Harriet Harman throws women under the bus.

The most depressing thing about the whole gender issue is that it exposes how deeply ingrained the idea of innately different male and female personalities is. Deep down even 'progressive' people think there's a way men should be and a way women should be and anyone who differs has been born faulty. All the stuff about women being passive and nurturing and attracted to pretty frilly things is, deep down, what even the likes of Ayesha Hazarika and Harriet Harman think. We thought we'd progressed since Mary Wollstonecraft but we haven't moved a step. Our rights may have improved but people's minds are right back there.

So Harriet Harmon was the Legal Officer to the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL, now Liberty), an umbrella group which also included the Paedophile Information Exchange, PIE. Maybe she didn't know what a Paedophile organisation would be espousing. Maybe that is a difficult as knowing the difference between men and women.

Oddly enough, another member of NCCL, a Court of Protection judge, confirmed that he resigned in 1979 when he discovered that representatives of PIE were speaking at NCCL meetings at the London School of Economics.

So, it was not a case of people being unaware what the Paedophile Information Exchange were. Some people took the sexual abuse of children seriously and found paedophilia abhorrent, as did the Judge who resigned from NCCL because it included a paedophile organisation.

But Harriet is likely to retire anyway so she has nothing to fear.

Jacqui Smith is the same though, even though she’s well out of politics. Whenever anything on this topic comes up on her podcast with Iain Dale she avoids and tries to move on as quickly as possible.

Look I don't like this. I've been a member of the Labour Party for 20 years and this drives me nuts. Ultimately though the Tories post-May are not looking to fight on this front and so we can sit on the fence and rely on the law.
The law as it stands is on our side. Gender Reassignment is protected; waking up and thinking you might be the other sex is not, and don't get me started on "non-binary". Yes, the law is widely misunderstood and in practice most people assume StonewallLaw is in fact the law, but with no legal change on the horizon I think we can challenge that with legal challenges and education - and to be fair in the last few weeks with all the Stonewall controversies, followed by Maya's victory, I think we are turning a corner a bit. The ridiculous spectacle of a man entering a woman's sporting context in the Olympics will help too.
Politically keeping quiet, whilst challenging what is unlawful anti women activities is surely the best way forward?
For those saying they won't vote Labour, well vote in your constituency for the best outcome for women. Sometimes Labour, sometimes not.
(FWIW In the last leadership contest I vote for Starmer as Leader and whatever that Scottish bloke was called as Deputy simply because they were the only contestants who didn't sign that crazy document saying feminists should be excluded from the Labour Party. Bizarre - for the first time in my life I voted with sex at the forefront and voted for 2 men despite the candidates being virtually all female).

and, sorry, but in response to
and it would push the Labour hierarchy to adopt a more extremist anti-women's position.
what could be worse than Labour's existing position?

*The reality is that most Labour women are keeping shtum about this. I can't help thinking that that is probably for the best. Yes, it's irritating and stupid and....but if they said ANYTHING they would be deselected, never promoted to a position of influence and it would push the Labour hierarchy to adopt a more extremist anti-women's position.

Most Labour women won't say anything, and in almost all cases it's because they support women. It's maddening as hell, but compared to the alternative, I say leave them be and so they are there to help us when the time comes.*

My local MP fits into this category. She's an excellent local MP, but has no comment to make on this at all.

FWIW I'm not going to put up with this 'you do the heavy lifting, and we'll join in when the job's done' attitude. I think it's despicable.

What is the point of having influence in the labour party if you cannot say what you believe? She's either just a puppet for TRA or she really believes women shouldn't be allowed space separate from men.

TRA's have been working into the top levels of all areas for so long now that they have been able to change the course of debate. We have been really slow on the uptake and will have to work to put this right. We will be able to do this.

Harriet is not scared, she is not that kind of woman. HH has been stonewalled good and proper. Words like 'difficult' 'complex' and 'complicated' are used as part of the no debate strategy. If HH had been on the side of women's rights, she would have stood up for Rosie Duffield. Saying the HH is really on the side of women but just keeping quiet is plain daft, the evidence doesn't stack up. I like HH but on this she is a complete dork and knows full well that the arguments are very thin

Lol wrong thread...

aweegc spot on.

There's no one to vote for. That's the problem.

I mean if you're a left voter generally.

The signalling coming out of the Tories is worrying. I think there's going to be a general undermining of a lot of stuff around protection for minorities.

Wel they’ve driven a lot of us away. I’ll never vote labour again after how badly they’ve betrayed me and every other woman in the country.

The thing that shows the IOC acted to find a way to include some transwomen rather than looking at fairness is glaringly obvious when you look at their conclusion..

'Athletes would also be required to demonstrate that their total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nanomoles per litre for at least 12 months'

Reference ranges for normal:

Male: 10 – 30 nmol/L
Female: 0.7 – 2.8 nmol/L

As for the rest, I have no respect for them. Better to be forced out of your seat with your integrity intact (and enough of a fuss kicked up to be noticed) than to lie through your teeth and pretend that everything is fine while women's rights get sent down the river.

She's a coward. Her body language said she doesn't believe a word of it. Just another coward.
If Labour women MPs wont stand up because they are so terrified of the backlash from the party then it's not the party for me. I just wish more would show courage.
Very few MPs I respect now because of this issue. Be brave, like so many women (and some men) have been.

Which thread, stealth?

And they certainly used to be very keen on checking the sex of those competing in the women's category, I think they used to do a physical exam.

They managed to miss all the women who were given testosterone (and likely were not told).

All of a sudden they go from checking female women very carefully to saying oh s penis is no problem.

Almost as if they have a bias...

Almost all the time it is though, number.

These are standard males.

Getting entangled in the situation with CS and others is a bad idea.

The reality is that most Labour women are keeping shtum about this.

The Labour guy on the phone to DH this evening told him ‘actually, a lot of women in the party feel the same as you’ to which he replied ‘well why is it we don’t hear their voices?’

Well we all know why. They get the Rosie Duffield treatment from the zealots and the Labour men - particularly the leader - offer zero support if they even dare not to offer up their catechisms, let alone speak out.

this
I've probably hijacked it enough

[quote NumberTheory]@Truthlikeness

Competing in elite sport is expensive. A simple chromosome test once someone starts showing serious talent is a minor cost and inconvenience, even for less affluent countries.

Semenya, Francine Niyonsaba and Margaret Wambui (the 3 Rio 800m medal winners) all have XY chromosomes. I don't think it was complicated, the IOC just didn't care enough about women's sports to prevent them running will full male levels of testosterone before.

The IOC has been going back and forth for decades and fought in the courts over testosterone limits and other restrictions. It's absurd to say they just didn't care enough. They see it as tricky in part because not all people who grow up thinking they are female despite having xy genes have an advantage over other females in sport.[/quote]
Having read about the process and 'evidence' that went into the IOC decision to allowed trans women to compete against women, you may have to forgive me for being somewhat skeptical of their motives and decision-making abilities!

fairplayforwomen.com/emma_hilton/

Which thread?