Main Edition
US
FR
"She only has herself to blame." Andy Buchanan/ POOL/AFP/Getty Images.
So it’s goodbye from Nicola Sturgeon. During a relatively expansive press conference on Wednesday — the prolonged duration of which somewhat undermined her claim that she always knows when it’s time to go — she offered the official version of why she was stepping down. No, this was definitely not a response to “short-term pressures” such as the Isla Bryson prison controversy or the ongoing investigation into SNP financial irregularity. As if delivering a shocking revelation to her audience, she confided that the real reason was because she was “a human being”. Politics has more “intensity” and “brutality” these days than it used to, she said, and her heart is no longer in it.
During her address to journalists, the First Minister’s well-honed rhetorical abilities cast their usual spell — broken only during the Q&A, when she was asked about her legacy of a collapsing NHS, widening attainment gaps in literacy and numeracy in schools, and soaring numbers of drug deaths every year. Before that, though, we were firmly in Sturgeonland, where — a bit like being on a Highland distillery tour — reality tends to disappear in a euphoric haze and temporarily everything looks better than it actually is.
Despite plummeting personal approval ratings, she focused several times on consoling those who, she assumed, would be saddened by her departure, giving the impression of trying to avert outpourings of weeping in the streets. Putting an optimistic gloss on the general mediocrity of her party, she implied that for too long she had eclipsed the many talented SNP politicians with her own brilliance, promising that from now on we would be able to see them more clearly. And perhaps most startlingly — fresh from calling critics of her government’s gender law reforms “homophobic” and “racist” only a fortnight ago — she noted that, over the years, she had somehow become a lightning rod for “irrationality” in the “tone and tenor of discourse” on controversial areas, and expressed the fervent desire that things be less polarised from now on.
All of this must have been quite enraging for one of the few actually talented individuals left in the SNP, Joanna Cherry. Cherry is well-known for disagreeing with the party line on gender law reform in favour of self-identification, arguing that it will harm women’s and lesbians’ rights. In 2021, on the same day that an SNP supporter sent her violent sexualised threats for which he was later convicted, Cherry was sacked from her Westminster front-bench role, apparently for her opposition to self-ID. You don’t get much more “intensity” and “brutality” in politics than that.
Equally, Sturgeon’s new turn as a pacifist in the culture wars must have been hard for Joan McAlpine to hear. She was a highly successful MSP for a decade, but was viciously ostracised in 2019 for expressing reservations about the conflation of sex and gender identity in the Scottish Census. She was eventually pushed out of politics via a gerrymandered party rule change that some suspected was deliberately designed to oust her.
Sturgeon did nothing at the time to reduce toxicity in the party with respect to Cherry and McAlpine, even when SNP MPs were openly describing the pair as hateful for views about self-ID which — it now turns out — most of the Scottish population share. Quite the contrary: she frequently turned the heat up, via the regular delivery of public statements of support for transactivist causes that could easily be read as green lights for others to carry on smearing. Right up until the moment a fortnight ago when the First Minister was left havering on ITV about whether Isla Bryson is or is not a woman, she tended to present any dissent towards the “trans women are women” mantra as the product of confused or malicious thinking. When a headteacher publicly sides with the school bullies, she might as well have declared open season on their victims.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeKathleen Stock at her finest. The writer herself having fallen foul of the mindlessness which Sturgeon personifies, she uses here the full range of her intellect to put on record the damage caused to both public debate and the reputation of Scottish politics, which Sturgeon has quite simply trashed.
Actually, i’ll revise that. Kathleen scarcely needed anything like the full range of her intellect in putting the record straight. The evidence has been staring us the face, the brazen stare of Sturgeon from her parliamentary pulpit, these past eight years.
Sturgeon’s contempt, as the writer points out, for virtually everyone except a miniscule minority over the issue of self-ID was only matched by Sturgeon’s attempt to self-ID as a glorious political leader. The dancing on the streets of Glasgow at her departure at least provides hope that the good people of Scotland retain some sense.
It remains only to feel vomitous at Sunak’s craven display of imbalanced praise for Sturgeon, that fixed grin every bit as false as the stare to camera of the departed self-idea.
Nicola Sturgeon had long been the cleverest politician in the UK. But power and success led her to believe that she could do anything, even obviously stupid stuff. Hubris beget nemesis.
Most Machiavellian rather than cleverest, I think.
More like Savonarola!
Good shout. Have you read George Eliot’s novel Romola?
No, to my eternal disgrace I haven’t, but will do so immediately!
Many thanks.
No, to my eternal disgrace I haven’t, but will do so immediately!
Many thanks.
Good shout. Have you read George Eliot’s novel Romola?
More like Savonarola!
Cleverest? What was her legacy, if not serial public policy failure? She was and will always be a one trick pony for whom the answer to everything is “independence”, which would see Scotland taking its economic and fiscal policy, and much else besides, directly from Brussels and Frankfurt.
Exactly. The English are to blame for her incompetence. A one trick pony whilst other suffer and she rakes in the cash.
Exactly. The English are to blame for her incompetence. A one trick pony whilst other suffer and she rakes in the cash.
I would suggest that while she was even more teflon-coated than Blair and exceedingly ruthless, she faced little competent opposition at Holyrood, save for Ruth Davidson who frequently bettered her at FMQs. With a compliant media and a population that kept voting for her party despite endless scandals and failures, she never really had to do anything other than bang on about independence. First time she really nailed her colours to the mast and holed below the waterline. I suspect that much of the woke zealotry came from being in coalition with the utterly insane Scottish Greens.
Yes, especially to that last sentence. Hopefully the Greens can now take their rightful place at the bottom of the list in Scottish politics.
Yes, especially to that last sentence. Hopefully the Greens can now take their rightful place at the bottom of the list in Scottish politics.
The woman is clearly as thick as pig-dung since she clearly actually believes that it is possible for people to change sex. So if she is the most clever politician in the UK it sets a very low bar. However this is probably appropriate, looking at the crazed antics of so many of the deluded denizens of Westminster
Surely she doesn’t actually believe that men can become women. Nobody sincerely believes that.
Surely she doesn’t actually believe that men can become women. Nobody sincerely believes that.
Nonsense. She simply demonstrates how craven and superficial the political media is in this country, and particularly in Scotland.
Something perhaps to do with the bizarre happy acceptance and now common practice of calling heads of presumed democracies as our “Leaders”, the title chosen and one is tempted to feel inspired by none other than the ‘success of Herr Hitler?
Notable too it seems in is its milder form with public speakers addressing their audience as “folks” as if assuming already a shared identity and common goal; and like revivalist preachers presume to be offering salvation to those seeking confirmation and/or persuasion with answers to as yet unresolved “burning issues’.
Sectarianism and fanaticism no stranger to political parties any less than religions in a godless world. And as so often these days, success in capturing the levers of power goes to one’s head that on the way up one had kept modestly covered.
Most Machiavellian rather than cleverest, I think.
Cleverest? What was her legacy, if not serial public policy failure? She was and will always be a one trick pony for whom the answer to everything is “independence”, which would see Scotland taking its economic and fiscal policy, and much else besides, directly from Brussels and Frankfurt.
I would suggest that while she was even more teflon-coated than Blair and exceedingly ruthless, she faced little competent opposition at Holyrood, save for Ruth Davidson who frequently bettered her at FMQs. With a compliant media and a population that kept voting for her party despite endless scandals and failures, she never really had to do anything other than bang on about independence. First time she really nailed her colours to the mast and holed below the waterline. I suspect that much of the woke zealotry came from being in coalition with the utterly insane Scottish Greens.
The woman is clearly as thick as pig-dung since she clearly actually believes that it is possible for people to change sex. So if she is the most clever politician in the UK it sets a very low bar. However this is probably appropriate, looking at the crazed antics of so many of the deluded denizens of Westminster
Nonsense. She simply demonstrates how craven and superficial the political media is in this country, and particularly in Scotland.
Something perhaps to do with the bizarre happy acceptance and now common practice of calling heads of presumed democracies as our “Leaders”, the title chosen and one is tempted to feel inspired by none other than the ‘success of Herr Hitler?
Notable too it seems in is its milder form with public speakers addressing their audience as “folks” as if assuming already a shared identity and common goal; and like revivalist preachers presume to be offering salvation to those seeking confirmation and/or persuasion with answers to as yet unresolved “burning issues’.
Sectarianism and fanaticism no stranger to political parties any less than religions in a godless world. And as so often these days, success in capturing the levers of power goes to one’s head that on the way up one had kept modestly covered.
I agree with every word of what you say, except for the last paragraph. One of the key things that did for Sturgeon was Sunak invoking Section 35 to block her GRR law, against advice of many Ministers and officials, and the subsequent realisation that a majority of Scots welcomed the intervention rather treating it as yet another reason to hate the English. Sunak hardly gave Sturgeon a ringing endorsement following her announcement, he was just being his usual polite self.
Yes, i’ll accept that. The trouble is, those who don’t look too closely into the legislative framework (probably a majority of the electorate?) will only see the soundbite. It would appear i’ve done both!! Sunak may have been better served by adding that particular difference to provide more balance.
Yes, i’ll accept that. The trouble is, those who don’t look too closely into the legislative framework (probably a majority of the electorate?) will only see the soundbite. It would appear i’ve done both!! Sunak may have been better served by adding that particular difference to provide more balance.
That seems a reasonable assessment of Kathleen Stock but she she was on on the ‘progressive’ bandwagon until she made the mistake of clambering off when the lunacy got too much.
These type of comments are as predictable as they are tiresome.
So is yours. If one day Kathleen Stock finds herself next to Sturgeon in some smart Edinburgh nursing home they can do their ‘forgetting’ together. Unless they have already forgotten for real.
So is yours. If one day Kathleen Stock finds herself next to Sturgeon in some smart Edinburgh nursing home they can do their ‘forgetting’ together. Unless they have already forgotten for real.
These type of comments are as predictable as they are tiresome.
No I am sorry
It is a very good article but as far as I can see until the recent falling out KS was very much in the same camp as Sturgeon and her ilk and enabled them
Where have we seen this tactic before
“Effectively, they paid this organisation and its parent charity, Equality Network, to tell them what to think on trans issues, and then obediently did exactly what they were told —”
Eh? I think you’ve lost touch with reality, Stock has never ever been in the same camp as Sturgeon.
Eh? I think you’ve lost touch with reality, Stock has never ever been in the same camp as Sturgeon.
Someone has the file of dirt and has aid they aren’t afraid to use it if you don’t resign.
I think Sunak’s praise for Nicholas was fulsome, using the cheat meaning of the word.
Residing at the other end of the M8, I am interested in the reaction to her departure in the dear old ‘Weeg’. As a major SNP stronghold, how has this been received? I’m raising a glass with the lads later, that’s for sure. I think a nice pink cosmopolitan cocktail in honour of her favourite business suit. Made with Beefeater London gin.
Wow, I thought Stock’s article was hard hitting enough but this adds to it! And I thoroughly agree with both.
“Scottish culture has a long and justly famed tradition of valuing independent thinking. There is a rejection of closed hierarchies of power, and a habit of nose-thumbing authority figures.”
Let us hope that Scotland can now return to that tradition which made the Scottish Enlightenment justly famed throughout Europe.
Nicola Sturgeon had long been the cleverest politician in the UK. But power and success led her to believe that she could do anything, even obviously stupid stuff. Hubris beget nemesis.
I agree with every word of what you say, except for the last paragraph. One of the key things that did for Sturgeon was Sunak invoking Section 35 to block her GRR law, against advice of many Ministers and officials, and the subsequent realisation that a majority of Scots welcomed the intervention rather treating it as yet another reason to hate the English. Sunak hardly gave Sturgeon a ringing endorsement following her announcement, he was just being his usual polite self.
That seems a reasonable assessment of Kathleen Stock but she she was on on the ‘progressive’ bandwagon until she made the mistake of clambering off when the lunacy got too much.
No I am sorry
It is a very good article but as far as I can see until the recent falling out KS was very much in the same camp as Sturgeon and her ilk and enabled them
Where have we seen this tactic before
“Effectively, they paid this organisation and its parent charity, Equality Network, to tell them what to think on trans issues, and then obediently did exactly what they were told —”
Someone has the file of dirt and has aid they aren’t afraid to use it if you don’t resign.
I think Sunak’s praise for Nicholas was fulsome, using the cheat meaning of the word.
Residing at the other end of the M8, I am interested in the reaction to her departure in the dear old ‘Weeg’. As a major SNP stronghold, how has this been received? I’m raising a glass with the lads later, that’s for sure. I think a nice pink cosmopolitan cocktail in honour of her favourite business suit. Made with Beefeater London gin.
Wow, I thought Stock’s article was hard hitting enough but this adds to it! And I thoroughly agree with both.
“Scottish culture has a long and justly famed tradition of valuing independent thinking. There is a rejection of closed hierarchies of power, and a habit of nose-thumbing authority figures.”
Let us hope that Scotland can now return to that tradition which made the Scottish Enlightenment justly famed throughout Europe.
Kathleen Stock at her finest. The writer herself having fallen foul of the mindlessness which Sturgeon personifies, she uses here the full range of her intellect to put on record the damage caused to both public debate and the reputation of Scottish politics, which Sturgeon has quite simply trashed.
Actually, i’ll revise that. Kathleen scarcely needed anything like the full range of her intellect in putting the record straight. The evidence has been staring us the face, the brazen stare of Sturgeon from her parliamentary pulpit, these past eight years.
Sturgeon’s contempt, as the writer points out, for virtually everyone except a miniscule minority over the issue of self-ID was only matched by Sturgeon’s attempt to self-ID as a glorious political leader. The dancing on the streets of Glasgow at her departure at least provides hope that the good people of Scotland retain some sense.
It remains only to feel vomitous at Sunak’s craven display of imbalanced praise for Sturgeon, that fixed grin every bit as false as the stare to camera of the departed self-idea.
An excellent evisceration of Sturgeon’s departing message by Kathleen Stock. However, Sturgeon’s modus operandi was to double down on the worst ideas that had already been adopted or proposed south of the border.
Self ID is still the prevailing official practice in large swathes of England in Bureaucratic circles even if many conservative politicians are seeking to draw distinctions. It should never be forgotten that the proposed introduction of this policy in Scotland was supported by Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green parties and it remains official policy of these parties in England. The Conservative Party would stand some chance of revival if only it could gird itself up to clearly adopt a conservative rather than progressive policy in this area.
I think you misspelt ‘any’ as ‘this’ at the end there.
Precisely.
Indeed my comment was too narrowly directed to this particular woke policy that has little popular support.
Precisely.
Indeed my comment was too narrowly directed to this particular woke policy that has little popular support.
Gender Identity ideology isn’t progressive, it’s regressive. The wealthier you are, the less it costs you. The poorest, least advantaged women pay the price. It legally defines us (all of us; people haven’t understood that the GRA redefined legal sex for everyone) by identification with regressive sexual stereotypes.
I accept your point but I think we all understand that “progressive” identifies a particular type of destructive policies advanced by the woke left.
Could we please stop accepting the definition of ‘progressive’ as it is trotted out to us. It is a way of pandering to minorities and is totalitarian in direction. We shouldn’t take such people at their own evaluation: it’s just another form of self-identification.
Could we please stop accepting the definition of ‘progressive’ as it is trotted out to us. It is a way of pandering to minorities and is totalitarian in direction. We shouldn’t take such people at their own evaluation: it’s just another form of self-identification.
More precisely, transgressive.
This is true of every so called progressive idea. The wealthy can indulge themselves financially insulated from the consequences and the poor reap the consequences
I accept your point but I think we all understand that “progressive” identifies a particular type of destructive policies advanced by the woke left.
More precisely, transgressive.
This is true of every so called progressive idea. The wealthy can indulge themselves financially insulated from the consequences and the poor reap the consequences
I agree but she was also very anti English in every thing she did and said. I have lived in Scotland for almost 30 years and her rhetoric, which carried on from Salmond, was always anti English and that was carried forward by her supporters all over Scotland. Any colour or race so long as not White English were welcome and although it is not easily seen in public, it sits under the surface everywhere and that is why her mindless supporters could be rallied at every election.
I suspect you are right but what you speak of may have a longer history.
There was a BBC radio 4 documentary broadcast more than 20 years ago about about the discrimination and even violence suffered by English people living in Scotland. It stuck in my mind because it came as such a surprise.
Very much more recently a colleague told me that when her parents divorced she moved with her mother from the home counties up to the west of Scotland. She attended a local school where she had to be kept in during breaks and at lunchtimes to avoid being beaten up. The attitude of the staff was that this was more or less inevitable because she was English and there was nothing else to be done
Even longer ago than 20 years. More than 40 years ago, having moved from Bedfordshire to Scotland my son was told in the (unsupervised) school playground “go home f—–g englishman”. Innocently unaware of anti English racism we were stunned and found no support from the school staff.
Typical.
Sorry to hear that Brenda. As a native of Scotland now residing in Bedfordshire, any real anti-Scottish racism is extremely rare in my personal experience.
How things have changed. In 1966 the overwhelming majority of Scots supported England against Germany in the World Cup Final. Now it is ABE (Anyone But England) which I find disgraceful.
Typical.
Sorry to hear that Brenda. As a native of Scotland now residing in Bedfordshire, any real anti-Scottish racism is extremely rare in my personal experience.
How things have changed. In 1966 the overwhelming majority of Scots supported England against Germany in the World Cup Final. Now it is ABE (Anyone But England) which I find disgraceful.
Even longer ago than 20 years. More than 40 years ago, having moved from Bedfordshire to Scotland my son was told in the (unsupervised) school playground “go home f—–g englishman”. Innocently unaware of anti English racism we were stunned and found no support from the school staff.
I suspect you are right but what you speak of may have a longer history.
There was a BBC radio 4 documentary broadcast more than 20 years ago about about the discrimination and even violence suffered by English people living in Scotland. It stuck in my mind because it came as such a surprise.
Very much more recently a colleague told me that when her parents divorced she moved with her mother from the home counties up to the west of Scotland. She attended a local school where she had to be kept in during breaks and at lunchtimes to avoid being beaten up. The attitude of the staff was that this was more or less inevitable because she was English and there was nothing else to be done
Progressive or’progresssive’?
I think you misspelt ‘any’ as ‘this’ at the end there.
Gender Identity ideology isn’t progressive, it’s regressive. The wealthier you are, the less it costs you. The poorest, least advantaged women pay the price. It legally defines us (all of us; people haven’t understood that the GRA redefined legal sex for everyone) by identification with regressive sexual stereotypes.
I agree but she was also very anti English in every thing she did and said. I have lived in Scotland for almost 30 years and her rhetoric, which carried on from Salmond, was always anti English and that was carried forward by her supporters all over Scotland. Any colour or race so long as not White English were welcome and although it is not easily seen in public, it sits under the surface everywhere and that is why her mindless supporters could be rallied at every election.
Progressive or’progresssive’?
An excellent evisceration of Sturgeon’s departing message by Kathleen Stock. However, Sturgeon’s modus operandi was to double down on the worst ideas that had already been adopted or proposed south of the border.
Self ID is still the prevailing official practice in large swathes of England in Bureaucratic circles even if many conservative politicians are seeking to draw distinctions. It should never be forgotten that the proposed introduction of this policy in Scotland was supported by Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green parties and it remains official policy of these parties in England. The Conservative Party would stand some chance of revival if only it could gird itself up to clearly adopt a conservative rather than progressive policy in this area.
My question is why did Nicola Sturgeon chose to “put the vested interests of a small group of privileged, university-educated activists over the interests of huge swathes of ordinary Scottish women”.
Was it to support deeply held political beliefs, was it a quid pro quo for some political advantage, or did she find herself on a bandwagon going too fast to jump off?
In any event you might reasonably argue that Sturgeon had only contempt for huge swathes of ordinary Scottish women. Machine politics at the most obviously worst.
A very good question. I have yet to hear a very good answer. Ms Sturgeon has been portrayed as a canny politian, and yet she went with this programme. Did she not know how the aversge Scot felt about this? Or did she just think that she was somehow so beloved by all that she could do as she wished? The same seems to hold in England, will we have to wait for something like the Isla Bryson debacle before people will wake up to all this? Also, it’s not just the trans stuff, there is also the “anti-racism” movement who are determined to destroy any racial harmony in this country, to trample over free speech and reduce our universities to madrasas.
It was a display of power. The absurdity of the lie is a feature not a bug. And she very nearly got away with it.
I cannot remember who, but someone who had been a subject in a socialist regime speculating why the regime forced its subject to profess support for or belief in ideas that were patently absurd.
His conclusion was the purpose was to humiliate you and to teach you that you were powerless
Theodore Dalrymple pretty much said the same thing:
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
Julian
Thank you. It was Mr Dalrymple I was thinking of. Of course he puts it far better than I ever could
Julian
Thank you. It was Mr Dalrymple I was thinking of. Of course he puts it far better than I ever could
Theodore Dalrymple pretty much said the same thing:
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
I am starting to think that this is the correct explanation. It is an act of submission to pretend to believe this. That is the whole point in forcing people down this path.
Trans activism is huge in the US. She could count on plaudits from the New York Times , and that paper’s Anglophobia would have made it seem an attractive ally.
I don’t know why the New York Times is always singled out as Anglophobic, the Washington Post is even worse
I don’t know why the New York Times is always singled out as Anglophobic, the Washington Post is even worse
Trans activism is huge in the US. She could count on plaudits from the New York Times , and that paper’s Anglophobia would have made it seem an attractive ally.
Interesting thought.
I myself am leaning toward her having a belief in a special gnostic disposition. That is, a disposition that a person can have an intuitive or revelatory secret higher truth or knowledge (gnosis) – that they have been thrown into a prison of being, of existence or of their body, that they must escape from.
That gnosis grounds their way of understanding the world – their epistemology.
That is why she was wrapping herself up in a Gordian Knot when interrogated by the ITV journo. She could not say the secret part out loud. Perhaps that is because, if my explanation is right, she might be a Gnostic?
I cannot remember who, but someone who had been a subject in a socialist regime speculating why the regime forced its subject to profess support for or belief in ideas that were patently absurd.
His conclusion was the purpose was to humiliate you and to teach you that you were powerless
I am starting to think that this is the correct explanation. It is an act of submission to pretend to believe this. That is the whole point in forcing people down this path.
Interesting thought.
I myself am leaning toward her having a belief in a special gnostic disposition. That is, a disposition that a person can have an intuitive or revelatory secret higher truth or knowledge (gnosis) – that they have been thrown into a prison of being, of existence or of their body, that they must escape from.
That gnosis grounds their way of understanding the world – their epistemology.
That is why she was wrapping herself up in a Gordian Knot when interrogated by the ITV journo. She could not say the secret part out loud. Perhaps that is because, if my explanation is right, she might be a Gnostic?
I suspect she agreed with it but moreover it was seen another low cost way of burnishing her image as a progressive figure and wanting to be on ‘the right side of history’ (whatever that actually means). She also never lost any opportunity to create or amplify any differences with England, so I think she probably thought there was some easy political capital to be made.
I agree. I have yet to hear or read a good answer.
It was a display of power. The absurdity of the lie is a feature not a bug. And she very nearly got away with it.
I suspect she agreed with it but moreover it was seen another low cost way of burnishing her image as a progressive figure and wanting to be on ‘the right side of history’ (whatever that actually means). She also never lost any opportunity to create or amplify any differences with England, so I think she probably thought there was some easy political capital to be made.
I agree. I have yet to hear or read a good answer.
I think because she thought it would be an easy win that would make her look good. When it started to unravel she could never back out for fear of losing face, so she kept doubling down.
I, for one, don’t believe she believes it.
She took this route so that, upon the inevitable triggering of s.35, she could dramatically advance the cause of nationalism by claiming Westminster was blocking a policy of Hollyrood. Quite straightforward political gamesmanship, banking on the momentum apathy or mass boredom. Her strategy failed only when the trial of the trans rapist careered into front and centre, a risk her advisors had not seen, quite a misstep and actually an indicator as to how clever she was as a politician.
I think it was an inevitable extension of how she perceives herself and her need for recognition/adulation. She sees herself as one of the great progressive change makers but felt that ‘Scotland’ was too insignificant to showcase her credentials to a global audience.
I don’t think she’s actually very intelligent or a deep thinker so she looked at what others she wanted to be ranked alongside were championing and lighted on what Ardern and Trudeau were effecting with ‘trans rights’.
She bit off more than she could chew in the alliances she formed and never stood a chance of controlling the process and how far it went. As Kathleen and others have noted her tactic is always to double down when things don’t pan out – she could have reined it back in under the guise of “further consultation” at numerous points but can’t bear to admit that she isn’t in control.
Best explanation
Best explanation
It is one of the biggest ironies of Sturgeon that she so clearly holds large portions of the Scottish population in contempt and pushes on with vastly unpopular policies regardless…while all the time sounding off that the Scots are being denied democracy because the UK government won’t (yet) allow another independence referendum (a constitutionally cut-and-dried question).
You cannot make this stuff up.
Scotland is fast becoming indistinguishable from South Africa. The ANC and SNP are effectively untouchable, regardless of the misery they inflict upon citizens. Once you have such a situation, power and it’s pursuit simply becomes its own end; the chilling redactions after the (illegal) action against Salmond; the insulting & robotic “I do not recall” protestations; the sinister abuse of the Procurator Fiscal as an SNP party tool; we are in full one party junta territory.
A very good question. I have yet to hear a very good answer. Ms Sturgeon has been portrayed as a canny politian, and yet she went with this programme. Did she not know how the aversge Scot felt about this? Or did she just think that she was somehow so beloved by all that she could do as she wished? The same seems to hold in England, will we have to wait for something like the Isla Bryson debacle before people will wake up to all this? Also, it’s not just the trans stuff, there is also the “anti-racism” movement who are determined to destroy any racial harmony in this country, to trample over free speech and reduce our universities to madrasas.
I think because she thought it would be an easy win that would make her look good. When it started to unravel she could never back out for fear of losing face, so she kept doubling down.
I, for one, don’t believe she believes it.
She took this route so that, upon the inevitable triggering of s.35, she could dramatically advance the cause of nationalism by claiming Westminster was blocking a policy of Hollyrood. Quite straightforward political gamesmanship, banking on the momentum apathy or mass boredom. Her strategy failed only when the trial of the trans rapist careered into front and centre, a risk her advisors had not seen, quite a misstep and actually an indicator as to how clever she was as a politician.
I think it was an inevitable extension of how she perceives herself and her need for recognition/adulation. She sees herself as one of the great progressive change makers but felt that ‘Scotland’ was too insignificant to showcase her credentials to a global audience.
I don’t think she’s actually very intelligent or a deep thinker so she looked at what others she wanted to be ranked alongside were championing and lighted on what Ardern and Trudeau were effecting with ‘trans rights’.
She bit off more than she could chew in the alliances she formed and never stood a chance of controlling the process and how far it went. As Kathleen and others have noted her tactic is always to double down when things don’t pan out – she could have reined it back in under the guise of “further consultation” at numerous points but can’t bear to admit that she isn’t in control.
It is one of the biggest ironies of Sturgeon that she so clearly holds large portions of the Scottish population in contempt and pushes on with vastly unpopular policies regardless…while all the time sounding off that the Scots are being denied democracy because the UK government won’t (yet) allow another independence referendum (a constitutionally cut-and-dried question).
You cannot make this stuff up.
Scotland is fast becoming indistinguishable from South Africa. The ANC and SNP are effectively untouchable, regardless of the misery they inflict upon citizens. Once you have such a situation, power and it’s pursuit simply becomes its own end; the chilling redactions after the (illegal) action against Salmond; the insulting & robotic “I do not recall” protestations; the sinister abuse of the Procurator Fiscal as an SNP party tool; we are in full one party junta territory.
My question is why did Nicola Sturgeon chose to “put the vested interests of a small group of privileged, university-educated activists over the interests of huge swathes of ordinary Scottish women”.
Was it to support deeply held political beliefs, was it a quid pro quo for some political advantage, or did she find herself on a bandwagon going too fast to jump off?
In any event you might reasonably argue that Sturgeon had only contempt for huge swathes of ordinary Scottish women. Machine politics at the most obviously worst.
“The Great Forgetting”; brilliant Kathleen, absolutely brilliant. Perfectly sums up the way our politicians glide on past and leave behind their car crashes without a backward glance.
……and are usually the recipient of an ‘Honour’ for their ‘dis-service’ to the country…..
Fortunately that is far more difficult these days where “Sin lasts forever” and there is NO forgiveness.*
(* Thanks to the Internet.)
Alison Pearson has, for months, been using that expression to describe all those fans of extended lockdowns in the great Covid panic who now claim they were always against them now that the truely disasterous consequences of them are really starting to bite.
Currently in Auld Reekie. Genuinely surprised at how joyous everybody I’ve met is that Sturgeon is almost gone. Even those I expected to be neutral or even fans have been expressing their relief.
Regards
NHP
……and are usually the recipient of an ‘Honour’ for their ‘dis-service’ to the country…..
Fortunately that is far more difficult these days where “Sin lasts forever” and there is NO forgiveness.*
(* Thanks to the Internet.)
Alison Pearson has, for months, been using that expression to describe all those fans of extended lockdowns in the great Covid panic who now claim they were always against them now that the truely disasterous consequences of them are really starting to bite.
Currently in Auld Reekie. Genuinely surprised at how joyous everybody I’ve met is that Sturgeon is almost gone. Even those I expected to be neutral or even fans have been expressing their relief.
Regards
NHP
“The Great Forgetting”; brilliant Kathleen, absolutely brilliant. Perfectly sums up the way our politicians glide on past and leave behind their car crashes without a backward glance.
A magnificent rapier thrust at the death of a toxic reign! Kathleen, unarguably, is a standout Unherd Star! This insightful evisceration of Sturgeon’s ‘legacy’ cleverly holds up a mirror to all the sycophants who supported her, whilst their eyes were telling them that ‘the king had no clothes’. This political obituary needs to be out there, beyond Unherd.
I agree that it deserves a much wider audience. I wonder if Unherd would look to syndicate the article?
Seconded.
Be interesting to see whether the Guardian would run it..
Thought crossed this mind as well… I fear, the “snowball-in-hell” analogy applies.
Thought crossed this mind as well… I fear, the “snowball-in-hell” analogy applies.
My thoughts too. Thinkers such as Kathleen can reach the parts that politicians /political pundits can’t – she would liven up the turgid debates on ‘Question Time’ – the weekly ‘bear bating’ of hapless politicians indulged in by the BBC.
Seconded.
Be interesting to see whether the Guardian would run it..
My thoughts too. Thinkers such as Kathleen can reach the parts that politicians /political pundits can’t – she would liven up the turgid debates on ‘Question Time’ – the weekly ‘bear bating’ of hapless politicians indulged in by the BBC.
I agree that it deserves a much wider audience. I wonder if Unherd would look to syndicate the article?
A magnificent rapier thrust at the death of a toxic reign! Kathleen, unarguably, is a standout Unherd Star! This insightful evisceration of Sturgeon’s ‘legacy’ cleverly holds up a mirror to all the sycophants who supported her, whilst their eyes were telling them that ‘the king had no clothes’. This political obituary needs to be out there, beyond Unherd.
Superb article, well expressed. For too long it has seemed impossible to voice criticism of Nicola Sturgeon or to mention the appalling failures for Scotland during her tenure, and policies brought in by the SNP with little credible opposition. It is not healthy in a democracy to have so much power in the hands of one political party, and in particular one particular person.
Superb article, well expressed. For too long it has seemed impossible to voice criticism of Nicola Sturgeon or to mention the appalling failures for Scotland during her tenure, and policies brought in by the SNP with little credible opposition. It is not healthy in a democracy to have so much power in the hands of one political party, and in particular one particular person.
Her mien is very ‘reassuring sensible Mummy who will protect you and solve problems’. That Mummy actually wants you banged-up with a rapist to keep herself in power takes some processing but the women of Scotland got there in the end.
Interesting. If she were my mummy I would have run away from home at the earliest possible moment. Her mien is, to me anyway, quite creepy.
Interesting. If she were my mummy I would have run away from home at the earliest possible moment. Her mien is, to me anyway, quite creepy.
Her mien is very ‘reassuring sensible Mummy who will protect you and solve problems’. That Mummy actually wants you banged-up with a rapist to keep herself in power takes some processing but the women of Scotland got there in the end.
As always, a brilliant article from Dr. (now Professor again?) Kathleen Stock.
If I might be allowed one micro-quibble, unless you were being sarcastic, I think you exaggerated “independent thinking” as a Scottish trait. You only have to look at the frontrunners for Nicola’s replacement to get the general idea.
Kate Forbes’ faith group, the Free Church of Scotland is “free” in the same sense that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is democratic. They are never happier than when padlocking the playground swings on the Sabbath.
You quoted Burns’ “A man’s a man for a’ that”, but
Angus Robertson always brings to mind P.G. Wodehouse’s quip: ‘It is never difficult to distinguish between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.’
Peter Murrel (not a runner, but Nicola’s bloke and SNP president) brings to mind J.M. Barrie: “There are few more impressive sights than a Scotsman on the make”.
I say this as someone who would never dream of leaving Scotland, despite Nicola’s higher tax rate.
As always, a brilliant article from Dr. (now Professor again?) Kathleen Stock.
If I might be allowed one micro-quibble, unless you were being sarcastic, I think you exaggerated “independent thinking” as a Scottish trait. You only have to look at the frontrunners for Nicola’s replacement to get the general idea.
Kate Forbes’ faith group, the Free Church of Scotland is “free” in the same sense that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is democratic. They are never happier than when padlocking the playground swings on the Sabbath.
You quoted Burns’ “A man’s a man for a’ that”, but
Angus Robertson always brings to mind P.G. Wodehouse’s quip: ‘It is never difficult to distinguish between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.’
Peter Murrel (not a runner, but Nicola’s bloke and SNP president) brings to mind J.M. Barrie: “There are few more impressive sights than a Scotsman on the make”.
I say this as someone who would never dream of leaving Scotland, despite Nicola’s higher tax rate.
An absolutely wonderful piece by Dr Stock, and I realise that she was addressing only one issue here, but she did mention in passing the near destruction of Scotland’s health service and her education system, the epidemic of drug deaths and the corruption in Scotland, as well as the public vendetta against Alex Salmond – I have little love for him, but he didn’t deserve what happened. In all, she has made Scotland into her own fifedom, and she is stepping down after trashing it. It might have been the trans mess that finally brought her down, but the Scottish people are better off without her toxic presence. It remains to be seen if they get anything better, because the SNP is not exactly bristling with highly competent people (as is also the case for the parties in England and Wales). In general the SNP needs to clean up its act, what it should be doing is preparing Scotland for independence whilst it is in power, this is its sole purpose – it’s what it says on the tin. As it stands, Scotland’s dependence on English tax-payers means that it is ill-prepared for any such move.
I know it’s a typo, but I absolutely love the idea of Scotland being Wee Burnie’s ‘own fifedom'(sic).
Actually, given who wrote it, it might not be a typo, just an example of outstanding wit. I wish I had thought of it.
“Flattery Will Get You Everywhere”.
“Flattery Will Get You Everywhere”.
Actually, given who wrote it, it might not be a typo, just an example of outstanding wit. I wish I had thought of it.
I know it’s a typo, but I absolutely love the idea of Scotland being Wee Burnie’s ‘own fifedom'(sic).
An absolutely wonderful piece by Dr Stock, and I realise that she was addressing only one issue here, but she did mention in passing the near destruction of Scotland’s health service and her education system, the epidemic of drug deaths and the corruption in Scotland, as well as the public vendetta against Alex Salmond – I have little love for him, but he didn’t deserve what happened. In all, she has made Scotland into her own fifedom, and she is stepping down after trashing it. It might have been the trans mess that finally brought her down, but the Scottish people are better off without her toxic presence. It remains to be seen if they get anything better, because the SNP is not exactly bristling with highly competent people (as is also the case for the parties in England and Wales). In general the SNP needs to clean up its act, what it should be doing is preparing Scotland for independence whilst it is in power, this is its sole purpose – it’s what it says on the tin. As it stands, Scotland’s dependence on English tax-payers means that it is ill-prepared for any such move.
She was a very clever operator when she promoted anti English sentiment. Unpleasant, but clever. She ran an absolutely hopeless Government. There is no successor in prospect who can be expected to do much better. Political pygmies all. So the legacy of Blair’s cynical policy of devolution, designed to keep Labour in power at Westminster, is two failing devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales. Drakeford has already committed himself to go down Sturgeon’s trans rabbit hole. Two wonderful parts of the UK, with glorious country and great people, damaged by fourth rate politicians most of whom have been nowhere and achieved nothing of substance in their lives. Shame.
She was a very clever operator when she promoted anti English sentiment. Unpleasant, but clever. She ran an absolutely hopeless Government. There is no successor in prospect who can be expected to do much better. Political pygmies all. So the legacy of Blair’s cynical policy of devolution, designed to keep Labour in power at Westminster, is two failing devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales. Drakeford has already committed himself to go down Sturgeon’s trans rabbit hole. Two wonderful parts of the UK, with glorious country and great people, damaged by fourth rate politicians most of whom have been nowhere and achieved nothing of substance in their lives. Shame.
Excellent article. I detest Sturgeon as quite possibly the most divisive, rabble rousing, hypocritical, and downright thuggish politician in Britain in decades. Instead of focusing on trans as the next big wedge issue over which to pick a fight with Westminster (a colossal and felicitous misjudgement) she should have focused on delivering on very well funded bread and butter concerns like health, education, drug deaths, alcohol abuse and even ferry building, all areas of decline and intergalactic mismanagement.
Yes, but bread-and-butter decency and efficiency don’t generate headlines and drive wedges.
Yes, but bread-and-butter decency and efficiency don’t generate headlines and drive wedges.
Excellent article. I detest Sturgeon as quite possibly the most divisive, rabble rousing, hypocritical, and downright thuggish politician in Britain in decades. Instead of focusing on trans as the next big wedge issue over which to pick a fight with Westminster (a colossal and felicitous misjudgement) she should have focused on delivering on very well funded bread and butter concerns like health, education, drug deaths, alcohol abuse and even ferry building, all areas of decline and intergalactic mismanagement.
Amazing how Nicola Sturgeon, and others, are prepared, thinkingly or unthinkingly, to say things they only believe when they are in a safe-place. Nicola was unlikely to be bothered by violent men claiming to be women in a Rape-Refuge Centre, unlikely to be sharing a shower in a prison with such a character, unlikely even to have to worry about unwanted attention in a changing-room trying on a new dress at a fashion shop. First Ministers have the level of protection not available to most women.
But when the storm broke over a convicted rapist, with a wonderful sense of timing when to announce a gender-change, all the protection officers in the world couldn’t shield Humpty Dumpty from the outrage of people who are not on the invitation list to the WEF. Had she really believed that, ” a trans-woman is a woman” she could have stood her ground and said, “No. She says she is a woman, so she’s a woman. A conviction for rape is irrelevant. As a woman she belongs in a female prison.”
Suddenly reality broke in, and the rest is history. It remains to be seen if the eventual autobiography outsells, “Spare”, and how far history is to be further re-written.
Amazing how Nicola Sturgeon, and others, are prepared, thinkingly or unthinkingly, to say things they only believe when they are in a safe-place. Nicola was unlikely to be bothered by violent men claiming to be women in a Rape-Refuge Centre, unlikely to be sharing a shower in a prison with such a character, unlikely even to have to worry about unwanted attention in a changing-room trying on a new dress at a fashion shop. First Ministers have the level of protection not available to most women.
But when the storm broke over a convicted rapist, with a wonderful sense of timing when to announce a gender-change, all the protection officers in the world couldn’t shield Humpty Dumpty from the outrage of people who are not on the invitation list to the WEF. Had she really believed that, ” a trans-woman is a woman” she could have stood her ground and said, “No. She says she is a woman, so she’s a woman. A conviction for rape is irrelevant. As a woman she belongs in a female prison.”
Suddenly reality broke in, and the rest is history. It remains to be seen if the eventual autobiography outsells, “Spare”, and how far history is to be further re-written.
the zeitgeist of today’s global decay
Tredeau, Biden, Sturgeon, Boris, Sunak, Hunt+Hancock, Jacinda, Macron, Merkel, Erdogan, Lula, Zelenski, et al…………….And then…….. Gates, Bezos, Claus, Yuval Harari, Zuckerberg, Dorsey, Fink, Buffett, Soros, Xi and Putin, Dalio, Legarde, the WEF’s faces…….
These are the elected world leaders??????? During the greatest existential times in all history? Fools, corrupt, useful idiots, and then sheer evil directing from the real top power….
Never has the world been led by such evil from behind the scenes, and then such corrupt fools as the elected heads of state. A powerful machine works behind the scenes to get the very worst of all elected.
No worry – someone as stupid and destructively useless will replace her, as surely as Kamala would replace Biden..haha, the world is F*** ed –
Your mindless hyperbole does a disservice to this fine article. Your rhetoric is actually part of the problem, firmly in the same territory that Kathleen Stock eviscerates with such intelligence.
I think Galeti has been short on the stock market for a while.
You think Sanford, maybe? There’s more than one contender among the current crop of regular posters.
You think Sanford, maybe? There’s more than one contender among the current crop of regular posters.
I think Galeti has been short on the stock market for a while.
Elected? You don’t appear to know what the word means.
Somebody forgot to take their meds today.
Too cruel.
Too cruel.
Your mindless hyperbole does a disservice to this fine article. Your rhetoric is actually part of the problem, firmly in the same territory that Kathleen Stock eviscerates with such intelligence.
Elected? You don’t appear to know what the word means.
Somebody forgot to take their meds today.
the zeitgeist of today’s global decay
Tredeau, Biden, Sturgeon, Boris, Sunak, Hunt+Hancock, Jacinda, Macron, Merkel, Erdogan, Lula, Zelenski, et al…………….And then…….. Gates, Bezos, Claus, Yuval Harari, Zuckerberg, Dorsey, Fink, Buffett, Soros, Xi and Putin, Dalio, Legarde, the WEF’s faces…….
These are the elected world leaders??????? During the greatest existential times in all history? Fools, corrupt, useful idiots, and then sheer evil directing from the real top power….
Never has the world been led by such evil from behind the scenes, and then such corrupt fools as the elected heads of state. A powerful machine works behind the scenes to get the very worst of all elected.
No worry – someone as stupid and destructively useless will replace her, as surely as Kamala would replace Biden..haha, the world is F*** ed –
The point about the Government funding charities to say what the Government wants is not brought out enough.
I am increasingly of the view that Government funding of charities or non profits is wrong – certainly if it is more than, say, 10% The charity will become dependent of Government and unmoored from its donors and original purpose.
The point about the Government funding charities to say what the Government wants is not brought out enough.
I am increasingly of the view that Government funding of charities or non profits is wrong – certainly if it is more than, say, 10% The charity will become dependent of Government and unmoored from its donors and original purpose.
Beyond Sturgeon’s narcissistic power-wielding and hypocrisy, she has also demonstrated a glaring lack of political instinct in placing her bets on the “trans women are women” issue. It was a slow-motion own goal that the nation could see unfolding – but to which she seemed utterly oblivious. Political circles are willing to excuse bullying and hypocrisy in pursuit of political gain clearly, but poor political instinct is a deal-breaker.
Beyond Sturgeon’s narcissistic power-wielding and hypocrisy, she has also demonstrated a glaring lack of political instinct in placing her bets on the “trans women are women” issue. It was a slow-motion own goal that the nation could see unfolding – but to which she seemed utterly oblivious. Political circles are willing to excuse bullying and hypocrisy in pursuit of political gain clearly, but poor political instinct is a deal-breaker.
“She purged reason from the gender debate.”
In fairness to her, she wasn’t the only one. I say this not to defend her – I cannot stand the woman and good riddance to her – but where this trans-rights fiasco is concerned, she’s merely one in a very long list of irrationalists, the rest of whom are still in jobs and still wrecking our institutions.
“She purged reason from the gender debate.”
In fairness to her, she wasn’t the only one. I say this not to defend her – I cannot stand the woman and good riddance to her – but where this trans-rights fiasco is concerned, she’s merely one in a very long list of irrationalists, the rest of whom are still in jobs and still wrecking our institutions.
She promoted the idea that all Scottish ills were the fault of the English. Maybe I’m sensitive but some of her rethoric was bordering on racist. One question that was never fully answered and was fundamental to Scottish independence, what would the Scottish nation use as a currency?
She promoted the idea that all Scottish ills were the fault of the English. Maybe I’m sensitive but some of her rethoric was bordering on racist. One question that was never fully answered and was fundamental to Scottish independence, what would the Scottish nation use as a currency?
“[Sturgeon] monomaniacally has put the vested interests of a small group of privileged, university-educated activists over the interests of huge swathes of ordinary Scottish women… And she has apparently done this for what she foolishly believed would be political gain.”
You can’t put it any better!
“[Sturgeon] monomaniacally has put the vested interests of a small group of privileged, university-educated activists over the interests of huge swathes of ordinary Scottish women… And she has apparently done this for what she foolishly believed would be political gain.”
You can’t put it any better!
Good takesdown of Sturgeon. She is an easy target, but it is important that easy targets are indeed targetted.
Good takesdown of Sturgeon. She is an easy target, but it is important that easy targets are indeed targetted.
“may well count as the most brass-necked reverse ferret of her long career”
Outstandingly vivid verbiage there. “Reverse ferret” should be a band name.
“may well count as the most brass-necked reverse ferret of her long career”
Outstandingly vivid verbiage there. “Reverse ferret” should be a band name.
Stupendous clarity, a plank, a blast, as we foundered in the doldrums of mainstream commentary. Thank you so much. Can now share and get on with my day.
Stupendous clarity, a plank, a blast, as we foundered in the doldrums of mainstream commentary. Thank you so much. Can now share and get on with my day.
Toxic seems an apt description.
Toxic seems an apt description.
Generally, I agree with the article. However, with apologies for cavilling, it’s arguably not quite accurate to suggest that Sturgeon and other transactivists are “hypocritical”. My impression is that they actually believe in it.
I consider trans ideology to be wholly illogical and that so-called trans people are mentally disturbed and / or exhibitionists and / or immature and in need of support and / or gay-denialists.
However, most transactivists I read about seem to be sincere in their beliefs.
Of course, when challenged in a debate about such matters, the various sink holes in their logic become apparent.
But that is not to say they’re hypocrites. Trans ideology is a mad secular church which seems to exert a powerful grip on well-meaning and otherwise rational people.
A pertinent point about who ‘believes’ or not is that some activists & ‘allies’ do seem to have at least some sense of compassion for the ‘gender confused’.
However, many of those actually calling themselves ‘trans’ know very well that they can’t change their sex. Their coyness about ‘bottom surgery’ suggests that they’re completely aware of what they’re doing & the vast majority of them who say they are ‘trans’ are fully intact downstairs. A sex fetish requires the sex organs to function after all! But they have a compulsion to fit a ‘female’ stereotype – to be seen as ‘beautiful’. Like preening peacocks crowing “Look at my fine feathers”. These are fetishist narcissistic autogynephiles seeking maximum attention & it seems to be driven by a deep resentment of women for the way they have become the dominant preeners in society – women get to wear the make-up, the dazzling gowns, all the trappings of super self-enhancement. (Even though the overwhelming majority of women don’t dress this way at all – most of us live in jeans & t shirts or jumpers). In the animal kingdom it’s the male that has the fine feathers & the more spectacular partner-attracting outward appearance & there’s no reason why human males can’t adorn themselves the same way if that’s what they want. It’s just not the current social norm, although Michael Jackson openly admitted that he embarked on his endless facial reconstruction specifically so that he could look like Diana Ross.
The other aspect of this entire fandango is that it seems to be only adult males who want to ‘be’ women. Where are all the adult human females who are clamouring to be men so that they can compete in men’s sports, go in the men’s toilets & be housed in women’s prisons? Young girls in their teens have been presenting recently as ‘gender-confused’, but their reasons are vastly different from those of adult men & in any case most of them grow out of it as they mature – the opposite of the male trajectory… not a word is ever reported about such an obvious anomaly.
This is a male porn & sex fetish that has leapt out of the closet & is now sitting at the end of the bed like a succubus. Personally I don’t give a toss what consenting adults do in private or how they choose to present themselves to the world. But the seemingly deliberate denial of all objective truth & reality is something we should all fight to the end to protect.
A pertinent point about who ‘believes’ or not is that some activists & ‘allies’ do seem to have at least some sense of compassion for the ‘gender confused’.
However, many of those actually calling themselves ‘trans’ know very well that they can’t change their sex. Their coyness about ‘bottom surgery’ suggests that they’re completely aware of what they’re doing & the vast majority of them who say they are ‘trans’ are fully intact downstairs. A sex fetish requires the sex organs to function after all! But they have a compulsion to fit a ‘female’ stereotype – to be seen as ‘beautiful’. Like preening peacocks crowing “Look at my fine feathers”. These are fetishist narcissistic autogynephiles seeking maximum attention & it seems to be driven by a deep resentment of women for the way they have become the dominant preeners in society – women get to wear the make-up, the dazzling gowns, all the trappings of super self-enhancement. (Even though the overwhelming majority of women don’t dress this way at all – most of us live in jeans & t shirts or jumpers). In the animal kingdom it’s the male that has the fine feathers & the more spectacular partner-attracting outward appearance & there’s no reason why human males can’t adorn themselves the same way if that’s what they want. It’s just not the current social norm, although Michael Jackson openly admitted that he embarked on his endless facial reconstruction specifically so that he could look like Diana Ross.
The other aspect of this entire fandango is that it seems to be only adult males who want to ‘be’ women. Where are all the adult human females who are clamouring to be men so that they can compete in men’s sports, go in the men’s toilets & be housed in women’s prisons? Young girls in their teens have been presenting recently as ‘gender-confused’, but their reasons are vastly different from those of adult men & in any case most of them grow out of it as they mature – the opposite of the male trajectory… not a word is ever reported about such an obvious anomaly.
This is a male porn & sex fetish that has leapt out of the closet & is now sitting at the end of the bed like a succubus. Personally I don’t give a toss what consenting adults do in private or how they choose to present themselves to the world. But the seemingly deliberate denial of all objective truth & reality is something we should all fight to the end to protect.
Generally, I agree with the article. However, with apologies for cavilling, it’s arguably not quite accurate to suggest that Sturgeon and other transactivists are “hypocritical”. My impression is that they actually believe in it.
I consider trans ideology to be wholly illogical and that so-called trans people are mentally disturbed and / or exhibitionists and / or immature and in need of support and / or gay-denialists.
However, most transactivists I read about seem to be sincere in their beliefs.
Of course, when challenged in a debate about such matters, the various sink holes in their logic become apparent.
But that is not to say they’re hypocrites. Trans ideology is a mad secular church which seems to exert a powerful grip on well-meaning and otherwise rational people.
Sometimes it’s not enough to blame the English.
But it is a good place to start.
Where else indeed?
Where else indeed?
But it is a good place to start.
Sometimes it’s not enough to blame the English.
An excellent essay, Kathleen! I admire your devastating ending:
“She’s right to say that Scottish politics has become more intense and brutal, but she only has herself to blame.”
Spot on!
Well, I’m not sure sturgeon is the only one to blame. She certainly dished out a large bowl for herself, though.
Well, I’m not sure sturgeon is the only one to blame. She certainly dished out a large bowl for herself, though.
An excellent essay, Kathleen! I admire your devastating ending:
“She’s right to say that Scottish politics has become more intense and brutal, but she only has herself to blame.”
Spot on!
“general miserabilist John Knox.”
A wonderful description, but let us NOT forget that Knox spent three years, naked, chained to the oar of a French galley.
What is Sturgeon’s excuse?
The Oar in a Scotch galley? No-one ever pulled on one.
The Oar in a Scotch galley? No-one ever pulled on one.
“general miserabilist John Knox.”
A wonderful description, but let us NOT forget that Knox spent three years, naked, chained to the oar of a French galley.
What is Sturgeon’s excuse?
Brilliant article Kathleen, many thanks!
Brilliant article Kathleen, many thanks!
The eventual demise of a demagogue who believes their own PR and believe it to be unassailable.
The eventual demise of a demagogue who believes their own PR and believe it to be unassailable.
Many mots justes here, but I still give the prize to Galloway: “Her pronouns are now ‘was’ and ‘were’.
Many mots justes here, but I still give the prize to Galloway: “Her pronouns are now ‘was’ and ‘were’.
Good stuff. How silly to be brought down by such silliness.
Go woke or go broke.
Isn’t this actually a case of ‘Go woke – go broke’?
Isn’t this actually a case of ‘Go woke – go broke’?
Good stuff. How silly to be brought down by such silliness.
Go woke or go broke.
Kathleen an excellent article. I’m shocked that Nicola Sturgeon has had so much influence, given your analysis of her actions. I always considered her to ooze self satisfaction but didn’t realise the extent of her hubris.
Kathleen an excellent article. I’m shocked that Nicola Sturgeon has had so much influence, given your analysis of her actions. I always considered her to ooze self satisfaction but didn’t realise the extent of her hubris.
Thank you, Kathleen. I am a born and bred Scot who has lived for many years in the south of England from where I have looked on in helpless horror at what has been done to my beautiful country and its people (not that politics down here is anything to write home about). I enjoyed the benefits of a good Scottish education and was brought up with the values of independent thinking, rationality, honest work and kindness as principles to live by. So much damage has been done to Scottish society by this party under NS’s leadership. I hope the other parties get their acts together quickly so that the electorate can escape the current stranglehold situation they have been subject to as a result of the voting/election arrangements that currently prevail in Holyrood.
Thank you, Kathleen. I am a born and bred Scot who has lived for many years in the south of England from where I have looked on in helpless horror at what has been done to my beautiful country and its people (not that politics down here is anything to write home about). I enjoyed the benefits of a good Scottish education and was brought up with the values of independent thinking, rationality, honest work and kindness as principles to live by. So much damage has been done to Scottish society by this party under NS’s leadership. I hope the other parties get their acts together quickly so that the electorate can escape the current stranglehold situation they have been subject to as a result of the voting/election arrangements that currently prevail in Holyrood.
Oh well, she had her hour, strutting and fretting on the stage, signifying nothing.
But, tell me, you Scots, how do you report her accent? Is it Estuary Scottish? Or what?
Really, her accent, not the damage she has done to civil society but her accent? Stay under your rock!
We Edinburgh folk would describe the accent of Glasgow, Renfrew and Nicola’s native Irvine as “Buckfast Triangle”.
BT for short?
Kathleen that was a humdinger of a piece.
Re Sturgeon’s accent. Buckfast Triangle! Thank you for that insight from the Latte Littoral Peter! : I find a lot of mirroring of what I would call her west coast mid Atlantic accent by her dunderheid colleagues and followers. I think Stalin’s henchmen often inserted a Georgian touch into their speech.
In Sturgeon’s case It’s mainly about substituting T:s for D’s mid word and elongating or truncating words with faux Scot’s. Language. The former
‘The people of ScoDland , the MajoriDY deserve to be heard by this corrupt UniDed English Parliament”
Pompous ex NATO buffoon George Robertson was the originaDor of this, but you’ll hear it from one trick actor Gerard BuDler
Then
They bizarrely call the “pandemic: which Sturgeon used as a shield as the “pindenic” as though it were a lockdown over acupuncture. do that say the Pin Am bombing at Lockerbie. No idea.
Anyway they say it that way because sturgeon says it that way. . Then there is the unnecessary elongation of certain words like institution as instiutInnnn or contradiction as ‘contradictinnnn”
A lot of young middle class Scots especially female now speak like that Clyde Valley girls I call them.
BT for short?
Kathleen that was a humdinger of a piece.
Re Sturgeon’s accent. Buckfast Triangle! Thank you for that insight from the Latte Littoral Peter! : I find a lot of mirroring of what I would call her west coast mid Atlantic accent by her dunderheid colleagues and followers. I think Stalin’s henchmen often inserted a Georgian touch into their speech.
In Sturgeon’s case It’s mainly about substituting T:s for D’s mid word and elongating or truncating words with faux Scot’s. Language. The former
‘The people of ScoDland , the MajoriDY deserve to be heard by this corrupt UniDed English Parliament”
Pompous ex NATO buffoon George Robertson was the originaDor of this, but you’ll hear it from one trick actor Gerard BuDler
Then
They bizarrely call the “pandemic: which Sturgeon used as a shield as the “pindenic” as though it were a lockdown over acupuncture. do that say the Pin Am bombing at Lockerbie. No idea.
Anyway they say it that way because sturgeon says it that way. . Then there is the unnecessary elongation of certain words like institution as instiutInnnn or contradiction as ‘contradictinnnn”
A lot of young middle class Scots especially female now speak like that Clyde Valley girls I call them.
She reminds me of Rab C. Nesbitt’s wife Mary Nesbitt?
Mary Nesbitt was smarter and nicer.
As there are many who think Sturgeon is the love child of Burnie Nesbitt and Jimmy Crankie (a triumph of thought over biology if ever there was one), that would make her Mary’s grandchild!
Wonderful!
Wonderful!
Mary Nesbitt was smarter and nicer.
As there are many who think Sturgeon is the love child of Burnie Nesbitt and Jimmy Crankie (a triumph of thought over biology if ever there was one), that would make her Mary’s grandchild!
Really, her accent, not the damage she has done to civil society but her accent? Stay under your rock!
We Edinburgh folk would describe the accent of Glasgow, Renfrew and Nicola’s native Irvine as “Buckfast Triangle”.
She reminds me of Rab C. Nesbitt’s wife Mary Nesbitt?
Oh well, she had her hour, strutting and fretting on the stage, signifying nothing.
But, tell me, you Scots, how do you report her accent? Is it Estuary Scottish? Or what?
Another populist bites the dust. She thrived as long as she only disdained The Elites ™, but could not survive disdaining the people.
Another populist bites the dust. She thrived as long as she only disdained The Elites ™, but could not survive disdaining the people.
If we want to understand Sturgeon I think we need to backtrack to Covid and then link it with self ID.
Quite early on in 2020, she published a 26-page document and urged Scots to read it, on Covid policy that moved heavily in the direction that both New Zealand and Canada adopted, high levels of testing, rolling lockdowns, etc and she said the Scottish People should consider that if the other Nations of the UK divert from using the same methodology Scotland would go alone. Once again setting the tone for differentiation but rather like Self ID based on profoundly flawed logic. Ardern was forced to abandon the approach at the point of full vaccination and then, of course, the delayed deaths occurred generating the standard 3-1 on influenza outcomes. (500 people die of Flu each year in New Zealand as against 20,000 to 25,000 in England).
She has been so determined to show the uniqueness and difference to England on both Covid and Self ID that she overlooks the fundamental arguments the distinctions are based on.
Cases and deaths in Scotland, taking population differences into account, gained and lost momentum at the same time as in England, there was no discernable difference in outcomes and just as male rapists and pedophiles have ended up in female prisons in England, one stepped out and proved the point in Scotland literally weeks after the Self ID was passed.
I heard the interview Kathleen gave to a New Zealand Radio Station. She will remember because the interviewer questioned whether her take on the prison issue was overdone and Kathleen’s response was simple. ” Believe it, It’s happening.”
If we want to understand Sturgeon I think we need to backtrack to Covid and then link it with self ID.
Quite early on in 2020, she published a 26-page document and urged Scots to read it, on Covid policy that moved heavily in the direction that both New Zealand and Canada adopted, high levels of testing, rolling lockdowns, etc and she said the Scottish People should consider that if the other Nations of the UK divert from using the same methodology Scotland would go alone. Once again setting the tone for differentiation but rather like Self ID based on profoundly flawed logic. Ardern was forced to abandon the approach at the point of full vaccination and then, of course, the delayed deaths occurred generating the standard 3-1 on influenza outcomes. (500 people die of Flu each year in New Zealand as against 20,000 to 25,000 in England).
She has been so determined to show the uniqueness and difference to England on both Covid and Self ID that she overlooks the fundamental arguments the distinctions are based on.
Cases and deaths in Scotland, taking population differences into account, gained and lost momentum at the same time as in England, there was no discernable difference in outcomes and just as male rapists and pedophiles have ended up in female prisons in England, one stepped out and proved the point in Scotland literally weeks after the Self ID was passed.
I heard the interview Kathleen gave to a New Zealand Radio Station. She will remember because the interviewer questioned whether her take on the prison issue was overdone and Kathleen’s response was simple. ” Believe it, It’s happening.”
This was a great romp with clever features and humorous highlights. I guess the lesson for Sturgeon is that hypocrisy is a dish best eaten cold after resignation.
This was a great romp with clever features and humorous highlights. I guess the lesson for Sturgeon is that hypocrisy is a dish best eaten cold after resignation.
Why say 500 words when one will do?
She was/is a GOBSHITE, (to use the vernacular.)
Why say 500 words when one will do?
She was/is a GOBSHITE, (to use the vernacular.)
I had to chuckle at the subtitle, “She (Sturgeon) purged reason from the gender debate”. Hardly surprising given she’s a feminist, the geniuses who for so long have been insistent that “gender is a social construct” while it suited their political purpose, now back-tracking because it no longer does.
The responsibility for transgender ideology lies squarely with feminists themselves. To understand why, you couldn’t do better than read Professor Janice Fiamengo’s article, “Lia Thomas is the Child of Feminism”:
https://fiamengofile.substack.com/p/lia-thomas-is-the-child-of-feminism
This, too, is well worth catching, Anti-Trans Feminists are now Reaping the Whirlwind
https://fiamengofile.substack.com/p/anti-trans-feminists-are-now-reaping?
It’s no accident that Janice is one of the most important anti-feminists and MRAs in the world. She’ll be the keynote speaker at the 2024 International Conference on Men’s Issues in Budapest.
Mike Buchanan
Party leader
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
Not sure why you are getting downvoted. Those are good articles you linked to. Male sexuality has also come under critical scrutiny (#metoo, Title IX, ‘r*pe culture’, etc). Maybe for these confused men, expressing their sexual identities in a feminine way seems much more socially acceptable than in a masculine way
Thanks Julian. Anyone who criticizes feminism and feminists can expect to be downvoted. The truth obviously hurts!
I see the downvoting continues haha! Do these men-hating feminists (I repeat myself) not realise I welcome their downvotes? Probably not.
By way of appreciation to them, I’ll post a link to all our blog posts relating to a visit to Cambridge Uni in 2019, when Elizabeth Hobson (Director of Comms at the time, later party leader) https://j4mb.org.uk/elizabeth-hobson-2-2/ and I gave talks despite the efforts of feminists to have us cancelled, a baying mob of threatening feminist demonstraters (many of them men) outside the lecture theatre, and most memorably, a female supporter racing after the feminist who milkshaked me, catching up with her and capturing some entertaining video on her smartphone. The blog posts:
https://j4mb.org.uk/2019/06/04/cambridge-university-talks-related-blog-pieces-videos-etc/
The video (4:32):
https://j4mb.org.uk/2019/05/28/nobodymesseswithnatty-cambridge-university-milkshake-incident-video-footage-of-alleged-assailant-and-alleged-photographer/
Enjoy!
Thanks Julian. Anyone who criticizes feminism and feminists can expect to be downvoted. The truth obviously hurts!
I see the downvoting continues haha! Do these men-hating feminists (I repeat myself) not realise I welcome their downvotes? Probably not.
By way of appreciation to them, I’ll post a link to all our blog posts relating to a visit to Cambridge Uni in 2019, when Elizabeth Hobson (Director of Comms at the time, later party leader) https://j4mb.org.uk/elizabeth-hobson-2-2/ and I gave talks despite the efforts of feminists to have us cancelled, a baying mob of threatening feminist demonstraters (many of them men) outside the lecture theatre, and most memorably, a female supporter racing after the feminist who milkshaked me, catching up with her and capturing some entertaining video on her smartphone. The blog posts:
https://j4mb.org.uk/2019/06/04/cambridge-university-talks-related-blog-pieces-videos-etc/
The video (4:32):
https://j4mb.org.uk/2019/05/28/nobodymesseswithnatty-cambridge-university-milkshake-incident-video-footage-of-alleged-assailant-and-alleged-photographer/
Enjoy!
I tend to agree with that thinking. It was only a matter of time before the woke train careened off the tracks after, one by one, every honored institution was destroyed or mangled. Now the very concept of man vs. woman has been breached and we all are living with the consequences.
Thanks Warren. Difficult to think of any “honoured institution” that hasn’t been corrupted by feminists. For 50+ years they’ve demanded “women-only spaces” while working hard to shut down “men-only spaces”, sadly effectively. Just one example, the Scouts have long since admitted girls (they even had a feminist CEO at one point, saying her prime goal was to increase the number of girls) while the Guides continue to exclude boys. As for the “cancel culture” they complain about, they’ve also denied Men’s Rights Activists platforms at universities etc.
Thanks Warren. Difficult to think of any “honoured institution” that hasn’t been corrupted by feminists. For 50+ years they’ve demanded “women-only spaces” while working hard to shut down “men-only spaces”, sadly effectively. Just one example, the Scouts have long since admitted girls (they even had a feminist CEO at one point, saying her prime goal was to increase the number of girls) while the Guides continue to exclude boys. As for the “cancel culture” they complain about, they’ve also denied Men’s Rights Activists platforms at universities etc.
Wow, that was some mental gymnastics there. When did feminists back track on gender as a social construct? Or are you talking about the third wave handmaidens who call themselves feminists but have thrown women and children under the bus. Blaming women, and specically feminists, is the oldest male projection in the world.
He’s got form too. I’m afraid he’ll be too blinded by his loss of male prestige to be able to understand your point.
Always embarrassing when men spout the “male prestige” or “male privilege” feminist myth. Western women and girls are some of the most privileged people ever to have walked the planet – men and boys inevitably pay the price for that privilege, often with their lives.
I suggest you enlighten yourself by reading William Collins’s “The Empathy Gap: Male Disadvantages and the Mechanisms of Their Neglect” (2019) – the ebook is a steal at under £5.00 – or our 87-page election manifesto https://cafpuk.files.wordpress.com/2023/01/279a5-221128-j4mb-manifesto.pdf.
Alternatively you could read Dr Warren Farrell’s “The Myth of Male Power” (1993) or Ernest Belfort Bax’s 1913 masterpiece “The Fraud of Feminism”, downloadable for free here https://j4mb.org.uk/the-fraud-of-feminism-1913-2/.
Always embarrassing when men spout the “male prestige” or “male privilege” feminist myth. Western women and girls are some of the most privileged people ever to have walked the planet – men and boys inevitably pay the price for that privilege, often with their lives.
I suggest you enlighten yourself by reading William Collins’s “The Empathy Gap: Male Disadvantages and the Mechanisms of Their Neglect” (2019) – the ebook is a steal at under £5.00 – or our 87-page election manifesto https://cafpuk.files.wordpress.com/2023/01/279a5-221128-j4mb-manifesto.pdf.
Alternatively you could read Dr Warren Farrell’s “The Myth of Male Power” (1993) or Ernest Belfort Bax’s 1913 masterpiece “The Fraud of Feminism”, downloadable for free here https://j4mb.org.uk/the-fraud-of-feminism-1913-2/.
He’s got form too. I’m afraid he’ll be too blinded by his loss of male prestige to be able to understand your point.
Not sure why you are getting downvoted. Those are good articles you linked to. Male sexuality has also come under critical scrutiny (#metoo, Title IX, ‘r*pe culture’, etc). Maybe for these confused men, expressing their sexual identities in a feminine way seems much more socially acceptable than in a masculine way
I tend to agree with that thinking. It was only a matter of time before the woke train careened off the tracks after, one by one, every honored institution was destroyed or mangled. Now the very concept of man vs. woman has been breached and we all are living with the consequences.
Wow, that was some mental gymnastics there. When did feminists back track on gender as a social construct? Or are you talking about the third wave handmaidens who call themselves feminists but have thrown women and children under the bus. Blaming women, and specically feminists, is the oldest male projection in the world.
I had to chuckle at the subtitle, “She (Sturgeon) purged reason from the gender debate”. Hardly surprising given she’s a feminist, the geniuses who for so long have been insistent that “gender is a social construct” while it suited their political purpose, now back-tracking because it no longer does.
The responsibility for transgender ideology lies squarely with feminists themselves. To understand why, you couldn’t do better than read Professor Janice Fiamengo’s article, “Lia Thomas is the Child of Feminism”:
https://fiamengofile.substack.com/p/lia-thomas-is-the-child-of-feminism
This, too, is well worth catching, Anti-Trans Feminists are now Reaping the Whirlwind
https://fiamengofile.substack.com/p/anti-trans-feminists-are-now-reaping?
It’s no accident that Janice is one of the most important anti-feminists and MRAs in the world. She’ll be the keynote speaker at the 2024 International Conference on Men’s Issues in Budapest.
Mike Buchanan
Party leader
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/51327088-eab0-4bf7-ad5e-35e472b969f8
Watch one of her minions unwittingly lay out the corruption here.
At what time point does this happen? It’s a 2 hour Q&A and I must admit I don’t have the time to listen to it all.
If I were a Scottish voter this would be deeply embarrassing! An unquestionable disciple of Sturgeon (although often unintelligible to my ear) who clearly knew Stonewall policy well – but not the Trans legislation she was defending – being eviscerated (and also hung by her own petard) by a very competent female opponent! ‘Knickers in a twist’ came to mind! It’s worth sticking with as, once the politician stops spouting, the reasoned arguments are given some oxygen!
At what time point does this happen? It’s a 2 hour Q&A and I must admit I don’t have the time to listen to it all.
If I were a Scottish voter this would be deeply embarrassing! An unquestionable disciple of Sturgeon (although often unintelligible to my ear) who clearly knew Stonewall policy well – but not the Trans legislation she was defending – being eviscerated (and also hung by her own petard) by a very competent female opponent! ‘Knickers in a twist’ came to mind! It’s worth sticking with as, once the politician stops spouting, the reasoned arguments are given some oxygen!
https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/51327088-eab0-4bf7-ad5e-35e472b969f8
Watch one of her minions unwittingly lay out the corruption here.
I love the “Sturgeonland … like being on a Highland distillery tour”. An attribute of wokeism in general, though.
I love the “Sturgeonland … like being on a Highland distillery tour”. An attribute of wokeism in general, though.
“Sturgeon doesn’t even reach the fairly low bar for public rationality set by Presbyterian founder and general miserabilist John Knox.”
Whoa! That’s a bit heavy-handed. A belief in astrology and the existence of witches was commonplace amongst the educated of sixteenth century Britain. Look at the success of John Dee, for goodness’ sake. Still, at least Prof. Stock did not mention the “monstrous regiment of women.”
Well, Ms Stock DOES belong to the monstrous regiment of feminists along with Julie Bindel and others posting articles on Unherd and elsewhere. Whatever else they are, they’re certainly not unheard, unlike anti-feminists.
The pro trans lobby has captured every level of government and all of our institutions, including the media. I’d call that being heard, wouldn’t you?
I wasn’t referring to the “pro trans lobby”, I was referring to anti-feminists. I don’t know of any anti-feminists or MRAs who could be described as being in that “lobby”.
I wasn’t referring to the “pro trans lobby”, I was referring to anti-feminists. I don’t know of any anti-feminists or MRAs who could be described as being in that “lobby”.
The pro trans lobby has captured every level of government and all of our institutions, including the media. I’d call that being heard, wouldn’t you?
Well, Ms Stock DOES belong to the monstrous regiment of feminists along with Julie Bindel and others posting articles on Unherd and elsewhere. Whatever else they are, they’re certainly not unheard, unlike anti-feminists.
“Sturgeon doesn’t even reach the fairly low bar for public rationality set by Presbyterian founder and general miserabilist John Knox.”
Whoa! That’s a bit heavy-handed. A belief in astrology and the existence of witches was commonplace amongst the educated of sixteenth century Britain. Look at the success of John Dee, for goodness’ sake. Still, at least Prof. Stock did not mention the “monstrous regiment of women.”
An excellent piece, superbly written. And brilliantly astute.
An excellent piece, superbly written. And brilliantly astute.
Thank you Kathleen for an excellent article.
Thank you Kathleen for an excellent article.
Jacinda Ardern, Nicola Sturgeon, witch next?
(comments deleted by myself – MB)
(comments deleted by myself – MB)
Jacinda Ardern, Nicola Sturgeon, witch next?
…
…
Great article. Thanks.
Great article. Thanks.
Absolutely brilliant resume of the last few years in Scottish politics!
Absolutely brilliant resume of the last few years in Scottish politics!
After that fantastic eulogy it is time to send the sainted Nicola to the House of Lords.
What title would serve her best?
The Thane of Corridors.
Does that involve a gender change?
Probably, hence her determination to change the law around self-ID.
Probably, hence her determination to change the law around self-ID.
Does that involve a gender change?
The Thane of Corridors.
After that fantastic eulogy it is time to send the sainted Nicola to the House of Lords.
What title would serve her best?