start all the wars, wars and crime would end were it not for men’s aggressive brains) that it’s not worth a serious response.

  15. So Much For Subtlety

    NiV – “Catering to small groups clearly isn’t a problem. You could have a special unit sited in a separate building inside another prison of either category.”

    So he would be in solitary. As the chances of there being two such people in any prison outside London is small.

    “Why would you worry any more about the couple of transgender rapists than the hundreds of cisgender rapists? Which group would you categorise as the bigger problem?”

    Depends on where the prisoners are being kept. I doubt that normal rapists pose much of a problem to normal men. Not their cup of tea. Also prison rape is not something the British do. In Segregation you have vulnerable people. That is something else altogether different. I would expect problems if you put any sort of rapist in there.

    “It’s not usually the women who start all the wars.”

    Every female leader seems to do it. It is not rare.

    “As for the women in Cologne, I suspect that if you gave them a few guns and the training to use them, they could manage the problem without any support from the men.”

    Women don’t fight back against rapists much. It isn’t in their DNA.

    “it’s about everyone fighting for everybody else’s liberty with all the abilities they have.”

    I don’t notice a lot of people to the Left of me being remotely interested in fighting for my liberty. That includes most feminists. I am disinclined to fight for them. We are not the community we once were. I suggest a pre-fighting Sammich test. If they can make a good one without complaint, I will think about it.

    “And it would have the interesting side effect (in the context of this discussion) of making transgender ‘normal’ and cisgender the aberration. In such a world, how tolerant would you want society to be of you cisgender ‘freaks’?”

    You assume there is a link between hormone levels in utero and unusual sexual preference. I don’t know of any such link. It wouldn’t matter how tolerant they were. Without the testosterone they would not have the courage to do anything but b!tch. And the race would be extinct in a generation or two.

    “whether the benefit to a patient’s ability to cope mentally outweighs the multitude of extra physical difficulties it causes. It’s an imperfect technology as yet.”

    It is witch doctoring. Not technology. And there is no real way of knowing how they can or will cope.

  16. Tim Newman,

    Okay, that’s a reasonable answer. So why would you put teh gheys in the same facilities as straight men? Why do teh lezzers go in with the straight females? Or indeed with each other? If we’re trying to segregate on the basis of sexual interest- which is entirely reasonable- why are we going on sex, when it would surely be sexuality that is the variable?

    See the problem here?

  17. As to fighting, males evolve to act as bodyguards to females, which is why men fight, and which is why the claim that women not having the same “right to fight” is evil discrimination is lunacy on a stick.

    Men have the physical characteristics for fighting. Women don’t. As an average male, I could kill the average female with my bare hands. I’m designed to use that level of force against other males to protect said female. That’s just a fact.

    Women historically have been actively entusiastic in watching their menfolk go off to war, for the same reason. Come back on your shield or not at all, and all that.

  18. See the problem here?

    I see your point, but not the problem. We segregate by sexes because, on aggregate across society, it works. Sure, it might not work for individuals, but that’s not what the segregation is for. Prison populations are separated into men and women because, in general, it makes running prisons easier. It’s not done as a solution to ensure every individual prisoner has an optimum environment in which to be housed.

  19. I think where the discussion I proposed above naturally heads is the conclusion that as a society, we’re only interested in protecting women from men. We’re not interested in protecting vulnerable women from other women, or vulnerable men from other men. Maybe we should overtly recognise that.

    At the very least, we can then start thinking about whether a six foot five former athlete is, in this particular regard, in any meaningful sense “a woman”. Does “she” need protecting from cis men, or do cis women need protecting from “her”?

  20. I think where the discussion I proposed above naturally heads is the conclusion that as a society, we’re only interested in protecting women from men.

    Probably because practicalities have driven it to this point. Sure, if we have nothing stopping us we can look at how to improve the lives of individuals on an individual basis, but the general approach taken to date is sound.

  21. So, if a person declares their gender to be that which they believe themself to be, do they now transition into (or out of) the “gender group which requires protection”?

  22. So, if a person declares their gender to be that which they believe themself to be, do they now transition into (or out of) the “gender group which requires protection”?

    Case-by-case basis, I’m afraid. This could get expensive.

  23. Surely we’d then have to start judging the vulnerability of everyone to a particular prison environment?

  24. Possess a Y-chromosome? You’re legally male. End of.
    (Germaine Greer put it far better than I could.)

  25. Surely we’d then have to start judging the vulnerability of everyone to a particular prison environment?

    You either do everybody, or nobody, or everybody who fulfil certain sub-criteria. Whatever can be done practically and can be afforded relative to other priorities.

  26. Niv: The fucking Telegraph is–while trying to peddle itself as a Tory paper– spewing CM shite. Just like all the rest of the media.

    I don’t give a rat’s arse what terminology London based leftist shite use. But I resent the cunts sly attempts to “normalise” bizarros and by obvious extension de-normalise the unafflicted.

  27. “I don’t give a rat’s arse what terminology London based leftist shite use–amongst themselves.”

    Is what I meant to say.

  28. “Because society, in order to function, has to organise itself so that men do something useful rather than shagging, wanking, or walking around with a distracting hard-on.”

    It’s a matter of what you’re used to. Humans evolved naked, and only developed clothes for warmth, originally. Those Amazonian tribes pictured in National Geographic often still are. Men are perfectly capable of controlling themselves – it’s the segregation that turns the natural into something especially arousing.

    “Sorry NiV, there is just so much utter bullshit […] that it’s not worth a serious response.”

    Heh!

    “So he would be in solitary. As the chances of there being two such people in any prison outside London is small.”

    Yep. And why would solitary in a women’s prison be any worse than solitary in a men’s prison?

    ” I doubt that normal rapists pose much of a problem to normal men. Not their cup of tea. Also prison rape is not something the British do.”

    What’s a “normal rapist”?

    And I’d say it depended on what was available. If the British don’t rape in prison, then there’s no problem, is there?

    “Every female leader seems to do it. It is not rare.”

    Who was you thinking of, here?

    “Women don’t fight back against rapists much. It isn’t in their DNA.”

    Depends on whether they’ve got a gun or not.

    For that matter, neither do men – if the statistics on prison rape are to be believed.

    “I don’t notice a lot of people to the Left of me being remotely interested in fighting for my liberty.”

    So? Does that mean it’s not worth fighting for?

    It wasn’t the left-versus-right axis I was talking about, but libertarian-versus-authoritarian axis. Authoritarianism is seductive – everyone wants to be able to tell other people how to live their lives – but it’s primary problem is that different authoritarians want different things, and sometimes authoritarians for one way of life get told by authoritarians of a different stripe how to live their lives in a way they hate. This leads them to adopt a sort of pseudo-liberal stance in which they’ll fight for their *own* freedom, but not anyone else’s.

    There are authoritarians on both left and right, and libertarians on both left and right as well. Your problem is with the authoritarians on the left, but primarily because they’re on the left rather than because they’re authoritarian. You don’t have a problem with *you* telling transgender people how to live, only with the left-authoritarians telling you that you’re not allowed to tell them.

    “You assume there is a link between hormone levels in utero and unusual sexual preference. I don’t know of any such link.”

    The article was based on reports of the effects in actual cases. That you don’t know of any such link isn’t a big surprise, since your views seem to be based mainly on ignorance and prejudice!

    “It is witch doctoring. Not technology. And there is no real way of knowing how they can or will cope.”

    Of course there’s a way! You just need to try it and see.

    It used to be that people born without arms or legs could be given artificial ones. Initially, these were pretty crude – the pirate’s peg leg and hook being the most famous example – but they’re getting better. The same applies to any other sort of surgical intervention. At the moment we’re rather closer to the ‘peg leg’ stage, but like peg legs it’s still often better than the alternative.

    The biggest problem they have, of course, is other people. But there’s not a lot (ethically) we can do about that. You just have to hope other people will choose to be a bit nicer about it voluntarily.

  29. “I don’t give a rat’s arse what terminology London based leftist shite use. But I resent the cunts sly attempts to “normalise” bizarros and by obvious extension de-normalise the unafflicted.”

    Mmm. But all they’re doing is the same thing you’re doing, only with the groups swapped around.

    Your transphobic attitude is nowadays what is counted as “bizarro”, and your attempts to de-normalise those unafflicted with it are just the reflection of the same attitudes in the political mirror. 😉

    The problem with intolerance is always what happens when society suddenly decides not to tolerate *you*. That’s why tolerance has to be generally applied as a matter of principle, if it is to work at all.

  30. It’s a matter of what you’re used to. Humans evolved naked, and only developed clothes for warmth, originally. Those Amazonian tribes pictured in National Geographic often still are.

    And what have they achieved, exactly?

  31. “And what have they achieved, exactly?”

    Are you saying the only reason they haven’t is because they’re distracted by the ladies bits hanging out? That the invention of trousers was more important than stuff like fire, and the wheel, and the spinning jenny?

  32. NiV: “Your transphobic attitude is nowadays what is counted as “bizarro”, and your attempts to de-normalise those unafflicted with it are just the reflection of the same attitudes in the political mirror. ”

    The problem with intolerance is always what happens when society suddenly decides not to tolerate *you*. That’s why tolerance has to be generally applied as a matter of principle, if it is to work at all.2″

    Oh no!!!–I’ve been de-normalised AND AFFLICTED BY TRANSPHOBIA!!!! Society will no longer tolerate me!!! Sob,Sob.

    “The problem with intolerance is always what happens when society suddenly decides not to tolerate *you*. ”

    No shit Sherlock. And we are all overwhelmed by the stunning level of “tolerance” shown by the scum of the left. They are tolerant to the nth degree of freakshows and Islamic sex criminals and even of slightly off-message metrosexual rumpkin jargon-spewers like your self. Anything that causes trouble to or damages ordinary white people and esp white men. Cos they are ever so tolerant of us.

    Read your handbook of cultural Marxism chump. The left don’t give a shit about any of the minorities they supposedly defend. They are just tools to attack the rest of us. And fellow-travelling pukes like you are happy to help so it seems.

    For the record I don’t give a damn what transgender freaks get up to until the scum of the left start demanding special favours for them and demanding that others endorse their life styles. If some tranny can pass for a woman then who would ever know or care he had been in the Ladies bog. It is when the demented Desperate-Dan-in-drag lookalikes start shouting about openly demanding to be treated and addressed as women that my piss starts to boil. Even then most of that is due to the involvement of the scum of the left rather than the freakos themselves.

    Next time have your emoticon write the comment–it has more depth of character than you.

  33. “Read your handbook of cultural Marxism chump. The left don’t give a shit about any of the minorities they supposedly defend. They are just tools to attack the rest of us.”

    Yes. That’s exactly the argument I’ve made here several times before.

    They pick some sympathy-inspiring minority group that the right-authoritarians can reliably be depended upon to kick up about, introduce all sorts of authoritarian measures to ‘defend’ them, and make the right-authoritarians look like a bunch of bigoted shits when they spend their time attacking the innocent minority group instead of attacking the authoritarians hiding behind them.

    They did it originally with “the poor”. They did it with women, with blacks, with gays, and you idiots fell for it every time. There’s no sense today in attacking the rights of *women* and defending misogynistic chauvinism because radical Marxist feminists happen support that cause. It just makes you look like a prick. There’s likewise no sense in attacking the transgender people as such because the Marxists happen to have picked them to hide behind for their next attack.

    The *serious* problem is the creeping authoritarianism. Nobody else *cares* about what pronoun people use to describe themselves, or what clothes they wear. They’re doing nobody else any harm – so why the hell not? Why fight about it?

    You can like them or not like them as you choose, just as other people like or dislike what *you* do/are. But life’s a lot nicer for everyone if we all try to get along, and let other people live their own lives as they see fit.

  34. “You can like them or not like them as you choose, just as other people like or dislike what *you* do/are. But life’s a lot nicer for everyone if we all try to get along, and let other people live their own lives as they see fit.”

    So in short –if what the above is what you are actually saying–we have been arguing about your inability to express yourself. Because what you say there doesn’t sound like what you were saying in your previous posts.

  35. “So in short –if what the above is what you are actually saying–we have been arguing about your inability to express yourself.”

    My position has many components. Sometimes I express one part, sometimes another.

    But I think I’ve been consistent about the point that it is not the transgender people themselves that are the main problem, but the authoritarian SJWs removing our freedoms on their behalf. Which is why I get so pissed off seeing the right-wingers falling into the same stupid trap yet again.

    If, as you say “For the record I don’t give a damn what transgender freaks get up to”, then why are all the posts above attacking the transgender people and not the SJWs? You all sure do give a good impression of people who *do* give a damn about what they get up to.

  36. When they get up to co-operating with and providing ammo for CM scum I do care..

    Just getting on with their lives is one thing. Becoming a willing ally of CM is another matter.

  37. “When they get up to co-operating with and providing ammo for CM scum I do care..”

    Desperate people seek help wherever they can find it. Perhaps if they got a bit more tolerance and support from the liberal right, they’d not have to turn to the authoritarian left.

    Which is another tactical reason not to keep kicking them.

  38. Even before I’d finished reading the headline I’d concluded that the appropriate test would be “just drop your keks, matey”.

  39. Are you saying the only reason they haven’t is because they’re distracted by the ladies bits hanging out? That the invention of trousers was more important than stuff like fire, and the wheel, and the spinning jenny?

    Quite possibly, yes.

  40. NiV: What help is possible from CM scum who intend to use your problems as a club to attack everybody else? You would have to define help as having your “values” forced on others to believe that the left is your buddy and can do anything for you.

  41. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    As someone who regards himself of the relatively small libertarian Left, I’d like to wholeheartedly agree with NiV. Both Left and Right are afflicted by an authoritarian tendency; and it’s their ability to make common cause which has led to the current Centrist dystopia.

  42. So Much For Subtlety

    NiV – “Yep. And why would solitary in a women’s prison be any worse than solitary in a men’s prison?”

    I have never said it would. Although you may as well keep them with the men. It is not a nice way to treat a prisoner.

    “And I’d say it depended on what was available. If the British don’t rape in prison, then there’s no problem, is there?”

    British prisons are full of non-British people. And the future of British prisons will be like American ones – White boys being raped by non-White prisoners.

    “Who was you thinking of, here?”

    All of them. Except Merkel.

    “Depends on whether they’ve got a gun or not.”

    No it doesn’t. Give them an Apache helicopter and they still won’t fight much.

    “So? Does that mean it’s not worth fighting for?”

    Their liberty but not mine? Damn right it is not worth fighting for. I am not fighting for people who want to enslave me.

    “You don’t have a problem with *you* telling transgender people how to live, only with the left-authoritarians telling you that you’re not allowed to tell them.”

    I have no problems with anyone telling anyone else how to live. I have a problem with them using the force of law to make people believe insanity. The authoritarians here are not on the Right but entirely on the Left.

    “The article was based on reports of the effects in actual cases. That you don’t know of any such link isn’t a big surprise, since your views seem to be based mainly on ignorance and prejudice!”

    Which article is this? Ignorance and prejudice is likely to be more accurate.

    “Of course there’s a way! You just need to try it and see.”

    Well it is not my cup of tea either. But that misses the point. Given the massive suicide rate, the regret rate and so on, we should be careful before making irreversible medical changes that do not lead to improvements. That is medical malpractise.

    “At the moment we’re rather closer to the ‘peg leg’ stage, but like peg legs it’s still often better than the alternative.”

    They do not think so.

  43. So Much For Subtlety

    Witchsmeller Pursuivant – “and it’s their ability to make common cause which has led to the current Centrist dystopia.”

    You cannot make a common cause with people who are out to destroy you. Who seek to hunt down and ruin anyone guilty of the smallest Thought Crime.

    The Trans lobby has decided they would wage war on the rest of us. They can deal with the consequences.

  44. “NiV: What help is possible from CM scum who intend to use your problems as a club to attack everybody else?”

    It does at least eliminate some of your problems.

    It’s the same reason that the poor vote for welfare statists, that women like all-women short lists, that blacks like affirmative action, and that the disabled like laws mandating the provision of wheelchair ramps. They’re not thinking about the longer-term economic/social consequences of such laws, they’re thinking “Great! A wheelchair ramp! I can go get a proper job, now!”

    It’s always the same with authoritarians. They bait the trap with something you want, tempt you with the power to tell other people to stop doing something that annoys you, and only later do you realise the precedent you’ve set when they start banning the stuff you do that annoys everyone else.

    I’ve no doubt TGs are as dumb and deluded about it as the poor, the disabled, or the people who just like cuddly animals and therefore vote for the Green authoritarians. They’re human, after all, and especially vulnerable ones, too. They need educating – they’ll certainly not be taught this stuff at school. So who’s supposed to teach them, if not the people who are on the liberal-right? (Or the liberal left, for that matter, although they’d presumably do it by fighting the statist policies of the right-authoritarians.) The question you have to answer for them is: what better alternative do you have to offer them?

    If you want to take the poor away from the welfare statists, you don’t do it by attacking the poor, instead you do it by giving them the opportunity to get a better job, offering training and experience, and teach them enough economics to follow the flaws in socialism. You liberalise markets to make everyone richer. You invent labour-saving technology like washing machines and cars and sell it at ever-decreasing prices. Maggie did far more to break the chains of the poor than either Labour or the old-style Conservatives ever did. But trying to make your case to them while referring to them all the time as “scrounging council estate scum” doesn’t exactly endear you to them. It’s not persuasive.

    If you want to take the disabled away from the statists, you provide the organisation and knowledge to commission their own wheelchair ramps. You introduce teleworking. You set up specialist businesses that understand their needs. If you want to take the animal-lovers away from the ecofascists, you show how wealth and industry is far better at protecting the environment than poverty. You do what Bjorn Lomborg did, and educate people. If you want to take black people out of the hands of the statist left, you give them examples like Condoleeza Rice, to show them how they can escape poverty and prosper with the right attitude. You don’t get far by insulting them.

    Their dupes are as much their victims as anyone is. But nobody is going to be persuaded that you’re right and the authoritarian left are wrong if they come here and find nothing but insult and invective directed against them. The only thing they’ll conclude from that is that the left-authoritarians are in fact completely correct – that the right wing hates them and the only way they can be protected is for the State to suppress and control the right. The left relies on it – it’s why they picked those sympathy-inspiring groups to support in the first place. (I mean, what the dickens does Marxist philosophy have to do with transgenderism?) It enables left-authoritarians to paint the right as evil and selfish in their propaganda. Racists, sexists, homophobes, greedy capitalist despoilers of Mother Earth. The left-authoritarians win another battle in the culture war. Again.

    They’ve done it half a dozen times already, hiding behind a different group each time – surely the pattern must be obvious by now? But they keep on doing it, because they keep on winning with it, because we never learn to separate the puppets from the puppet-masters.

    “The Trans lobby has decided they would wage war on the rest of us. They can deal with the consequences.”

    The kittens, fluffy bunny and baby polar bears lobby has also decided to wage war on us. So we should declare war on the baby polar bears? Really?

    “The trans lobby” is not identical with “the trans”, and likely have no particular long-term interest in transgender issues. They’re just trying to find groups they hope you’ll object to, so they can call you a reactionary old phobey and ban you.

    Why help them?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *