Guest post: Causing damage was the goal
Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on What no excuses?
“I wish they could have found another way to promote their cause without causing damage.”
All the women who have suffered at the hands of this “cause” would agree. But “causing damage” was the goal of this cause. Getting what transactivists wanted was only possible by destroying women’s rights. Unfortunately there were far too many people eager to do exactly that, knowing full well what the consequences for women would be, and became, because women told them. It should always be remembered that this was a price that activists and their allies were willing to force women to pay. This was not an accident, or an unforeseen, unintended consequence: it was the inevitable result of choices that were made deliberately, choices and policies enforced with calculated, misogynistic malice. Men in women’s prisons. Men in women’s hospital wards. Men in women’s crisis centres. Men in women’s short-lists. Men in women’s sports.
None of this just “happened.” It was all done, with authorization, coordination, and implementation from Cabinet on down, through all levels of corrections, hospital, counseling, and sporting authority management and staff. And all of it was regulated and enforced by these same departments and officials, as well as both the police and the judiciary. It was all reported upon by compliant, partisan, pro-trans/anti-women media, both public and corporate. This was a coup of delusion that captured practically the entire apparatus of the British state. How did it happen so quickly and so completely? How does anyone trust any of these institutions ever again? Some of them engaged in what amounted to state-sponsored terrorism against many of their own citizens, with the vast majority of the victims being women.
I’m still slightly amazed at the ruling of the Supreme Court, but it’s still early days. Too many institutions and departments are dragging their feet, or actively denying and resisting the clear meaning and legal requirements of the ruling. They’re pretending there’s wiggle room, nuance, or confusion when there is none. This is a slap in the face for the women who stood up and said “No” to a state gone mad. We can hope that their courageous example will serve as a beacon and promise of justice to come in other countries. The continuing human toll of what has been perpetrated during this nightmare time may well be incalculable. Some of it just can’t be undone. The tide seems to be turning, but the cleanup will take years; there’s a lot of toxic waste to be collected and safeguards to be installed. Heads should roll, but probably won’t.

One of the parallel misogynist movements happening in the West is that in favour of Islamist terrorism. The most unlikely people fell for the transgenderist lies (mea culpa; some of us have been helped to escape by saner people) and ditto for the genocidal authoritarian colonialism of the Islamists.
I thought that ‘turkeys for Christmas’ was an amusing bit of hyperbole which would never map to anything in the real world, until I saw ‘Gays for Palestine’ on banners held by people who really meant it.
I suppose that there have always been people who are more comfortable with the certainty provided by authoritarian rule than with the effort of personal responsibility; and the threat of social ostracism (and worse) means that most of the rest don’t want to admit to their resistance.
Right now, it still probably feels safer to many people to go along with the transgenderists, especially as they are currently being particularly successful in their propaganda efforts to deny and denigrate the Supreme Court’s April explanation.
Sometimes an entire congregation can comprise non-believers, each thinking that they are the only one, each too afraid to admit it.