Boris has nailed colours to mast

Full piece here , it’s a shite show in Scotland for women 🤦‍♀️

www.holyrood.com/news/view,scottish-government-lose-court-battle-over-redefinition-of-women

In Scotland now we have to go to court so the meaning of the word woman is not redefining

The Scottish Government has lost a court battle over legislation which expanded the legal definition of a woman.

Ministers were taken to court by campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS) over the Gender Representation on Public Boards Act, which creates a target for public boards to have 50 per cent of non-executive members who are women.

The legislation, which was passed by MSPs in 2018, states that the definition of woman should include “a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment...if, and only if, the person is living as a woman and is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of becoming female".

That means a trans woman who has not yet changed their legal sex from male to female using a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), but who is “living as a woman” would be covered.

FWS argued that by passing the law Holyrood had exceeded its authority by redefining the 2010 Equality Act, which is reserved to Westminster, and defines a woman as a female of any age.

My reason for pointing it out is to show that Starmer isn't lying, or stupid. It doesn't help to suggest he might one day change his mind and tell the truth. He is fully bought in to a new way of looking at the world. It's a way I regard as dangerous to women, so I want to describe his take on it with accuracy.

I like this idea, our own party. I've often thought most of the people on here would make a better job at running the country than any of the current options. I think I could join a party that looks after those in society unable to look after themselves and isn't bloody bat shit crazy!!

@tabbycatstripy thanks, I kind of hope that woman I dismissed over so many things reads here and maybe realises I know I was approaching things wrong. I suspect she might be as she knew about rapid onset gender before any of us be kind colleagues did.

Of course I may just be becoming more right wing as I hemorrhage my eggs.

Who knows!

tabbycatstripy

Not strictly denying it. Decoupling it from the concepts 'woman' and 'man'. So he believes there are physically male people who are women, and that they can be declared 'female' to make their legal situation clearer, without changing their biology at all.

I fully understand this but to repurpose "woman" or "man" is denying they relate fundamentally to biology, which they do. I think we agree so I'm not sure why you are challenging the idea that gender ideology and those who support it are denying biological reality.

Labour and all those supporters of this ideology are usually hand wringing and weeping about the plight of these women, so what happens to them when they can't access the spaces and services they need because there are men in them? Where is the compassion and understanding for them? Ah no, it's all saved for those most oppressed men.

It’s okay. I’m not expecting anything other than straw man arguments and hyperbole in response. Just maybe hoping to plant a seed.

How very magnanimous of you to offer us some rare insight and patiently wait for us to come to the same understanding as you.

Stating you anticipate only strawmen and hyperbole in response to your post establishes a "no win" dynamic for anyone wanting to engage. It's transparent and not very sophisticated but perhaps you thought it was clever.

Starmer is far too clever not to know and understand that this is what is is doing.

It's an assertion that being a woman is to do with something other than biological sex.

So denying biology in favour of feels?

Those of you who think you can change labour should be already involved locally to discover just what a waste of time it will be.
Either join now and try and change or vote against them at the local elections.

'Don't you think TWAW is denial of biological sex? Women are adult human females. Transwomen are adult human males.'

No, this is what I'm saying. It's actually not. It's an assertion that being a woman is to do with something other than biological sex. I don't know what - I don't understand what people mean by 'gender identity' that is separable from thought/feeling. But KS is not denying the existence of sex.

He might be saying sex matters less than gender identity (and naturally I think that's nonsense).

I'm not defending him (in any way) but where did he deny this?

Don't you think TWAW is denial of biological sex? Women are adult human females. Transwomen are adult human males.

To be honest I don't like the way people who vote conservative and ministers are villainised. It's this whole good versus evil narrative that is really unpalatable.

See for me, the seed this planted was that I was doing very black and white tribal thinking. I wasn't looking at the nuance of why people believed differently to me. Same with Brexit. I'm ashamed to say that I viewed anyone who voted leave as a rcaist ignorant. And I'm sure that was some people's motivation. But a lot of people had good reasons for thinking being put of the EU was preferable, and some of them were even selfless. Like people who wanted more control on foreign labour so people from other countries weren't explored into working for less than minimum wage in appalling conditions and English people weren't being overlooked as possiblities to be trained and do the jobs.

At the time I saw it as good versus evil but actually reading others' views without resorting to calling them gammons has meant I understand more that they are real people with real concerns and not evil selfish privileged prats.

And I have listened to gender ideology and I do get there's a sense of longing and sadness for wanting to belong; yet I can recognise this without wanting to harm the women who will be excluded by inviting gender ideology into policy.

Anyway, my point is, that instead of feeling sad that I can't vote Labour, I need to stop demonising myself or others for voting Conservative if they feel it's the right thing to do. I need to accept they are motivated by other things and not just simply evil.

Sadly, I can't come out and say any of this in real life because of the risk, which is a shame as I realised how intolerant I was in the guise of tolerance.

A wise women once told me we vote for the path of life we're on. At the time I dismissed her as a invisible middle aged woman.

I like to think I'm working towards being a little wiser now.

Nothing trumps this issue for me. How can a labour government possibly help the poor if they cant understand what a woman is? Poor women are some of the most put upon in our society. Losing their status as women will have a bigger impact than any tax benefit from labour. Tories will now have my vote

You can say this

I know it seems useful but trying to shame people won't work and is exactly the problem with modern politics

And then follow it with this? Seriously?

How about I ask why you're on the side of history that gives children puberty blockers and mastectomies and agrees that the right place for rapists is in female prisons? Does that make you rethink anything?

@whitecreambluejug

Actually I see it completely the other way around. I see this gender ideology as an exercise in class privilege. The people promoting this don't give shit about the women from disadvantaged communities who are most likely to be most harmed by this - those that end up in prisons, homeless shelters, refuges and recovery centres. The privileged with degrees care not one crap about those women, who are far distanced from their lives. The privileged never imagine themselves ending up in one of those places so care not about what happens to those who do. One of the reasons this ideology has being able to take hold is that we no longer have a class analysis: all that has been replaced by individual 'identity'

This is a fair point and a common factor in the voting intentions of those who consider themselves underprivileged - resenting the cultural issues that divide middle and working classes more than the economic ones that divide the ruling class from everybody else. It was a huge factor in the Brexit vote.

But why does it have to be either/or? Why can't both cultural AND economic issues be indicative of class privilege?

When you look at it that way, then you can see why it's in the interest of those with economic power to exploit highly emotive cultural issues, to put huge effort and resources into stimulating anger and division at that level - and to ensure that peoples' attention is focused on those rather than on the structural economic privileges that they wish to maintain extactly as they are.

How about I ask why you're on the side of history that gives children puberty blockers and mastectomies and agrees that the right place for rapists is in female prisons? Does that make you rethink anything?

Don't respect my sex, don't expect my X.

'This one issue though, you agree with them. You are aligned in viewpoints with the party whose views and actions you otherwise find abhorrent…that doesn’t give you any pause for thought?'

I don't find all their viewpoints abhorrent. I have always been for political tolerance, free speech and freedom of conscience. I still am for those things. It's just that Labour stopped being for those things.

But regardless of that, is it impossible for you to understand 'single issue' voting? Impossible for you to understand that, to some, whether or not we let people remove the breasts from young women and tell them they are men now, is a deciding issue?