Just when you thought that Harriet Harman and her band of Equality Taugenichts could not come up with anything even more bizarre than they already have, guess what? That’s right. They’ve come up with something even more bizarre.

Leg-iron has written about the Bill currently going through Parliament which states that being a woman is a protected characteristic.

Insinuating that a woman is not as strong as a man will be “unlawful sex discrimination”, under the terms of the forthcoming Equality Bill.

An example the Telegraph gives is that,

it is likely to be unlawful sex discrimination for a gym to test every woman’s strength but not every man’s before allowing them access to weightlifting facilities.

In other words, if you run a gym, don’t be concerned about your clients’ wellbeing: by order of the Government. Of course, if they hurt themselves, it will be the gym’s fault and they will be able to sue. The gym owners may have to cover themselves by asking the same questions of a big hunky man and a 16 year-old stick-insect model.

It reminds me of supermarkets demanding ID from anyone who looks under 25 before selling them alcohol. I read that Tesco’s is considering putting the age up to 30.

The ‘Nanny State’ has been extended so that everyone who serves the public in any capacity whatsoever is also obliged to be a nanny.

— Prove to Nanny you are seven years older than you legally need to be to buy a few cans of beer or be humiliated in front of other customers.

— Show Nanny you treat everyone ‘equally’ by pretending you cannot discern for yourself that some people are not fit for purpose, whether in the gym or in your employment.

— Demonstrate to Nanny that you approve of her smoking ban by being an unpaid grass.

Then there is this, frankly, scary piece of ‘advice’ in the ‘equality’ Bill,

It does not matter what the service provider’s intentions are or whether the service provider’s less favourable treatment of the person is conscious or unconscious.

The service provider may even think that they are doing the person a favour, or simply be unaware that they are treating the person differently because of a protected characteristic.

I have to question the real motive for this. Well, you have to with everything the Government does these days, don’t you? You might be breaking the law by trying to do someone a favour? Come again? Some people already risk being prosecuted if they help their neighbours by clearing snow from the pavement outside their homes and someone slips on it. This is bad enough, but simply giving advice to a woman that you wouldn’t give to a man could be deemed ‘discrimination’ just because the government says that being a woman is a protected characteristic.

A woman is different from a man. Not in a bad way, in a good way. It is about time Harman accepted this. I actually think that womanhood is a precious thing, unlike Harman and the government. If they want to protect women, why are they turning them into gender-neutral creatures for equality’s sake?

It is because what is normal must be destroyed and replaced with the seeds of destruction of our freedom. I expect they rejoice in the gangs of female lager louts stoating around our towns and cities because it proves their re-engineering is taking hold.

Even chivalry will be illegal if this Bill makes it through. As if manners aren’t thin enough on the ground already, the government wants us men to pretend women aren’t women and not be concerned about them. It is normal for men to be protective towards women.

But every type of healthy, normal human impulse and interaction is under attack. Heterosexual relationships with men as the providers and protectors and women as the gentler sex – the carers and home-makers, are being redefined as just another lifestyle option. And childhood, where ‘equality’ means that this must end at the age of five when children, many of whom cannot yet tie their shoelaces, are to be told that sodomy and abortion are their rights, that all religions are equal and that climate change is killing all the cuddly polar bears (it’s not) and it is all their parents’ fault.

So be careful what you say at all times. In fact, it is better to say nothing at all in case you are less favourable towards someone with a protected characteristic, whether it is conscious or unconscious. Just stay in your home and tune in to the BBC for further instructions.

One simple thing we can all do (but won’t). There is an election due any time now. Don’t vote for these criminally insane sociopaths.