Labour conference: which politician gave the worst answer on women's rights?

Rachel Reeves. She couldn't even pretend she believed it or understood it. Coward. She worked so hard to go against her better instincts and her gut. She should be utterly ashamed.

They are all winners in my eyes 💅💅🙋‍♀️🙋‍♀️👏👏👏👏🥇🥇🥇🥇

Most pathetic - Reeves, closely followed by Starmer.

Most offensive - Lammy.

My 10 year old nephew could, because it's banal, insincere, rubbish, totally lacking in depth or conviction

It's all they have though and seemingly intelligent adults who are in positions of power are happy to blindly follow it.

I admit I would pay good money to see that briefing script.

I usually think McConnell comes across quite well in interviews, but what a fudge. Is it transphobic to say only women have cervixes? "It depends on the context."
I suppose if the context is the world going bonkers, he's right. But genuinely, in what context would TRAs not deem that statement to be transphopic now? Gender ideology needs to start being treated as the religion it is. No one should be condemned for not believing in religion.

I felt quite bad for Ian because I’m not sure he knew what a cervix was

That was to @PronounssheRa, I don't know why quote didn't work.

Yes I noticed that, but it's still confusing because whatever the script was, it was just the usual bluster anyway: 'toxic debate' 'debate unhelpful' 'both groups face discrimination' and the usual false equivalences. I could reel that off without a written script. Anyone could. My 10 year old nephew could, because it's banal, insincere, rubbish, totally lacking in depth or conviction. If they have to have that written or inculcated with a firm hand just to be able to regurgitate it accurately, well then, maybe there really is a severe problem in the quality of intellect of those on the Labour front benches at the very least.

mobile.twitter.com/LBC/status/1442380463298027520

This is a prepared answer? Bring back Malcolm Tucker!

Maybe, just maybe, these otherwise intelligent people will get together for a debrief about all this and agree to Fuck This Shit from now on.

so why are they not preparing an appropriate answer. Instead, they keep putting themselves in the position of stumbling out words/phrases that don’t make sense or ignoring the question time and again.

I think this is the prepared answer, if you watch Rachel Reeves you can tell she has something next to her that she keeps looking at. The reason they stumble is because they don't believe what they are being told to say they know its incoherent nonsense but they still have to say it.

Starmer looks increasingly like a man who wishes he hadn't got the job. He must be thinking about the lucrative legal career he gave up to hang around with the goons of the Labour Party.

Telling us we shouldn't talk about female biology is not sitting on the fence.

In a way I can see why Starmer sat on the fence, after all there’s still a large TRA element in the party, however Lammy came across as a sanctimonious twat. As a pp wrote “No mention of women's rights, then?“. He didn’t even think to include women rights. Just goes to show what he thinks of us, doesn’t it. Oh and women’s rights aren’t yours to give away!

You have to start with the party leader so it's a fight for second place as far as I'm concerned and Lammy has a clear lead at the moment.

I’m getting a bit suspicious about all of this, especially the planned interviews. After the last few weeks, it would be a fair bet that they would be asked something along the lines of the cervix question, or on single sex services - so why are they not preparing an appropriate answer. Instead, they keep putting themselves in the position of stumbling out words/phrases that don’t make sense or ignoring the question time and again.

Lammy framing retaining sex-based rights as 'hoarding' rights is a clear indication of labours intent, so at least he's honest.

Do I have to choose just one? They are all winners in my book!

(Actually, I haven’t heard comments from Murray or Phillipson yet but I am sure they are just as worthy).

From the Labour List article: 'Lammy told the event that the “great story of the 20th century is “people who had no rights claiming those rights” – including the working class on the factory floor, and those fighting for LGBT rights and BME rights.' No mention of women's rights, then?

I have to say watching and listening to Reeves on LBC was something else. I can't decide if it was funny or painful.

It really isn't complicated.

Lammy wins the prize for being the biggest hypocrite, because he said it right after lambasting (should that be Lammy-basting?) everyone about the dire lack of black male MPs and calling for "positive discrimination" to solve the problem. While he has a point over here in material reality, in his universe there's no way he knows who identifies as a black male MP, the auld dinosaur!

guernseypress.com/news/uk-news/2021/09/27/david-lammy-says-labour-must-do-more-to-ensure-black-men-become-mps/

Lammy not Lanky, hah!

Lanky has been a long time proponent of the GRA. Though I agree with Starmer being the worst because he is the leader and should have a spine, FFS.

McDonnell gave several speeches and interviews under the Corbyn leadership - including organising a conference - about how legalising sex work would be “civilised”. He is not someone who really cares about women - only the fashionable things to think about them.