Did Rachel Reeves change anyone's mind re Labour?

Wes Streeting said something muscular about this the other day in a New Statesman interview - something about how people need to stop 'gaslighting' women and listen to their concerns. It was very interesting language - he specifically used 'gaslighting'. I suspect the SNP situation has given any Labour waverers a big kick up the arse - it won't decide the election, but it is (in Lynton Crosby's terminology) a 'barnacle on the boat' that Labour won't benefit from if they get into power, and the sensibles (including Reeves and Cooper and Streeting) are quite willing to drop the more extremist positions now before they write the manifesto.

It's a net positive for me, certainly. I can't vote Labour where I live anyway but it makes me much happier about the idea of them winning. Seems fairly clear there'll be no return to self-ID if they win the next election.

Thanks, Arabella. My first thought was that RR's use of "spaces" was reminiscent of Starmer's disingenuous letter, and I was going to try to dig out LWD's devastating response.

I think if the whole party purity spirals into death, then something else will come along to start again.

We are stuck between a rock and a hard place, I know what I'm voting right now, and the labour party have less and less time to convince me to vote for them instead. There are still women in the labour party fighting the good fight, I applaud them. Because I wouldn't still be there. But one day maybe soon, they too will give up and let the labour party go. Nothing stopping them then or now setting up a new party that puts women first for a change.

I have an uncomfortable feeling that a month or two before the next election, kier starmer will come out with what we want to hear, very earnestly too. And it'll be too late.
When I saw the mess that was happening (circa 2003) I immediately saw what the issues would be re single sex (I didn't see the language mangling) if I can see that the GRA was going to be terrible and it has since proved to be terrible for women, then why cant the wannabe leader of the country? How stupid do you have to be to not see it? I don't want a stupid man in charge, look how bad bojo was, do we need another imbecile running the country?

As for Rachel, good she said something, sad it's only her saying it.

Ive had years of the left wing saying 'after the revolution, love' to me. I'm not going to take the risk when child safeguarding is at stake.

The EqA and GRC has allowed men into women's prisons, allowed the NHS to lie about a man being on a ward when that man sexual assaulted a woman.

These are government controlled organisation, if they weren't interpreting the EqA correctly, how can private companies. If the government broke the law by allowing it, why arent human rights lawyers all over it? The find the money and time for other issues.

If reeves is waiting for the right time to speak up, how bad is she waiting for it to become?

I need any politician who expects my vote to demonstrate that they understand both the law in principle and how it works in practice. Its not good enough to give subtle hints, we wouldnt settle for that for another issue, why this one.

If you have a Labour MP who you know is suuportive of women'srights and understands that sex matters, then you might feel accepting of voting Labour; but if like me you have a Labour MP who is full on TWAW then there is not one thing that could possibly entice you to vote for that MP. My MP is Kim Johnson ( Liverpool Riverside) and there is not a chance in hell I'll be voting for her.

A lot of leftists are not going to approve of Rache Reeve for a variety of reasons, and one of those is because she is a ' Friend of Israel', never mind the fact that she understands that sex matters.

I've always suspected Rachel Reeve has common sense and I do like her; though it is going to take a lot more for me to vote Labour again. They are still too embedded and at the mercy of their activist base. And too many have said things and then dug themselves in afterwards.

It’s not enough to make me vote Labour - it’s not long ago Keir Starmer was saying it was wrong to say only women had a cervix and said “it was something that SHOULDNT be said”.

I’m going to have to see a lot more consistent evidence before they get my vote. That will include standing up for Rosie Duffield.

I don't trust her, she has the same air amount her as Starmer, Sturgeon, Leyla Moran and Tories like Maria Miller - nose in air ( I have the best thoughts, opinions beliefs and everyone should do as I say, agree with me as if I am God or it's blasphemy).

Someone described this type and their enablers so well in this clip.

twitter.com/deb_fillman/status/1635291809177022467?cxt=HHwWhsDR4Y_P3LEtAAAA

If she says they will uphold the Equality Act, then she needs to be clear that in order to do that, it has to be made clear in the Act, by amending it, that “Sex” in the Act is biological.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mps-to-debate-gender-petition-backed-by-jk-rowling-qh0h0bctk
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4534821c-bf89-11ed-b52d-512231a0c9aa?shareToken=a2be6368ec3ec1a7a1e413545f54b9d9

To sign the petition
www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4758082-petition-to-update-the-equality-act-thread-3

I am very sympathetic towards ordinary women muddling through - I am one myself. However I expect more from politicians who pass laws that shape all our lives, and I think I have every right to do so. Nobody forced them to stand for public office.

I see you saved me the bother of having to type lots. 🖕what she said.

No. She's spoken out far too many times about cracking down hard on benefits claimants and disabled people.

Trans Rights Activists really really hate Reeves and think she will block their advance. Check out what they say about her on twitter. They are right to fear her.

Reeves knows what a woman is, she just won't admit it in full because she has what she thinks are more important priorities to sort out. The thing is Reeves whether we like it or not has the same approach of most older left women. Talk to them in private they break the trans rules. In public they feel pressure to be "nice".

Most people on Mumsnet were in that zone - the Peaking zone, the pre-Peak zone before, often for many years, we should be sympathetic to others there. What people here do not like to admit is that without a push many left women will never leave the peaking zone. If anything men are more likely to do it because there a different consequences for men and women who are not "nice". The two sexes are treated differently and also act differently, whether you think that is down to nature or nurture, or a mix that is a debate that doesn't matter right now.

What matters is Reeves probably slags off Trans ideas in private or in her own head. She knows male rapists are always male and the fact she is happy to indicate it in interviews means she thinks the mantras are dumb. Which is why TRAs hate her.

Obviously it would be better if she was like Rosie or Tonia, BUT if she was like them she might not have the second most important job in the Labour shadow cabinet. As I said she needs a push and we know who will push her. Sadly I don't think it will be anything Mumsnet says. Instead it will be the TRAs doing insane stuff or going for her hard enough that she might fully peak the same way anyone else peaks.

People in the Pre-Peak zone are still important allies to us. Because they can do stuff that peaked people can't. They can use procedure to sideline batshit ideas and no-one can call them out without looking weird, and pushing more people into the pre-Peak zone.

Make your own mind up about voting Labour and who to campaign for in the next General - that is an individual thing there are a LOT of things to consider. The most important thing is the TRA agenda inside Labour is all over the place and it is down to some of them being fanatics. Populist TRA circles online detest Starmer too and condemn him. Notice Stonewall doesn't, instead they meet with him. Because Stonewall is the real issue the most dangerous TRAs are the ones who will compromise and slowly advance. That is HOW they got the power they have now. If we want to win long term we need to be thinking like them. Get our people into power, real power, wherever we can, advance our agenda, raise questions, debate things, avoid demanding purity from people who are not ready to give it yet. I am not asking anyone to back Reeves, what I am asking is to remember that we have to avoid double standards at all costs. Do not treat potential wavering allies as set enemies, especially women, because being a women on the left is hard. Remember the alternative to Reeves is someone like Stella Cressy. Dodds, the previous shadow Chancellor, is way more confused about gender than Reeves is.

Look what happened inside the Tories. The TRAs were incredibly powerful 6 years back. Now they are broken, and part of that is down to women activists inside the party being clever, ruthless and advancing at all costs. Obviously their fight is way easier of course, but there are lessons to be learned.

Because this is about recapturing ALL the parties long term. It is going to take years. Reeves is part of the process. Because whether you like her or not, she is clearly an effective politician who will soon have a lot of power. Better with her than others inside Labour.

Starmer saying that GRA reform is 'not a priority' is also a tiny bit of progress (of a sort - I actually think it does need reform, just not in the way politicians tend to mean it). Very tiny, but it's not something he'd have said a year ago.

Politicians think theyve said sonething profound when they talk about female, biology and women in the same sentence. But as Thelnebriati said, if they are going to ignore the fact that the EqA and GRA is a mess that doesnt make sense, they havent achieved anything.

Yep.

I want someone to tell me how women get our spaces, our words, and our rights back. Without men, of any kind, being included, no matter how the men feel about it.

Its all sleight of hand. SSE are allowed, but not compulsory. Also, services providers seem to be allowed to advertise something for women only and have their own definition of women. Thats bugger all use to me.

I want to know how its possible to give men female id and guarantee sse. I want the government to make it clear that the PC of gender reassignment does not mean men with GR can use womens spaces.

I wont vote for anyone until they demonstrate that they understand the practical consequences of the GRA and EqA.

she said they wouldn't changed EA10.

They could just choose to do what every other fucker does and ignore it, or pretend it says what they want it to say. There don't seem to be any repercussions for orgs like Stonewall, do there?
I was about to say I'd wait until their next manifesto, but remembered they aren't obliged to actually do anything they put in it.

Nancy Kelley, CEO of Stonewall, was invited by David Evans to address all party staff in a zoom only this week, further contributing to misapprehensions which many staff still hold.

Hmmm...I wonder what Nancy Kelley had to say.