Hi Folks,

Am I alone in thinking that the world is going mad?  Its always been a bit bonkers around the fringes, but now even the mainstream is well and truly losing the plot.  Why do I say that?

This week saw one of our self appointed Cultural Elite call for a ban of Dad’s Army repeats on TV.  Why?  Because in her opinion, it presents a biased view of a plucky Britain standing alone against the might of a European foe.  By doing so, she believes the faint whiff of old-school British patriotism is encouraging us to vote for Leave in Brexit. I thought at first it was a spoof, but no.  She is deadly serious. Doesn’t this just sum up the increasingly hysterical and humourless times we live in?

I grew up watching Dad’s army. I would happily watch it again now because I always thought it very funny and had I thought about it; which I didn’t, its largely apolitical.  If anything, it’s a very gentle, self-deprecating humour. So whilst sniggering at the vain, blustering Captain Mainwaring and his dysfunctional platoon of merry men, I never once had the urge to blow up the Channel Tunnel or join the National Front.  It’s utter claptrap.

Whilst this is the latest and perhaps most barmy example of our growing intolerance, it is everywhere.

This  week, a 17 yr old schoolboy in Aberdeen was excluded from class for expressing an opinion which was at odds with his teacher and that of the school and local educational board policy. For his is an Inclusive School and his crime was to suggest and argue that there are only 2 sexes. Male and Female. This apparently, is a “non-inclusive” opinion and one fit only for the privacy of his own home.  He argued that actually, it’s a biological fact and stressed that he had absolutely nothing against the LGBTQ  movement or anyone who wished to express a different gender.  But a fact is a fact. Not in this school apparently.

Should we be concerned that schools and teaching staff are prepared to defend current en vogue dogma, by suppressing alternative opinions and indeed ignoring the scientific facts?    In my opinion, it’s a worrying trend and I support the 17yr old.  To the best of my knowledge, there are only 2 sexes and it is; or at least it was, generally accepted that if you had a gentleman’s sausage, you were a man/male/masculine. If however, you had a womb, ovaries and lady parts, then you were indeed a woman/female/feminine.    That’s not trying to disrespect anyone, it’s not transphobic,  it is a simple scientific fact.

Dysmorphia is a real and medically recognised condition.  If someone feels that they are trapped in the wrong body and or sex, then they have my deepest sympathy. I cannot begin to even imagine how that must feel.  If they subsequently elect to transition from one sex to another, I respect their decision and wish them well.  Where I begin to struggle with the whole thing is when it starts to impact on broader society.  What we are allowed to say, write and how we refer to each other.

I think I am right in suggesting that the vast majority of Women, like being women. Similarly, I  would suggest that the majority of Men like being men.  So society should be comfortable in addressing them as such. Women and Men.  Men and Women.  I take great offence that as a society we cannot address a man as a man in case we offend anyone who might actually identify as a woman and vice versa.  If someone rocks up to an exclusively female swimming pool, (if such a thing exists these days)  and they are sporting a moustache, beard and full set of wedding tackle and yet proclaim that they self identify as a woman, what should happen?  If the attendant offers a robust, ” On your Bike, Sir” is this a hate crime?   When does common sense if not common decency give way to political correctness?  It shouldn’t be that big a dilemma and yet it seems to be?

And how  did the Trans lobby become so powerful and so intrusive in every walk of life so quickly? And by wholeheartedly embracing every aspect of their agenda, are we actually doing harm?  My Sister growing up was a bit of a tomboy.  She hated pink. She preferred trousers to dresses and would far rather grub around in the dirt than play with dolls.  I don’t think she ever questioned her gender and neither did we.  She was just a kid who liked doing what she liked doing. She is now a grown-up, in a long term relationship with a nice guy and very happy.  Oh, and she even wears dresses occasionally.  The point is, I  suspect today, by behaving the way she did as a kid, that is, by simply not conforming to the gender stereotype,  she would end up being labelled ‘trans’ and offered councilling and support that she really didn’t need.  So are we inadvertently forcing highly suggestible young minds into going down an irreversible path because they are innocently going through a ‘phase’?

I have two daughters of my own now. There is a big age difference between them, but they both behaved in similar ways growing up.  Both went through a very ‘girly’ phase. Everything had to be pink. Pretty dresses were the norm and the house was full of Barbie and Little Mermaid dolls.  Then suddenly they both hated pink. Elder daughter and her younger sibling both entered what I guess can safely be called a tomboy phase.  I never gave it a second thought for the older daughter, but in our current environment, I am constantly worrying about her younger sister.  Her favourite colour is now blue. She loves science and is often found up to her elbows in our garden pond, attempting to capture weird looking bugs. She climbs trees, was the terror of her school rugby team for being a little too rough with the boys and thinks fart jokes are hilariously funny.  But she likes being a girl. I know because I have asked and she has told me so.  She is a happy, well adjusted, hyperactive, exhausting handful.  But I do worry what would happen if some earnest do-gooder decided her behaviour were actually evidence of latent dysmorphia and started her down a hitherto unthought of path.  She may be happy but she is also highly suggestible.  I may be being naive and am certainly far from knowledgable on the subject, but it is a concern.

But how do we ever get comfortable with or come to accept our brave new world, if we can’t discuss this or other issues,  openly and without fear of being branded as a “‘phobe” or a “hater”?

This whole issue of stifling debate if the opinions being discussed do not match your world view I really do find disturbing.  And this seems to be the whole basis for No-Platforming, a growing trend in our universities.  Actually, whilst it’s certainly more in the news these days, its not a new phenomenon. In the UK it was actually around in the ’70s.   In 1973 the National Union of Students adopted a No-Platform policy to prevent proscribed person or organisation being given a platform to speak. Back in the day, it was aimed at entities considered racist or fascist. In the ’80s the most notable organisation at the time to be No-Platformed was the BNP (British National Party). A nasty bunch of nutters if ever there was one. Of course, Tories have always been fair game.

These days it seems like you can be No-Platformed for pretty much any idea or opinion that the students union doesn’t like.  I do get the idea of No-Platforming and of Safe Spaces. I can entirely understand a desire to protect against overt racist, sexist, seditious or  comments meant to incite harm to others.  But who should be the arbiter of what is acceptable and how do you avoid this becoming wholly subjective, influenced by the bias of the appointed arbiter?  The Millenium generation gets slapped with the derogatory tag of Snowflakes because of their perceived sensitivity and willingness to be offended by anything.  I think they are probably a bit more resilient than that, but this attitude of hiding from ideas, opinions, history and even immutable facts doesn’t help them.

Opinions of what is acceptable do change.  Some of the humor I found hilarious as a student would now be No Platformed as racist.  The joke hasn’t changed, just societies attitude and sensitivity to the subject matter. I still believe most people can tell the difference between what is deliberately offensive and what is meant to be humorous, even if in bad taste. Take the recent furor over Jo Brand’s  comments about milk shakes and battery acid in the context of what is best to throw over politicians.  It might not have been tremendously funny, it may have been ill judged. But it certainly didn’t amount to an incitement to commit harm.  So when does new piousness, including No – Platforming cross over into limiting Free Speech?

If you really disagree with another viewpoint or idea, without being able to debate the idea how do you change minds or modify these ideas?   When I was a student I, of course, knew everything. I had very firm beliefs and opinions on anything and everything. In short, I was a  regular pain in the arse.  I loved a good argument, but in order to have these arguments, I had to first listen to the other position.  I can’t say I changed my mind on many issues, nor did I change the minds of others.  But it did happen occasionally.  Where we didn’t reach a consensus, by and large,  we would agree to disagree, but respected each other’s relative position and go and have a beer in the union bar. By rigidly adhering to one viewpoint, refusing to even listen to another and then ostracizing it’s advocates, are we not just encouraging division?

And let’s face it, boy are we divided at the moment. I think more than at any other time during my lifetime,  society is polarising. Are you Remain or Brexit. In Scotland you also get, are you Union or Independence.  All of these aforementioned camps are the result of national plebiscites that might have been better left unasked. But the referendums were held and pandora’s box opened. The Brexit issue has managed to thoroughly divide the nation and end at least 2 prime ministers careers in recent years and may well do for a 3rd before the year is out.  The Scottish Independence question divided communities and even families, but despite getting a clear result, it hasn’t gone away and is still the topic dominating Scottish politics.

I wish I knew what we could do to try and resolve these issues. But I haven’t a clue.  The democracy that I knew growing up, the rule of the majority, well it seems to be, if not dead, then in its death throes.  Our elected representatives have never seemed more out of touch with ordinary people, instead, they are perceived as self-serving and opportunistic.  They happily bow down to the latest strident lobby for the purposes of virtue signalling, whilst ignoring the will of the majority who elected them in the first place.

Into  this maelstrom, enter stage right, Messers Bojo Johnson and Jeremy the Hunt. Are either of these two the gentleman whom is going to heal the rifts and get a divided Britain re-United. I fear not as they too are very polarizing characters,  Bojo in particular being something of a marmite character.  To be honest, I am not sure anyone will manage to  get us back on track? One thing I am certain of is that Comrade Corbyn and his unsavory collection of unreformed Student Union trots won’t be the ones to provide our salvation. If you think things can’t get any worse, be careful what you wish for, or whom you vote for.

So with all this going on, with no end in sight and with common sense on an extended sabbatical, all I can say is, thank god for Dad’s Army. For whilst we may All Be Doomed to quote private Fraser, it does at least provide a brief respite from it all. Shove over Capt’ Mainwaring and pass me a beer someone.  Stupid Boy.

Graham