Keir Starmer - GRA

Test

Here you go, UK legislation, Sexual Offences Act 2003.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape

GG52, I don't know where you are, but in the UK, rape is defined as an assault with a man's penis. By law.

Everything else is categorised as sexual assault, and may be treated just as seriously.

Brilliant and absolutely ridiculous comment. Go to the top of the troll class for effort but bottom for originality

GG52 not it the UK it's not.

Rape is with a penis, otherwise it's sexual assault.

www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/rsa/rape-and-sexual-assault/what-is-rape-and-sexual-assault/

By all accounts since Momentum are backing Long-Bailey and UNISON are backing Starmer, speculation is that Nandy and Phillips won't make the final round and it will be a straight Long-Bailey v Starmer contest which many feel favours Long-Bailey.

It's speculation at this stag but it does look like how it's shaping up.

Rape is an offence that may be committed by an object

Mo Mowlem!

@Justhadathought yes, you are probably right. Extremely feminist is ridiculous. I met him and spent 2.5 hours over a long lunch during a conference chatting to him.
I was impressed by his knowledge of female issues, of the struggles women face, of the inequity.
I came away that day thinking that this was a man I could vote for. Well, now I can.

He is a nice, thoughtful man who actually listens, not pretends to listen, but really does.

During my working life I have met a number of politicians. I have liked and loathed a lot of them. Tony Benn and Mi Moslem made a huge impression, then along came Starmer.

Not trying to compare, but I had the same sort of gut feeling of rightness with him.

I found it very difficult to hear what Starmer was saying in that clip - but I think what he did say was that the present government had taken GRA off the table and that trans people are a small and vulnerable group who have suffered discrimination and abuse for too long, should not be used as a political football - did he say that the issues had to be approached carefully or am I imagining that?

It sounded like a careful answer to me - I think he would be jumped on if he said anything else, but also possibly an answer which believes the trans narrative without having questioned it. I do not doubt though that some trans people are vulnerable, do experience abuse and discrimination and of course should be allowed to live life in peace. The question was about trans and NB rights being under threat - but it did not really specify in what way they are under threat. Trans people’s rights are surely protected in just the same way as everyone else’s. What is under threat under the present government in Westminster (not Scotland of course) is the extension of those rights to access all same sex spaces, I think, not the current rights.

I don’t know. I think Starmer is the candidate who could give Johnson a run for his money and I would like to hear more before I decide.

Starmer is a great choice. I am not saying he is perfect, but I do have personal experience of him and he is actually extremely feminist

To be a feminist you need, firstly, to know what a woman is; and secondly, to have deep awareness of the many ways in which women are accorded second class status in society. You also have to understand the ways in which male voices are privileged over female voices......Being a feminist is not just about 'equal rights' and 'opportunities', although that, of course is important too.

I think i need to hear a lot more from Kier Starmer before I decide whether he's 'Extremely feminist' or not. I would need to know whether he understands the gender critical argument as a priority.

Haha Binterested beat me to it!

No potential leader is going to alienate ANY potential voter deliberately.
Except when it comes to women who want to preserve single sex spaces. They don't seem to have any problem alienating them.

I agree that Starmer may well turn out to be the best choice but, if he hasn't got the guts to say what a woman is - or even worse, can't answer the question - then I think it's a bit of a stretch to describe him as feminist.

Funny they don’t worry about alienating women though isn’t it. What with telling us they don’t know what women are while consorting with these Womanfacers for extra woke points from the bros.

Politicsitics that's a good word,😆

Sorry, am a wee bit wobbly😲

You need to get real. No potential leader is going to alienate ANY potential voter deliberately.
I understand what you are saying but we DO need to live in, the unfortunately, real world.
Corbin was honest. Honest to the bone.
Had he omitted, obsfuracated (???), Or, dare we say, fibbed a bit, he may well have had the votes.
Politicsitics is shite. Choose the best of the worst.
Starmer is a great choice. I am not saying he is perfect, but I do have personal experience of him and he is actually extremely feminist.
I think we realism is needed. Want honesty? God knows who to vote for. Want reality? Make your own decision. I would go Starmer.

.

How very disappointing.

Can you be more specific about your hyperbolic claim that Labour would be 'dangerous'

I can.

Because of Momentum, and their Dear Leader mentality.

Because of deep-rooted misogyny and anti-semitism within the party.

Because of the intolerance within the party (again, Momentum) - of others' opinions, of anything other than hard-left politics. They are incapable of rational discussion (they just no-platform dissenting voices).

I voted for Corbyn in 2017 - but a lot happened since then. Couldn't vote for him in 2019.

To b***to gender

Can you be more specific about your hyperbolic claim that Labour would be 'dangerous'

@cupwomenspledge (the people who started the Conservative women's petition) are asking women to write to their MPs. There is a template email available, if you contact them on Twitter.
Many women don't have time to put something together themselves, they just don't know where to start, so they can just add their name and address to the email (MPs are likely to ignore emails from people outside their constituency).
Or, they can adapt the email as they prefer, it just gives a starting point.
There are still many MPs who claim they haven't been contacted on this issue. We can fix that!

twitter.com/CUPWomensPledge/status/1214157442164150272?s=20

Whose post?

Your post was just one stream of cliches. Not one fact, word of analysis nothing useful at all.

I agree that a MN webchat is unlikely to happen or be nuanced enough to be reassuring on this specific issue.

I’m sick of our elected representatives being apparently uninformed on this area, or vague about it, or cryptic, or scared, or sitting on the fence and trying to please everyone in this clash of rights (not possible to do).

Our MPs need to actually tell us what they think and what they plan to do about it. Some MPs will be happy to promote misogyny and sex stereotyping, authoritarianism and being anti science, we already know that.

But all MPs need to know thousands of women are concerned about this and that we will show support for them if they ask questions or call for debate, if they consult with women, or try to look for policy soliutions by involving women’s groups( or if they to speak out, eg around the problems caused by outdated GRA, by adopting self ID where law doesn’t support that, by perpetuating sex stereotypes, by not offering adequate mental health support for kids; by society not reassuring kids that gender nonconformity is normal and healthy and says fuck all about what sex they are... and many other questions besides.

It’s definitely worth all of us who can do so, writing to our newly elected MPs to start or re-start this conversation with them as their constituents. Also worth it for us to write to any politician who puts their head above the parapet to thank them.

If you are able to, making a surgery appointment with your MP that would be even better so that an informed, nuanced conversation can happen and the MP will start to gain confidence that there are solutions, that these issues can be resolved and is not jus a toxic area to be avoided.

What other policy issue are women expected to vote for candidates when they won’t declare their position publicly? It’s ridiculous.

Like many others on here, I wrote to all three major party candidates at GE time and did not get a single reply. It was a really good thing to do and I don’t regret writing at all but it’s still infuriating how politicians responding clearly to questions which substantially affect women is somehow seen as an optional thing for them to do, in an apparently functioning democracy.

Good point about doing the webchats differently. I just can't be bothered trying to engage public figures on Twitter any more.

It's worth noting though that women who have the ear of Westminster types, have said for some time that loads of MPs are sympathetic to our views, but just too scared to say anything. Which is cowardly beyond belief.

Was it on here somewhere that someone posted about MPs doing a cost/benefit analysis of issues they are prepared to speak up about? Evidently the cost to them is considered too high (which is daft given how few of the general population even know about this stuff, let alone care (hence the bemused faces in the KS video)

Yes it was interesting to hear that. As I’m sure none of the grass roots labour supporters would be remotely interested in this and would certainly want to retain single sex spaces