How can people vote Green?

You're right of course @XDownwiththissortofthingX . It's interesting though that the man who told women who were raped and didn't want a man examining them to "reframe their trauma " and accused them of bigotry isn't standing for any of the other parties. The Greens think his stance on that (and the way he treated Adams) was so acceptable and reasonable that they have him standing as a candidate.

No, this isn't "what happened in Scotland" either.

Gender reform had been a formal SNP policy commitment since 2016, the same year the consultations on the matter began. The SG's did not enter a formal coalition with the SNP until the Bute House Agreement, which was August 2021.

The resulting Gender Reform Bill was overwhelmingly supported by parties across the Holywood chamber, so much so that SG support for it would have been irrelevant as it would have been approved in any case.

So no, the SG's didn't use their leverage to "push through" this at all as it was well on the way to happening regardless.

@Alexandra2001 They may, on paper, be separate parties, but their policies are the same. That's already been covered. The male might get his certificate but they key thing to remember is that the current legislation (which could and should protect women's sex based rights far more, of course )currently offers a level of protection to women which means a GRC has a limited effect. Under the Greens, those rights will vanish - or at best, be significantly diminished. Polanski has been very clear on that.

Out of curiosity, do you think women who have been raped should have the right to know if should know if she's being counselled by a female? Or ask for a female to examine her (and get one)?

Well, they are separate parties and Self ID is pretty much a given here in England.
Over 90% of applicants get a GRC, ok it takes a while and isn't instant but the male gets his certificate.

But that's not what happened in Scotland. The Greens used their leverage as kingmakers to try to push through their priority, which was gender self ID.

Why the name calling/insult? i've not resorted to calling you anything.

You need to re read the post, i said the Greens will modify their views because they will want to be elected, thats what pragmatism means..... to form a govt or be part of one, they will have many more new MPs... from the membership.

All i'm saying is that their views will change & no one is saying they will form the next Govt either, at best they "might" be the 3rd party in a coalition.

To change a ward requires a whole lot more than cordon off a ward for women only... the big one.. setting aside enough beds, these beds have to be configured for various equipment, so we need more capacity, which we do not have... the women in these wards will want female only staff too....

Good idea.

@thedramaQueen You don't say what type of 'evidence' you want, if not people's testimony OR BBC news articles about it. The fact you won't say what type of 'evidence' you want is quite convenient and not without reason. Because you never wanted any evidence in the first place, and nothing at all would ever satisfy you. You will keep moving the goalposts to avoid admitting you are wrong.

Just as I thought. I new it. You were going to invalidate and minimise whatever I said and whatever source I posted. Does the BBC 'fan culture wars'? Those sources have NAMES listed as sources. They named names.

Just admit it. You were not genuine. You did not want any evidence because no evidence is acceptable to you. None whatsoever.

Children's testimony, with NAMES in the articles, is not 'hate and discrimination'.

You were proven wrong. And you have shifted the goalposts - yet again, after giving evidence. You are not posting in good faith.

You'll be in good company then.

So you don't believe what girls and women are saying. Why is that?

Anyway we are going off the the topic of the thread and I haven't got the time to discuss this matter any more - so I am off to my local Green Party meeting to discuss how to be so horrible and anti girls and women😂😂😂

I have looked and I am not dismissing them at all - but this is still not what I asked for.

It also does not say say that girls are missing school because of the lack of single sex toilets from I can see. It says

....49% of girls have missed an entire day of school because of their period;
of those, 59% have made up a lie or an alternate excuse to cover the absence
71% of girls admitted that they have felt embarrassed buying sanitary products
48% of girls aged 14-21 in the UK are embarrassed by their periods

Then it goes on to say:

If girls feel too embarrassed to use mixed-sex toilets - this is an assertion with no empirical evidence to back it up from what I can see?

I would also be interested to know how many toilets in schools are only mixed - from what I have read, where there are gender neutral toilets - single sex toilets are still available for those wishing to use them.

Read it.

Are you dismissing the experiences of women and girls?

No I did not - is it robust empirical evidence?

Did you see the link I posted?

I'm interested in your claim that these reports of actual incidents are nothing more than an attempt to fan the culture wars and rage baiting, rather than expressing concern and anger that women and girls have had had to endure these experiences.

It's sad that you jump to assumptions about people on the internet that you don't know just because they have a different opinion to you. Never have I said I don't believe women and girls - I asked for robust evidence for your claims which you have failed to provide. Instead you provide links to newspaper articles that have form for fanning the cultures wars and rage baiting people in hate and discrimination.

All the people saying this isn't an important voting issue never seem to direct this message at the trans activist zealots and politicians.

The Green party make statements along the lines of "There can be no climate justice without justice on trans rights". The SNP and Scottish Greens spent enormous political capital trying to push through self ID. So clearly they think this is a big issue. But they never get seem to get called culture warriors.

Aren't 99% of toilets seperate sex in the uk?

Not for all of them.

What do you think "men" means?

Then you’ll know focus group are held before the poll to arrive at the ten issues. Pollsters don’t pluck them out of thin air.

You said Women and men during the suffragette era did make it a single issue voting issue.

You didn’t mention husbands. From what I’ve read the vast majority of men didn’t want women to have the vote and many who did thought they’d get two votes if their wives were enfranchised. The only reason we got the vote was as a gesture of gratitude for the work women did in WW1.

Them and their husbands - men, drove it. I already said.

It's a womens rights issue, there is no 'trans issue', but I know you need to frame it as it is. Pollsters pick a list of topics and ask people 'what is the issue most important to you out of these?' and reads out a list of 10 issues. I know because I've done these polls.

How could suffragette women make it a single voting issue? They hadn’t got a vote.

The trans issue would be in the top ten if enough people mentioned it. You do know how polls work?