Shark Hugging Is a Mental Illness
Every time the truth enjoys a resurgence, as it did when the UK Supreme Court declared only women can be women on Thursday, defenders of other irrefutable facts feel a frisson of optimism.
There are several similarities between men who think they are women and marine scientists who think sharks need our protection, not least of which is a cavalier preparedness to make the world less safe for everyone else.
I yield to no man in my sympathy for people who think they are born in the wrong body. Such people deserve all the psychiatric help they can afford, and I wish them well in their quest to solve such a devilish conundrum. But even the most harmless transgender man must concede that his demand for access to women’s toilets will also give a green light to other men in dresses who want to do something more sexually deviant and dangerous than sitting down to pee.
Similarly, some shark-loving marine scientists might be motivated by the wholly virtuous (if deluded) idea that the entire marine ecosystem will collapse into a soggy mess of algae and rotting seaweed if governments don’t spend tens of millions of dollars protecting and researching the marine environment’s “apex predators”. But even they must surely concede that some of their colleagues are also motivated by a morbid fascination with a creature that frequently kills other humans.
It’s an irrefutable process of self-selection. Men who have deviant tendencies towards women will take advantage of any opportunity to enter women’s bathrooms, and people who have a deep psychological resentment towards others enjoying nature at its finest (that is, by swimming, surfing or diving in the ocean) will be drawn to protecting the most vicious and lethal species therein. Only a creepy, resentful loser would find ways to increase the likelihood of other people being eaten alive for merely enjoying the therapeutic wonders of salt water.
I am making this analogy today because the people who have bravely maintained, against overwhelming and malicious opposition, that only women can be women had a huge win in the UK Supreme Court on Thursday.
“The unanimous decision of this court is that the definition of the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex,” Lord Hodge announced as women popped champagne on the steps of the court and JK Rowling lit a cigar and posted, “I love it when a plan comes together.”
That plan will continue to unfold in the coming months as the mass psychosis of transgenderism dissolves, and the ancient understanding that there are only two immutable genders resumes its ubiquitous status. As that happens, we can break out the popcorn and watch as the butchers and bastards who profited from this mental illness are sued into bankruptcy or, better still, marched off to prison.
Shark huggers are perpetrators of similar illusions, that we must live with the ever-increasing danger of sharks at our beaches because they are both endangered and a crucial link in a desperately fragile marine environment. They are neither. Great whites are bigger and more abundant than at any other time in Australian history, and nature herself is indifferent to whether they become extinct or not; species come and go, and have done so for millennia. I’m not saying we should kill them all; just that any measure to protect them must be weighed against the cost in human lives and limbs, and place human safety above that of the sharks.
Most of the people who argue to the contrary are coincidentally professional shark huggers themselves. When the illusion of sharks being endangered is finally shattered, their careers will be over. Until then, they fight on, despite the mounting toll paid by ocean lovers. They are no different in my mind to men who want to invade women’s bathrooms or beat women to a pulp in a boxing ring.
One day the truth will become ubiquitous, and the front page of The Australian will resemble the front page of The Telegraph in London on Thursday.
I’m looking forward to lighting that cigar as another plan to pursue and defend the truth comes together.
i had the privelage of working with marine researches in Ningaloo and Abhrolos marine protected areas. Facilitating acces to their data collection. driving boats and being out in the briny can make up for a lot of frustration, but between holding their hands thru logistic and ever changing marine weather variables was a sad eye opener to the perverse incentive that is " publish or perish" within scientific research. dody data collection methods and practical applications in obtaining it were often commonplace.
One such honour student was researching Baldchin groper. there were no seasonal closures for the species at the time and they faced no underlying threats to the population or their habit. In fact local local lobster fishers in the area maintained they were a pest - commonly biting of all of the crayfish legs in surface water holding baskets. These multi generational fishers has various unflattering names for the "baldies" such as rats of the sea. and plauge fish. They are a particulary good eating fish so their distain did not of course extend to eating as many of them as they could...a practice i also enjoyed. Of course the underlying premise of his study was that to prevent overfishing the trendy management tool of seasonal closures during the spawning season was essential. trouble is they dont need to spawn as they are hermaphrodites.when the biggest among them is taken ( the males)the next biggest female changes sex and fertilises the rest. size limits were perfect in ensuring their ongoing abundance. the little spawning that occoured was serving to mix the dna of adjascent and far flung members of the species. Anway the paper produced did not discuss this and the seasonal closures went ahead, much to the detriment of recreational fishers.The masters student was also an existing employee of the department and was duly promoted to his level of incompetence as a result. people have agenda's. sigh.
It’s just common sense!!!!!