Starmer on what a woman is, and GRA reform

Well he can jog on frankly.

I wrote to my MP before the GRA debate and got the same nonsense back - TWAW but also we protect single sex spaces but TW can access these - well how the fuck does that work? You know most of these jokers still have their dicks? Do you think we don’t know that?

Getting really fucked off now.

I’ve got a work deadline then I’m going to devote the whole of next week writing a letter to my MP, Keir and the rest of these reality denying fuckwits.

“Hoarding all my rights up my dinosaur wazoo”. I love Suzanne.

It's another T shirt slogan.

Misiecle

The process of trying to get medical support for very heavy periods is pretty fucking undignified and can take a decade or more. It would be awesome if Starmer decided to put some effort into making that less undignified for women.

Yes, I imagine Starmer has never actually had to experience his psychotic 11-year-old, in the process of starving himself to death, both attacking the CAMHS emergency visitor and screaming at the CAMHS panel convened to work out whether there was, actually, any help available. And I was glad he did, because it meant we actually did get help. But to get that help my poor child, after months of struggle, had to give up all respect and dignity. So don't talk to me about most oppressed.

Oh yeah, how could I forget the joy of waiting for CAMHS? Also the marathon effort to secure EHCPs etc.

*Amen to that.

Ditto PIP.

Ditto reasonable adjustments and work.

Ditto every other damn thing related to disability.

Are we whinging that we want the right to Self ID into disability? No. Would it get us anywhere if we did? Also no.*

CAMHs assessment for ASD and ADHD for my child, still on the waiting list since 2016. and from talking to others in the area thats not unusual. but oh diddums cant have people waiting 2 years for a GRC thats inhumane!

The misogyny of trans activism is unmissable yet Jollyon Mourn to Billy Bragg to Owen Jones to Michael Cashman and many so -called comedians - compile your own list - believe themselves to be on the right side of history, possibly because they don’t know much about history.

No I think its because they dont know much about rights.

Ditto PIP.

Ditto reasonable adjustments and work.

Ditto every other damn thing related to disability.

Are we whinging that we want the right to Self ID into disability? No. Would it get us anywhere if we did? Also no.

[quote DomesticatedZombie]Suzanne Moore: suzannemoore.substack.com/p/i-am-a-dinosaur-hear-me-roar[/quote]
“Hoarding all my rights up my dinosaur wazoo”. I love Suzanne.

Suzanne Moore: suzannemoore.substack.com/p/i-am-a-dinosaur-hear-me-roar

best comment on that daily fail article.

"I really have no problem with anyone identifying as whatever they want to be, but as a natural biological women my rights should be come before those who choose not to be male. That includes competitive sports, changing facilities and prisons."

HQ have a problem in that politicians don't want to come here to talk because women here expect actual interaction, logic, response to evidence, and don't swallow soundbites.

Which is why now there are very tightly limited questions on subjects absolutely fundamental to women's engagement in politics, many deletions, questions are submitted in advance, only select ones are answered and are quite obviously cut and paste responsed from advisors using soundbites, slogans and no logic, and those answers are not up for discussion. Which makes the whole thing a waste of time, and makes those politicians look afraid of the electorate, afraid and unwilling to hear voters point out facts, evidence and issues that conflict with the Message, and unable to stand up for what they claim to believe in. Politicians come here thinking its an opportunity to download key messages onto the electorate hard drive; not to listen. Not to be challenged. Not to think. Not to have to face the screaming hypocrisy, factual inaccuracies and cognitive dissonance in what they're claiming. Voters are blank slates to them, to be Told What To Think. Engagement with them is to be avoided.

And they wonder why all respect for politicians is dribbling away.

The word 'oppressed' has been flung around with gay abandon in the past few years, largely to justify much of this political agenda. Just as Starmer's comprehension of 'dignity' is very selective and applies only to some but not others, many of them seem oblivious to the basic principles of what 'oppression' actually is as opposed to a Big Word that is On Message.

If you want to know who is actually oppressed, look at who is being demanded to provide service and labour, and who is doing the demanding. Look at who doesn't have a voice and isn't even allowed to come to the table to speak. Look at who gets arrested and who does the reporting and calling of the cops. Look at whose privacy is viewed with contempt and whose is a reason for passionate and emotive speeches. Look at who gets invited to select committees and has cups of tea in back rooms creating laws, and who has to be careful in case they get reported to the police for being difficult.

the law needs to clearly distinguish between sex and gender and what rights and lengths of legislation those two merit if any.

sex is very simple and clear you are male or female, its in your DNA.

gender is social construct based on expected behaviour and appearance of the sexes, its a cats cradle of cross overs, the tom boy, the trans woman, the butch lesbian etc etc.

you can not mix the two up in law one has two types and is very clear regardless of presentation, the other is as clear as mud and both sexes account for everyone within that secondary category of gender.

but then if you start screwing up the law to look at gender rather then simply sex, wouldnt that be in breach of the human rights act.

if you try to incorporate gender into the law over or alongside simple biology your opening a can of worms of offensive stereotyping.

its all just 1984.

@Spectre8

The David Lammy quote you provided, how disgusting his words are,
Reducing women and girls to absolutely nothing, like we are worthless,
Other than for whatever males have in mind when they have free access to us,
'Dinosaurs who want to hoard rights' .. how dare we try to spoil the fun of males by thinking we have the right of somewhere safe to go.
I wonder what his mother and other female members of his family feel about this,
Disgusting man.

@SolasAnla

"And law would need to qualify that it's human & female because animal welfare laws recognise sex classifications too."

++++

Well to be fair my dog seems fairly indifferent about what "he?" Tries to hump - male dogs, female dogs, my leg, various bits of furniture etc. And "he ?" is definitely very fluid 🤮

Apologies for going cross topics but,
I have been reflecting that whilst Russia is busy trying to rebuild the Soviet Union empire with hostile invasions and silencing opposition, China is going all out for world economic dominance and global influence through its belt and road initiatives, the West is .... well obsessing about gender neutral toilets and preferred pronouns.

We are totally screwed !

In the interests of respectful debate I do hope Sir Keir agrees to be interviewed on Woman's Hour by Emma Barnett. I really would like to see how he manages to defend this inaccurate, illogical and frankly insulting garbage. I'm another one who is absolutely seething with rage about this utter shambles of a Labour Party.

This. I am politically homeless.

Lib Dems are funded by pharmaceuticals that make puberty blockers.

I'm assuming that Labour have got a big direct debit from similar.

It's the only explanation.

I wonder how many pieces of silver they got when they threw my rights away?

I'll never forgive them. And their problem is that it makes me so angry that I am now politically active in an entirely new way. Stupid pricks, they're leaving us with a one party country. Fuckers.

@MidCenturyClegs thanks for posting the trends map tweet.
Interesting.
I need to learn how to do that! Any tips?