Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Happy clappy castration time.

Susan Buchanan, the director of National Specialist Services Division Scotland, apologised for the documents being uploaded in error and said her organisation would now commence a full investigation into the incident.

It shouldn’t be hard to find out who tried to insert these ideas into the document. Whoever it was should be fired. Perhaps this was somebody’s trial balloon, reeled in and walked back as soon as there was pushback. Had there not been, it would have stayed in place and become normalized as policy. I’m guessing that much of the genderist agenda that’s been introduced into various institutions and organizations has followed a similar path. Push, push, push, then wait to see what happens. Push: put TiMs in women’s prisons. Push: stop recording the sex of offenders. Push: let men who claim to be women compete against women. Push: erase the word “woman” from use in communications aimed specifically at women. If there are complaints, apologize and claim it was a “mistake.” If there is little or no resistance, (or resistance that can be dismissed and ignored), it stays put. Once established as the standard, resist reversals of policy once opposition arises (especially if it is only from women.) Rinse. Repeat.

None of these were “mistakes.” The only “mistake” was getting caught.Somebody, somewhere, thought these were all good policy ideas. Someone had to suggest them; others had to say “yes.” Then there’s implementation and enforcement. That’s not an accidental process. These things take time and effort and deliberation (even if the initial circle of decision makers is small.) They don’t happen by themselves, without guidance and planning. It’s as likely as “accidentally” building a cathedral.

If you’re around like-minded people, you might not know just how aberrant the ideas you’re batting around might look to the unwashed and unitiated masses. Not everyone is going to find the contents of your id as enternaining as you do. The usual tools of discussion, consultation, and debate are a necessary reality check that, ideally, should rein in stupid or dangerous ideas. The fact that these tools were not used in establishing the above noted “inclusive” policies that feminists are now trying to roll back, is all too obvious.