Starmer on Marr now

I honestly can’t believe this! Are MN now telling us we can’t say only women have cervixes ? Am I in an episode of Black Mirror?!

[quote OldCrone]They took exactly the stance a centre left party would be expected to take and the stance logically consistent with left wing ideology.

Why is this 'expected' of centre left parties? And why is it logically consistent with left wing ideology? Left wing parties such as the communists tend to be against this.

The present debate around self-identification conflates “sex” and “gender” and fails to understand that challenging the specific discrimination faced by trans people is not served by undermining resistance to the centuries-old oppression of women as a biological sex.

For women, the result is that their collective rights as a group are currently being undermined through the weaponisation of a post-modern identity politics, focused solely on the rights of individuals.

morningstaronline.co.uk/article/women-class-and-gender-%E2%80%93-communist-perspective[/quote]
“Why is this 'expected' of centre left parties?”

Because centre left parties are socially liberal and the only responsibilities or limitations of an individual that social liberalism recognises is the responsibilities and limitations that the individual chooses for themselves. That’s one of the reasons the pro-life/pro-choice debate in the USA is so split on party lines.

Once the socially liberal side of the political debate wins a political debate on any issue they immediately pick a new one. It’s a process that never ends and incidentally one that social liberals have been winning in the western world since at least the 1960’s. It has no natural end point.

You will always be able to find a few exceptions such as the SDP or a few MPs but these exceptions are so small that they prove the rule.

The far left are not the centre left, the far left are essentially communists and communism isn’t socially liberal. Communism is also modern, it’s not a post modern idea, Marxism is rooted firmly in modernism.

If liberal left wing voters are unable to see where their parties principles will lead them when unleashed in the real world, well I don’t know what to say about that.

I have a cervix. Get checked by the NHS every few years. Demeaning talking about it @AndrewMarr9. You absolutely know this a work-around way of calling women who are T men, leading into all the other bigotry. #Marr

This is the problem. Saying only women have cervices is not a 'work around'. It's not code, it's not an agenda, it's not reading between the lines.

It's a fact. It's a fact that certain people do not want us to say. We are not the ones with the agenda.

I wonder how many years those checks have been going on.

Sublime. Thank you

Sorry, cross post, thanks for the support everyone. I'm genuinely shocked.

My goodness. I've had a post deleted for pointing out that a person who is biologically male cannot have a cervix.

I mean, maybe the monitors didn't like my post, but I'm shocked the mods saw fit to delete it. How are we supposed to have a discussion about this if we cannot refer to fundamental scientific facts?

If the tories fought against this and won I’m sure many feminists would go back to voting Labour, re-subscribe to guardian and sneering at conservatives and their daily mail reading voters as soon as the tories gave them what they wanted.

The Tories did though, they reviewed the GRA consultation results and decided against removing the medical diagnosis.

Labour are still planning on doing the opposite so women are still not going back to them.

Read the Guardian? It's been far too silly for a long time.

There's much better writers available in a wide range of places now.

India believes India has a cervix? The mind boggles!

The question is: who's cervix is it and where is the rest of them?

Interesting deletion of EdgeOfACoin's post. I still have it open on another tab. Nothing but a statement of biological fact.

But I believe India now believes India is a 'ciswoman', so I presume any statement of fact which suggests that this is not true is 'transphobic' and will be deleted. But how can it be transphobia if India is a 'ciswoman'?

India does not have a cervix.

India may have a kind of neo- vaginal vault, but that is not what a cervix is.

Not having a cervix does not by itself mean that you’re not a woman. Christ, I know I bang on about this, but I don’t see why I fucking shouldn’t- I don’t have a cervix either, but I do continue to be a woman nonetheless.

This unscientific nonsense is not helping anyone. Words have meanings. Women’s words are not up for grabs.

They took exactly the stance a centre left party would be expected to take and the stance logically consistent with left wing ideology.

Why is this 'expected' of centre left parties? And why is it logically consistent with left wing ideology? Left wing parties such as the communists tend to be against this.

The present debate around self-identification conflates “sex” and “gender” and fails to understand that challenging the specific discrimination faced by trans people is not served by undermining resistance to the centuries-old oppression of women as a biological sex.

For women, the result is that their collective rights as a group are currently being undermined through the weaponisation of a post-modern identity politics, focused solely on the rights of individuals.

morningstaronline.co.uk/article/women-class-and-gender-%E2%80%93-communist-perspective

...

*keep not people !

And no, India Willoughby doesn't have a cervix, of course.

cervix
/ˈsəːvɪks/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the narrow passage forming the lower end of the uterus.

This is really becoming desperate stuff indeed.

It's also interesting that India thinks getting their cervix checked every few years is 'demeaning'.

The Labour Party took a stance on this long before the last election and long before stammer was leader. They took exactly the stance a centre left party would be expected to take and the stance logically consistent with left wing ideology. And many feminists knew this and voted Labour anyway.

They will get what they voted for in time I’m sure.

I don’t think the Tories should waste their time fighting against trans rights on behalf of feminists. If the tories fought against this and won I’m sure many feminists would go back to voting Labour, re-subscribe to guardian and sneering at conservatives and their daily mail reading voters as soon as the tories gave them what they wanted. And If the tories fought this and lost they’d only have wasted their time in office fighting a losing battle on behalf of voters who tend to despise them and would never support them on mass.

Brendan Clarke-Smith MP
@Bren4Bassetlaw6h
Only women have a cervix. There, I said it. It’s not difficult. Women also have a right to women-only spaces. Speaking up in defence of women’s rights doesn’t mean we can’t respect how others wish to live their lives

It shouldn't be difficult, no.

Right - just read the interview, so when asked about 'only women have a cervix he was unequivocal that ' that shouldn't be said and is 'not right' .

But after banging on about being respectful, he was asked about Angela Raynor's statement of ' scum. homophobic, racist, misogynistic Etonian pieces of scum' all he can manage is a weak 'well Angela does things differently from me and I would not have said that'.

The man is weak, weak, weak. Pathetic. Unprincipled. Incoherent in his position. I have no respect for him at all.

One should not say, 'only women have a cervix as that is not right', but calling people scum is a matter of personal preference!

Dear God man, can you not hear yourself?!

Is Starmer suggesting that everyone should be called for a cervical smeer? I suspect that would slash the efficacy their for rendering it pointless. And more women, sorry people, will die from cervical cancer. How does Starmer round that square? Idiot.