Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

I live in Rosie Duffields constituency. Just had local election door knock from labour party

341 replies

BadgerWadger · 22/02/2023 16:08

He asked what my main concerns were. I said my main issue was that i stood with Rosie and felt that Labour, as a party, from the top down, did not offer her enough support. And my main concern was womens safe spaces.

Man said, well, this is local elections and not about that, and that issue is more complicated than you think. What are your concerns, locally?

I said the local council is involved in issues to do with womens safe spaces. Like the womens refuges, the womans changing room at the local pool, etc. All spaces where biological men should not have access and that womens safe spaces was my main concern.

There followed a debate. And his stance is that its not that simple, i am being brainwashed by the right wing media, and that Rosie is in fact, (drumroll please...), mainly being supported by American right wing anti abortion groups.

Arrrrrghhhhhh. So that is where my local labour door knockers are at. Saying Rosies main core of support is American right wing anti abortion groups and i am being fooled by them. Silly, foolish, female me.

OP posts:
DdraigGoch · 23/02/2023 21:04

ijclark · 23/02/2023 18:56

Can you clarify…do you think right-wing groups don’t agree with her on trans rights?

Show quote history

I've a feeling that right wing groups agree with me that water is wet. Does that mean that anyone who believes that water is wet owns a MAGA hat?

But then the Communist Party probably also agree that water is wet too.

PopGoesTheProsecco · 23/02/2023 21:00

ijclark · 23/02/2023 19:33

That’s nice. I know a lot of people in the constituency, from soft left to hard left, who don’t and won’t vote for her again. So I think that trumps your “cousin”.

Show quote history

Are they planning to vote for another party or not vote at all? At least the Tories can’t try to foist the Firth on us again.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 20:59

If I was getting emails from you, they'd probably not pass my spam filter either.

Yes, I'd personally set up a rule to automatically "file" them.

DdraigGoch · 23/02/2023 20:55

ijclark · 23/02/2023 17:46

Bloody hell, it’s so rare she replies to emails. Probably handy for her to know what most of the constituency thinks of her, so I hope the candidate in question tells her to her face how unpopular she is. Here’s hoping!

Show quote history

If I was getting emails from you, they'd probably not pass my spam filter either.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 20:47

the bloke down the pub says

Like your entire collection of motley arguments about "trans rights" and what women on a feminist board should prioritise politically then.

Caturday · 23/02/2023 20:29

🦖🦕 Well done OP 💜💚🤍

FlowerArranger · 23/02/2023 20:27

Sorry, pressed post to soon. I was quoting @Grammarnut re. Duffield's support of women's sex based rights.

FlowerArranger · 23/02/2023 20:24

MrsOvertonsWindow · 23/02/2023 19:57

It' always interesting when the "guilt by association" posters like ijclark are asked to explain why so many male born paedophiles, rapists and sex offenders claim to be women and want access to women and girls in changing rooms, showers, wards, prison cells etc. Why is that do you reckon?

Show quote history

Absolutely this. It's like TRAs are deliberately blind.

Duffield supports women, and women's sex based rights. She does not think trans rights trump anyone else's rights. I think she is correct in that stance; that stance is not axiomatically right-wing - it is feminist.

IwantToRetire · 23/02/2023 20:23

VictorStrand · Today 18:28

I can see why someone who isn't a solicitor could try to interpret it that way but that isn't how the law or the Act works.

Dear oh dear - you are making this heavy weather of this.

I am saying that the male entitlement attitudes of those framing this Act influenced how they approached it.

I am saying that stupid male entitlement as an after thought wrote in something to protect women's rights because stupid male entitlement meant what that had initially drafted meant women's rights were lost so they had to create exemptions.

Had they not been those influenced by stupid male entitlement they would automatically have assumed that women's had rights, and then thought about how they could create exemptions for those with a GR that didn't impact on women's rights.

But no, thanks to stupid male entitlement they wrote it back to front.

You seem to be the only person who hasn't understood this.

Why else was there a court case to challenge what the meaning of the word woman was in relation to equal representation on company boards?

Why else is there a petition to change the wording of the EA to ensure that sex means sex?

Because stupid male entitlement had written what their mentality naturally assumes. That women are insignificant and dont need to be thought about.

That is how this situation arose.

What part of institutional sexism do you not understand?

Britinme · 23/02/2023 20:14

Majority view on here as far as I can see.

ijclark · 23/02/2023 20:13

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 20:04

No-one has claimed they are in bed together.

Plenty of people do. But I imagine you will be correcting them if they do it in your earshot, no?

“Plenty of people do”. Ah, “the bloke down the pub says” argument. Always a winner..

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 20:04

No-one has claimed they are in bed together.

Plenty of people do. But I imagine you will be correcting them if they do it in your earshot, no?

SinnerBoy · 23/02/2023 20:01

Oh yeah, awful Jotunphobe that I am!

ijclark · 23/02/2023 20:01

SinnerBoy · 23/02/2023 19:58

ijclark · Today 19:54

Bold move to publicly argue that no right wingers support her position on transgender rights.

As you're on about American Fundamentalists, militia types and Timmy Robinson fans, her views don't really intersect, excluding the one point that transw are men. The first lot want to get rid of them, jail them, kick their heads in etc.

Rosie Duffield most assuredly does not. If they offered her support, she'd shun them, sure as eggs is eggs.

Your whole fake point is that they're in bed together; if not, why would you keep flailing away at it?

No-one has claimed they are in bed together.

But I appreciate your faith that she’d shun far-right types.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 20:00

He identifies as being an intellectual giant, and completely correct. So just who are you to deny that identity, Sinner?

SinnerBoy · 23/02/2023 19:58

ijclark · Today 19:54

Bold move to publicly argue that no right wingers support her position on transgender rights.

As you're on about American Fundamentalists, militia types and Timmy Robinson fans, her views don't really intersect, excluding the one point that transw are men. The first lot want to get rid of them, jail them, kick their heads in etc.

Rosie Duffield most assuredly does not. If they offered her support, she'd shun them, sure as eggs is eggs.

Your whole fake point is that they're in bed together; if not, why would you keep flailing away at it?

MrsOvertonsWindow · 23/02/2023 19:57

TheBiologyStupid · 23/02/2023 19:54

Er, YES ABSOLUTELY - unless you want to stop playing guilt by association?

Show quote history

It' always interesting when the "guilt by association" posters like ijclark are asked to explain why so many male born paedophiles, rapists and sex offenders claim to be women and want access to women and girls in changing rooms, showers, wards, prison cells etc. Why is that do you reckon?

ijclark · 23/02/2023 19:54

SinnerBoy · 23/02/2023 19:53

Supported, backed, whatever - you're still mistaken. And my point stands.

Bold move to publicly argue that no right wingers support her position on transgender rights. Good luck to you with how that pans out for you!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 19:54

So does mine, SB, but he's not interested in a good faith debate.

TheBiologyStupid · 23/02/2023 19:54

ijclark · 23/02/2023 19:47

Not really, no.

Show quote history

Er, YES ABSOLUTELY - unless you want to stop playing guilt by association?

SinnerBoy · 23/02/2023 19:53

Supported, backed, whatever - you're still mistaken. And my point stands.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 19:53

But you don't have the self awareness to realise your own considerable shortcomings in that department.

ijclark · 23/02/2023 19:53

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 19:52

I think kucinghitam was being ironic, ijclark. Your arguments are great for showing lurkers the lack of quality of the debate from your peers.

I think that’s sinnerboy’s job tbf ;)

Ereshkigalangcleg · 23/02/2023 19:52

I think kucinghitam was being ironic, ijclark. Your arguments are great for showing lurkers the lack of quality of the debate from your peers.

ijclark · 23/02/2023 19:51

SinnerBoy · 23/02/2023 19:49

ijclark · Today 19:46

I mean, that was exactly my point. Keep up! Maybe have a chat with your “cousin”.

What, by saying that she's backed by right wing groups, you meant that she's actually not backed by them? Who are you? Humpty Dumpty?

“No-one has suggested she’s financed. “Supported” isn’t shorthand for financial support. Saying she’s backed by right-wing groups is though. But as I recall, the OP didn’t claim that was what was said.”

Read it slowly. Take your time :)