It could undermine women’s rights

So they’ve noticed.

UK ministers have called on Nicola Sturgeon to scrap plans to let Scottish people “self-declare” as the opposite sex over fears it could lead to “legal chaos” and undermine women’s rights in England. 

Of course it “could undermine women’s rights in England.” Of course it can and does and will continue to undermine women’s rights everywhere. It renders them nonsensical. If men can become women by saying so then what are women? Nothing; just another word for “people.” They don’t need women’s rights because they have people’s rights. Rape, childbirth, child care, differences in size and strength, are all irrelevant, because everyone is a person. Giving away women’s rights slightly more gradually than Scotland is still giving away women’s rights.

Senior UK government figures fear the move, which is not available to people in England, could allow biologically male Scottish prisoners in English jails to demand to be placed in female-only prisons.

So what’s the problem? Just because they’re a risk to the people formerly known as women is no reason to trample on their True Selves.

Currently anyone wanting to change their sex in the UK needs to apply for a gender recognition certificate. To be successful applicants need to have been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria and been living in their affirmed gender for at least two years.

Blah blah blah. But what real difference does that make? It slows things down but that’s all. Slowing things down is better than speeding them up, to be sure, but it’s still bad for women to pretend that men can become women by “affirming” their “gender” for two years.

The Scottish move would remove the need for a medical diagnosis and reduce the time limit to six months. It would also allow under-18s to change their gender for the first time.

But it’s basically the same in both. The core claim is the same.

4 Responses to “It could undermine women’s rights”