To think Keir Starner is ignoring women and children’s rights?

I'm sure they will.

I think the issues and concerns for womens rights and where we go with reforms shall be a far bigger issue in the next election for the Labour Party

and of course the Tories are not finished that is nothing but wishful thinking. Far too much power and money is involved. They will no doubt take a battering at the next election but they already have their sights on the election after and Labour will absolutely need to win this election to

Well that’s not correct. You may feel angered by pp talking about it but it’s clear to see from Self ID a few years ago to Cass review and no puberty blockers today women are getting somewhere,

And ’man in a dress’? a bit reductive

Are you on glue?

No, not on glue. Is glue still a thing?

Just able to care about multi issues at the same time, like I stated. The threat to women's rights doesn't equate to 'boo boo a man in a dress'. If you don't have the capacity to get that then I can't help you. Child poverty is also a massive problem. Both can be addressed. Simultaneously. You don't have to engage with anything you don't want to.

It's bad form to quote across threads, certainly to misquote across threads. I don't agree with self ID so please don't imply I do. I'm not derailing the thread into toilets. It's totally irrelevant as to whether "Starmer is ignoring women and children's rights".

It is a fact that there are fewer threads about childhood poverty. That's an observation. And I agree with PP that it's one of the biggest threats to children at the moment, one they deserve protecting from. Just one of many reasons I'll vote Labour.

Are you on glue?

This isn't whataboutery and it's a damn sight less blinkered than bo hoo man in a dress.

These threads do more harm to woman's rights than anything as people get bored with having it rammed down their throats every 5 minutes and switch off. That's when things creep under the radar. Right now, politically, everything has stopped- we have no governance so no decisions on gender are being taken by anyone, but by bringing up the same lame crap every day people won't care when we need them too.

Rude.
There are far fewer threads about childhood poverty than trans issues and resulting "safeguarding". PP makes a good point that's entirely relevant to the thread title.

If there weren't people insisting men can be women and saying they should be in women's spaces by simply saying they're a woman (like you have over various threads saying you aren't bothered by the presence of men in bathrooms and the like) then maybe we could focus on more important matters like child poverty!

People get their words muddled all the time, it happens. I think taking one verbal slip as evidence that he had a trans child is ridiculous tbh.

Yeah totally, I have no idea if he has a trans child or not. I'm just saying you don't usually trip up with the sexes of your kids. Names yes. I said IF his child was trans then that leads to further discussion which may have further impact on why he won't commit to saying what a woman is. Happy to be presented with concrete evidence though.

Rude.
There are far fewer threads about childhood poverty than trans issues and resulting "safeguarding". PP makes a good point that's entirely relevant to the thread title.

Which? The childcare shares?
Or the Infosys on preferred government supplier list so they are making ££ from government contracts? Or the trade agreement with India involving many visas for Infosys workers to come to the UK for the benefit of Infosys?
I think Murty potentially benefitting from government decisions is in the public interest. Ever heard of kleptocracy?

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/07/what-kleptocracy-and-how-does-it-work

This is a bit more than fumbling words in an interview, isn't it?

But he’s referred to his daughter as being just that - his daughter - on many occasions (pre and post the “two sons” comment - which was confirmed by a spokesman to just be a slip of the tongue).

People get their words muddled all the time, it happens. I think taking one verbal slip as evidence that he had a trans child is ridiculous tbh.

Oh fuck off with this whataboutery, you can be bothered about more than one thing at the same time. Wild I know.

but that was found to be inadvertent - so he did not intend to benefit her interests, as you implied.
im sure that was inadvertence on your part too, rather than disingenuousness.

FFS, 3 in 10 children in the UK are now living in relative poverty and there are still people banging on about whether Labour are ignoring women and children's rights. I think a child's right to be fed, clothed and warm is pretty fundamental and there's only been one party ignoring/actively taking away that right. I despair of how blinkered some people are to the devastation this government has caused.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67921954.amp

https://www.thenational.scot/news/24079665.rishi-sunaks-family-firm-infosys-set-millions-government-money/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/news/economy/foreign-trade/uk-pm-sunak-faces-questions-over-wife-akshatas-infosys-shares-in-fta-with-india-report/amp_articleshow/103103265.cms

I'd say it's a bit more credible as a "vested interest" theory than Starmers interview brain fart

@MistyGreenAndBlue I agree.

It would have been beyond awful

It’s always « fair game » when it suits the left. Dreadful little hypocrites that they are.

If you have evidence of impropriety or conflict of interest on the PMs part I’m sure you’ll be taking it to the relevant authorities. Or are you just spreading rumours you read on the internet?

*One of the replies on the first page was:

”if it makes you feel any better, just after I had had my second baby, a lady who lived locally saw me in the local shop and asked me what I had.
I told her I had a girl .
I hadn’t it was a boy 🤪
I realise straightaway, but I couldn’t say anything, in case She thought I was bonkers.
Unfortunately, she started asking me what the name was et cetera. Luckily I managed to tell her my other child’s name.
I still think about how daft it was that I couldn’t remember what I’d given birth too . Never mind”

Brainfarts happen.*

Understandable if you'd just had a baby. Baby brain and all that. Not so much when you're a man with teenage children.

Sorry, you've lost me

Eh? Who are you referring to?
I have only seen Labour bring things up when there are actual facts that people might find relevant. Such as Rishi Sunak doing deals that benefit his wife's financial interests. That's fair game. Speculation about teenage children and their potential medical issues isn't. In my opinion.

Do you say that the posters on FWR with trans children and family members can't be trusted, because they have "vested interests"?

Who said anything about can't be trusted? Are any of the posters on FWR leader of the opposition party of this country? Yes you should be able to separate family life from work life there's still a vested interest there. I'm not sure why that's difficult to grasp.

There was a thread a couple of days ago where someone wrongly and accidentally said to a friend that she’d been to the Grand Canyon on a recent holiday.

One of the replies on the first page was:

”if it makes you feel any better, just after I had had my second baby, a lady who lived locally saw me in the local shop and asked me what I had.
I told her I had a girl .
I hadn’t it was a boy 🤪
I realise straightaway, but I couldn’t say anything, in case She thought I was bonkers.
Unfortunately, she started asking me what the name was et cetera. Luckily I managed to tell her my other child’s name.
I still think about how daft it was that I couldn’t remember what I’d given birth too . Never mind”

Brainfarts happen.