Boris Johnson backs Kathleen Stock and LGB Alliance in trans rights row

I see BJ as opportunistic, but many amongst the Tory back benches will be relieved. They are women or have wives, or female partners, or mothers or daughters. Or perhaps they are gay and unhappy about the capture of Stonewall.

I think Keir ducked because he has enough on his plate dealing with Momentum, and does not want the distraction of a full out, and largely generational, culture war.

BJ cannot believe his luck. I think the Sajid Javid quotes following Stamer's cervix problems at the Labour conference
“total denial of scientific facts” “And he wants to run the NHS” indicate of the line the Tories will take.

I think Labour will have to bend...but how?

I'm 0 for 2 in my expectations as to what would happen in the last 3 days (Margaret Atwood and Boris Johnson's office).

I couldn't be more delighted.

I too am surprised Boris took so long to see the advantage in supporting women and gay people in this matter. As Heseltine says of him ' He waits to see where the crowd is heading , then runs to the front.' And nobody ever accused him of not knowing what a woman is.

So, no errors made.

Looking forward to Catherina telling us another well thought through reason why there is no way the majority support women’s rights while agreeing trans people need their own rights that don’t cause harm to women’s rights.

Or will it be the continued ignoring the truth because [insert emotive reason here].

It's a fantastic endorsement for LGBA, and, I imagine, a bitter blow for Stonewall.

I just hope it translates into Stonewall's removal from their hugely influential position in public life. That a lobby group with a pernicious agenda that isn't well supported by the public has such a hold on both public and private institutions is an outrage. The podcast by Stephen Nolan has finally put the issue centre stage.

I think this whole business has been a gift to the Tories. Once they had the sense to pull back from self-ID, they realised that this would be a fantastic stick to beat Labour with. If you look at what's happening with Kathleen Stock, with Stonewall, with the LGBA etc it's perfectly obvious that a large chunk of the public is deeply unhappy with the idea of biological males on female wards, in women's prisons, competing in women's sports etc. Most people will also feel very unhappy about the intimidation of Professor Stock and other female academics.

Because Labour has been spectacularly useless on this, and has even failed to defend one of its own MPs, Rosie Duffield, from the bullies, it opens up a perfect opportunity for the Tories to present themselves as the party both of free speech and of women's rights. I don't imagine the Tories actually care that much about free speech (they are inconsistent on the issue at best) but they are now able to look good by very obviously and publicly doing all the things that Labour isn't doing. The very public show of support for the LGBA - coming so soon after the appalling letter from Taiwo Owatemi - is an example of this. It's a fantastic endorsement for LGBA, and, I imagine, a bitter blow for Stonewall.

Whatever you think of Boris, he listens to his advisors, and I'm willing to bet that focus groups (which politicians generally take note of), are consistently dismayed by the TWAW line of all the other parties. The Cons have clearly twigged at this point that being a counterpoint to that narrative has/will continue to serve them very well at the ballot box.

One redeeming feature of BJ can be that he is lazy, and relies heavily on advisors. Whoever in No 10 is advising him on this is clearly onside.

I hope you're correct. Amidst the general investigation, I can only trust that somebody is going to extirpate all the problematic categories and alterations to policy that have taken root in the NHS.

BJ knows exactly what he is doing.

My guess is that they are more worried about the stranglehold a lobbying organisation has on decision making. The influence lobby groups, not just Stonewall, have on Government has long been predicted to be the next big scandal.

My guess is that Stonewall's overreach is very convenient. This can addressed by tightening rules for all lobby organisations (including those who employ former Tory and Labour PMs.)

90 odd percent of the British public will oppose having natal men on female hospital wards, prisons, sport etc. The vast majority will oppose giving life altering drugs to young healthy, but possibly confused, teenagers. Most will support the idea of a charity that works to protect same sex attracted people. And equally will think that Sussex students, with the opportunities thay are being given, are very wrong to attack Prof Stock.

This is not about Labour or Conservative. This is about people being one, or all, of: sensible, scientific, concerned about safeguarding and protecting the vulnerable, and socially conservative.

The Conservatives are wary of being caught on the wrong side of any LGBT debate and being labelled the nasty party. Initally it was just backbencher David TC Davis MP who put his head above the parapet and received complaints and more. Stonewall continued overplaying their hand, and BJ has a strong majority. Liz and Kemi have tested the waters, following in the footsteps of Maya etc. Keir has managed to look silly and weak by espousing Labour's pro Stonewall line. Time for BJ to wade in and say what almost everyone is thinking.

Like him or not, it is good when any politician pursues sensible policies that reflect public thinking. More bizarre that Labour, along with a whole raft of major private and public organisations, cannot manage this.

I dont think Carrie is "pro Stonewall". I am sure she, like most people, opposes discrimination, whether against LGB and T people, women, the disabled, people of different races, religions or creeds and so on. Stonewall's agenda has been more than that. Seeking the prioritisation of one group of the needs of others. I think it was a masterstroke to have Carrie, who is not a member of the Government, speak at the Stonewall meeting during the conference. The Tories avoided having LGBT issues dominate the headlines, and Carrie very much focused on the LGB.

One redeeming feature of BJ can be that he is lazy, and relies heavily on advisors. Whoever in No 10 is advising him on this is clearly onside.

Link to the letter mentioned by RedDogsBeg :

Last night, the group said it had also been invited to a meeting in Downing Street, where members had been told they had a lot of support really high up.

Asked about the letter, the PM’s spokesman said: ‘The Government is clear that biology matters and there are different health needs between the sexes.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10118587/Boris-Johnson-wades-culture-war-backing-controversial-LGB-Alliance-group.html

Last night, the group said it had also been invited to a meeting in Downing Street, where members had been told they had a lot of support really high up.

Asked about the letter, the PM’s spokesman said: The Government is clear that biology matters and there are different health needs between the sexes.

Not a 'generic' letter methinks.

Just had a scan of the comments and pretty much mirrors the views on here

So I'm not sure where the assumption that these things make people evil comes from, even if we are talking about some sort of tribalist perspective.

I don't care what our prime minister has decreed, nothing could cajole me to vote Conservative. They always make me poorer, and I was poor to start with.
Not just me, but millions of others. I currently live in an East Midlands town which has massive street homelessness. I mean fuckijng loads. The Tories have been in power for 11 years, almost as long as I've been NFA and have done nothing about it other than to say they're helping hard working families. Cunts.
'We' can't afford it apparently, but we can afford to fund Trident, our 'independent' nuclear deterrent, so independent that we don't even get the launch codes unless the US says so. What's the point? We keep the banks alive through quantitative easing, their failure in 2008 was blamed on us, but it was people like Sajid Javid made millions on CDOs and then avoided tax. Why aren't these arseholes in jail for knowingly crashing our economy?
So our Prime Minister can say whatever he likes, he's against people like me (poor and homeless) so why the fuck would i vote for his party? In fact, I'll heartily campaign against it.

I actually think this has more significance than we are giving it. I reckon the last couple of years has been the end of the beginning. But this last week or so is the beginning of the end. Boris knows it. Fuck knows why Kier can't see the wood for the trees.

I also think young people are bored with it too now. When you are told it's going to be Ru Paul fabulousness and when you turn up it's 'Girls like us' it's difficult to maintain your enthusiasm I should imagine. Fickle fickle youth.

Oh and, REPENT MOTHERFUCKER!

If how women vote measured by ‘women’ as a group loosing transmen and including transwomen (men) then how women vote on women’s issues can’t ever be assessed anymore. It would be cutting our access to democratic process for good. There will be no party looking at how they can address women’s issues to get women’s vote or better represent women if women includes any man who feels like it.

Although I have apparently just been cancelled off t'internet so who knows how long my reign of terror will last?

It seems like those who cancelled you forgot it was the internet and that it won’t let you be canceled that easily. Because it is too late!!! There is so many Repent Motherfuckers out there now it will be like rounding up a thousand cats at once.

Repent ! Repent !!

John McManus has tweeted.
twitter.com/JohnMcM1/status/1451232213454966792?t=V4sTK9dCpzrMViYBLs3tLQ&s=19
Meanwhile, @BorisJohnson has sent a message of support to the @ALLIANCELGB conference - not hugely significant in itself, but what is, is the Downing St Spad who was also present to observe.

Personally I think this is significant. TRAs and Stonewall have overreached. They've been given enough rope to hang themselves. It was significant that no government rep attended LGBT event at the party conference.

Look I never expected to be here either. None of us did. My parents work/worked for the nhs. I’ve been labour through everyone, milliband, corbyn everyone. Voting Tory is an anathema to me, and sorry to get excited and silly and joke about shagging frogs. BUT I want to live. I want my daughter to live. I want girls and women to live and be proud and free to be daughters and women and not be scared to ever speak up for ourselves or share how we feel. I want children and teens to get the best possible care, and not mutilate themselves and make themselves infertile and forever patients and still be fucking miserable. I want women to have their own spaces and be safe, or as safe as we can be. If I have to vote for someone I wouldn’t ever normally countenance well that isn’t even on me, that’s on labour, greens and Lib Dem’s for abandoning us and forcing us to choose between our personal politics and our actual existence.
I know we are all on the same page with those things. Maybe this will wake the other parties up, and I hope so. But if it doesn’t I would rather vote Tory than against women.

Although I have apparently just been cancelled off t'internet so who knows how long my reign of terror will last?

From me, a mid ranking civil servant, up to my Director and then Permanent Secretary. And then up to No 10. Can you imagine how many layers of officials that went through once it landed in Number 10? This wasn't done casually at all. This went through the proper process and were signed off and approved at every level. If the PM has written this letter then it has been reviewed and approved appropriately. Excellent!!

I do worry, that rather than the other parties getting a blast of reality here as to what the public likely thinks, they become further entrenched in TWAW in order to take up the opposite position.

I probably agree with about 90% of what the genderist movement wants to see, and probably 100% of what the #bekind lot think it stands for.

The problem is that the 10% I don't agree with is so very very dreadful for female people it's a total dealbreaker.

It's a House-On-Fire scenario. If the house burns down, everything else is irrelevant. So it doesn't matter how much a party might check my other boxes, if they don't agree the fire has to be dealt with then I can't vote for them.

But while I may agree with "anti-woke" that the current situation wrt gender ideology is wrong and find myself temporarily aligned to stop it happening, I also know that once the excesses of gender ideology are curbed, that alignment will immediately fracture because what they and I think is right and should be happening instead is very different.

I don't want fighting genderism to mean going socially backwards. I want this crazy denial of female voices, existence and experience to turn out to be a crazy blip in a path that continues to move towards tolerance, acceptance, female empowerment and the deconstruction of toxic gender constructions.