In the Kate Bush song Experiment IV, she describes a secret military experiment designed to create a sound so horrifying it could kill.
From the painful cry of mothers
To the terrifying scream
We recorded it and put it into our machine
They told us all they wanted
Was a sound that could kill someone from a distance
Honestly, it’s hard not to think of the trans debate when I hear that. A conversation so relentlessly toxic, it feels like it could have been engineered in a dark basement in Moscow by Russian psy-ops specialists hell-bent on watching the West tear itself apart.
The whole thing centres on an issue affecting a relatively small number of people, yet somehow it manages to consume vast amounts of political energy and media oxygen. That alone is worth some reflection.
The latest chapter in this particular saga is the UK Supreme Court ruling. From the BBC:
On Wednesday, the UK’s highest court ruled that the definition of a woman in equality legislation refers to someone who is biologically female. The Supreme Court found in a unanimous decision that the meaning of woman in anti-discrimination law does not extend to a trans woman with a gender recognition certificate.
The Scottish government argued in court that transgender people with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) are entitled to the same sex-based protections as biological women.
The Supreme Court was asked to decide on the proper interpretation of the 2010 Equality Act, which applies across Britain.
Lord Hodge said the central question was how the words “woman” and “sex” are defined in the legislation.
He told the court: “The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.
“But we counsel against reading this judgement as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another, it is not.”
He added that the legislation gives transgender people “protection, not only against discrimination through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, but also against direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and harassment in substance in their acquired gender”.
Despite Lord Hodge’s careful words, they seemed to fall on deaf ears. Social media, as always, reacted like a toddler on too much sugar—frenzied, furious, and completely incapable of nuance. Hot takes flew thick and fast, with many convinced this was about pushing trans people back into rainbow-coloured closets.
And me? I’m opting out. There’s no way to express an opinion on this without offending someone. So I’ll just let you all carry on.
Just remember the Slugger golden rule: play the ball, not the man. Or rather—play the ball, not the man/woman/non-binary person/carbon-based lifeform… you get the idea.
Managing Editor of Slugger O’Toole. I help to manage Slugger by taking care of the site as well as running our live events. My background is in business, marketing and IT. My politics tend towards middle-of-the-road pragmatism; I am not a member of any political party. When not stuck in front of a screen, I am a parkrun Run Director.
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
