Guess how I got suspended from the Labour Party?

Any chance of a share token? Can only read the first few lines.

Times comments are generally sensible I find. After I’ve read the Guardian ones I feel like I need to be autoclaved ...

The comments below the piece in The Times are encouraging.

James Kirkup is doing sterling work at the mo. Such clearly articulated arguments and unshowy exposition of the gaps in current thinking. ⭐️ and a 🍺

I like your work David.

sigh

did someone link to Times already

Sadly we still live in a world where it takes men saying something for men to take notice.

This is it.

I've even reading the MN posts on this issue from the sidelines completely unaware of the Self ID issue before then. Thanks for your action in doing this it's given me something to wave a red flag about on Facebook in the hope that similarly ignorant friends start to take an interest.

Well done.

All excellent points being raised here about how it is our biology that brings females together as we all share in the highs and lows of what it is to be female. Nationality, religion, class, wealth, through all of those differences we find common ground in our biology. What do females and transwomen actually share that transcends everything else?

Throughout this debate I don't think I've come across any Trans activists or allies who get this. They're so caught up in Identity politics they are blind to the obvious. And they claim to know better than anyone what a woman is! The irony.

Would you like to become a Guide leader instead?
We're all told it's only an hour and a half a week so you can EASILY fit that in on a Weds.

I’ve not read the full thread but I just wanted to say thank you.

Sadly we still live in a world where it takes men saying something for men to take notice.

shaped by men being utterly crap at having babies

Also throughout most of history women couldn't stop having babies.

Both my Grandmother and Grandfather came from families of 7+ children.

Gender only exists because of biology. Mostly because of the way societies have been shaped by men being utterly crap at having babies, plus them tending to be bigger and more aggressive.

Yes, biology is a great leveller. The social construct of class has to bow before biology. So I don’t see why the social construct of gender should be any different.

Look at the way pregnancy and birth stories bring together women across the divides of race, religion or nationality.

Queen Elizabeth I was much criticised for showing favourites with males. When it is kings prominent families would throw their daughters in the kings' way.

Had she married she would expect to at least partially give up the throne to him. There were massive negotiations when her sister, Mary, married the king of Spain, in order for her to keep it.

Lady Jane Gray was heir to the throne after Edward (very complicated period legally as people had been disinheruted. It should actually have been her mother but...). So Lady Jane was married off with the expectation that her husband would rule, thereby getting the support to launch the bid for the throne. I'm pleased to say she buggered that up nicely.

Victoria allowed Albert to rule at home because he found it so difficult having to obey publically and be ruled by a woman. She was courted by politicians who used her femininity (and age!) by flirting shamelessly.

Elizabeth ii would not be queen if she had a younger male sibling. There had to be major law change in order for Charlotte to be ahead in the succession than Louis.

Ladies can not usually inherit a title. (This still counts even if people are trans - male born would still inherit and Female born would not, even if they present male).

A poor woman still has plenty in common with the queen.

Just wanted to say thank you David Lewis. I am sure you have woken many people up by standing and being accepted for election.

@IAmDavidLewis - why aren't you allowed to do this....? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/23/fluid-gender-policeman/

Another fine piece by James Kirkup - and I don't think he sounds like a "failing philosophy undergraduate" at all!

But I think he's being a bit optimistic in hoping people will think before they tweet and avoid swearing and abuse ...

*Seafoodeatit

Women aren't defined by biology, oh the irony flying high over their heads. 'Don't define women by their bits, define them by liking pink instead'. Being female IS just about your dna and genitals though, that is all there is to it, there is no fancy feeling or thought or sexual orientation. It's not reductionist to call a kettle a kettle. Your genes don't define what you as an individual but they do define your species/sex.

I think it all went to shit to put politely as soon as gender got made into a big deal, it should be irrelevant to day to day life and how people live, if you want to identify as something fine but it shouldn't be the state's job to validate your experiences.*

^Well bloody said.

Well, haven’t Labour made themselves look like twats. Glad I cancelled my membership really.

Discussion of David's suspension and implications etc by James Kirkup:
(extract)
"In short, Labour policy’s and the suspension of David Lewis opens up a conversation that involves asking fundamental questions about how an approach based on the principle of self-identified gender can actually be made to work in practice. This case has also proved that policies devised with the very best of intentions can run into trouble if they are not properly debated and considered first.

A proper debate about self-ID would surely consider the possibility of the sort of abuse David Lewis stands accused of. If anyone who says they are a woman must be accepted as a woman, what’s to stop men with bad intent obtaining the legal status of a woman for malign purposes?"
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/the-catch-22-of-labours-gender-policy/

Thank you, David, for taking a stand. If you know more men like you who will take a stand, we could use all the help we can get. Thank you.

The queen didn’t have two kids, she had four

bd67th
Also menopause and carrying the risk of female specific diseases eg Gyny cancers.

Lauren Rosewarne, a senior political science lecturer at the University of Melbourne interviewed about 'virginity testing'. Practice strongly associated in the past with royal marriages:

www.whimn.com.au/talk/news/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-humiliating-practice-of-virginity-testing/news-story/7244fcae5ce065c76c8306bd9a31467c

"Such ceremonies date back as far back as the Middle Ages, she says. Previously, when the eldest son was the family's heir, it was also justified as a way of guaranteeing paternity."
"The "blood ceremonies" are still being practised now in many cultures around the world."
"In all of these cultures, there is no ritual to test the groom's virginity."