Women’s Issues April 2023
Still Battles to Win:
Section 35 Challenge
Humza Yousaf is apparently ploughing ahead with a challenge the UK government’s section 35 order which was made against the gender reform bill. This is in apparent contradiction to the previous legal advice and is clearly against the will of the majority of the people of Scotland. It leaves the women of Scotland in the unedifying position of supporting the UK against Scotland.
Identifying as a woman
is not the aim of the aggressive trans lobby when it involves excruciating periods, hormone fluctuations not of our choosing, the dangers and pain of pregnancy and childbirth, taking a huge step back in your career and depressing your lifetime earnings and therefore your pension, or having to take your employer to court for being paid less than a male, or having the triple burden of paid work, unpaid housework, and childcare (some men do share the burden, but an awful lot don’t). The lobby also doesn’t identify into painful cervical smear tests and mammograms, or into menopause, or endometriosis, or a pension which may depend on a man’s contributions.
They don’t identify into being a WASPI woman who has had up to 6 years’ pension ‘stolen’ by the state (up to £48K), who has lower earnings and a ridiculous timescale to make up that unattainable total.
They identify into a parody of woman as someone clutching a hot water bottle watching a romcom through floods of tears, dressed in soft, pink, fluffy clothes, clutching a tiny pink bag, generally adopting a soft fluffy name to go with it.
Sports Sponsorship
British Shot Put Gold Medallist Amelia Strickler points out that shockingly only 1% of all sports sponsorship money goes to women. And until recently, Nike reduced female athletes’ sponsorship by 70% when they could not run due to being pregnant or just after giving birth, although they reversed this after an outcry to give women 18 months off around pregnancy.
A new controversy
has blown up over the decision by Anheuser-Busch to select trans social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney as the face of Bud Light, and Nike to feature Dylan in their sports bras. Dylan is still biologically male and will still be even after any gender surgery. Dylan has not surgically transitioned, and has no breasts, so why choose this person to advertise a ‘women’s’ sports bra? Even after any surgical transition, Dylan will remain biologically male. Yes, Dylan Mulvaney is a parody, and Nike and other big brands may regret parodying women.
Extending the depiction of women’s bodies to ‘all types of woman’ surely doesn’t include men? Three-time Olympian and silver medal winner Sharron Davies is strongly against the move, as is trans icon Caitlyn Jenner, a trans former Olympian, who says inclusivity should not be ‘at the expense of the mass majority of people’.
Nike’s sports bra was famously showcased by England footballer Chloe Kelly at the Women’s Euro 2022 final against Germany.
Amelia Strickler thinks Dylan’s exaggerated exercise movements for the sports bra parodies a female exercise routine. So does Mulvaney’s bath routine for Bud Light. Strickler is acutely aware of how difficult it is for women to reach the top in sport, usually working paid jobs in addition to training due to the lack of help for women. She knows the utter grind of getting up at dawn and sacrificing everything for your sport and thinks Mulvaney prancing around in a sports bra is an insult to all female athletes.
It is easy to understand women’s anger over Dylan Mulvaney. A women’s sports bra advertised by a biological male with no breasts who can never be subjected to many of the discriminations a woman would be, and who has no idea of the sheer grind involved in women becoming top athletes.
Prominent gender-critical activist
Kellie-Jay Keen recently returned from New Zealand calling it the ‘worst place for women she has ever visited’ after she was violently attacked and sprayed with tomato ketchup. She founded the group Standing for Women and has promoted the definition of woman as ‘adult human female’, paying for billboards announcing ‘Woman = adult human female’ which have mostly been removed by authorities for fear of upsetting the trans lobby.
A sticker at Dundee Railway Station was removed in May 2019. Its crime? It said ‘Women only. This is a single sex service under the Equality Act 2010’ and was produced by Standing for Women.
Riley Gaines
Another prominent gender-critical voice, American swimmer Riley Gaines, blasted San Francisco state University for saying a trans protest was peaceful, when in fact she says she was chased and verbally abused by protesters, as well as physically assaulted by man ‘in a dress’. She has been a vocal opponent of the inclusion of biological males in women’s swimming, having previously had the dispiriting task of competing against biological male Lia Thomas. Many Republican states have banned biological males from women’s sports. Gaines had been due to address a Turning Point USA (TPUSA) event at San Francisco State University, which was cancelled after dozens of trans protesters overran the venue. She said
“The prisoners are running the asylum at SFSU…I was ambushed and physically hit twice by a man. This is proof that women need sex-protected spaces. Still only further assures me I’m doing something right. When they want you silent, speak louder.”
Equality and Human Rights Commission
The official human rights watchdog has admitted there may be a conflict of rights between trans rights and women’s rights and has written to Kemi Badenoch, Minister for Women and Equalities, who wants to clarify the protected characteristic of sex for purposes of the Equality Act 2010, saying that human rights law may require the statutory recognition of biological sex. There is huge concern about the interaction of ‘gender reassignment’ with ‘sex’ in the provision of women-only services.
The EHRC feels defining ‘sex’ as biological sex for the purposes of the Equality Act would bring greater legal clarity in a number of areas including the provision of single sex spaces in hospital wards, domestic refuges and free association of female-only groups. At the moment it is for a venue to try and interpret the law, often against a background of fear of an aggressive lobby which too often has managed to force the issue incorrectly in its favour.
Julia Pannell 12/04/23