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

I'm starting to think this might be a gift. He has said 0.1% of women have a penis so now we can distinguish between women with a penis and women without a penis which will opens the door to questions about whether women with penises should be allowed in the same spaces as women without penises. I think this will highlight the absurdity of TWAW, no one thinks a person with a penis is a woman.

Or they will back it and include not affirming your child's identity as abuse. We've seen it elsewhere to devastating effect.

Meanwhile, WPUK have had some replies

https://twitter.com/womansplaceeuk/status/1642234148478763008?s=46&t=WHoOZ3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65152581

Many MPs will try to block this as it applies to them over Queer theory, in my opinion.

Duh.
Wrong pic.

LizzieSiddal · Yesterday 22:04

What makes me so angry is all the bullshit of “a toxic debate on both sides”.

Snap.

That has crossed the line once and for all for me, especially thinking about what has been happening to children.

That's quite a lot of peen in women's prisons. Does Starmer think women are stupid?

(We know the answer to that).

RubyTrees · Today 07:23
At the moment "not many" = 48,000.

And that’s before ‘reform of the GRC,’ as promised by
Kier Starmer, would mean any man at all who says they are a woman ( nothing required but saying they are) could sue for discrimination if someone tried to say a space or association is for women (biological) only.

All women only spaces would be open house ‘Gender’- woman spaces.

If I was standing against any of them, I'd be making then into leaflets

The only answer is to repeal the GRA, if you haven't reached this conclusion yet - in my opinion - you are a trans activist lite.

But at some point he’ll realise there is no compromising with TRAs

Without wanting to feed the argument that we’re just as bad as the TRAs (because we’re fucking not!), there’s no compromise as far as a lot of women are concerned either. TWAM, no woman has a penis, you can’t change your biological sex, no men in women-only spaces/sports, end of.

Also, the ripx4nutmeg thread above is brilliant! I’m going to save the individual memes quoting what MPs have said and splatter them over their Twitter feeds come the next election.

Starmer thinks he’s proposing a pragmatic, middle-ground compromise. But at some point he’ll realise there is no compromising with TRAs. They don’t simply want respect, of to be just left alone to get on with their lives - they want to take over.

Ye gods. starmer and his advisors really do think women are stupid and we will fall for this duplicitous nonsense

No woman has a penis Keir, HTH.

Because they are desperately hoping the TRAs - both the violently hostile Twitter mob and the faction within the party - won’t notice and Starmer can get away with being all things to all people. I suspect he is running very scared of a Guardian headline accusing him of “transphobic rhetoric”. His arse must have the mother of all splinters in it.

@Needmoresleep well done for standing! Interesting comment above about Rishi, I’m naturally a fairly lefty person but my MP has come out in support of women’s rights (hurrah!) so much as it sticks in my craw a bit to vote Tory at the next election, I may well do. I also trust Sunak/Hunt more on the currently-precarious economy than I do Labour. I know someone who is involved in the local Labour Party and she is full-on TWAW (including having TW as friends) so I don’t doubt that they’re all knee-deep in Kool-Aid there.

Really good luck to you. I'll check my independent candidates ahead of GE.

I had to give it a lot of thought as nothing much appealed. I started with Green because I care about the environment, but literally got kicked out when I confessed I was GC. (Some man had phoned me to ask if I would be a candidature them, but instead told me he would take me off the membership list!) Not Labour obvs. One thing I learnt with the Greens is that I don't have the patience for endless "democracy". Not LibDems either.

The Conservatives have some good women's groups and "the Baroness" who I have met. In London in particular there seems to be a bit of a revival with some good women coming forward, a good proportion of whom are from ethnic minorities.

I am not standing in London. Long story, but I spent a decade of commuting to care for my mother whilst my kids were in school in London. They have left home and and DH is working from home 50% of the time, and was 100% for the two lockdown years, so I am standing there.

Its fascinating. The local party is small, and, well, a boys club. (Probably true of all parties - just different boys.) It is interesting how, whatever party, such a small number of people select their MP and then effectively their party leader. If women are not involved, and most are simply too busy to put the time in, we will be represented by people who have no interest in or understanding of women's issues.

I have found it quite a tough journey. Lots of stuff to master in a short time. Issues, policies, IT, local politics (rampant!), even how to pace yourself. I am also uncomfortable with a couple of local policies - inevitable, few are able to take a complete slate from the get-go, and also seem to be viewed as alarmingly left wing. . Interestingly the two people who really reached out have been women. Straightforward nice women. I would have my doubts about the independents I am up against. I don't know them, but one set seem to be new-style LibDems in all but name. The other disaffected Tories. From what I hear some of the Council's nuttier Trans day of Remembrance/pronoun stuff was driven by one or two obsessive independents, who were given concessions in return for support elsewhere. No one thought it mattered.

I will try to write a "ask her to stand" post when it is over. Actually it could be ask "sensible people" to stand. Voters should have a choice. Not simply sit in the middle thinking there is no one they want to vote for.

Can't wait for 4 May and for it to be over. And if I get in, unlikely, I will do my best to ensure that my ward is pothole and littler free, and that people who need help to access local services, get it. Vote me!

And Keir. There are a whole load of people wanting to vote for you, who at the moment can't. The people who look at me and say "13 years" but who, at the end of the conversation say that they will vote for me, and that if Rishi keeps him head down and steadies the ship, they might also vote for him.

“A year before a general election”

but only a month before local elections.

I still think, that like most men, Starmer doesn't really think TWAW and has only been on that route because he's taken the mood of the country and figured it's a vote winner. It's only really come to light recently what an unpopular view it is.

The tide is turning nationally. Hell, it's even turning on this board. There's things you can say on here now that a couple of months ago would have gotten you a ban. We're still working out what we can now say.

And out in the real world people and politicians are also trying to work out what they can say. If I say TWAM at work, then I'll still probably get ostracised, but I can probably have a conversation about women's sports now that I wouldn't have felt comfortable about a few months ago.

Starmer is probably having the same thoughts. He cant just flip completely, as journalists would have a field day, so it's baby steps. And he'll be worrying about how far the party will follow him, and how far the voters will follow him.

None of us really know how much the mood of the public has changed on this, and he's still got a year before a general election to work it out.

Reverse ferret or insincere weasel?

He is still confusing sex and gender though.

Woman = sex, transwoman = gender.

So when he claims that 0.01 % of women have a penis , he should clarify that of the population that “identify” themselves as women 0.01% are not actually women , but transwomen.

Women who are women constitute 100% of the population who are women. Even if they identify themselves as transmen, or other genders.

In any case, since we aren't allowed to challenge a man in the ladies any more, its a moot point if they have a GRC or not.

I want them to clarify how they intend to change the GRA, and if they intend to trap women in marriage by removing the spousal exit clause. How do they think that could be legal? He's a lawyer, he should understand this!

If in Keir Starmer's world there are 48,000 'women with a penis' in the UK, and we know that circa 6,000 Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) have been issued in total, then Keir Starmer is presumably saying that 42,000 people are already self-identifying?

Therefore Keir Starmer accepts self-ID is already happening and is fine with that?

(Apologies if I have that all wrong.)

Anyone cynical would think there were local elections in the offing or something……..

Yes he is lying and it absolutely is intentional. It’s hard to know who I dislike more, Corbyn or Starmer. Both have meant I don’t vote Labour anymore.

Really good luck to you. I'll check my independent candidates ahead of GE.

I've spent my whole life giving politicians and the police the benefit of the doubt.

No more.

Actions not words.

Problem is, Starmer only has two modes...occasionally angry, man of action...ie purge of Corbyn and anti semitism.

And his fake pained caring look, apparently virtuous, but continues to vacillate on areas that need a principled opinion.

For some reason, he can move against anti semites in his party, but not misogynist TRAs.

Totally bogus.

Neither this article or the 'Stevenage women' article have been linked on Labour or Starmer's twitter pages. The article about self ID not being a priority wasn't either.
The article about 'modernising the outdated GRA was linked by Labour twitter but not KS.

He is lying to us, again, and it's intentional.