Sir Keir Starmer on women's rights, sport, and penises, in LBC interview

[quote jenny5000]@Fifteentoes I wonder too how many votes this will cost them? I'd like to think that they've alienated 50% of the population who will not vote for them, but I doubt it. Surely they have focus groups and they're following those? I also think KS is terrified of losing the young vote, especially in university towns and cities as well as alienating the captured in his Party. Whatever the reason, you'd think he might have prepared for such questions. They're not going to stop so he needs to sharpen up.

I do think it will cost Labour votes (including mine) but I wonder how many.[/quote]
Yep, and then you've got to consider that the opposite policy would cost some votes too. Coming out firmly against any extension of trans rights, and certainly for repealing or limiting any current provisions, would raise huge howls of transphobia that would contribute further to the perception (already strong) among the left, the young, the urban woke etc, that Starmer is not a genuine left leader but just another Tory in disguise.

The Tories don't have a such a problem with this as their core support is skewed much more towards the older and more socially conservative. There is an important base of socially liberal middle class people who vote Tory for purely economic reasons, but they tend to be more pragmatic and willing to compromise on principles to maintain the one all-important outcome of winning elections. They were generally pro-Remain for example, but still voted Tory in sufficient numbers when, for obviously political/electoral reasons, Johnson threw his weight behind Brexit.

Not read the whole thread. I am ragi g after listening to that interview with Starmer.
He says he has sympathy with women like me who were in abusive relationships yet I doubt he has any idea how many refuges for women admit men.

He doesn't think changing rooms are single sex spaces.
He calls certain people ie women intolerant.
He refused to answer the question.
He wouldn't say a woman can or cannot have a penis.
He is no ally to women. He has drawn a line in the sand.

Kier Starmer and Labour are no friends or supporters if women.

Sorry *full impact.

*be a rabbit hole

Cooper did not get it right by stating she isn't going down that rabbit hole.

Why must the safety and well being of girls and women by a rabbit hole! How can she even get away with saying that??

We are already so bound by what can't be even whispered out loud, our own politicians are unable to speak candidly. Censoring the whole nation won't work for long, the backlash will grow and grow, and so will the resentment. Stonewall and others will find themselves being deserted on mass as people wake up to the realities of their fringe campaign, and understand the fall impact of their toxicity.

My dds have/had been brainwashed to an inch of their lives, thankfully have the intelligence and critical thinking skills to question it all. I believe whole generations are being indoctrinated, and it goes well beyond Keir and is dumb answers and his go slow answers. A day of reckoning is coming, and it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

Fuck you Keir Starmer.

That is all.

I think I must be on the extremist end then as I believe that whether a man has a penis or not, he should exclude himself from women’s facilities.

About time Labour started actually reading the room, and asking people on the doorstep how they feel about adult males with a penis being allowed into loos and changing rooms with young girls.
Labour have become the party of not listening and then slagging off the people who vote for someone else.

I don't think Starmer will lose millions of dyed-in-the-wool 2019 Labour voters from this. Maybe 50,000 GCs (including me) but that won't kill his chances of being PM. Lots of women support self-ID.

What might kill his chances is being unable to win back enough of the votes that went to Johnson in 2019. Particularly older men, who don't.

@Fifteentoes I wonder too how many votes this will cost them? I'd like to think that they've alienated 50% of the population who will not vote for them, but I doubt it. Surely they have focus groups and they're following those? I also think KS is terrified of losing the young vote, especially in university towns and cities as well as alienating the captured in his Party. Whatever the reason, you'd think he might have prepared for such questions. They're not going to stop so he needs to sharpen up.

I do think it will cost Labour votes (including mine) but I wonder how many.

I am truly wondering why Starmer and Labour ARE so deeply invested in the first place. Why?

Stonewall deliberately filled the parties - Labour, LDs, Greens and SNP most successfully - with "true believers". Backfired a bit with Aimee/ Ashton, but they kept going. Then a bit of 'wrong side of history' hyperbole, 'be kind' threats and as PPs have mentioned, the weapons ingredients of shouty twotter, and bingo, everyone is either brainwashed or too frightened to speak up.

This was a deliberate act of infiltration. It didn't just evolve

James kirkup being brilliant as always

www.spectator.co.uk/article/starmer-won-t-talk-about-sex-and-gender-that-s-a-problem

Unless you want to allow him a get-out card to avoid answering the question that you're not willing to allow Starmer.

Oh I'm keen to hear Boris answer this question directly too, don't worry about that.

Now I think it got to be money or good old fashioned misogyny it's a woman's issue so unimportant - ie they'll still vote for us so can ignore with a huge does of dismissing concerns with it will never happen and when it does victim blaming or lessons will be learnt platitudes.

[quote HermioneWeasley]@Thymeout

Whether or not women have penises is not a complex issue. People have tried to pretend this is complicated and it isn’t - you are either male or female and humans can’t change sex. Sometimes being male or female matters - sports, hospital wards, prisons, changing rooms, medical treatment and screening. If it’s one of those occasions then you need to be treated according to your sex, in some instances a third space/service may be appropriate for trans people.

The end.[/quote]
^^ This puts it so well!

Boris isn't coming out of this question well either. Or, his spokesman isn't:

"The Prime Minister has "a very clear position" on trans rights, his official spokesman said.

The spokesman was asked whether the PM thought trans women were women, and said people have "the ability to change their legal sex and how that's recorded".

So that's a yes, then. Unless you want to allow him a get-out card to avoid answering the question that you're not willing to allow Starmer.

'Apart from the ambiguity and obfuscation around whether part-time crossdressers and the like are transwomen, this is a much clearer position that could be supported by many people across the political spectrum. But no we are in full-on woowoo land instead'

The difficulty with the position I've laid out - which I think is fair to both women and transwomen and recognises everyone's legal rights, is that it denies the woo. The woo cannot be denied.

[quote HermioneWeasley]@Thymeout

Whether or not women have penises is not a complex issue. People have tried to pretend this is complicated and it isn’t - you are either male or female and humans can’t change sex. Sometimes being male or female matters - sports, hospital wards, prisons, changing rooms, medical treatment and screening. If it’s one of those occasions then you need to be treated according to your sex, in some instances a third space/service may be appropriate for trans people.

The end.[/quote]
I totally agree about third spaces . my suggestion was they could be called “freestylers”

But still not sure how far it could be extended?

I think most people know this Needs sensible discussion but we need to start from a sensible base / starting point .

Good questions, Unsure. We should pin him down on those. But I think he is saying a transwoman with a GRC is female and should be able to use a women's refuge that has used the single-sex exception.

And was he saying a refuge is a different situation to a prison or toilets etc ?

Where do you draw the line ?

'How many other MPs are in a similar position, or have a close friend whose child identifies as transgender, making them terrified to speak out because of the potential personal consequences and the effect they think this will have on the vulnerable young person?'

We need to know their positions, because if they can't or won't look at the issue objectively because of a personal issue, they're not able to discharge their responsibilities.

@Thymeout

Whether or not women have penises is not a complex issue. People have tried to pretend this is complicated and it isn’t - you are either male or female and humans can’t change sex. Sometimes being male or female matters - sports, hospital wards, prisons, changing rooms, medical treatment and screening. If it’s one of those occasions then you need to be treated according to your sex, in some instances a third space/service may be appropriate for trans people.

The end.

It’s all about passing the buck to individual organizations, just like the SNP / Greens are trying to do in Scotland. They say that organizations can use the single sex provisions if that organization chooses to, so what happens when they don’t?
I can give a clear example of what happens when an organization completely ignores the law.
I don’t know if everyone on this thread is familiar with the situation at Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre where a trans identifying man without a GRC is the CEO. That post was exclusively meant for a woman. As an aside Sturgeon is a friend of that person.
I know it’s a different political party but the point still stands.