The private members Bill on period poverty sponsored by SDLP MLA Pat Catney passed at second stage in the Stormont Assembly on Tuesday.
As we pointed out in an earlier piece, the legislation itself is pretty uncontentious within the parameters of welfarist policy and has given rise to no opposition with regards to its actual proposals. What it has done is to highlight again the painful degradation of language and the disregard for biological facts in order to comply with an ideological agenda.
Catney’s Bill refers to “persons” who require period products, and nowhere mentions women or girls. When pressed on this, the MLA who represents Lagan Valley made the absurd claim that “some men experience menstruation.”
The agenda in question is transgenderism and in common with all extremist dogmas it has now given rise to a mini-civil war among the left as the different factions turn on one another over the interpretation of the edicts.
Old school feminists and many gay women appear to have had enough of the never-ending nonsense. Curiously, much of the nonsense is emanating from men who have decided that they are now women, and even lesbians.
In the north of Ireland context this has led to an appeal from trans activist Adrianne Elson for “compromise” in regard to the wording of the Catney Bill whose lack of reference to women – almost uniquely pointed out by Gript – has irked many. Elson’s proposed compromise is quite funny, as this person has suggested that there might be a way to include women in the text. Almost as an afterthought.
Maya Forstater of the feminist group Sex Matters was having none of that. She told BBC Ulster that “periods happen to women and girls because of their sex. It’s really clear. We have words for women and girls and we don’t need to replace them.”
Which places her in the curious company of Jim Allister of Traditional Unionist Voice who was the sole Stormont MLA to make that same, and pretty obvious point in the debate on the Catney Bill. Allister stated that “It is quite clear that need is the need of those who menstruate, and they, of course are women and girls, and no-one else.”
He was interrupted by Paula Bradshaw of Alliance who asked him did he not think he was being offensive to the transgender community, “many of whom suffer from severe mental health issues.”.
Sinéad Bradley, a comrade of Catney’s in the increasingly ridiculous SDLP (think Woke Fianna Fáil for reference) interjected to point out the need for the Bill to be inclusive of “someone being born intersex.”
Which surely begs the question as to how much primary legislation is drafted with a view to possibly not offending somewhere in the region of 18 in every 100,000 people of whom a tiny % again might menstruate?
Well, seen as the British National Health Service is now the ideal venerated by pro-abortion former northern nationalists in the SDLP and Sinn Féin, perhaps they will accept that august body’s medically based opinion on all of this, viz:
Someone ought to tell Ogra Shinn Fhéin perhaps.
Not merely the absurdity of all of this but its malign consequence for rational debate is illustrated by the fact that – other than when the occasional person sticks their head over the parapet and points out the facts and invites virulent attack –the issue itself is debated at Stormont and in Leinster House and elsewhere with absolutely no reference to the possibility of “persons” other than women and girls having the need to access period products.
Everyone knows that it is biologically impossible for anyone but women and girls to menstruate, so why do people who are elected to positions of responsibility feel the need to pretend otherwise?
To conclude on an optimistic note, it is encouraging that someone like Catney – who obviously thought this was a way to wean back his party’s rapidly diminishing electoral base – is being made look a prize fool whose only excuse was that he claims that he had to draft the bill using “gender neutral language” because he was told to by the Equality Commission.
Says it all really …