Wes Streeting on trans rights.

Not articulate enough to explain why tho!

I found listening to this interview more disturbing than listening to Tom H or James M.

Want to win my heart and mind? End self-ID and all cack-handed versions thereof which let men talk themselves into women's safe spaces. Create third spaces or insist men fucking well treat gender non-conforming men with respect in men's same sex spaces. Which means create third spaces because men can't be trusted with that.

Apparently the two aren't in conflict. But if the two aren't in conflict, surely there is no side to pick?

Odd, isn't it?

Jo Maugham is apparently deeply upset at Streeting not picking a side, but then also tweets that Streeting is wrong to frame this issue as trans rights versus women's rights. Apparently the two aren't in conflict. But if the two aren't in conflict, surely there is no side to pick?

Streeting keeps on saying the goal is "winning hearts and minds".

Where as he should know that the goal is creating a safe environment for women and children. It shouldn't matter if mens hearts are broken in the process.

what I am seeing is an ambitious politician apparently deciding it would be wise to distance himself from extreme TRA rhetoric

The problem isn't the extreme TRA rhetoric. It's the fact that if any man is walking about with a female passport or birth certificate, SSE are impossible. But that isn't seen as extreme, that's the status quo.

Acknowledging some TRA are extreme is distracting from the horror of what is happening now, and that no party seems to what to change.

I don't think these are even 'crumbs'. He's discussing electoral tactics. He doesn't agree with JKR but knows the OJ 'she's weaponising her trauma' approach plays badly with voters, basically. They've pushed so far to the extreme that even an MP saying that the removal of words like mother and breast feeding is wrong can now be painted as some sort of 'concession' to women.

An interesting listen. Nick Robinson doing his job.

Streeting keeps on saying the goal is "winning hearts and minds". That seems to be in the context of getting acceptance by the public like with gay marriage, but I'd expect he's thinking of it in terms of what voters will be willing to accept in terms of inroads into women's rights.

The most important person in his life was his working class Tory grandad who voted Liberal and that was only to keep Labour out. Ha!

His grandma went to prison and shared a cell with Christine Keeler. That's quite an anecdote.

And is he being cancelled by the trans activists the way female politicians who speak out are? Thought not.

The programme including Streeting's comments, Political Thinking, has just started now on Radio 4.

So women will get a few soothing words about 'protecting single sex provision' which will be completely meaningless because Labour are still committed to Self ID, which changes 'legal sex'?

This is barely even smoke and mirrors, or crumbs, or jam tomorrow. Yes, they know it's a bad look. So they will change the packaging to make it more palatable while they plow ahead with the same plans they always had.

After Starmer's hostage video, this is a great way for them to discover that they will not please the TRA.

Necessary Arabella Can I agree with both? Of course I bloody can Let's remember that us (used to be) staunch Labour voters have always had that superior, we know best attitude. Labour are still trying to convince their should be 'die hard' voters to have open borders and that got them nowhere. They have now decided that there does need to be a policy. Perhaps they will begin to change, but they have lots more to do. I look forward to their manifesto

I do not like or trust Wes Streeting but then I don't like or trust all feminists either. I don't think either fact is the point here. I don't see it as being about him personally; what I am seeing is an ambitious politician apparently deciding it would be wise to distance himself from extreme TRA rhetoric. Even if he retracts - and he might well do so - it's out there now. I think it's a sign that things are slowly shifting, nothing more and nothing less.

Streeting's whole argument is based on the premise that women are wrong but we have to find a way to teach them why they are wrong.

He's just suggesting TRAs swap threats for faux compassion the better to deal with the silly, nasty, confused women's wrongness before he removes all of our rights systematically. He still wants/expects women to capitulate, he just wants us to feel grateful for it instead of fucking raging at the utter injustice.

I mean, well done anyone that can countenance building a golden bridge for the twerp, 'I promise not to push him off it' is about the best I can do.

Meanwhile ...

ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAR

I agree with the others who are (very) cautiously optimistic here. It suggests that someone has been doing some polling.

But finding a middle way is going to be very hard for the Labour Party: so many CLP activists have views that mean they have little in common (on all sorts of issues, but especially this) with the people whose votes they need to form a government. Which is why Starmer is always so nervous of rocking the Labour Party boat.

Use better tactics to educate and defeat these abusive old women. Don't try to cancel a feminist who frames her views in terms of being a victim (no problem if she's just speaking her mind). Maybe let go of stuff like cervix haver and chest feeding - it's looking like they won't agree to having their lives wiped out entirely. Use the phrase single-sex spaces as if we respect them. Then use kid gloves to lead women on the kind, caring 'journey' to - ha ha! - self ID. Got 'em.
I'll watch and wait, and I very much welcome his urging trans activists to dial down the aggression, but I've read enough of Wes Streeting to know he's not my friend.

I feel cautiously positive over this. Every small step means it is easier to voice sensible views in public (such as ‘men shouldn’t be in women’s prisons’ and ‘sport should be single sex). And since we are pretty sure that when faced with sunlight, the majority of people agree single sex spaces are needed, and people can’t change sex, then it makes it easier to have a debate over the next areas (single sex wards, right to female doctors etc).

It is changing political discourse from ‘I don’t want to go there, squirm, platitudes, starting point is TWAW’ to ‘there are some serious concerns that need to be answered’.

And, if the message from the top of Labour ceases to be ‘TWAW, no debate’ then a number of Labour MPs will start to voice reasonable concerns about the lack of single sex provisions.

I don't trust this sort of superficiality at all. They're also watching the US. Biden's alt-woke is really scaring people and the mid-terms potential to destroy Democrats might be giving Labour, Lib-Dems a real fright.

True, but inevitably whoever is winning it's going to be in part by such superficial support. There are always going to be a bunch of "bend whichever way the wind's blowing" people.

So we've got to accept those people's support, not too grudgingly. Don't blow back when the wind's blowing them our way.