They both love television appearances. Hardly a day has gone by this week when Yousaf has not been giving broadcast interviews about campervans, disappearing auditors and the general chaos that is now the SNP. Some might say his willingness to stand in front of any passing TV camera or radio mic to comment on his party’s woes is admirable, but as a media strategy it is novel, courageous even.

So it was hardly surprising he got himself into a bit of fankle earlier this week when he was asked if he knew how much his court battle over the Gender Recognition Reform (GRR) Bill would cost. “No, I don’t go into legal advice…” he said, batting the question away with his magnificent eyelashes.

Others are less reticent, with estimates of up to £500,000 for the forthcoming legal tussle being bandied about. Suffice to say, it is the Scottish taxpayer who will foot the bill for Yousaf’s day in court. And for what? The smart money suggests he will lose.

Some argue that Yousaf’s challenge to the UK Government’s decision to block the controversial GRR Bill – primarily because it risks adversely affecting the UK-wide Equality Act – is a cynical distraction. A clumsy move by a rookie leader to take everyone’s attention away from the scandalous mess left by his predecessor, one Nicola Sturgeon.

But the First Minister signalled his intention to go to court loudly and very clearly throughout the leadership contest, weeks before the police arrested Sturgeon’s husband. And after his narrow victory over Kate Forbes last month, he reminded journalists of his clear intention. He said: “My first principle, my starting principle, is to challenge that Section 35 order.”

Yousaf, like Sturgeon before him, has decided to ignore both science and public opinion and instead focus on the politics of identity and division. He has three groups he needs to keep onside in the run-up to next year’s general election – a contest which will likely decide his long-term future.

He needs to cuddle up to the progressive wing of his party, personified by Karen Adam MSP, who wears her pronouns with pride and dismisses any criticism of the flawed gender bill as hate crime. He has to offer succour to SNP members and the wider independence movement, terrified that recent events have scuppered their dreams of a second referendum. There is nothing nationalists like more than a David and Goliath battle with big, bad Westminster.

Humza Yousaf's legal challenge to the UK Government's blocking of the Gender Recognition Bill would embarrass Alan Partridge (Picture: Trevor Leighton)

And he has to keep the Scottish Greens on board. The price Patrick Harvie demands for his party’s continued support is not more investment in measures to tackle the climate emergency, but a promise from the SNP leader that he will defend everyone’s right to change their legal sex at will – even, it seems, violent sex offenders.

Speaking to BBC Scotland earlier this week, Scottish Green MSP Maggie Chapman argued that double rapist Adam Graham (aka Isla Bryson) should be treated as a woman. “Any trans person should be able to get the gender recognition certificate they seek, that recognises in law something that the rest of us take for granted, being recognised in law as who you are… Isla Bryson is a trans woman,” she said, emphatically.

Chapman may be from the evangelical wing of the trans movement – she has argued in the past that eight-year-olds should be allowed to change their legal sex – but nothing she said this week contradicts the Scottish Greens’ position. Their primary policy concern is gender ideology.

Women’s rights campaigners greeted news of Yousaf’s legal challenge with disdain. He is “remarkably foolish”, said Susan Smith, co-director of For Women Scotland, adding: “It is widely predicted that they will lose, so it seems like an incredible waste of everybody's time and money to go through this when there are other really pressing matters.”

A view echoed by independent policy experts MBM, who pointed out that the Scottish Government has so far been silent on the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s recent advice that it would be “helpful to amend the Equality Act to make clear that ‘sex’ means ‘biological sex’”. MBM added: “Instead, the First Minister regrettably appears interested only in taking potentially protracted legal proceedings to assert the parliament’s right to pass the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, whatever its effects. That he has nothing to say about the substantive argument that it will adversely impact on the operation of the Equality Act for women sits uneasily with his commitment last month ‘to advance women’s rights.’”

And who could forget hapless Humza’s pink promise to women last month – a photo op to make his TV doppelgänger proud. He was widely mocked for his clumsy attempt to woo female voters with a cardboard heart and a megaphone emoji, but he was undeterred. “I will not allow one step back on your rights,” he told the women of Scotland.

But instead of a new plan to properly transform social care – where the majority of the workforce are women, as are the unpaid carers on whom the service depends – or even offering his views on the Scottish Law Commission’s recent report on surrogacy, the First Minister has decided to indulge in a piece of performance theatre in the Court of Session to protect the rights, not of women, but of men who ‘identify’ as women. A move so politically crass that would it embarrass even Alan Partridge.

Humza Yousaf's legal action over Gender Recognition Reform Bill would embarrass Alan Partridge – Susan Dalgety