Labour councillor reveals she suffered 'transphobic abuse' at party conference

If this is the situation as it stands now, the women who were in that queue at the Labour conference genuinely need to speak up either individually or as a group; these 'gossip attacks' need to be brought into the light & shown for what they are or we can never move beyond what is essentially another group of (men? I don't want to say that...) putting themselves in front of us, believing themselves to be higher than us & unwilling to stand with us.
I desperately want to support transgender people; I believe they are just trying to make their lives into something that resembles a normality that they are comfortable with (which everyone deserves) but how can I when this is how we are attacked? Women could be the greatest advocates for trans people; we know what its like to be 2nd place, ignored and othered. I don't understand how we ended up so distant, what went wrong? Does it really all boil down to the fact that so many of the born males now identifying as female are just too indoctrinated in their upbringing? Without making a hormonal & surgical change to womanhood, are they destined to never truly be what they want to be & so...is it jealousy, is jealousy of women the crux of this hatred (sorry, people with a cervix)?
This behaviour can't be true of the majority can it, is it a minority of MBW who are perpetuating this behaviour?

Must have been a big ladies loo to get a mobility scooter in it. Normally there's no room for even a small pushchair and when 8 months pregnant it can be a challenge to get in and shut the door and turn round.

Ds watched with me and asked if the person was the prime minister

I'd be interested to hear the details of this alleged ABUSE.

I just checked the link and slowed down the speed to check which Patricia said:

'I was transphobically ABUSED....in. this. conference.hall. By onw of our sisters in this conference hall now.
This is not happening This should not happen.

Freudian slip, Patricia?

[quote dyslek]@FrankieCH I better re-write that for you as the name Tim for some reason get an instand deletio

So, Frankie said;

Okay so the «horrific transphobic abuse» this person alleges never happened. The person went into the women’s toilets despite there being other sets of toilets for disabled people and more toilets for anyoneelse nearby. This was a staged incursion to allow the person to complain on the conference platform later. One woman quite calmly and politely said they were surprised to see a man in the ladies’ loos. If that’s « abuse» I wonder how the person would describe what happened to Sarah Everard at the hands of a strong, powerful male.[/quote]
Thank you! I wonder how the moderators cope when someone mentions their partner is called T!mothy …

Yeh fine to challenge the police but we can’t challenge other types of cloaks. Cos T*rf.

Yes on R4 this morning someone talking about “using the cloak of being a police officer “being unacceptable “ But other types of cloaks worn to attack women and girls does not mean we should challenge I assume.

I see PWH as being full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

At that point it would be deeply transphobic to question or challenge the officer?

Have I got that correct? Perhaps one of our resident TRAs could confirm.

… And has been pointed out on other threads, said police officer just needs to identify as trans.

I feel like my head is going to explode.

And if you dare to share that, you’ll be treated with disdain and derision. ‘Cos lady penis.

Patricia got up on stage and shouted to the rooftops. Patricia did not feel fear. Only outrage. Unlike the average woman confronted by a male in her safe space.

It would be fair to assume Patricia hates women. Is that because Patricia is jealous whilst simultaneously having zero imagination of what it is to be a woman? Imagine being the poor ‘sister(s)’ Patricia was denigrating on stage. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them… Wayne Couzens was sentenced yesterday. He had no issue distinguishing between a man and a woman. The cognitive dissonance is bewildering.

The other thing here is that after the speech. And hearing about the abuse.

I would fully expect the relevant person to find Patricia and invite them to discuss. On their terms. What happened. Who did it. The group of colleagues who witnessed the abuse.

Because it's the labour party conference, this issue is something they are really prioritising. Given there is an attendee, who did this at the conference of all places to Patricia. That says the person is prepared to risk penalty/ expulsion, so if they're prepared to do that then my guess would be they would do it again.

So surely having heard that the party would be keen to act. And to tell the conference that they have acted. To not do so would be remiss. Unsettling for other trans people at the conference.

In fact it's a given they would talk to the victim, find out how they wanted to proceed, and let everyone know they were on it. To not do that would be a failure on their part imo.

I mean say at a work conference a woman went up and said to everyone they had been subject to sexualised verbal abuse from another attendee. You would expect the organisers to get on it and fast. And reassure everyone that you were on it because it was unacceptable.

No?

If it’s a sticker why not say? I’m sure Keir Starmer would be horrified by a sticker. We’ve seen enough comments that show Labour view stickers and the ideas expressed on them to be abhorrent.

So speak the truth and let the people condemn. (This does not mean I object but I’m sure plenty in attendance would. We’ve seen it before)

Yet it’s a vague claim, without evidence or clarification.

There’s far less evidence than the Wi Spa flasher which had posters here claiming hoax. I’m better than them. Whether this is likely or not I’m prepared to hear evidence before I announce it didn’t happen.

But the evidence isn’t forthcoming (despite enough time elapsing for something to have been said).

It’s not out of the realms of possibility. No one is saying they witnessed an alien abduction here. “Transphobic abuse” is a broad term and seems to mean anything the person making the allegation wants it to. But why is someone able to get on stage, speak in extremely loose terms and have so many accept unquestioningly?

This would be easy to prove. There are witnesses. The alleged perp could be identified and challenged by officials. If it’s a sticker say that.

Why would an allegation be made on stage with nothing to back it? Why do so many accept it without any proof? What else can be said on stage as an appeal to the emotions without any need to show the facts? Why are the Labour Party happy with unsubstantiated claims of abuse to be made? Why is it ok? Labour ought to address it. They won’t.

No it is still there, no editing as far as I can see.

Oh ok, I haven't any sound on, plus I didn't want to listen again.

Patricia is still there, but they seem to have cut the accusations of horrific toilet transphobia

Do not fear, Patricia is still here.

At about 2.38

I can see it would be cut if abuser named or described.

But there's no indication in Patricia's speech about anything. Not even a hint of what time, which bogs etc.

I am genuinely disturbed by the party that is essentially the opposition editing this content. If they have done this and don't flag it/ say why. Then that is utterly dishonest. And strange.

I would never have imagined that would happen, genuinely.

'Ok so I can understand the victim may not see the point in reporting if they think it won’t be dealt with'

That doesn't really tie up with the going on stage and telling the whole conference about it. To my mind.

Plus as you mentioned. The idea that labour would not act is... ?

Given the long term activists etc they kicked out for having the wrong views a couple of years ago or so.

Arabella- unless I have misunderstood posts there are two accounts on the thread.