How John McDonnell wooed Mumsnet - James Kirkup

They are in hoc to Momentum. They are stuck with the Trans women are women mantra because all hell would break lose if they backtrack on this.

Labour voter, parents and grandparents before me. Cannot vote for them due to Self ID, although in fairness can’t find anyone else to vote for either.

Did JK acknowledge the change in web chat rules and that after the Stella Creasey chat a number of FWR posters were suspended?

(DH is always messing up our password for our subscription so I can't see the article.)

The tone was, we will carefully weight the needs of about 0.01% of the male population against the needs of the 50% of the population that's female

very good point AAK. when you put it this way he actually looks a bit of a presumptuous prat doesn't he?

I’ve voted labour in every election since I’ve been old enough. It’ll be a long time and a lot will have to happen before I ever vote for them again.

I too am unwooed. Who was it introduced the GRA in the first place, but failed to introduce gay marriage? Hmmm let me think.

I’m not sure why the positive reaction. Labour have already given away roles intended for women to men without asking us. And then tell us we can compromise. It’s like a burglar kindly compromising and agreeing to walk out with only half your stuff.

I remain unwooed.

Bitterly disappointed in the party I've supported all my life, yes.

I took a group of teenagers to an event with a panel including Zoe Williams once.

They were unanimous in their view that she was a patronising posh fool. I didn't actually think she was that bad but they are very good judges of character teenagers...

The tone was, we will carefully weight the needs of about 0.01% of the male population against the needs of the 50% of the population that's female (with the males being mentioned first of course).

How fucking dare you? That's meant to sound fair and reasonable?

We don't want concessions now: we want our rights back

This.

No consensus possible. They were never politicians' rights to re allocate in the first place.

Labour have already thrown women under the bus so a mild nod from a politician stating he may discuss this issue means nothing. Actions speak louder than words and Labour have acted against women and continue to do so.

I'm not so sure we can come to a consensus between women who want no males in our spaces ever and those who want self-Id leading to full access to any spaces the person would like to be in.

A year or so ago John McD might have got an overwhelmingly positive reaction to what he said today, so pathetically grateful would we have been for our existence to even have been acknowledged.

John: you're more than a year too late (and even you a bit, James, because we've been at this for a long time now). Women have found their voice. They don't need the Labour Party now (indeed, I left you long since). You're behind the curve. We don't want concessions now: we want our rights back. And waffle about seeking consensus and respectful debate won't cut the mustard.

Too little too late.

#handsoffmyrights

Splenetic?! WTF. Patronising twat - talking from the immense privilege of someone who has her own column. The rest of us are RIGHTLY furious. Zoe smug face Williams can go and do one.

Agree Crackpots that piece by Zoe Williams is patronising shite, fuck knows what the btl comments will be like...

But have Labour forgotten that they have already said that they support self-ID? And that there is no debate?

Labour have so far been very clear about their position, and they have systematically dismissed women's concerns in coming to that position. Labour have never defined what a woman actually is but are absolutely clear that men can self-define as this thing that Labour can't define.

And now they want votes consensus? After already reaching their decision?

I'm not expecting much from Labour, either. They are not in government right now, it won't happen on their watch. The Spectator commentators think we're just gullible if we believe McDonnell.

That said, wasn't it some brave women from Rother Valley CLP who raised concerns about self-ID? This is more than other parties have done:
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/09/labours-refusal-to-accept-the-definition-of-a-woman/

Apart from David Davies ... argh!

I wonder if they'll attempt to pass it around like the proverbial hot potato, hoping someone else will take responsibility for passing it into law and thus the blame.

AAK is right. There can be no consensus between those two positions.

But I think any government which bringing in Self ID should brace themselves for a shitload of terrible publicity. Every voyeur, every paedophile who uses Self ID to access victims - it'll be blamed on the government.

I'm not so sure we can come to a consensus between women who want no males in our spaces ever and those who want self-Id leading to full access to any spaces the person would like to be in.

I don't think that's possible either. I think he really means he hopes we can come up with a compromise.

Completely agree Kittens.

Labour come across as disingenuous at best, over the Brexit and Self Id issues.
McDonnall more or less said on the chat he'd rather screw over the country on Brexit, and gave platitudes over self id to keep the women sweet. There goes my vote.
The Party comes across as a We'll do it tomorrow fucking omnishambles.

I'm not so sure we can come to a consensus between women who want no males in our spaces ever and those who want self-Id leading to full access to any spaces the person would like to be in.

He didn't avoid them but he didn't exactly say much either. "Meaningful debate" doesn't actually mean much coming from the Labour front bench at the moment.