Be More Kemi
As Critical Theory becomes more embedded, more normalised, it gets harder to put your finger on precisely what the problem is in any given interaction. Watch for the inversions and reversals.
In news that will surprise nobody at all, Government ministers have an agenda. Generally speaking, that’s they were elected. But those agendas need to be held in check, and it’s the job of parliamentary scrutiny committees to make sure that the policies delivered by government departments are appropriate, fair and lawful. There is a natural tension between the minister and the committee which is intended to deliver the best outcomes by avoiding groupthink. Cross-party committee appointees are expected to bring balance and rigour to the process.
The job of the Women and Equalities Committee is to hold the Government to account on matters relating to equality policy and law. And on the face of it, the robust exchanges we saw between the minister and the WEC on Wednesday 15 December showed this working as intended.
But something felt off.
That something was the reversals, and the subtle corruptions of the process that are the hallmark of Critical Theory and its poisonous offspring, Queer Theory.
The discussion on clarifying the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 was welcome and useful, as was the acknowledgement that the purpose of a GRC must be revisited. But it stopped being useful when a member of the WEC, Kate Osborne, claimed that discussion of these issues is causing “a rising tide of hate” against people who identify as the opposite sex (at 16:55), which she followed up with the accusation that Kemi Badenoch is “inflaming the situation at times, which I believe you have with some of the language that you have used”?
The primary purpose of parliament is to discuss, to debate, the big issues of the day, and yet here we have a member of parliament trying to close down the discussion on any terms other than her own.
Worse, Osborne put her own (or her advisors’) words into the minister’s mouth and accused her of using “inflammatory language”, thereby holding Kemi Badenoch to the exact same double standard applied to Rosie Duffield. It’s not by chance that Kate Osborne interpreted the word “epidemic” to mean “disease” rather than “widespread prevalence”. Despite having used it in exactly that way numerous times herself.
It's pure reversal. Osborne accused the minister of the very thing she has done herself, and it was very good to see Kemi Badenoch robustly call her out.
The claim that delays in “gender affirming treatment” are so serious that they are the cause of self-harm and suicide was laid at the minister’s door despite that not being an equality issue. Even while the idea that there was an explosion of need for these services was both recognised and dismissed as being without evidence.
All of which points to a more subtle reversal.
The minister was being forced to hold the Women and Equalities Committee to account. For making false statements, for “just making stuff up”, and for asking questions way outside the equalities remit.
The most concerning reversal of all is the groupthink within the WEC which is entirely unmitigated by having cross-party appointees if they are adherents of Critical Theory and Queer Theory. The notions of equality and justice mean something new for them. They’ve even redefined the word “women”. And their adherence to these beliefs transcends party lines.
Caroline Nokes who chairs the WEC has made no secret of her support for gender self-ID, and as reported by The Times in January 2023 spoke against the Westminster veto of the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform Bill:
the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill delivers many of the recommendations of her Westminster committee, except the provision to cut the age of legal gender transition to 16.
It’s not just Nokes who has declared for the biological equivalent of flat-earthism, though. Kate Osborne is comfortable making science-denying counterfactual statements like “some women have a penis”.
Kirsten Oswald has actively campaigned to erase the sex-based rights that other women fought so hard for:
And what does “There is no solidarity without trans solidarity” even mean, Bell Ribeiro-Addy?
“Trans liberation” from whom? From what?
Here’s Kim Johnson rewriting history and declaring fealty to the orthodoxy
And Carolyn Harris (albeit back in 2018) posted:
It was good to meet with members of Lloyd's Gender Inclusion and LGBT networks earlier today to discuss trans rights and what the business community can do towards inclusion #LloydsResponsibleBusiness#LloydsPeople
Caroline Dineage was an early adopter with this post from 2016, and she’s not changed her mind as far as I know.
Supporting transgender day of visibility - helping raise awareness of trans issues #Morethanvisibility #tdov
Posting in support of self-ID, Elliot Colburn had this to say:
Last week, I spoke on the Government’s response to the Gender Recognition Act consultation. I welcomed the first steps toward reform the Minister set out, but I was clear that these need to go further for our friends in the trans community.
The rainbow lanyard he wore in the WEC meeting tells its own story.
Of the 11 members of the Women and Equalities Committee, only Dr Lisa Cameron and Jackie Doyle-Price have spoken to retain women’s rights to single-sex spaces, while the position of Lia Nici on this issue is unclear.
Thank goodness, then, for Kemi. Thank goodness there are some politicians who are still able to think for themselves, to look at the evidence and to speak with clarity.
Notice the reversals. Be more Kemi.
December 2023 WEC Members
Rt Hon Caroline Nokes MP @carolinenokes
Dr Lisa Cameron MP (No twitter account)
Elliot Colburn MP @ElliotColburn
Dame Caroline Dinenage MP @cj_dinenage
Jackie Doyle-Price MP @JackieDP
Carolyn Harris MP @carolynharris24
Kim Johnson MP @KimJohnsonMP
Lia Nici MP @lia_nici
Kate Osborne MP @KateOsborneMP
Kirsten Oswald MP @kirstenoswald
Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP @BellRibeiroAddy