(LifeSiteNews) — The transgender movement took over our institutions inside of a decade and promptly entrenched. Pronoun policies, “misgendering” bans, and the comprehensive enforcement of gender ideology promptly followed. But as the transgender movement begins to lose ground in places like the U.K., those same institutions are now risking a catastrophic loss in credibility as transgender activists cling to their territorial gains for dear life in the face of growing public backlash.
Let me provide two examples.
In Scotland, the police have been getting hammered in the press for allowing rapists to “self-declare” their preferred gender – in order to create “a strong sense of identity.” Members of Scottish Parliament submitted a petition to Police Scotland from the all-female policy analysts Murray Blackburn Mackenzie expressing concern that male sexual offenders were being recorded in crime statistics as women, despite, as The National reported, the fact that “the legal definition of rape” specifically involves male genitalia.
The petition asked MSPs “to urge the Scottish Government to require Police Scotland, the Crown Office and the Scottish Court Service to record accurately the sex of people charged with or convicted of rape or attempted rape.” The MSPs, in turn, asked Police Scotland to give “a clear explanation of how its policy on recording the sex of perpetrators of crimes aligns to the organisation’s values.” This, according to Murray Blackburn Mackenze, was the fourth time such a request has been submitted.
Police Scotland responded in March, stating that the “sex/gender identification of individuals who come into contact with the police will be based on how they present or how they self-declare.” According to Police Scotland, this was due to “legislative compliance, operational need and the values of respect, integrity, fairness and human rights while promoting a strong sense of belonging” and that:
Police Scotland requires no evidence or certification as proof of biological sex or gender identity other than a person’s self-declaration, unless it is pertinent to any investigation with which they are linked as a victim, witness or accused, and it is evidentially critical that we legally require this proof, or there is reason for further inquiry based on risk.
To summarize: Male rapists can be recorded as women simply because they decide to, and no evidence whatsoever will be required at them – despite the legal definition of rape. The actual sex of the perpetrator is not considered “evidentially critical” by Police Scotland. As MBM stated in their response: “There is no ‘legislative’ requirement for Police Scotland to allow men accused or charged with rape to be recorded as female. Nor are we aware of any ‘operational need’. We think the policy is morally indefensible and indicative of an organisation that does not take the interests of women seriously.” For Women Scotland concurred in a statement to The National:
We were beyond shocked and dismayed by the treatment of victims by the Scottish judicial system. We never expected that Police Scotland would rate a rapist’s ‘strong sense of belonging’ above the law as set out in the Court of Session’s ruling last year, and above the impact of such a grotesque lie on women who have already suffered so much at the hands of an abuser. This is a gross insult to all women who are being told, without irony, that some of the most violent men in society want to ‘belong’ to the sex they target and that we have to accommodate them and affirm their delusions.
It seems likely that in the long term, Police Scotland will be forced to walk this position back due to public and political pressure as well as the ongoing disintegration of the transgender narrative. In the meantime, however, the transgender activist institutional capture of Police Scotland will guarantee that the badly-needed credibility of law enforcement will suffer enormously in the meantime as Police Scotland insists on defending premises that much of the public finds not only wrong-headed, but abhorrent.
The same is true with the ongoing fallout from the British Medical Association’s opposition to the U.K. government’s ban on puberty blockers for minors. As I’ve already reported in this space, over 1,000 doctors have signed a petition objecting to the position of the physicians’ union, and some prominent medical professionals have begun to resign from the BMA in protest. Now, the Guardian – a leftist, pro-LGBT publication – has published an article by their Health Policy Editor titled “BMA stance on Cass review of transgender care ‘has damaged its reputation’”:
The British Medical Association has threatened the reputation of all UK doctors by rejecting the findings of the landmark Cass review of [‘gender transition’ practices], a leading member of the BMA has told the Observer. Dr Jacky Davis claims that the doctors’ union’s stance on the Cass review is “irrational”, has created a “fracture” between its leadership and the grassroots doctors it represents and left the medical profession “in an uproar”.
The BMA refused to endorse the findings of Dr Hilary Cass, whose review was published in April and was widely welcomed. It claimed the review contained “unsubstantiated recommendations” and its council called on members to “publicly critique” it. Last month, the BMA also called for the ban on prescribing puberty blockers for under-18s to be lifted.
The BMA is the only medical organisation in Britain to not accept and to find fault with Cass’s findings, which were accepted by the last government and its Labour successor. It has said that it wants to carry out its own evaluation.
Doctors on the BMA’s ruling council who have dared to challenge its criticism of the Cass review have been subject to “abuse” and its decision-making body is now shrouded in “a climate of fear and intimidation”, Davis claims.
Writing in the Observer, Davis, who has been a member of the association’s council for 18 years, says: “The BMA now finds itself isolated in its opposition to Cass, and with its reputation and integrity damaged.”
A number of other council members affirmed Davis’s assertion. As with Police Scotland, we have a prominent, important organization that requires public trust in order to function effectively jettisoning that trust in order to kowtow to an ideology that is swiftly losing its grip on the public narrative. They will pay a price, and they would be wise to consider that now – before public trust is irreparably harmed.
