Starmer in favour of clarifying Equalities Act

Of course, we need to protect women from those who might seek to abuse them and where that means biological women, yes, it must mean biological women primarily

No not primarily as that implies a secondary, solely is the word you were looking for.

And?

Have you actually looked at the map distribution on this? It's rather telling in terms of limited demographics. Or are you aware how easily gamed government petitions are?

Meanwhile lots of women have said they are too scared to put their name on the other petition out of fear and that STILL has over 100k. The national distribution is much more even and has a clear pattern in Scotland.

It is fascinating to look at.

There's a petition in circulation to not change the Equalities Act. It has quickly gained over 100,000 signatures, and has more signatures than petition to change the Equality Act (which has been running for longer and has been shared by JK Rowling to millions of people).

A few points you may want to consider in your analysis of the Tories:

Firstly, while the Tories have a theoretical majority of 70+, their MPs have got into the habit of rebelling on a large scale and plenty would ignore the whip just to irritate Rishi.

Secondly, there are a large number of MPs who are either leaving the HoC at the next GE or who's seat has disappeared. How much leverage will the whips have over them?

Thirdly, whipping your MPs through the lobbies on a "matter of conscience" isn't a particularly good look. Ask the Scots about voting on the GRR?

Finally, a SI has to be adopted by both houses. How confident do you think Rishi is of getting it though the Lords?

It should be "game over" @Apollo441. But the Tories aren't going to introduce any legislation to protect women's spaces for KS to back. Even with their sizable majority the party that knows what a woman is doesn't think they can pass it.

Or maybe they just can't be arsed because they don't give a shit about the women whose rights they have destroyed.

Yes this exactly. Be clear on this or you don't get my vote.

100% agree. And this is what we need to keep on saying.

Hi, Keir or any of your people who are on here:

It's 100% of women are biological women or don't waste my time. Anyone who is not a biological woman is a man.

More than happy for my taxes to be spent on safe third spaces. But men do not belong in women's single sex spaces. If men don't like this, this is men's problem to fix not women's.

He can’t be trusted and uses opaque and deflecting language to get away from problems.

Yes.

And based on those observations, that makes him not really someone you'd want to ask to run a country.

True. They can stick their fingers in their ears and say women aren’t talking about this and constantly obfuscate on the issue, it only lowers what people think of him.

He can’t be trusted and uses opaque and deflecting language to get away from problems.

Starmer backs the change because he knows it will sound good to the majority of do gooder virtue signallers who believe in equality and have no idea what the issues really are. The Equality Act = Good you see. "We can sell improving the Equality Act to the masses" says Starmer.

It also gets him out of a bind. If the current government changes the equality it's no longer Starmers issue to deal with. It would be much harder to roll back on women's rights from that position. It's toxicity means he wouldn't go there.

It's a way to dodge to subject if he wins election. He gets to support equality and say some women have a penis. It's merely playing both sides for electoral purposes and so he can kick the subject into touch if he becomes PM.

Perhaps someone has reminded him that Local Government elections are on 4 May. Not the time to enrage your activists, especially in woke places like Brighton.

As I have said before from my canvassing gender does not seem to be a voting issue. However lack of trust in Keir does seem to be. You don't need to read much of this board to understand why the two are related.

There is still a staunch belief that biological females should not have things or say things that may make special biological male people sad.

Including equality of access, safety and humanity.

And that good females wouldn't expect such equality or wish to retain laws making male people sad.

I would have to be out of my tiny little mind to vote for that.

You think? It appears he's doing the opposite
https://mobile.twitter.com/K_F_P/status/1644033751817547787

KS is definitely manoeuvring Labour into a less polarised stance but there's still a lot of ambiguity there.
I'm heartened that it does show that some politicians are listening though as we wouldn't have heard this a year or two ago.
But yes, I would also like to see Lisa Nandy or Angela Rayner interviewed and find out their views on this - if it's TWAW is still a staunch belief held by senior Labour people then I couldn't trust them in Government as I think this wing would influence policy a lot..

Yes. This is the key thing. It limits the degree of transition and makes it clear: biological female humans are a specific group, and their equality and meeting their needs and rights requires that they have an identity of their own and the ability to be grouped by that biological characteristic.

Regardless of how sad and distressing this is for some biological males. TWATW and that's great. But TWANW.

It's pissed off the trans crowd particularly as he refers to women's rights as a separate thing to trans rights and they are all like 'but we ARE women'. ( yes, I lurk on reddit transuk. Always good to know what the other side are thinking)

But the rhetoric of women's rights v trans rights is becoming established which is a GOOD thing as it means, implicitly, that TW are not W

Shadow domestic violence and safeguarding minister @jessphillips says not all women are the same and that there should also be "specialist spaces for transgender victims of domestic abuse"

The language needs to be clearer but she’s calling for third spaces. That’s a GOOD thing.

Philips is a coward, just like Starmer. She is a betrayer of all those women, & their families, whose names she has the huge responsibility of reading out every year. Shame on her

Absolutely. Bloody ridiculous from Jess Phillips who COULD have done so much on this but put her career first and, as you say, weasels her way around facts and truth. Women cannot trust Labour at all.

Why does this shit always have to be wheeled out with reference to Johnson?

Starmer has two kids and seems not to have a fucking clue what a woman is.

He's like mist, you can barely make it out, it swirls around, and any attempt to pin it down is pointless.

He should have enough splinters in his arse by now to rebuild Hadrians Wall. I cannot take to that man. He can talk for five minutes and at the end of it you still have no idea what he thinks, what he believes, what he stands for, or what he would do in power.

It’s weird isn’t it? BJ came out with a clear and sensible statement and appeared like a grown-up and everyone else turns into an impression of him on this topic - waffle waffle, both sides, heat light waffle waffle, look, A SQUIRREL! etc.

There is a very, very simple way out of this for Labour.

Simply state that they will look at the law, in which single sex spaces are for single sex bodies.

And look at the funding which states that 0.01% of people consider themselves 'trans' [as per the census] so they will look at the funding that goes to shelters/prisons/ etc and ensure that 0.01% of the funding and spaces are put aside for 'trans' people.

Sorted.