Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Starmer: biology matters

108 replies

tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 20:03

“Biology matters, and for the vast majority of women that’s what matters. Nobody is quarrelling with that. But there’s no denying there are also a small number of people who struggle with their gender identity, and they go through a difficult time...”

Went on to say that three times. Almost exactly what Rachel Reeves said: “the vast majority of women” - in other words, there are women who are not female.

Robotic performance aside, it’s at least better.

OP posts:
Thewindwhispers · 31/03/2022 21:26

@Cayeli

“Marriage is a social convention.”

As is the notion of womanhood or manhood.

“The two sexes of men and women still exist whether social convention chooses to acknowledge that or not”

Even if, so? Why does "biological reality" need social and legal enforcement? If you truly believe biological reality to be immutable, why not just let it be?

Are you planning to enforce the laws of gravity next? Pass laws to prohibit humans from levitating, just in case someone does?

Womanhood is not a social convention. Maybe retake GCSE biology.
Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 21:24

‘You do not need to impose labels and categories on people based on the physical characteristics they have.’

We do. The physical categories exist. Naming them is useful and sometimes necessary.

OP posts:
Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 21:24

‘So, why impose specific social identities on people based on their sex?’

I don’t.

OP posts:
Cayeli · 31/03/2022 21:22

@tabbycatstripy

‘So why the efforts to prevent people from socially and medically transitioning?’

I support people who feel they need to transition. I just don’t believe it literally changes their sex. It’s just a limitation on what is possible, not a preference.

So, why impose specific social identities on people based on their sex?

The physical characteristics are what they are. You do not need to impose labels and categories on people based on the physical characteristics they have.

teawamutu · 31/03/2022 21:19

@Cayeli

“Marriage is a social convention.”

As is the notion of womanhood or manhood.

“The two sexes of men and women still exist whether social convention chooses to acknowledge that or not”

Even if, so? Why does "biological reality" need social and legal enforcement? If you truly believe biological reality to be immutable, why not just let it be?

Are you planning to enforce the laws of gravity next? Pass laws to prohibit humans from levitating, just in case someone does?

Biological reality doesn't need social and legal enforcement, silly.

Women, however, need rights and protections in law based on that reality. Because of things that very definitely do happen.

It's not a subtle distinction.

Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 21:16

‘So why the efforts to prevent people from socially and medically transitioning?’

I support people who feel they need to transition. I just don’t believe it literally changes their sex. It’s just a limitation on what is possible, not a preference.

OP posts:
Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 21:15

‘Honestly, it sounds as though you're not saying "You can't change sex" as a statement of fact, but more as a prohibition.’

I said the opposite. Nobody needs to prohibit it. It’s not possible.

Nor do I want to prohibit people modifying their bodies to feel more comfortable. It’s not an issue for me.

OP posts:
Cayeli · 31/03/2022 21:15

@tabbycatstripy

‘Are you planning to enforce the laws of gravity next? Pass laws to prohibit humans from levitating, just in case someone does?’

Nobody is trying to pass laws to prevent people literally changing their sex. That can’t happen. No law is needed to prevent it.

So why the efforts to prevent people from socially and medically transitioning?

Again, why does this "biological reality" need social and legal enforcement? Why is your ideology centered on restricting something that you believe to be physically impossible?

Cayeli · 31/03/2022 21:13

Honestly, it sounds as though you're not saying "You can't change sex" as a statement of fact, but more as a prohibition.

Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 21:10

‘Are you planning to enforce the laws of gravity next? Pass laws to prohibit humans from levitating, just in case someone does?’

Nobody is trying to pass laws to prevent people literally changing their sex. That can’t happen. No law is needed to prevent it.

OP posts:
Cayeli · 31/03/2022 21:08

“Marriage is a social convention.”

As is the notion of womanhood or manhood.

“The two sexes of men and women still exist whether social convention chooses to acknowledge that or not”

Even if, so? Why does "biological reality" need social and legal enforcement? If you truly believe biological reality to be immutable, why not just let it be?

Are you planning to enforce the laws of gravity next? Pass laws to prohibit humans from levitating, just in case someone does?

DomesticatedZombie · 31/03/2022 21:07

The two sexes of men and women still exist whether social convention chooses to acknowledge that or not, and there is precisely nothing you can do about that

Thank you. It's absurd anyone will try to argue this point.

DoubleYouOhEmAyEn · 31/03/2022 21:00

No thank-you Keir.

Pixiedust1234 · 31/03/2022 20:59

@Joystir59 - I don't really trust any of them but at least Boris knows what an adult female is. I don't want men gaslighting me that they are really women. #nothankyou

PearPickingPorky · 31/03/2022 20:58

@Cayeli

“Expanding definitions to include the opposite of the concept renders language meaningless.”

Like how marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman, amirite?

Marriage is a social convention.

The two sexes of men and women still exist whether social convention chooses to acknowledge that or not, and there is precisely nothing you can do about that.

TotalRhubarb · 31/03/2022 20:57

He’s only saying this now because he’s been caught on the hop by other MPs deciding to be grown ups. I’m not going to be forgetting his enthusiasm fo sell women and girls down the river to avoid getting called nasty names on Twitter. The absolute melt.

Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 20:55

‘Like how marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman, amirite?’

The opposite of married is unmarried.

OP posts:
Joystir59 · 31/03/2022 20:54

@Pixiedust1234

I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. He's only changing tack because its coming up to election time, then he will weasel his way back to how he has been. He's slimy.
I would trust Boris and the Tories even less. They subject women and children to genuine suffering through creating a state of grinding inequality.
Cayeli · 31/03/2022 20:53

“Expanding definitions to include the opposite of the concept renders language meaningless.”

Like how marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman, amirite?

Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 20:51

‘Because you want to maintain womanhood as some sort of exclusive club?’

It is an exclusive club. Expanding definitions to include the opposite of the concept renders language meaningless.

OP posts:
CrossPurposes · 31/03/2022 20:50

It is an exclusive club.

Original poster
tabbycatstripy · 31/03/2022 20:50

Twitter/ITV News Politics about 4/5 hours ago.

OP posts:
Cayeli · 31/03/2022 20:49

@Whatsnewpussyhat

Some people don't like their sexed body. And? Why the fuck should that matter in relation to women being adult females in reality and law?

WHY do we have to pretend some men are included in our sex class in order for them to feel better about their chosen 'gender identity'

If an identity needs constant external validation and affirmation it's because the person knows it's false.

Tell me, why should anyone's "sexed body" matter in social context?

Because you want to maintain womanhood as some sort of exclusive club? Because including people you don't like "devalues" it? Gee, where did I hear that kind of rhetoric before.

“If an identity needs constant external validation and affirmation it's because the person knows it's false.”

Right, sure. Like how it was oh so wrong it was for gay people to demand "external validation and affirmation" of gay marriage. 🙄

MarshaBradyo · 31/03/2022 20:49

It just seems to be repackaged bumpf

LizzieSiddal · 31/03/2022 20:47

Thanks for posting. Where did he say this?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

Posting is temporarily suspended on this thread.