Keir Starmer on Sophy Ridge

The problem is Starmer’s inability to get to grips with a problem that should be simple. All he has to do is accept the existence of conflict of rights and give his MPs clear support when they defend sex based rights.

Yes.

Alex Sobel deleted that tweet where he was asked if he thought women were entitled to single sex refuges, prisons and hospital wards and he replied with a flat 'no'. Because even he must realise that that is an absolute terrible and misogynistic look and an indefensible stance.

Keir doesn't even have to do that much, just acknowledge biological sex and that single sex spaces must be upheld.

The fact that he is too chicken shit to even do this just illustrates how batshit Labour is now.

A better question is why safeguarding is being put aside for one group to the detriment of another? Safeguarding is about prevention.
Or why traumatised women have to make a choice between mixed sex spaces or staying with their abuser.
Or why there cannot be a third mixed sex option for trans people.

As depressing as this is, I don't think we should be completely despondent. Until very recently, politicians thought that there was no downside at all in taking a TWAW stance. Women had been silenced so effectively that only the TRA voice was heard, amplified by Stonewall and other lobby groups.

Things have changed a lot in the last couple of years. The Times, Telegraph and DM are all openly GC and that is shifting their readers' views. When the Times and DM first started publishing GC articles, most BTL comments were basically This is feminist rubbish and any downsides of mixed sex facilities are problems that women have brought on themselves by shrewishly demanding equal rights. It's totally different now, with GC comments the overwhelming majority.

Now, of course, that cuts two ways with Labour, as their base is implacably anti-the right wing press (understandably). But ultimately, their strategists know that they cannot win without the votes of people in the middle ground and even the liberal end of the right wing. Alistair Campbell understood this very well. If they ever win again, it will be because they listen to their strategists and not to Twitter.

Politicians are not stupid when it comes to their own self-interest. I suspect many are quietly shifting from Why wouldn't I support TWAW because I get a lot of woke points and where's the downside? to Hmm, I need to treat a bit carefully here because lots of voters are not on board with this

The Tories know this is a safe issue for them because the sane public are not keen on wokeness. All the identity politics crap of Labour activists works in the Tories favour. Plus, very few elected Tory women are saying TWAW.

For Labour, the problem is both that their activists are TWAW and, more worryingly, high profile women MPs such as Rayner are TWAW.

So why continue - I was listening until I turned off to Ash Sarkar spouting such utter nonsense. I could then see why Labour are losing again and again.

I don’t think the problem is Ash Sarkar - Jeremy Corbyn was an MP throughout the Blair years without threatening Tony Blair too much. The Conservatives have their own dodgy MPs and affiliates.

The problem is Starmer’s inability to get to grips with a problem that should be simple. All he has to do is accept the existence of conflict of rights and give his MPs clear support when they defend sex based rights.

That clip was the highlight of the GE night. That and the fact the Momentum leader just sat there. For them it’s not about winning an election, it’s about protesting to make themselves feel better. The fact they might be middle class, live in London, send kids to private schools is irrelevant.

Right on with their woke agenda,

WhereYouLeftIt thank-you!

There’s a nuance that the fight is pointless, benefitting no one; and a slight exasperation towards the participants for wasting their energies

If this is what Starmer meant by this phrase (& it would be in keeping with his stance so far) that is massively patronising and ignorant. Does he categorise any other human rights dispute like this? Or is it just women he doesn’t take seriously?

Is there a lot of evidence of trans women seeking refuge at women's DV hostels and then committing DV against the women there?

I'd like to understand the issue.

Violet - I agree. This agenda is rife. So carry on Labour - lose again.

I would like all women to be safe. But as someone said previously, I don’t know any trans people. My DS knows one he thinks. You ask the average working class Northern voter and they probably won’t care, what they will care about are regenerating industries helping get their kids a trade or career and to stop the obsession with London lead woke agendas.

@MoltenLasagne thanks for sharing that clip. Fascinating looking at Osborne - and especially Ed Balls - listening to it. They know he’s right.

Tories will win the next election and the one after. Starmer if he is still on board will be seen as a fence sitting twit.

Boris won the election last time with a clear mandate, get Brexit done, he smashed through a wall with a digger. Cannot imagine Brown or even Maggie doing anything like that but Boris got away with it.

Corbyn was a disaster. Jonathan Ashworth the Shadow Health Secretary was right when it was leaked just before the polls saying Corbyn was not selling it and that they would lose. I cannot believe those within Labour didn’t know this before then.

So why continue - I was listening until I turned off to Ash Sarkar spouting such utter nonsense. I could then see why Labour are losing again and again.

Blair and Campbell would never have put up with such rubbish and in return one three elections.

I am not sure though that attacking the current gov now would do any good. We are doing a brilliant job on the vaccine rollout. If an election was called tomorrow I think Boris and co would win again.

Come on Labour - get a grip. You need to move to the centre ground.

He just admitted by omission that children affected by domestic violence are invisible to lawmakers. If you can't see them, you can't help them.

Why is it so difficult to acknowledge that women are and always have been more oppressed? Waiting for someone to tell me what rights trans people don't have? Oh yeah women's
Labour are done and Keir needs to check his arse for splinters

I don't understand why people think it's just the hard left in Labour pushing that TWAW it's people like Lisa Nandy, Angela Rayner, Jess Philips etc.

"He's gambling that new young voters will get on board as they did with Corbyn - he doesn't seem to have seen the massive flaw that all those new members ultimately didn't add up to winning an election. At the next election, if Starmer is still in place, the media will destroy him over this and he'll deserve it."

Exactly this. The membership numbers are meaningless if they don't translate into election wins. He's chasing the wrong metric.

A moderately competent Opposition should be running rings around our current Cabinet; it's an open goal FFS. That they are not, preferring to waste their energies on infighting and dogma. They'll lose the next election too, and wither away as the Liberals did and they will have no-one to blame but themselves (not that they will).

People thinking the Tories will be any better on the issue are deceiving themselves. Who tried to bring in self-ID in the first place? And who is it who are trying to bring it in now under the guise of a Committee?

I guess under the Tories we won't have to worry about who gets into Domestic Violence shelters because they'll continue to be defunded out of existence just like in the last ten years.

Everyone has equal civil rights already including those identifying as trans.

What is being sought is ideological in origin, and on top of that seeks to actively privilege some 'protected groups' over others ( namely women & girls).

The image in my head when I hear it is of a vicious dogfight, two snarling biting dogs sinking their teeth into each other, but so evenly matched that neither can win. Both will emerge injured and weaker from the fight.

There's a nuance that the fight is pointless, benefitting no-one; and a slight exasperation towards the participants for wasting their energies.

I keep thinking that Starmer is just biding his time and that as the next election draws closer he will come out for women and girls, but I am really starting to doubt that now

That's what I was hoping (and arguing) a year ago but I've given up now. Every time he's had the opportunity to do that he doesn't take it and eventually I had to accept it was because he just doesn't really care. He's not alone in that of course - Lisa Nandy, Angela Rayner and even Jess Phillips have been prepared to sell women out and humiliate themselves over this. It's so sad and shocking to me.

He's gambling that new young voters will get on board as they did with Corbyn - he doesn't seem to have seen the massive flaw that all those new members ultimately didn't add up to winning an election. At the next election, if Starmer is still in place, the media will destroy him over this and he'll deserve it.

He did start to answer the first question by saying that trans people are the most abused and oppressed in society

Oh FFS, there aren't any transpeople in the society most of us live in. None! I don't know why their rights gets such prominence. They - wherever they are - can have the same human rights as any of us.

Oh dear. Looks like I'm voting Tory now! Do Labour want to stay in opposition? Maybe he's hoping enough high court cases come along that establish women's rights fully in law, so it becomes a non-issue. The Scottish Hate Crimes bill is already a s-show.

I'm sure he said the exact same thing, they ''don't go far enough'', just after self ID was scrapped. IIRC, he also said the ''baddies on both sides'' (paraphrasing) thing too. He's sticking to a predictable script.

Have fun losing more and more thoroughly pissed off women Kier!

but refused to say whether refuges should be single-sex or not (fence-sitting).
Is there an issue on Earth that he wouldn't sit on the fence for?

Once at work I overheard two women discussing trans rights - not political activists, both middle aged, the sort of women you might hope would be "on our side".

And the message that they'd picked up about us was that we were trying to kick harmless old transwomen out of toilets because we're "mean". They hadn't picked up the messages about sports or prisons or anything else. Just toilets. And it really woke me up to how we're not operating to our strengths politically.

If we really wanted to help our cause we'd be out there now tweeting about how great it was to hear Keir "standing up for victims of domestic violence". Show him that taking a line more favourable to our side has a political reward. Because seriously any Labour adviser reading this thread would be saying to Keir now "Don't bother to offer this lot anything Keir. They'll never be happy."

It's not that I "like" this. I'd much prefer to have a Leader who was totally on our side. But it's not going to happen in current politics.