Danny Kruger hid his true talent – he knows what women want | Catherine Bennett

0

Hike instructing to meet Danny Kruger, the Tory MP for Devizes, who is probably best known for being Son of Prue Leith. Sound-looking, his least appealing features seemed, until last week, to be his previous devotion to David Cameron, Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings, whose rule-breaking he defended.

It appears, however, that this particular Etonian believes his own gender should be free, collectively, to coerce women into unwanted pregnancies. Speaking after a number of female parliamentarians, who wanted the UK to signal its disapproval of Roe v Wade being overturned, Kruger said he did not understand why they were ‘lecturing the US’ on this judgement. “They believe that women have an absolute right to bodily autonomy in this matter. However, I think that in the case of abortion, this right is qualified by the fact that another body is involved. Although by far the most famous, this is not Kruger’s first sermon on the subject. He has opposed decriminalization in Northern Ireland, is against buffer zones and told MPs last year: ‘It says a very, very terrible thing about the value we place on an unborn life if we let’s just say she should be determined by whether the mother would want to keep him. parachuted in Devizes (replacing Claire Perry), that he considers consulting mothers for their own pregnancies?

Surely they might have expected, given Kruger’s affection for Johnson, a man who is not universally popular with fetus, that his approach would be, to avoid hypocrisy, without judgment. There’s still nothing in the “About Dannyexcerpted from his website to warn voters that this affable individual is clearly comfortable with the female misery and deaths that result, especially for the poor, from banning abortion. Nor is there any indication that female biology is incompatible with personal autonomy. He told Devizes: “I want to be everyone’s MP in our part of Wiltshire.” Which is tricky if you’re also representing the womb police. Yesterday he sought to qualify her recent remarks, though her statement was not as clear as her anti-abortion record.

There are probably women in Wiltshire, like in Afghanistan, who are happy to be represented by a righteously repressive man at Britain’s version of the loya jirga. But others demonstrated against the MP yesterday. Until he can stop them, one in three women in Devizes are likely, given the approval of two doctors, to have an abortion before the age of 45. How they must have appreciated Kruger telling them they are, or were, incompetent to make the decision.

Yet all credit goes to this minor celebrity for announcing the need, overturning any previous complacency, for women to quiz parliamentary candidates on abortion. Not on their personal choices, which are nobody’s business, but on the possibility that, if elected, they threaten women’s existing access to legal dismissals. Judging by resistance to buffer zones around abortion clinics besieged by zealots and a very recent vote on keeping the pandemic innovation of home abortions, dozens of MPs would still, like Kruger, be unable to stop.

If they cannot emulate the United States and overturn the Abortion Act of 1967 (which allowed state-sanctioned abortion), an alarming number of parliamentarians, whether motivated by faith, misogyny or an ungodly mixture of the two, obviously feel entitled to make abortion as difficult and as shameful as possible for English women. Lending respectability to their efforts is the enduring convention that women’s reproductive autonomy is not an unequivocal right, but a parliamentary gift, subject to constant review by the combined consciences of the jirga, the majority of whose members do not will know neither the all-consuming fear of an unwanted pregnancy nor the colossal relief of a voluntary abortion.

Naturally, we find Kruger taking advantage, in March, to join Jacob Rees-Mogg, Jim Shannon and other stars of the Commons anti-abortion lobby in ignoring the “overwhelming feminine and professional support for early home abortions. So looking down list of 184 moral guardians, said the MP who just resigned for drunken groping at the Carlton Club. Oh, and here are Natalie Elphicke, Theresa Villiers and Roger Gale, equally principled – the three hanging last year for intervening inappropriately on behalf of sex offender Charlie Elphicke – all keen, in another matter of pressing concern for women, to defy the advice of all major reproductive health bodies in the UK . Mr Edward Morris, President of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: “We urge governments across the UK to listen to women and set the regulations that allow telemedicine abortion services to become permanent.

Like-minded MPs won the vote (212 to 184), but worryingly, among those who thought they knew better was Health Secretary Sajid Javid, whose department had previously put his face against telemedicine abortion services. In Javid’s case, female voters aren’t the only women who now deserve clarification on his views on their empowerment. Did he skip that piece of Ayn Rand? “An embryo has no rights.”

It would be reassuring to think, after six relevant abstentions, that Javid recognizes the insignificance of his personal views on the soul. But his 2018 refusal to institute buffer zones around clinics, coupled with his recent opposition to home abortions, indicates the health minister agrees on at least one thing with anti-abortion zealots: women who have it can be rightly tormented. . On the other hand, the Court of Appeal confirmedin 2019, a judicial finding that Ealing council’s buffer zone was justified, as ‘the women’s privacy was most seriously invaded at a time and place when they were most vulnerable and susceptible to uninvited attention “.

With abortion still largely criminalized, a health secretary who is a hero for anti-abortion extremists, and a host of MPs who prefer embryos to women, I guess it’s something to see Johnson blame the United States for. Unite their failure on reproductive rights. One day he might even try it at home.

Catherine Bennett is an Observer columnist

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 250 words to be considered for publication, please email it to us at [email protected]erver.co.uk

Share.

About Author

Comments are closed.