Page 12 | The "terrifying threat from Labour"

BigWordAtlas · 2024-07-02T12:50:04+00:00

I know that Tory HQ staff often come on here and post, and will be doing even more so at the moment. I also know that Kier Starmer has done a terrible job in gender critical thinking, and members like him, Rayner and Lammy are currently an absolute shitshow when it comes to the rights and protections of women and children. I'm not looking forward to the battle we'll face after the election to reverse the damage that's been done and to protect those rights, and fully bring down all the MRA policies that have formally or informally kicked in over the last few years. But does anyone else feel like the absolute barrage on here in the last few days about the Holy Bloody Handmaid Terror that will be Labour's government is a bit... overblown? A bit Tory HQ-flavoured? They're absolutely panicking at the moment and will do any kind of astroturfing they can to chip away at votes, particularly in swing constituencies like mine. No party is perfect, and Labour is currently far from perfect for me and my children. But realistically, I have to vote Labour where I am if I want to keep a Tory candidate out. I *hate* their gender ID policies, but this nail-bitten tone of total and complete apocalypse (and yes, I've heard posters use that word in this context) feels unhelpful and not really equipping anyone to improve things after the GE. They made me feel extremely anxious until I just hit a wall with the frantic language, and now I'm feeling much more pragmatic and ready to fight *with* Labour on this stuff, rather than against them and allowing another party to get in. So AIBU to feel that most of these posts are at least seeded by Tory HQ, rather than actual Labour voters like me? <hard hat donned>

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:40

Alwaystired94 · 02/07/2024 14:35

Maybe don't vote for parties that say nice things about Hitler?

I haven't ever referred to a Tory as as a Hitler. Reform? Definitely.

Show quote history

Never spewed Tory hate? You must be a very rare Labour party voter, it's in the DNA

I noticed it when I grew up and moved more to the right. I had never had any viciousness from the right when I was a loud member of the Labour party, yet one slight move to the right, small c conservative, and the vitriol that comes your way from the left is relentless.

And yeah, Farage is very like Hitler, you are totally right

https://x.com/ArchRose90/status/1807445277625794737

x.com

https://x.com/ArchRose90/status/1807445277625794737

EmmaGrundyForPM · 02/07/2024 14:39

@hamstersarse I earn over £50k, as does Dh. We are both voting Labour as are many of our friends who are higher rate tax payers.

I'm voting for the party who I believe will be best for the country, not the best for me personally.

FOJN · 02/07/2024 14:39

BigWordAtlas · 02/07/2024 14:36

Sorry, I do agree with you about the difficulties of giving a party a mandate and then wanting them to do the opposite, and I also agree with you that MN women are brilliant educators and fighters in the battle against all the TRA rubbish. I don't think the GC women on here are Tory HQ, and I didn't mean it as a shorthand that anyone questioning Labour = Tory bots.

I think we've applied pressure, we've done our best to bang drums and draw attention, and the ship is slowly turning around. I also think Starmer has pathetically done his best not to make any waves and lose any votes by mumbling this stuff about men's cervixes, and that's not at all what I want from a leader. But we do work on a constituency system, and I 100% cannot let a Tory MP win here because I think Starmer is too weak to say what the vast majority in the country accepts is the functional truth.

Tories will not be better for women, despite Kemi Badenoch's excellent efforts. I think once the fuss dies down, Labour will actually end up helping women more, in the long term (if they get a long term).

Show quote history

I'm not trying to persuade you to change your vote so you have no need to justify your reasons to me.

Spinet · 02/07/2024 14:38

I don't disagree but I also think that having that as your thread title might be an own goal quite frankly!

Melisha · 02/07/2024 14:37

@hamstersarse why are you repeating a lie?
Starmer said in an interview that he always takes Friday evening after 6pm off to spend with his family. It is very sensible for people in very busy jobs to carve out a bit of time that is set aside for family. And one evening a week is not much time.

WishfulThunking · 02/07/2024 14:37

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:33

Well done you,

But you do realise people who might not be voting Labour generally don't tell you. The reason being they generally get called 'racist bigot Hitlers' by the #bekind folks

Show quote history

Gosh really? I didn’t know that. So all my friends are lying to me - they’re very good actors 🙄

Original poster

BigWordAtlas · 02/07/2024 14:36

FOJN · 02/07/2024 14:29

You think you can give a party a mandate and then argue with them about it afterwards?

We've been flagging this issue for years. The time to apply pressure was long before the polls open not after they've won.

I respect your right to vote however you please but to congratulate women on all the campaigning we've done and then accuse us of posting on behalf of Tory HQ is really disrespectful.

Show quote history

Sorry, I do agree with you about the difficulties of giving a party a mandate and then wanting them to do the opposite, and I also agree with you that MN women are brilliant educators and fighters in the battle against all the TRA rubbish. I don't think the GC women on here are Tory HQ, and I didn't mean it as a shorthand that anyone questioning Labour = Tory bots.

I think we've applied pressure, we've done our best to bang drums and draw attention, and the ship is slowly turning around. I also think Starmer has pathetically done his best not to make any waves and lose any votes by mumbling this stuff about men's cervixes, and that's not at all what I want from a leader. But we do work on a constituency system, and I 100% cannot let a Tory MP win here because I think Starmer is too weak to say what the vast majority in the country accepts is the functional truth.

Tories will not be better for women, despite Kemi Badenoch's excellent efforts. I think once the fuss dies down, Labour will actually end up helping women more, in the long term (if they get a long term).

OP posts:

Alwaystired94 · 02/07/2024 14:35

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:33

Well done you,

But you do realise people who might not be voting Labour generally don't tell you. The reason being they generally get called 'racist bigot Hitlers' by the #bekind folks

Show quote history

Maybe don't vote for parties that say nice things about Hitler?

I haven't ever referred to a Tory as as a Hitler. Reform? Definitely.

hairbearbunches · 02/07/2024 14:34

@Alwaystired94 Lammy said live on radio that he understood that transwomen could have a cervix after appropriate hormones and treatment etc.

WTAF?

I think he might be a bit thick, actually.

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:33

WishfulThunking · 02/07/2024 14:30

Absolute shite. My friendship group largely exists of people earning over £50k - we are all voting Labour and all accept that taxes improve public services. Not rocket science 🙄

Show quote history

Well done you,

But you do realise people who might not be voting Labour generally don't tell you. The reason being they generally get called 'racist bigot Hitlers' by the #bekind folks

Shortfatsuit · 02/07/2024 14:32

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:29

It is quite terrifying that Starmer refuses to work "pretty much come what may" past 6 o'clock

Sounds totes committed

You forgot to mention that this was on one day a week when he prioritises his family.

I have no issue with that if he works hard the rest of the time and gets stuff done.

Apolloneuro · 02/07/2024 14:32

I was thinking the same thing this morning, OP. It’s been proven that social media manipulation was at play during the last election hasn’t it.

Oakskn · 02/07/2024 14:32

BigWordAtlas · 02/07/2024 14:13

Thanks for that, I'm sorry it happened to you. Can you say why Starmer 'terrifies' you? As I say, I'm enormously unhappy with his policies around gender ID but I'm also really uplifted by the brilliant campaigning women around the country have been doing the last few years to clarify and strengthen the (current) laws around GC. I hate the thought of what the worst of Labour could do with a supermajority, but 'terrified' is such strong language. Trump is terrifying. France's far right are terrifying. Starmer, though?

My granddad uses to say he was 'terrified' of Labour getting in under Blair (and would leave the country) - spoiler: he didn't leave, and he just didn't want his taxes going on 'things he didn't use', like schools, the NHS, Sure Start centres.

Show quote history

i agree with labour wanting to spend major money on health and education. But. I don’t think that their sources of funding will materialise as they have laid it out.

I have no idea why a non dom wouldn’t run away to Monaco, for example. Those kind of people must have teams of tax people. I just don’t see them coughing up 5bn. It just seems so convenient and easy for us to think oh we’re in the shit with lots of stuff, let’s have some unicorn super rich sort it out. Nobody seems to question this money magically appearing.

also, whilst I would be happy to pay a bit more tax, I think a raid on private education (a raid which is illegal under EU law), is very wrong. Most of the people who’ve dreamt this up have no current experience of private school and also, many economists have said it won’t raise money - for various reasons. To be clear, I appreciate state schools need money and I want them to have it. But again, I do not believe money from this source will materialise as estimated by labour and having been inside private schools for the past 15 years, some of the assumptions that labour have made are so far out of touch. Out of another century.

where is the money coming from?????

Alwaystired94 · 02/07/2024 14:32

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:29

It is quite terrifying that Starmer refuses to work "pretty much come what may" past 6 o'clock

Sounds totes committed

omg the horror that a MAN wants to actually be involved with his family?
how AWFUL. Imagine us being a country that prioritises a work life balance?

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:31

How can you want to vote this person into power? It is stunningly stupid.

https://x.com/alexharmstrong/status/1806753236302610664

If you met this person down the pub, would you really think "yay what a guy!" ?

I don't get it, it is there in front of your eyes how idiotic they are

x.com

https://x.com/alexharmstrong/status/1806753236302610664

WishfulThunking · 02/07/2024 14:30

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:18

I think anyone earning over £50k will be pretty pissed off with the prospect of a Labour government. They make it clear time and time again that 'rich' people are their target, and by rich they simply mean high tax earners.

For me it will be the lack of incentive to do well because of the tax burden that is terrifying - when will people realise that socialism doesn't work?!

Absolute shite. My friendship group largely exists of people earning over £50k - we are all voting Labour and all accept that taxes improve public services. Not rocket science 🙄

Arewealljustloosingtheplot · 02/07/2024 14:30

BeforetheDawn · 02/07/2024 14:04

I do understand that anything expressing any party affiliation will sound that way this week.

I think you've answered your own question!

Women are desperate. I have 3 young adult daughters and I know I am. Once we lose the legal definition of 'women' it's open season on the rights it's taken over 100 years to gain. This government is a corrupt clown show but once we have a leading party who define 'woman' as 'anyone who identifies as one' we've lost something it'll be very hard to reclaim.

Excellent response.

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:29

It is quite terrifying that Starmer refuses to work "pretty much come what may" past 6 o'clock

Sounds totes committed

FOJN · 02/07/2024 14:29

BigWordAtlas · 02/07/2024 14:21

Yes, I agree with this. I was getting panic attacks as I read thread after thread about this threat, and I do think it's very real: as political commentators have said, some of these constituencies are so desperate to get a Labour member in that many of those standing are young, untested and possibly very wokey, and they could push the party in a dangerously anti-women direction.

But I also think that women have done brilliant work legally and publically countering all this nonsense, that Cass and other reports are showing the damage and hollowness of all the glittery hypocrisy, and that the public tide is turning against telling 7 year olds that they can have wrong bodies, and liking football or fancying women means you're 100% male. Starmer will learn pretty quickly that the mechanisms that actually power the country don't have much time for 'but this grown man wants to be in the Ladies', please BeKind'.

Show quote history

You think you can give a party a mandate and then argue with them about it afterwards?

We've been flagging this issue for years. The time to apply pressure was long before the polls open not after they've won.

I respect your right to vote however you please but to congratulate women on all the campaigning we've done and then accuse us of posting on behalf of Tory HQ is really disrespectful.

GrumpyPanda · 02/07/2024 14:29

Forum regular, not a Brit but facing very similar issues in our own elections. I've been reading quite a few of these threads and don't get the impression they're planted, they reflect genuine anguish. Some of us are single-issue voters, some of us aren't and also, it depends on just how starkly you perceive the party differences on issues not related to s4x and gender.

Now where I'm reasonably sure there are paid trolls at work is the Biden threads!

WishfulThunking · 02/07/2024 14:28

BeforetheDawn · 02/07/2024 14:04

I do understand that anything expressing any party affiliation will sound that way this week.

I think you've answered your own question!

Women are desperate. I have 3 young adult daughters and I know I am. Once we lose the legal definition of 'women' it's open season on the rights it's taken over 100 years to gain. This government is a corrupt clown show but once we have a leading party who define 'woman' as 'anyone who identifies as one' we've lost something it'll be very hard to reclaim.

So we’ll stick with the corrupt clown show? 🙄

Original poster

BigWordAtlas · 02/07/2024 14:27

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:18

I think anyone earning over £50k will be pretty pissed off with the prospect of a Labour government. They make it clear time and time again that 'rich' people are their target, and by rich they simply mean high tax earners.

For me it will be the lack of incentive to do well because of the tax burden that is terrifying - when will people realise that socialism doesn't work?!

It's a bit simplistic to say socialism 'doesn't work'. It's a massively complex push and pull of various factors as to whether it works or not. The post-war social consensus built a free-at-the-point-of-use health service that has saved millions of lives, as well as thousands of schools, arts centres, libraries, parks and more that were open to everyone.

For many different reasons, we're still in the Thatcherite mentality of 'no such thing as society', everyone is out for themselves and whatever benefits me and my family is all I'll vote for. If anything, we should have learned that it's individualism that doesn't work and socialism is the best bet for all of us, taking the hit of what we can afford to make society fairer and better for as many as possible (the only thing that actually does reduce crime and poor health, and increases revenue, trade, creativity and good health outcomes).

But for now, the main political philosophy of the West is 'everyone else can get fucked if I can't have everything I want yesterday.'

OP posts:

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:27

Alwaystired94 · 02/07/2024 14:26

Did you forget Transmen exist? They still have a cervix. Not everything about Trans is about Transwomen.

Show quote history

Just watch what Lammy said and then comment?

Alwaystired94 · 02/07/2024 14:26

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:24

Starmer is genuinely terrifying on the trans issue, if that is what we are talking about. He just cannot speak the truth about it. It is way worse than any of BJ's lies.

Lammy literally said the other day that men can grow a cervix

These people are horrifying. Smug, virtuous and possessed by ideology that they know what is best for everyone.

Did you forget Transmen exist? They still have a cervix. Not everything about Trans is about Transwomen.

CheerfulBunny · 02/07/2024 14:25

Totally agree with you and often post as such. This forum ticks a lot of boxes to enable whoever to canvas opinion and plant seeds. It represents a demographic political parties are desperate to influence and anyone who doesnt think it goes on is being naive. God knows Facebook is used enough to spread crap that people eagerly gobble up. I tend to avoid these threads on MN or approach with caution.