C4 now labour leadship hustings question on trans pledge

Women are not good enough to be women
so we men will do it for them
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51331571

now do go back to the kitchen dear

I think the scariest thing about this for me is the sheer financial clout and political influence of what seems to be a pro-misogyny, pro-paedophilia, pro-genital-mutilation movement. It's like we're up against an invisible army of Jeffrey Epsteins who haven't been caught yet.

"how a society; its rulers and law-makers, can be so utterly captured and in thrall to an ideology; an ideology that dares not be examined......for the plain and simple truth that if it should be so examined, it would be found out to be just another version of 'the Emperor's New Clothes'. It is simply astonishing what is happening."

Absolutely. And I still actually can't quite believe that women's rights have been so completely sidelined, as if 51% of the population don't matter, and actually don't vote. Do they think we are all thick? Are we thick? At the same time that rapes, sexual assaults and domestic murders are at an all time high, and convictions at an all time low. It's scary. Personally I'm hoping the sunlight means we're over the worst of it, but in many ways it feels like a war.

From twitter

Just picture it @DawnButlerBrent, @lisanandy & @RLong_Bailey rushing in at the end of each day. "How did we do boys? Did we say the right things? Did we throw enough women under the bus?" And elbowing one another out of the way to be the one that gets the coveted pat on the head.

Very true - I don't trust him at all on this.

And to top it all now I'm feeling guilty for my somewhat blunt retort to Mr mansplainer this morning. Bloody societal conditioning of women to be "nice"

It’s a bit like the Labour Party thought momentum and corbyn was a good idea and the nation were behind them

They haven5 learnt a thing tbh

Lisa Nandy is especially compromised - because of her involvement with - as she keeps mentioning - vulnerable women and children's groups. She must surely understand safeguarding.

until the full and open public debate happens

Do you all reckon they don't realise this is a vote loser

I think they think it is a minority opinion and concern. and as long as the real full and open public debate happens it will be......Get the GRA rushed through before anyone knows what on earth it implies.

It is really odd to see otherwise thoughtful people gripped by an agenda they did not create, nor one that they truly own.

I think some of them at least didn't realize that the public wasn't onboard until the blowback on this happened. Starmer might have, which is why he's been trying to hedge his bets. Doesn't mean he's any less likely to commit to a horrible policy than the rest of them, just that he's brighter.

TheProdigalKittensReturn that is sadly very bloody true!

Do you all reckon they don't realise this is a vote loser? That they are so insulated in their woke bubble they don't even see it? Not that that excuses anything.

Politicians don't usually go for vote losers which this issue obviously is, not only among women but their own socially conservative Labour voters who can't stomach wokeism.

I only watched the answers to the trans questions. I thought they were all appalling. Nandy was particularly dreadful because she tried rowing back from her bald statement that a rapist should be allowed into a women's prison while simultaneously attempting to give the impression that she wasn't rowing back. Talked about the importance of risk assessments and other waffle.

Nandy once again brought up the trans child in her constituency who seems to be in a more dire plight every time she mentions them. Yet no mention of women - none of the thousands of women in her constituency who must have experienced domestic abuse or sexual violence. It's all about the single vulnerable trans child.

She also had the sheer brass neck to talk about the importance of compromise and measured debate, after having called for the expulsion of people who disagree with her.

Keir Starmer was shit. Trans people are the most vulnerable group of people in the entire world blah blah, nothing about women.

Didn't even have the guts to say that he refused to sign the pledge because he was opposed to expelling people with entirely reasonable views. He could have put clear blue water between himself and the other two, but refused.

Can't remember what Wrong-Daily said but it was pretty much an amalgam of the other two.

If this is the best the main government opposition party can offer, we are absolutely screwed.

The problem is that all the other bras in the drawer are full of holes, too, and we can hardly go try on a new on at Mark's Suspenders.

Ha Mockersisrightasusual - you're all right, you didn't mansplain :)

I tend to agree that keir is least worst, but he's not shown his hand and I don't trust that - he could believe in anything.

I think Justhadathought is right - we need to have a good think about whether this party is worth supporting. I fear it has become like ones favourite bra that has developed massive holes - we cared deeply for it but it no longer does the job. We can try to patch it (sunk cost fallacy) or we can bin it and try to find a new bra.

I know being a 'Labour party person' is in the blood of may people, and is an integral part of their identity...but I really think all of that needs to be seriously re-examined. Looking at the Labour party these days is like reading a text that is a cross between a social history encyclopedia and an Orwellian book of 'truths.' It's finished.

What do we want?

an intelligent opposition

When do we want it?

Now!!

I'm afraid I'm going to save my "let's do something about this dehumanizing, stressful process" energy for tacking Universal Credit, or disability benefits.

One of the best hope we have is that things start to unravel, even more quickly, in other countries in which " things have been taken further"....before Rebecca, Lisa, Kier, Dawn and Jeremy ever get a look at power; and also, that the current government kicks the whole thing into the long grass for the forseeable future.

...if one more bloody bloke tries to msnsplain women's rights to me I am going to sodding scream.

(Dons tin hat and tiptoes in)

So with Rayner a shoe-in for deputy, it looks like Starmer is the least worst option.

We Need an opposition to this bunch of entitled clowns, and we need it now.

It's fucking awful isn't it. I'm sorry for the constant swearing, it's just I've run out of words to express how grim this is. And if one more bloody bloke tries to msnsplain women's rights to me I am going to sodding scream.

...and also the talk of how dehunmanising and bureaucratic the GR process is. For goodness sake...that is the nature of bureaucratic procedures, and we all have to tolerate them on any number of occasions.

And changing your legal sex is hardly a stroll in the park is it...nor should it be. The whole "trans rights are human rights" talk disguises the fact that trans people, like everyone other citizen, already have equal rights in law. what the trans lobby want is additional rights to everyone else. To be able to move in and occupy the legitimate spaces of others - without their permission ( colonisation); and to be able to self identify in any way they want and have the law of the land take that seriously.

In order to accept the above people are going to have to realise that 1) it is possible to change sex 2) that it is possible to be born in the wrong body 3) and that trans women really are women 4) ...that giving puberty blockers to children is a social good 5) and also the very profound implications for everything and everyone in any society - that this all implies.

Other countries have gone further, we can go further", Starmer sai

This is Kier Starmer. This is what he would do if he had to......and don't think otherwise just because you want to be able vote for someone.

Starmer hasn't got a clue what he is talking about.....and he totally blanked requests for clarification into his not signing 'the pledge'.

Yes, "let's go further", like some other countries, Kier: countries and states which are now starting to ban puberty blockers; like countries in which girls are having to sue because they are losing out on scholarships and medals due to the presence of male people in their sporting competitions; or perhaps countries like Canada, where poor immigrant women are being taken to court for refusing to wax someone's girly balls; or where long standing women's organisations have been closed down altogether.......Great idea!

This is all turning out to present us with one of the most salutary tales of our era: how a society; its rulers and law-makers, can be so utterly captured and in thrall to an ideology; an ideology that dares not be examined......for the plain and simple truth that if it should be so examined, it would be found out to be just another version of 'the Emperor's New Clothes'. It is simply astonishing what is happening.

Yes, let's have a civil debate. One which examines ,in detail, the facts and claims of transgenderism; and let's take an honest look at the full range of outcomes that arise because of its implementation. And then put it to the people.....because right now they still have not got a clue...as was pretty evident last night; which was, in effect, a non debate about how to avoid an actual debate.

Fucks fucking sake I am furious. Have just hadone a male friend act all surprised that I'm pissed off about the Nandy/rapist issue and surprised that this issue has become so charged and polarising. FFS! how come even nice kind men don't fucking get it?!!