To be completely shocked about someone I used to know

I mean if we are talking about exterminating a class of people (in this case women as a sex class) in the hyperbolic way that others have on this thread, doesn't this make them Nazis and fascists?

We can all play at that game!

Exactly. PP supports a party with divisive policies, which will strip rights from certain people. But feels superior to other people who support other parties, which don't even seem to have such divisive, rights stripping policies.

I personally feel that denying biological reality and effectively getting rid of woman as a sex class, is a very extreme viewpoint, for example.

Should I shun all Labour voters (except perhaps those in Rosie Duffield's constituancy?) due to their political views?

'Transgender women with penises'

So men then basically.

So you don't hold much store by the rights of women and girls then?

Seems labour is a good fit for you then!

Fair enough.

You might not care but other women do. It's quite simple to us, women need single sex spaces to keep women and girls safe and a progressive democratic society would see that that is necessary.

I've said what I think about it. It's complex.

For you it's very black and white, for me it isn't.

As for women with penises, I'd say, some transgender women have penises.

I, personally, don't feel threatened by transgender people.

Gender identity issues are complex and the situation isn't black and white.

Can you expand on this please @Maia77 ?

Do you agree with Starmer that some women have penises?

Do you believe women should have single sex spaces, such as prisons and refuges?

Do you think that women & girls should have single sex sports?

Do you think children should be taught gender as fact in schools?

Or do you think that the wishes of males who have a gender identity should be more important than the safety, dignity and opportunities of females?

Everything I posted is easily verifiable fact.

Yet you have decided it isn't true, or doesn't matter, because it doesn't fit with what you want to believe.

You judge others on the policies of the parties they support, and the behaviour of the prominent members of those parties. Yet refuse to see the policies and behaviour of the party you support.

I firmly believe that will not happen if Labour comes to power. Those kinds of accusations are just attempts to discredit Labour.
I hope that Labour will try to create a more tolerant society.
Gender identity issues are complex and the situation isn't black and white.

Was about to post that holding political views is slightly different to actively overseeing the genocide of 6million people. Lots of people supported the Nazi party in Germany until the true meaning of what they wanted and the extent to which they were prepared to go to became apparent (eg Schindler, of Schindler's Arc) - as far as the OP states, this person that she now reviles has not committed any atrocities, just got involved in a political party… which she may chose to leave at some point anyway.

Can you not see that you are making PPs point for them?

The Labour party have until extremely recently said some pretty dehumanising things about women, and been in favour of stripping women's rights. They have a long standing problem with unaddressed antisemitism. They have supported groups which attack lesbians for wanting to exclude males from their dating world, and their MPs have shared platforms with the likes of Sarah Jane Baker, a violent transwoman who tortured and sexually assaulted a teenager and exhorted his followers to 'punch a terf in the face'.

Does all that mean that if you vote Labour, you have views which, if you and your party came to power, would create a fertile ground for discrimination, dehumanising of certain groups of people, stripping them of their rights and so on?

😂
Awaits drip feed...

Yes, she won't be a mass murderer because the laws of this country won't allow for that, but she could have views which, if she and her party came to power, would create a fertile ground for discrimination, dehumanising of certain groups of people, stripping them of their rights and so on.

Wasn't Rudolph Hoss the son in that old telly programme Bonanza?

Loved it as a kid, iconic intro music too

😂

Well depends if the woman in the OP was just a nice, gentle, friendly person OR if they were a nice, gentle, friendly person who also facilitated mass murder and genocide.

The mass murder wasn't mentioned in the OP. But could be the mother of all dripfeeds I guess?

Jesus Godwins Law is getting a right threshing here. Here we go again with the Nazi shite 🤣

Its a fact that those correcting others spelling and grammar, and being supercilious superior twats are tending to be singing from the left side of the hymsheet.

That said, I really do feel for the OP who was in such a state of shock that she had a physical reaction, and I hope she's feeling better today.

I've recently watched the Zone of interest about Rudolph Hoss, who was the longest-serving commandant of the Auschwitz. He was a very loving father and husband and served the 'interests' of his tribe well. So according to quite a few posters, the fact that someone is a nice, gentle, friendly person is all that matters, their politics and ideology doesn't matter, we should just accept it.

I don't think that is really comparable in terms of scale of claim - the timeframe Labour have given is TEN YEARS which is two whole terms, so it is potentially doable.

There absolutely can not be a health service with no waiting lists. To do that you would need to have doctors standing around, and it is impossible to achieve that ever, never mind in the TWO YEARS that Reform have said they will!

I understand what you are saying about being sceptical about targets, but there is:
-a target that looks challenging and could be missed
and
-a proposal that is utter bollocks

Agree 💯

This thread and almost every other thread!

I wasn't even one page in before names like 'Nazi' and 'fascist' were being thrown around. People seem incapable of hearing any viewpoint different to their own without resorting to insults.

I've long suspected the refusal to engage in conversation is because they fear they'll encounter an opinion they moderately agree with and have zero idea about how to respond to it. So it's much easier to just call someone a 'Nazi'. It's beyond tedious.

Godwin's law struck early here. Possibly Poe's law too, though nobody can know for sure.

@EWAB - politics and human goodness are funny bedfellows. It is ok to feel surprised that you expected to align more with this woman, but in life you need to accept that people will hold a range of theories about what is "best" politically. I don't think I've ever heard of people's views being changed by avoiding conversation and resorting to ad hominem attacks, even if your advisers and attackers here seem to believe the opposite.

I have a relative who thought it reasonable not to support close family at a funeral because of her political intolerance. When causing actual harm to others "on principle", the ground becomes very rocky. How can anyone trust someone again who is able to place political theory above actual humans they pretend to care for? Be careful not to fall into a similar trap. If she has always seemed like a decent person, then you might do better to reset your tolerance levels.

OP - Have you thought about having a discussion with this lady to find out the reasons why she supports this party?

I know conversation is a somewhat radical suggestion but it's worth a shot!

Reading through this thread I 100 percent agree with you.

For anyone saying it's more extreme or bad voting right wing than left wing, the new Green party councillor for Leeds, Mothin Ali, was posting on 7 October in approval of the Hamas terrorist attacks.