Jess Phillips throws GC women under the bus

The GRA used to serve a purpose (to enable marriage for post-op transsexuals, at a time when gay marriage was unavailable).

There doesn't seem to be any actual legislative purpose in allowing everyone to be legally recognised as the sex they're not.

She ignored my question about the level of rape and sexual assaults, even in situations where women and girls can expect there to be a level of supervision such as schools and psychiatric wards.

I couldn't even bring myself to vote Labour now.
The party has been taken over by lunatics who have made their distain for women clear.

Both of these comments exemplify the situation women are in now. A Men's (sexual) rights movement has gleefully co-opted women both inside and outside political parties, major organisations, etc. and we find ourselves fighting not only for the rights we thought were a given, but even for the right to name ourselves.

We are, I'm afraid, at war. And we're facing massive opposition.

Agree, NotAssigned. The GRA should be scrapped.

I can't see her negotiating with Putin.

I used to admire Jess. But (and it's not just the TWAW stuff) the more I hear the less impressed I am. Fortunately she won't win.

She does not seem to be able to follow an argument through. I actually agree with her that the 2 year living in gender nonsense in the GRA is ridiculous. It essentially defines womanhood as tired stereotypes. BUT the solution is not to remove that clause and bring in legal self ID. The solution is to repeal the GRA. No-one should be able to be legally recognised as something they are not.

There is NO individual risk assessment that would EVER show that it is a good idea to put a transwoman into a women’s refuge.

I didn't know that but I agree that she has no excuse.

And actually I think her using the victims of DV as a tool to make herself look good (she was a business development manager which I can't imagine involves much involvement with the hoi polloi actually using the service) makes her droning 'transwomen are women' even worse because it lends an extra sheen of credibility to her perspective that it's fine to thrown DV victims under the bus if you do individual risk assessments.

Jess is more interested in Jess's political progress than the needs of vulnerable women. If I wasn't clear on that before, I certainly am now.

Brava Jess. I hope you sleep soundly tonight.

Jess knows KIS and heard her evidence at the Women & Eq Committee hearing on domestic violence and rape crisis centres. She has no excuse.

Jess would do well to read Karen Ingala Smith's speech to Scottish Parliament

kareningalasmith.com/2020/01/20/the-importance-of-women-only-spaces-and-services-for-women-and-girls-whove-been-subjected-to-mens-violence/

This is what we need a woman with an understanding of DV to be saying. Jess us like a soggy paper bag - gives the impression of being robust but absolutely pathetic under any pressure. And frankly I think it's a bloody insult to women victims of DV to keep using them to score woki even cookies.

Yes it wasn’t really an answer was it? More of a statement as to why she thinks free speech is a bad idea

memento

It was a great question, but her answer shows she doesn't regard freedom of speech as a value worth defending.

Sorry Jess. I used to admire you, but I couldn't even bring myself to vote Labour now.
The party has been taken over by lunatics who have made their distain for women clear.

She ignored my question about the level of rape and sexual assaults, even in situations where women and girls can expect there to be a level of supervision such as schools and psychiatric wards.

and I thought her answer to the question on freedom of speech and no platforming where she started wittering about the BNP was utterly dire

Yes it wasn’t really an answer was it? More of a statement as to why she thinks free speech is a bad idea :D

Huh. She didnt even bother with my question about porn or another poster about prostitution. Not engaging on things that impact women and girls at all. Happy to use her work atDV shelters for feminist brownie points but won't actually take on feminist issues. Very disappointing

OK so I'm confused. Has Jess done a complete U turn since the inquiry into single sex services?

Women and Equalities Committee
Wednesday 22 May 2019 Meeting started at 9.56am, ended 11.36am
parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/0d07ff13-636e-4b51-a946-2877e583dc4c

I am sort-of reminded of arguing for SEN adaptations for my son, and getting a mix of answers from
'He just needs to learn that the real world won't adapt to him'
to
'He can't have a safe space as that would be unfair to the other children'
to
'We know he needs a safe quiet space, so we made one, and then we found 25 other children who also needed it, so we've put them all in together! With extra-bright lighting in case any of them have VI! And extra-loud sounds in case any of them have hearing impairments or need more stimulating!
What do you mean, it doesn't suit him any more?'

I just re read her answers and saw the comment about Equality Impact Assessments.

Which in the context of her other answers...…. she has no clue what they are, she clearly hasn't used them in any meaningful way, or she'd be aware of the massive irony involved.

Tell me what her vision for the country is. She hasn't got one.

She could have taken your and Need's excellent questions and given a summary of her vision as leader:

How do you think the Labour Party should engage with the emerging post-liberalism in British politics? Especially the traditionally Labour-voting section?

Hi Jess, do you agree with the view that culture wars and identity politics have caused a fundamental shift in the political landscape, to the extent that the previous left-wing/right-wing way of seeing things no longer holds good. If not, how do you explain the phenomenon of “blue labour” and the crumbling red wall? And as leader, how would you address the issue?

But no, nothing. She just told us how she pronounces "Momsnet" - I take it her Brummie-ness is supposed to be the answer to everything (or maybe she thought she was on the radio).

what she has done for women and girls and yet apparently she believes biological men can also be women

The two aren't exclusive. She may well have done much good for women and girls, and also done good for the transwomen she says have used refuges in which she was involved, and not noticed (or chosen to ignore) the downsides of including those transwomen in women's refuges.

'Nobody complained. So it's clearly all fine. And if anyone does complain, it's their own fault for Not Believing. So it's still all fine.'

I think what makes it so especially heart sinkingly depressing, is that we have no credible alternative - we don't have anyone who does get it. It's so fucking disappointing.

The complete lack of insight, logic, common sense, intelligence and the denial of biology and the championing of stereotyping from a woman in 2020, advocating herself as someone who cares about women's right, is jaw dropping.

And Jess Philips seems like someone who, on the surface, wouldn't be like this. What fucking chance have we got? We don't have the "best of a bad bunch" or "the least worst option" - all the options are fucking terrible!

(Whether I agree with her vision or not. It's not that I don't agree - although obvs I don't on gender - it's that there isn't one.)

Paste all her answers into one document. Read them together. Tell me what her vision for the country is. She hasn't got one.

I think I'm in shock that this is an actual leadership candidate for one of our main political parties

Well said Lang It's a frickin insult to voters.

(Just copying across what I said in the other thread.)

Absolutely hopeless. And not just on gender issues but across the board. Hopeless. Bluster bluster bluster and no substance whatsoever.

Is anybody in the Labour Party thinking about the actual electorate at all?

I've just read all her answers through again. Any questioner with actual, granular detail on the issue they asked about will have been left unsatisfied. There was no policy substance in any of her answers. Embarrassing.

No vision for the country either. No joined up thoughts communicating her overall theme. I think I'm in shock that this is an actual leadership candidate for one of our main political parties.

The gaps in logic are pretty depressing.