The waiting is over. Anneliese Dodds has been named as minister of state for women and equalities, and will attend cabinet as part of her role. Meanwhile, Bridget Phillipson will be the official minister, tied into her Secretary of State for Education brief.
It’s not the courageous change that some were hoping for: Dodds was equalities shadow to Kemi Badenoch in the previous parliament.
Dodds needs to wise up to basic truths fast now that she is sitting round the cabinet table
But let’s hope now she’s taken up the role that Dodds has worked out what a woman is, and her vision for equalities is – as Badenoch pointed out at the despatch box – ‘a shield and not a sword’. Then this government might get somewhere. Otherwise the omens are not good.
In a futile attempt to be all things to all people, the Labour party has tied itself in knots in recent years over the concept of ‘man’ and ‘woman’. During her time in opposition, Dodds was asked by BBC Woman’s Hour for Labour’s definition of the word ‘woman’. She floundered:
‘Well, I have to say that there are different definitions legally around what a woman actually is. I mean, you look at the definition within the Equality Act, and I think it just says someone who is adult and female, I think, but then doesn’t say how you define either of those things. I mean obviously, that’s when you’ve got the biological definition, legal definition all kinds of things…’
When pressed, Dodds added, ‘I think it does depend what the context is surely.’ Total confusion, but that’s what happens when politicians abandon sense and reason, and deny human nature in a foolish quest to try and reengineer human society.
The truth is that everyone knows the difference between men and women. Distinguishing between the sexes is an evolved instinct that we share with other species, and we were doing it long before anybody knew anything about chromosomes and genetics.
Dodds needs to wise up to these basic truths fast now that she is sitting round the cabinet table. Attempts by Labour to reject fundamental human instinct as outdated will lead inevitably to absurdities and tragedies. We saw it in Scotland when Isla Bryson – a male rapist – was detained at Cornton Vale women’s prison days after Nicola Sturgeon had forced her doomed Gender Recognition Reform Bill through Holyrood.
Two of Labour’s manifesto pledges suggest the party has learned little from that fiasco. The party has committed to ‘modernise, simplify, and reform the intrusive and outdated gender recognition law’, and ‘deliver a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices’. In plainer language, that means the party will divest the GRA of essential safeguards – a second opinion and the panel that checks applications comply with the law – and send a chilling warning to therapists, church ministers, teachers and parents who might be tempted to counsel children distressed about their sex after watching too many TikTok videos.
Now she is in government, Dodds is responsible for delivering sound legislation that can be everybody’s shield and nobody’s sword. It will be a tough ask for anyone amid the febrile dispute between transgender activists and gender critical campaigners. Was it too much for Bridget Phillipson? Women and Equalities sits within the Department for Education, and since Friday’s flurry of appointments, that is now Phillipson’s patch. Indeed her full title is, ‘Secretary of State for Education and Minister for Women and Equalities’.
It was Dodds’ name that was heralded this morning, though, and she can report directly to cabinet. Is she up to the job? At this stage, actions speak louder than words. Will she meet with all interested parties, despite the howls of outrage that might ensue? Before the election her meeting with LGB Alliance provoked an ‘incredibly disappointed’ response from LGBT+ Labour.
Dodds needs to find the courage to ignore future attempts by entitled caucuses to control her diary, and she needs to avoid them controlling her thinking. She knows the difference between men and women in the same way that everybody else knows it really, but will she be able to put that instinct at the heart of equalities legislation? The time for obfuscation and ‘it depends’ is over. If she does see sense it will upset the LGBTQ+ lobby (who, let’s face it, are never satisfied) but she might leave a legacy that endures.
Watch more like this on SpectatorTV:
Comments