Keir Starmer - Trans Rights Can't Override Women's Rights

He signed a pledge saying that Labour would implememt Self ID.

But because of what happened in Scotland with the GRR and to Nicola Sturgeon, and the fact that this issue is simply gaining more prominence, he is now suggesting that " we have to take the public with us" - by which he means he still wants to implement Self Id but it might take a while longer than some had hoped.

He still seems to think that he's going to be able to make it all go away......and he'll deal with it further down the line. Head in sand as usual. But because he knows that women's issues are important he's putting all of his eggs into the 'tackling violence against women and girls' and maybe into better menopause provision.

The Labour party now has a fundamental cognitive dissonance when it comes to sex based rights and to women and girls. It is one that they cannot ignore, but one that they also cannot even begin to resolve until they commit to reality and the recognition of biological sex.

Lastly he said that this just isn't important, never raised when Labour are out campaigning.

Fuck me, this really boils my piss.

They say that it's not an issue because no-one is raising it on doorsteps but those that DO raise it are ignored or shut down. How can you hear when you've got your fingers in your ears while you shout, "LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU"?

Time to get used to this settling narrative.

Starmer doesn't want to, or can't (I'm still not sure which) go to the position we would mostly here want.

The policy will be that of course biological women don't have tackle, but there's a very small number (he used to say 0.5% but now settling on 0.1%) that ID as TW, and of course possess said tackle.

And that women's spaces will be protected, but the 0.1% must also have protections. And that he and the party will update the GRA to make these protections more, well, protective.

Throw in beefed up hate laws to crack down on violence against women...the 99.9% without tackle and the 0.1% with said tackle.

And that trans youth will be protected from bias and phobia by extending conversion ban to them.

--

Whatever you think of Starmer, he walks everyday into shadow cabinet meetings with two close colleagues with trans children, his inner circle are all TWAW, other than Rosie, there is no TRA dissent, and GC Labour women MPs are too fearful to pipe up.

This means that the whole Labour Party is now about threading the trans message thread thru the extremely tight eye of the electoral needle.

Starmer is intelligent enough to know from Sturgeons experience that he cannot go gung ho to Self ID...that can wait until 2028.

But for 2024, I believe this will now be the settled message.

And I truly believe the vast majority of female voters will give him the benefit of the doubt.

Your first point is spot on.

A prosecution barrister will argue that the defendant is guilty even while having strong doubts about the evidence.

A defence barrister in a criminal case will argue that his/her client is not guilty, even when believing strongly that the client is, in fact, guilty.

It's what they do. It's ingrained. Note that Starmer was a criminal defence barrister primarily.

If he had some intelligence he surely would see the massive huge, ginormous mistake hes making, not even with the some women have a penis shtick, but the no control of his party. I'd expect at least most of the time for a leader to have some clue how to lead his party if he wants to lead an entire country.

Yes you would think so but can anyone name me a Labour leader from the last 50 years, other than Tony Blair, who's been in control of their party? It seems to be a problem that's as old as modern politics.

A coward wouldn't want the world laughing at them unless they were a comedian, I have never seen Keir tell any kind of joke, the man is now a joke.

A coward would be sitting in solidarity and anonymous with Rosie Duffield not going to the media announcing a woman has a penis, that's what someone with a mind not working as well as it one did or Angela Rayner - would do.

Lastly he said that this just isn't important, never raised when Labour are out campaigning.

This statement has been frequently rolled out and has equally frequently been contradicted by doorstep campaigners. But the ideologically captured campaigners just dismiss those individuals as transphobes and won’t feed it back.

If he had some intelligence he surely would see the massive huge, ginormous mistake hes making, not even with the some women have a penis shtick, but the no control of his party. I'd expect at least most of the time for a leader to have some clue how to lead his party if he wants to lead an entire country.

I can only assume it is cowardice. Which again hardly bodes well to lead the country, make difficult decisions, be a man in power.

Barristers have to argue whatever case they are given. That is what Kier is trying to do - argue the gender ideology case. I wonder if he has really stopped to think if he believes in what he is arguing.

Brains do slow as we age but this is offset by experience and knowledge. At some point though the slowing brain outweighs the benefit of experience. This is normally older than 60 but I would say Biden has clearly passed that point.

The wise cowardly MPs are the ones sitting with Risie Duffield agreeing with her in anonymity, who never ran for leadership at this time because they knew this would happen and looking at idiots like Streeting who lead this stuff in Labour- making fools of themselves.

Maybe Starmer is not in decline and has a AGP type fethism about the world laughing at him saying women have a penis?

I hope he realises his mistake when it’s too late

As did Sturgeon, and to a lower extent Penny M

KS isn't playing with words or trying to pull the wool over our eyes, he confirmed on LBC this morning that indeed some women have a penis. He said for the 'vast majority' it's about biology but he is trying to bring a 'common sense proposition' and a 'respectable' discussion. He is not prepared to ignore those women who have a penis evidently. He mentioned the 99.9% but that's just an example number, could be different.

Lastly he said that this just isn't important, never raised when Labour are out campaigning.

If you want a listen it's on Nick Ferrari this morning at about 2 hrs 31 in.

Looks like this isn't being talked about enough on the doorstep ladies, perhaps we need to make Kier a bit more aware by raising it and emailing our local Labour candidate.

I take LidlChocolate's point that we're far too squeamish sometimes about confronting our inevitable decline and mortality (if that is the point?). But I don't think Starmer's intellect is the problem here. I think his problem is that - along with pretty much every Labour leader since Blair - he is not in control of his party, and that includes his deputy and his comms team.

All women will have penis, because the people formerly called women have a new name, generally menstruator but for those that dont menstruate for whatever reason, cervix owner and for those who neither menstruate or have a cervix some other name will happen, maybe old hag or dragon, harpy, crone something like that.

In his younger years as a top lawyer he would have the logic to see the trap that one day this ideology would make him an international laughing stock that he now is. I am just about average IQ with brain damage and a neurodivergent brain and it was immediately obvious to me.

It's not age, it's cowardliness and the need to be seen as being virtuous

I don’t think it’s Starmer’s age. It’s the left gender ideology - it renders a politician of any age incoherent because it’s lies.

It’s really hard to sound reasoned if the foundation of the discussion has no biological basis.

It’s why it’s taking down each of them. Hopefully more to come.

The question was asked why had a legal mind like Starmers not work anymore as well as it once did, as you say he has declined to the level of 2 GCSEs Rayner brain functionality and Drama student Truedeau.

Rayner, Nandy etc would be better because they're younger?

Trudeau, Ardern?

Really?

Teachers and NHS staff didn't object over here. You had a tiny minority who resigned and joined GC groups, most pimped out students and patients to AGPs, yet these same professionals expect an abused mother to leave her home and income to safeguard children, double standards for sacred castes.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2023/0403/1367841-agsi-conference/

Biden, Trump and Starmer are old men, that's my opinion, people take offence that's for them to deal with their own emotional stuff, 60 is old! They are too old to be running in an election to run a country, the lot of them, in my opinion.

Sigh people take it as a personal slight or attack.

The immune system, everything starts to decline with age, it's a fact as it is a fact that y chromosomes are in a male body.

I may not be a woman but my mother was. She was a woman, an adult human female. She breastfed me for nearly 3 years. What I am most concerned about in that statment he has made is the 1% of women who have penis'. That says a lot about what he really thinks. Be careful ladies. This man is hoping to pull the wool.

And yet I’m that age and my brain still seems to be chugging along. Tony Benn was still as incisive as ever, along with too many others to name. Starmer is only 60 ffs, he was talking like this in his 50s when retirement isn’t even on the horizon for most people.

Ageing does slow you down, it’s true. But Starmer seems to have lost his ability to reason. He doesn’t seem to realise (as PPs pointed out) that other people can easily see through lies and prevarications. Or does he genuinely believe humans can change sex?