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

Although I see your point, and believe what happened to that poster was obviously dreadful, she did volunteer that information in order to make a point about what I said, that you’d never know if your brother was a pervert. This was said in response to another poster who said she knew her brother and father were not a threat to women. My point was you can’t know that, and it has nothing to do with their trans-ness or lack of. This poster’s comment although very awful does not make the point she’s trying to. Men are the problem. Not trans women.

Men do not need to pretend to be trans to attack us. They are the most privileged in our society. The can come and go as they please. Men have attacked women in toilets, hospitals, shopping centres, their homes before and will do again. They don’t need to put on different clothes to get close to women. But telling us that trans women are the risk is a good way to distract us from those facts while they claim “not all men” (they never say “not all trans women” I notice)

Is that why you've now started a second thread on this then?

You are, of course, free to think what you please, but he has stood as a Labour candidate in the past which lends some weight to his claim.

It's not about "trans women". The only reason they come up in this is that these are the people who are insisting our rights (and reality) are dismantled in order to accommodate their wishes. I think it was thought that being supposedly "naturally submissive cis" types (as we are in gender identity ideology) we'd just roll over and capitulate.

It's about women. It's about whether or not we, you, every woman on this thread, their daughters, their mothers, are permitted to say no to men ever and whether or not we are allowed to participate in discussions when men, aided by naive women who think they're being "cool", decide to dismantle the legal rights to boundaries and spaces and even being recognised in law that were hard fought for in generations before ours. If you replace sex (material reality) with gender (sex stereotypes which according to gender identity idealogy you are a woman if you sufficiently fit what conservatively minded people think are "feminine" traits), for instance, you have effectively wiped out the entire historical basis of the Sex Discrimination Act 1974, which was incorporated into the Equality Act 2010 along with other historical anti discrimination legislation.

The ONLY characteristic of the nine that has been removed, the meaning changed or added to, is "sex". Literally only women's rights are being overtly erased like this, although it impacts sexual orientation equality laws too. I can't believe people really can't see this and handwave it away. This is a big important issue that will eventually affect EVERY female person in the country, whether she recognises it now or not. The blindness is absolutely astonishing. It stands alongside all the "big important issues" that YOU think are important in my mind. It underpins them all. I'm not sure why you imagine that we need to "choose" between them. They are all important.

I'll ask you again as we ran out of space on the last one: were you OK with people being single issue voters on stopping Brexit in the last election?

Such a mystery, isn't it?

Women’s rights is definitely one of them.

Plus, I don't know if you've noticed that wome have lost their jobs for talking about these issues? Received death threats, rape threats, abuse, violence, etc?

In case you were wondering why perhaps many women don't talk about/raise these issues 'in real life', but are happy to do so when posting anonymously/pseudonymously online.

These are not the words of a man who has “long wanted Labour to win the election” . His previous columns also belie that.

I should perhaps say at the outset that I have long wanted Labour to win the election (I don’t think I’m alone in regarding this Tory administration as woeful), but my fear all along has been that this front bench is flaky and willing to bend to the latest manifestation of progressive opinion. It appears to be packed with chameleons who don’t really have solid foundations and can therefore be cowed by a transitory mob, as long as it is co-ordinated and determined, like the extreme end of the trans lobby during the high point of its cultural power.

Schroedinger's voter.

So ... if you think women on here are not real, somehow, why on earth are you trying to persuade us to vote for a particular party?!

Of course OP, one of the reasons this hasn’t been a problem for you is precisely because we haven’t had a left-wing administration for the last 5 years.

I don’t think the Tories have generally done a good job, but on this, they have been far better than the alternative - see Australia or Canada to get a better idea. Without the Tories In Westminster, the SNP would have pushed through self-id.

Once lost, I believe women’s rights will be very hard to win back. Once our young people go down the path of medical transition, it is impossible to reverse. Any child abused because this approach leaves safeguarding in tatters will have to deal with a lifetime of trauma.

People criticise MN for allowing discussion on this topic - but that is why posters here are so very well informed

A woman declared she's a victim of child sexual abuse from 2 family members and you're more interested in correcting what was obviously a mistake in her terminology about trans people. Even picking up her very personal and intimate post and dropping it into a new thread without her consent. Disgusting behaviour and you should get it deleted.

@mrsskylerwhite - I'm so sorry for what happened to you and that your post was picked out for point scoring.

I whole heartedly agree.

I think, for me, the problem is more fundamental even than the issue of women's rights. It's the absolute lack of trust that the Labour front bench won't roll over for the next vocal minority that manages to gain a foothold as they did on this, I see that they are walking some of the crazy back on this issue, but how on earth did (do) so many of them find themself on this bandwagon in the first place?

Matthew Syed has it spot on in his piece in the Times today https://archive.ph/wX2sn

Does that mean I want the Tories in? Hell no! They have had 14 years to sort this out, but have chosen to keep it as a wedge issue for the election instead, so fuck them too, but Labour really aren't an easy party to put my confidence in either.

And there are women here who agree with the OP. Women can vote for whoever best addresses their concerns, whatever they may be.

You know I'm not referring to the Tories.

No it isn't. Not at all.

Gay people never tried to gaslight everyone into pretending that white is black and up is down, nor did their fight for their own rights compromise anyone else's in any way.

I too know a couple of lovely trans woman.

But they are not women and I would not want to encounter them in a female changing room or a women's rape crisis group or competing in a women's sporting category. I'd quite happily chat to them in the pub or sit next to them at work.

Seriously, how many points can over your head? It's the same as saying I know plenty of lovely men (and I do) but I realise that men as a sex class are more of a risk to women. Being gay doesn't carry the same risk. You are now just posting in bad faith.

Are you referring to the Tories?

But we are women on here, talking to you.

To the person on the previous thread who said “I know a lovely trans woman but…”
it’s just the modern version of “I don’t mind the gays but I wouldn’t want to work with one”.

As arguments go, this is not a strong one. Isn't Labour the only political party in the UK never to have had a female leader?

And of course it goes without saying that women can be misogynists.