Sheffield Central Labour Candidate - Abtisam Mohamed vs Eddie Izzard

So you don't think there can be a least worst case scenario in a political context?

I find that baffling.

I'm not going to be able to convince you otherwise. I'd rather have someone who might have sympathy for the position of women rather than someone who is demonstrating the opposite in the most obvious way.

The whole labour party is doomed under Starmer. That is not Abtisam's fault. She is doing good work for local constituents. The other candidate has no interest, that I can see, in any issues that might interest the women of Sheffield.

As for the general election that is an issue for Starmer not an issue for a woman in Sheffield who is the best Labour candidate for the local people.

Are you suggesting that if a woman is not the equivalent of Rosie Duffield they shouldn't bother to even stand and just let the likes of Izzard get on with it because that is how it reads to me.
I'm not quite there yet but I'm afraid I'm certainly asking myself that, yes. Because it sounds as if whoever wins contest this is likely to end up in parliament where they might well be voting on self ID legislation in the near future. If a candidate isn't prepared to put their head over the parapet now - and to be fair, I don't know much about Abtisam Mohamed and whether she is or not - then yes I'm beginning to ask myself why should Sheffield women who fear for their rights lend their support?

I really hope you can persuade me otherwise because I'm not just thinking about this contest in this constituency, I'm thinking ahead to where I will place my vote at the next general election and quite honestly it is hanging by a thread.

I dont read anything negative into the tweet about increased hate crime, given the context that she is operating in. I mean, I don't disagree with the tweet. It's terrible that crimes are committed against people because they're trans. Yes the context is that a lefty politician has to make a statement about that on the day of rememberence. It tells us nothing about her position on female only services etc. because hate crime and female spaces are quite different topics, and by making it nearly compulsory to make such statements they have actually taken away any power it might have. She should be judged on other more meaningful things in comparison to other candidates eg her past work.

I was talking about the tweet in the context of a race between two labour candidates.

You said:

But as, far as I'm concerned, if you (general you) won't or don't feel you can 'stand up for women's rights openly', then don't stand for public office.

I don't agree with this because of the wider context of the Labour Party under the leadership of Starmer. Are you suggesting that if a woman is not the equivalent of Rosie Duffield they shouldn't bother to even stand and just let the likes of Izzard get on with it because that is how it reads to me.

The wider point about what constitutes moderate views on women's rights I agree with.

I think that that tweet is fairly moderate within the context of the political race she is in, in the area they are in, against a trans identifying candidate. Unless there are other things I am not aware of I would not read that tweet as being anti woman.

What has any of that got to do with a tweet about transgender day of remembrance?
I was referring to this comment that you made (apologies for repetition):
Isn't it better to come across as moderate on this and to get into public office than risk being hounded on twitter called a bigot and then the electorate decide they can't vote for a bigot not fully understanding the issues.

I take the point that you were referring to a specific tweet so, if you don't want to widen it out into a broader discussion about what is meant by 'come across as moderate', then fair enough but maybe just say so.

Sorry nilsmousehammer I don't know where I got nilshaus from!

Yes Nilhaus I know but what we are talking about here is a race between two labour candidates.

My point is that complaining about Abtisam's tweet about the transgender day of remembrance to the point of saying it makes her an unsuitable candidate for her views on trans rights is going to favour Izzard who will absolutely remove women's spaces.

I don't know what her views are on women's spaces etc. and I don't live in Sheffield but I would assume that women's chances sit better with a woman than with someone who is gender fluid who has made their views on women's spaces crystal clear.

I'm afraid Starmer's long since burned that bridge.

He's come on here - twice - making vague noises about trying to have some kind of moderate views that mean he isn't actually one of the rabid nutjobs who hate women. He was the one candidate in the Labour Party leadership who stayed coy and wouldn't state any views while the other four - all women - had the integrity to at least be honest about what they stood behind.

And then he's illustrated that he was merely making don't frighten the horses noises in order to get into power and do exactly what he wanted. It's a known Labour tactic, Blair excelled at it.

Women have been repeatedly, endlessly, lied to, manipulated, deceived and fudged at by a lot of seriously lousy politicians who are in bed with the TQ+ male supremacy. It's been achieved by repeatedly leaning on women's willingness to be patient, generous, considerate, trusting - there is a point beyond which the only value this shows is being a gullible doormat. It is not respected, it is merely seen as evidence that women are stupid and a pushover and it's something to take happy advantage of.

Absolutely nothing would gain my vote now but frank, honest commitment to female sex based rights and equalities, with a history of proved action behind the words.

The belief that biological sex is real cannot be changed.
Advocating for single sex spaces.
Preserving the Gender Recognition Act and Equality Act in their current form.

What has any of that got to do with a tweet about transgender day of remembrance?

Has she said that she is going into the the position to remove women's spaces and believes that biological sex is not real?

We know Izzard's position on this.

Thanks for the link.

Isn't it better to come across as moderate on this and to get into public office than risk being hounded on twitter called a bigot and then the electorate decide they can't vote for a bigot not fully understanding the issues.
Before I answer your question, I think we need a definition of 'moderate'.
I'll try first. How about:
The belief that biological sex is real cannot be changed.
Advocating for single sex spaces.
Preserving the Gender Recognition Act and Equality Act in their current form.

All pretty moderate from where I'm sitting. I know many posters on here would disagree strongly with the third point but right now, I'd vote for a centre/left party that supported that view.

Now your turn.

But being openly seen as pro-woman is synonymous to many as being anti trans.

That's a high risk strategy when standing for public office against a Trans candidate.

Isn't it better to come across as moderate on this and to get into public office than risk being hounded on twitter called a bigot and then the electorate decide they can't vote for a bigot not fully understanding the issues.

That would really play into the hands of Izzard campaign.

I saw a bunch of tweets on her page demanding she stand up for women's rights openly etc. Of course we have a right to ask that, BUT we also have to recognise the tortuous difficulty there is in escaping groupthink. It can take years, it can take a moment.
Oh come on. I always read your posts, fromorbit and I admire your commitment to staying in the party, even though I don't share it. But as, far as I'm concerned, if you (general you) won't or don't feel you can 'stand up for women's rights openly', then don't stand for public office.

They are official hate crime figures issued by the police - in other words genuine crimes where hate of a particular group was a motivating factor:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63157965

Despite the largest percentage increase being in hate crimes against trans people, the actual numbers are very small - and are completely dwarfed by hate crimes motivated by racism at 109,000, and even disability at 14,000.

Good post @fromorbit

Great reply on that Twitter thread:
"It's a southerner in northerner mode" 😂.

(Could that poster be - - - a Mumsnetter??)

'integrity'

Where are all his supporters?

Why aren't they supporting him on twitter? It is literally pretty much unanimous.

Do you think the Labour Party actually understands what a disaster it would be?

Vote for me cos I'm famous!

twitter.com/EddieIzzardLab/status/1594420500402413571?t=k_7x_2KlV9GoOo34C_G59Q&s=19

the ratio on this tweet is nice!

Shoehorned into conflating crime with non-crime? It's hard to know what she thinks from that tweet. And if she's saying things she doesn't mean just to get the votes that's not great is it? Having said that, she's clearly a better option for local people than EI.

I do wonder if Izzard is a bit puzzled by all the boring paperwork and processes and committees and procedures required to get your name on a ballot paper. I wouldn't be surprised if Izzard thought he just need to declare interest in politics, talk about Izzardself on the telly a bit, and then the hard bit: deciding whether Scarlet Harlot or Flame Blush are the best shades of lipstick with the red rosette.

Well she's a bit shoehorned into this isn't she if she's still competing against Izzard.

Yes, the men are eagerly embracing something they want and the women are desperately trying to escape a situation they don't want - largely generated by males in the first place.

It's a woman hating ideology from start to finish.