Boris Speaks!

Are you on about women now or girls?
Both, really.
You were talking about it affecting 16 year olds and younger.
So girls.
Who should be able to make decisions for themselves too when it comes to making decisions about abortion and birth control.
If we start attacking gillick competence (bodily autonomy) for some, surely it stands to reason that it might eventually affect others too?
Or is it a case of its alright if you're trans, but OK stop there, right, that's it, no more - don't come for us too?
As I don't think it'll work like that.

Unlikely, yes.
Not impossible though.
Is it really a risk people want to take?
I don't.
So you would rather young girls were mutilated to avoid what is a tiny risk.

I actually think it is the reverse. If this legislation were to include the T, public opposition would grow to the extent wider socially conservative would become more likely.

Britain is a democracy and at the moment it is hard to think that the public, and indeed Tory backbenchers, would start calling for the measures you are calling for.

RODG is starting to affect a lot of friends families and communities across Britain. Quite why Stonewall maintains a tin ear on ordinary and reasonable concerns.

How do you think women and girls in Ireland managed all this time with zero abortion rights?
If it came to pass that we lost those right (bloody unlikely) then we probably would find a way around it.

Btw you know the USA laws pretty much ban any abortion anywhere bar a few states.?

And they sided with Lily Madigan over her, too. Any fool with half a brain could see what Madigan was about. Embarrassing.

Angela Rayner simpering "I'll keep a seat warm in parliament for youuuuu" 🙄

If you mean birth control, its unlikely
Unlikely, yes.
Not impossible though.
Is it really a risk people want to take?
I don't.
I'd rather know abortion and birth control were definitely safe, and we can't say they definitely would always be if we start attacking bodily autonomy.

Igneococcus - thanks - I've signed up!

Charley50 - yes, so I see!

Gillick is for under 16s. So girls maybe affected.*
Yes, but that could affect abortions too (hopefully never would) but where would it stop if its eroded or taken away?

If you need more of a refresher on Labour's weird past priorities, I reread this, this morning.

lachlanstuart.medium.com/the-confessions-of-a-transphobe-b4942c06e6e4

Starmer doesn't need 51% of the electorate apparently minus a few Labour women MPs.

It reminding me of the Giardian columnist who said the sexual assaults in cologne were the fault of the women because they were western and had smart phones and the attackers were under privileged.

Had to totally shift my world view from left / Guardian equals good. It just doesn’t. Not for boring old women anyway. So seems I’m a Tory now.

The Mail algorithms are odd. After any number of ‘trans’ stories over the last week or so, there don’t seem to be any today. Not even a report on what Boris said yesterday. As if he has said his piece and that’s it. Either Labour accept it and it all goes quiet, or they attack it and Labour are in the spotlight, with a position they know is unpopular.

Purgatory -

"Unique opportunity to acquire stunning property, with great outlook and huge potential. Doors currently wide open."

I don't think Labour want to elected into government, I really don't.

[quote Igneococcus]Alicia Kearns in the Times today:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f5f4a80a-b5e1-11ec-8c29-375fe0cc1f19?shareToken=e15020e28647a5112a145311438e46da[/quote]
What a terrible article, with no reference to facts, data, or the lifelong impact of 'transitioning' on vulnerable, often autistic, often care-experienced, often traumatised, young women and girls.

If you search Twitter for the terms “exploratory therapy” then half the results are from the POV that “of course, no ban on conversion therapy would include this” whilst the other half are “exploratory therapy is just conversion therapy by another name”.
Anyone who thinks that there is a simple compromise to be made here hasn’t been paying attention for the last few years.

I've just been reading about Crispin Blunt having a massive tantrum.

That and Nancy Kelley's article, also in the Guardian, are just screaming 'we have lost the plot' or 'we need the money' - take your pick.

No comments allowed, of course.

I can c&P some comments later (off to work now) @EmileFord but there are some cheapish deals around for new subscribers.

Though I do often wonder how many people have actually read or listened to the things those quotes are pulled from.

They haven't. I've seen a partial photocopy of the 'bumboys' comment, only because Pink News(!) got hold of an old print version and published it. I cannot find an online version of the full article (or at least I couldn't when I searched a few years ago). Admittedly, what I read was an unacceptable article by today's standards, but it was written in the late 90s. A lot of things written in the late 90s would not be published today, although I think that particular piece was below the belt even then. (But I also recall that women were routinely referred to as 'totty' back then, and I don't think language has particularly improved for women in the last 20 years).

Some of the other phrases were taken from satirical pieces of writing, eg the 'picaninnies' one. It was a sarcastic article, written in 2005, I think, from the supposed pov of Tony Blair. We see similar examples of satirical writing on MN all the time - eg, someone mocking the pov of a misogynistic man will write something like "Women! Get back to the kitchen and don't bother your pretty little heads about politics!" Clearly, the writer is not in agreement that women have pretty little heads and belong in the kitchen.

Anyway, I don't really want to derail the thread and I'm not a Boris fan (didn't vote for Tories in the last few elections) but I do get tired of people quoting these old phrases without considering the context in which they were written.

On the topic at hand - I wrote to Keir Starmer in his capacity as Leader of the Opposition on this issue when he first got elected as leader. He chose not to reply to me. Subsequent actions have showed he is not interested in gaining my vote.

I will almost certainly be voting Tory at the next election.

Gender critical feminists totally thick and being manipulated by the Tories to being cruel to the most marginalised group ever and who would care if a trans woman was in your aerobics class🙄. Utterly embarrassing show of her privilege there. Cringe.

Igneococcus - thanks for sharing that. I might have to subscribe just to see the comments!

@MsTSwift I make sure to always read the waffle from the ‘other side’.

I suffer from low blood pressure, so it’s actually good for me

Don’t read Zoe Williams in the Guardian if you value your blood pressure. What a total prat.

Can only conclude that Keir doesn’t actually want to be PM so he is epically self sabotaging himself. Only explanation for such a mad position to take and giving the Tories such a lovely open goal.