Different definitions legally
JKR reminds us of Anneliese Dodds’s chat with Emma Barnett on Woman’s Hour two years ago.
Emma Barnes: And Labour’s definition of a woman?
Annaliese Dodds: Well, I have to say that there are different definitions legally around what a woman actually is. I mean you look at the definition within the Equality Act and I think it just says someone who is adult and female, I think, but then doesn’t say how you define either of those things. I mean that’s then… you’ve got the biological definition, the legal definition, all of this kind of thing.
Emma Barnes: With respect I didn’t ask for that. What’s the Labour definition?
Annaliese Dodds: Well, I think with respect Emma I think it does depend what the context is, surely. You know there are people who have decided to…that they have to make that transition. You know, I’ve spoken with many of them. It’s been a very difficult process for many of those people, and you know understandably because they live as a woman they want to be defined as a woman. That’s what the Gender Recognition Act – again a Labour process – brought into place.
Let’s think about that. “It’s been a very difficult process for many of those people, and you know understandably because they live as a woman they want to be defined as a woman.”
It’s been hard work for these men to pretend to be women, therefore we should all pretend they are indeed women.
Hey, it’s hard work to break into a bank vault; does that mean the breakers-in should be allowed to keep the money?
Starmer did this as a calculated insult, didn’t he. He has to have, because he can’t not know what an insult it is.
This appointment (given her baggage), looks like a repudiation from Starmer’s position after the Blair Penis/Vagina Consultation. Tactical withdrawal before the election, followed by strategic advance afterwards.
Labour’s “Day One” plans for women’s subjugation to trans “rights” proceeds apace.