Concerns

GB News on Amnesty’s booboo:

Amnesty International has offered a grovelling apology for condemning JK Rowling’s women’s abuse charity as “anti-rights”.

The NGO previously listed the author’s Beira’s Place support service on a “blacklist”, accusing it of harming the rights of gay people and women in Britain.

The blacklist includ[ed] the names of 117 organisations, including For Women Scotland – whose action led to the historic Supreme Court ruling that the definition of a woman under the Equality Act is based on biological sex.

Another group mentioned in the list was Sex Matters – which campaigns for the protection of single-sex spaces.

Well after all, what right do women have to campaign for the protection of single-sex spaces? If women want single-sex spaces they should stay in their kitchens, god damn it.

Amnesty’s 22-page document – which has since been withdrawn – described Beira’s Place as part of an “organised anti-rights movement targeting the rights of women and LGBT+ people” in Britain.

Honestly you’d think Amnesty would be more cautious that. UK libel law is notoriously easy to trigger.

It accused organisations such as Ms Rowling’s of “drawing on concerns about children’s safety and wellbeing, family life or social change to build support for their campaigns”.

That’s my favorite bit. It couldn’t be that she just plain cites reasonable concerns, no, it has to be that she’s doing it to build support for her campaign. What campaign? The one with the concerns she’s drawing on. How do they know she doesn’t have actual concerns about children’s safety and wellbeing, and women’s rights, and men’s intrusions and interruptions and takeovers?

They don’t. They don’t know that at all. It doesn’t even make any sense. If she doesn’t have the concerns, why is she doing anything at all? Because she knows it teases?

After pulling the blacklist, Amnesty has since claimed it was published without the usual due diligence, and has said it has launched an internal review.

Oh really. Why’s that then? Why was it published without the usual due diligence?

I bet we can guess. I bet it was because trans ideology and trans bullying are such hot tickets, and they wanted some of that sweet sweet love.

A spokesman for the organisation said: “We regret that this briefing was uploaded to our website without going through the established internal review processes that are in place to ensure consistency, accuracy and alignment with Amnesty International UK’s positions.

“Its use of language does not reflect the position of Amnesty International UK, which is why it was promptly removed.

“We remain committed to defending human rights, including both the rights of women and the rights of trans people.”

But what are the rights of trans people? Is there a right to force people to agree that one is the sex one is not? Is there a right to punish people who refuse to agree that one is the sex one is not? Is there a right to take the jobs and prizes and honors intended for the sex one is not?

I don’t think any of those items are rights. I think purported trans rights intrude dangerously on women’s rights and I think we need much more free discussion of them, not less.