Starmer, JKR, what's most important to most women 2?

Not sure people can’t ask a question

reply to @the

@the
and now you mention it . Edinburgh Rape Crisis. When we can't criticise a group in society, we fail safeguarding and oh boy we have failed Edinburgh women and girls. Go and check that one out.
We fail safeguarding when we have an untouchable class of people who cannot be checked like everyone else and held up to the firm safeguarding standards as everyone else. A few examples I can think of ; Saville/BBC, Grooming Gangs, London Childrens Homes Scandals , Catholic Orphanages in Ireland and just look at Edinburgh Rape Crisis . Where a man , no GRC , no qualifications in social work, psychology, nursing ,medicine etc gets the top job. A job with EA exceptions and fails to declare it.
And then voices very inappropriate statements about women who have been raped .
That man is still in post . That man should not be in that job. It is a disgrace that that man is in that job.
So don't lecture me about calling trans women predators because I didn't but if they respectabilty, why aren't they calling for absolute predators like that to be halled over the coals? Why aren't they wanting to ensure safeguarding is maintained for women and children? Go on tell me ?

The only person who raised abuse in this scenario is you. We’re talking about people who need help with intimate care having a right to have same sex care. To be able to say ‘Sarah is very nice and very caring and I’m quite happy for them to assist me in all non intimate aspects of my care, but Sarah is a man and I do not want them helping me into the bath’. It’s nothing to do with Sarah or Sarah’s perfectly innocent intentions to just get their client clean and dry. It’s about a woman’s right to not want a man involved in her intimate care.

Meanwhile there are women named Nicola Sturgeon who cloak themselves in fauxminism but underneath are misogynists to their fingertips.

And you have the right to do that without your choice being questioned.

Yes Sooty, we all do. That's what living in a democracy is. If everyone votes to get out the Tories, or Labour, either directly or indirectly that's what happens. It's no one else's business how people use their vote. That applies to all voters, including the ones who voted for Brexit, and the ones who vote for parties you don't agree with.

😂

"there are people who have opposed this bill that cloak themselves in women's rights to make it acceptable, but just as they're transphobic you'll also find that they're deeply misogynist, often homophobic, possibly some of them racist as well"

I remember this bottom of the barrel bullshit from Sturgeon. Absolutely appalling.

He didn't need one, as he had access to women via his job. Had he not, I imagine he may have potentially considered it, if he thought it would help him.

Haha, this bit is golden. JKR is on fire.

But Ms Rowling said his answer left 'the impression that until Tony Blair sat him down for a chat, he'd never understood how he and his wife had come to produce children'.

And you have the right to do that without your choice being questioned.

Did Wayne Couzins have a GRC?

If he wanted one, he'd be allowed to get one.

The concept of having a 'legal' sex that is different to your biological sex is such errant nonsense that absolutely no one should be giving it the time of day.

The shit is hitting the fan for Starmer on this ...good. Thank god for JKR!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13558749/Sir-Keir-Starmer-female-JK-Rowling-Labour.html#comments

This.

No one wants to listen to women, maybe it's because we're all whiney? If Rosie took a course of testosterone it would make her voice more authoritive and then he'd listen.

@thefireplace except I didn't say trans women carers would abuse female service users or imply that in the slightest. I said that service providers, due to hard pushed resourses would ignore service users individual care plans and requests for same sex care by allocating a "woman member of staff" if requested . It happens already. Under Self Id , a biological male who is identify as a trans woman will classed as woman. Just because you are okay with that, you should respect that not every woman or girl accepts that person to give them intimate care . They don't think will abuse or molest them, but they just feel embarassed or scared or have their reasons for it . Some men have refused me to wash them in my many years in care, particularly some older bachelor men. It's about THEM . THEIR NEEDS . Not the workers . It's not personal.

I'm not sure I'll ever be over this moment. Pure Labour misogyny, laid bare.

“do you agree with Rosie Duffield?”
”I agree with Tony Blair!”

Why is it Tony is allowed to say he thinks men have penises and be congratulated for it, but Rosie gets shunned?

Absolutely! Women's Rights are Human Rights. Once they are being respected as such and children are adequately safeguarded I'll support anyone to identify however they wish.

Well, quite, @hihelenhi

Every time Starmer is asked about women, he answers the question as if it were asked about men.

“do you agree with Rosie Duffield?”
”I agree with Tony Blair!” - without being able to articulate what is materially different about “only women have a cervix” (wrong/toxic/should not be said) and “women have a vagina” (I agree with this very reasonable man)

“should women be allowed to keep single sex spaces”
”dignity for blokes etc etc etc. safe spaces !!! BE KIND YOU TOXIC BITCHES”

I don't know how many times we can repeat the same thing.

This isn't about "trans women." It's about WOMEN'S legal rights under the equality act, particularly to boundaries and single sex spaces when we need them. Not to mention being protected and recognised as a group in law. This is being dismantled by those who want "trans women" (males) and their wishes to take priority over women's safety and rights and all the gains made from legislation to protect women's rights in previous decades. It's about women's safety and rights, not to mention issues around the irreversible medicalisation of gender non-conformity which has been happening under the auspices of "gender". That people aren't necessarily mentioning "trans women" does not mean it is not going to matter when all their rights have been taken away without consultation.

'We will also modernise, simplify, and reform the intrusive and outdated gender recognition law to a new process. We will remove indignities for trans people who deserve recognition and acceptance; whilst retaining the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a specialist doctor, enabling access to the healthcare pathway.'

Copypaste from Labour manifesto.

Maybe those people talk about the things that are directly affecting them now. Some of us are looking at how the future may look for us/our daughters.

No, safeguarding and basic understanding of reality is not "a scare story Tory line." It was left wing women who believe in material reality who first picked up on this, many years ago now, long before it was handed to the Tories by sleepwalking middle class neoliberal lefties who seem to think this is 'the new gay rights' (it's very different). Why do you think safeguarding and an understanding of material reality and the facts are "right wing?" It's not a great indictment of the left if this is the case, tbh.

Once again, for the slow ones at the back, trans women ARE men with regard to crime rates. "The danger comes from men." Yes, it does. Trans women have been shown to have SAME RATES of crime, particularly sexual crime as other men. Not women. When we talk about "men" in the context of the reasons why we had to have single single sex spaces historically, trans women are included in that group. Why on earth do you think some males should be treated as exceptions? Making anyone, especially some males, 'untouchable' with regard to whether or not they're 'safe' hasn't tend to work out well historically, has it? Think priests, sports coaches, scout leaders, celebrities...