Indeed Mrs O!
What a convenient way to stop women campaigning for their and children’s needs? Categorise the needs of women and safeguarding protections as right wing. And reject any measures that reprioritise sex over gender identity and impartial safeguarding for children because any support of it would cause significant discomfort to those who have an identity revolving around their political beliefs.
Woman are saying ‘this is what we need’, and those who are concerned, even petrified, of being seen as supporting something that the party has decreed as not for them to address.
So instead of dealing with each EO and discussing relevant pros and cons, we get the ‘look over there’ tactics. There could be similarities with that document however, to declare that they are all part of a campaign of hate is a misrepresentation. It ignores that these are issues that concern ALL the electorate regardless of party membership.
The question remains, are the need of female people and children to be put on hold until the ‘good’ government comes into power and that ‘good’ government decides the issues should be addressed after all?
Or should the issues be addressed as and when campaigners have gained support?
When? When will it be convenient and politically acceptable for the needs of female people and children to be protected?
And if your (general you) answer looks anything like ‘but not Trump’, you have just assigned female people and children to another four years of known harm just for political purity. No wonder you need to align the EOs to being only hateful.