The Co Kerry contest may be a relic of a bygone age, but trying to update it by allowing those who were born male to take part is offensive to women
By now, if Christmas has gone according to tradition, the average home should look as if a bomb has hit it.
It’s Christmas. Don’t worry about it. But still women do. They can’t help it.
Don’t just take my word for it. Studies show that men and women simply see mess differently. They can both tell when a room needs cleaning. It’s just that men don’t care, whereas women’s anxiety and guilt goes through the roof as the mess piles up.
That’s why women continue to do the lioness’s share of the work at this time of year, from decorating the tree to buying presents to cooking Christmas dinner. The labour is both physical and emotional. Women feel it’s their responsibility to ensure everyone else has a good time.
No doubt there is a host of evolutionary or biological or social explanations for why women are compelled to prioritise the needs of others before their own, but that selflessness is easily exploited, as can be seen in the successful attempt by transgender activists to muscle in on female-only spaces, from changing rooms to prisons, so there is literally nowhere women can go to escape society’s expectation on them to be endlessly agreeable and self-sacrificing.
The latest example came last week when women woke up to news that the Rose of Tralee will now allow transwomen to compete in order, according to organisers, to “keep abreast” — no pun intended, presumably — “of what’s happening in the world”.
It’s tempting to cry: Who cares?
What happens at the Rose of Tralee contest is of no more importance in the grand scheme of things than the now-defunct Housewife of the Year contest. Beauty contests are a relic of the past, and that’s what the Rose of Tralee has always been, regardless of the claims made on its behalf.
The main qualification for Roses is they must be “lovely and fair”, in the words of the 19th century song on which the festival is based. That’s no less objectifying to women than the requirement of Miss World that she should look good in a swimsuit.
Both should have been put out to pasture decades ago. The Housewife of the Year contest, which judged women on their “cookery, nurturing and basic household management”, breathed its last more than 25 years ago before dying of embarrassment.
Covid provided the perfect excuse to put the Rose of Tralee to sleep as well. It hasn’t been held for the past two years of lockdown. Few would’ve noticed if it never came back.
The change of rule to allow transwomen to compete whenever the contest returns to Co Kerry does matter, though, because it’s indicative of the ongoing battle to impose an achingly liberal, fakely progressive, ‘woke’ agenda on every corner of Irish life.
Whether the organisers in Tralee are sincerely trying to stay relevant in a changing world, or are just trying to stave off the contest’s inevitable demise, ultimately doesn’t matter.
When you’re so inclusive you include those who are biologically male in a female-only contest then you’ve lost the plot, no matter how well-intentioned you might be.
There should be no confusion about what it means. Most people’s understanding when they hear the word “transwoman” is still to think of someone who was born male but who wishes they were female and takes steps, up to gender reassignment surgery, to bring that fantasy to reality.
While they may not understand it, most people are naturally sympathetic to those suffering from debilitating gender dysphoria, as it’s known.
That way of seeing things is, however, outdated. It’s no longer said that transwomen are “born male”, because that would imply they’re still not, and can never be, properly female.
These days the terminology demands that men who feel uncomfortable in their maleness should be said to have been “assigned male at birth”, with the explicit implication that this was done mistakenly by doctors.
These people are no longer deemed to have “changed” sex, but to have been that sex all along. As such, there is no longer even any need to undergo hormone replacement or surgery.
They must be accepted as already being female in every respect, even if they still have a penis.
On hearing this, most people unfamiliar with the current state of play in radical gender theory will look sceptical, and say: “Really?” Yes. Really.
The Rose of Tralee is now open to those who have penises. What else can they do once they’ve opened the door to transwomen, after all? They can’t look inside contestants clothing to ensure that they tick certain boxes. They simply have to accept the inclusion of anyone who says they’re a woman.
It marks yet another milestone in the ongoing assault on objective reality, and, for a time, it was difficult to believe that this battle could be won in favour of old-fashioned reason.
Recently, there have been small hopeful indications that the tide may be turning. This week, a former police officer called Harry Miller won his case at the Court of Appeal against Humberside Police in the UK who had taken action against him when, mocking the right to self-identify as any gender on any given day, he tweeted that he identified “as a fish”.
This was recorded in the national database as a “non-crime hate incident”, a category used by police to list instances which have caused offence after being “perceived” by anyone at all to be motivated by prejudice.
The Court of Appeal has now ruled that such rules have a disproportionate “chilling effect” on free speech.
This may have implications in Ireland too, where the exact same wording around alleged “hate crime” has been made law, creating the impression of an epidemic of hate crime sweeping the nation when nothing could be further from the truth.
The victims of the ongoing campaign of intimidation against those who insist that sex is not something that can be selected from a shopping trolley of imaginary gender identities now include Senator Sharon Keogan.
She was selected by the Independent group, the largest in the Seanad, to serve on the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Gender Equality.
She has been denied a place, however, after expressing her view that sex is immutable, and that the promotion of a radical transgender agenda in schools is a danger to vulnerable children. This is only possible because organisations such as the increasingly misnamed National Women’s Council of Ireland have joined calls to exclude women who hold such views from being able to express them in the political or media spheres by shamefully labelling them as “far right”.
This climate of censorship is finally getting the attention it deserves, leading to a long overdue pushback against the relentless onslaught of sinister, sneaky efforts to erase women’s identity and sex-based rights.
Women are, as the famous movie line goes, mad as hell, and we’re not going to take it any more. This Christmas we’re not cleaning up anyone else’s mess, no matter how guilty transgender activists try to make us feel for not giving in to them meekly.