Starmer insults women’s intelligence to blame Sunak for judicial failures when it was Starmer’s CPS that failed to prosecute rapists

What about all the Labour Women thrown out of the party for believing sex is real? What about the Women's groups frozen out of having stalls at Labour conferences? I can't see that, after allowing this to happen, Keir Starmer is likely to ditch his Self ID policy, as promised at that Pink News speech. If he's not simply trying to brush it under the carpet until all the stupid, bigoted women catch up with the progressive superior understanding he has, then he's doing a very good impression that he is.

Yes, can't even think there was anything remotely controversial....I mentioned my MP refusing to meet with her constituents and saying " she was never going to change her mind and that we should stop wasting our time".

The hair trigger, censorius nature of the contemporary so called Progressive Left is quite. disturbing.

Interesting it was deleted. Compared to some stuff I’ve read on here aimed at people not voting Labour it was pretty mild

Of course I can - I said you are entitled to your view. Where have I said otherwise?

Can you not deal with the fact that many of us have simply given up on the Labour Party - without having to suggest that we wish to prop up a Tory party? My vote has to mean something - and nobody should be voting for a party that completely disregards its own members, or whose own MP refuses to meet with their own constituents.

I didn't report you - perhaps you might find out who did.

What saying that some people clearly prioritise party allegiance over protecting the integrity of their sex?

enlighten

So much self righteousnes and inability to deal with straight talking is one of the reasons I've become disillusioned with the Left.

I didn't report it but I did read it. It was pretty rude!

I cannot read my view as someone appears to have reported it - for what reason, I'm unsure. Can you enligten me?

The Labour party in my city is thoroughly corrupt, incompetent and toxic and that adds to the problem if you are/or were a natural Labour voter. The best thing for my city is that the Labour council be voted out. Problem is people are so attached to voting that way as it forms a seemingly essential part of their personal and social identity.

@NotHavingIt - you are entitled to your view. But you can't deny that if the Conservatives had a sincere desire to address this issue, they could do it pretty much now.

My view is based on what Starmer has said. Is it enough for me? No. Do I see a shift, yea. Do I think he's likely to navigate the next election on TWAW. Absolutely not.

@Datun - you could ask the same question of the Conservatives who could at the stroke of a pen change the law to remove this issue and alter the Equality Act to deal with "biological sex".

Instead, they will use that in the next election to barter women's rights for votes. Now, I'd say the Conservative Party are far nastier because they have the power. They know the issue. They don't act.

As for Labour, I imagine the reason they don't is quite simple. There's little to be gained by doing this publicly, but what I see is the slow movement away from TWAW and a working towards having a basis to say "no". Is that decisive? No. Is it politically wise, yes.

The truth is many of us now spoil our ballots. The vote has to mean something, and I certainly will not vote for a party that completely disregards women's dignity, rights and protections. And i used to be a Labour party member.

Some people's allegiance to the Labour party is clearly more addictive than their feeling for the integrity of their own sex.

Indeed. Except the feminist board of the biggest gathering of women in history.

And actually, if you stray away from the feminist board, most of the women here are in agreement.

But count me out of GC' s trying to use the issue as a way to help the Tories stay in power

That's probably a contradiction in terms to be honest. Gender critical feminists don't tend to be tory supporters.

We're just waiting for labour to step up and say that men aren't women.

Do you have any idea how many women would write their X in blood, if that was the case?

Up to you if you want to stay away. Although posters always post this rather than just do that.

I guess it’s aligned to Labour’s view on it, just pretend everyone’s fine and read something else instead

How dismissive and patronising! And so cliched. Next you'll be telling us we rely on The Daily Mail to form a view.

Spend a lot less time on here for precisely this reason.

No problem at all with people criticising Labour's position on the issue or seeking to improve it. But count me out of GC' s trying to use the issue as a way to help the Tories stay in power

99.9% aren’t talking about it, or was it no one was talking about it

Sod that.

The Conservatives both created this monster and defended it practically and the Labour Party lost its head by engaging in a debate which alienated many of its own supporters and they now find they are stuck with.

But this is what I don't get. Why they stuck with it? Are transactivists filling their coffers? Not as far as I know.

So they are 'stuck' with an ideology they disagree with? Why? What are they scared of?

Who else are they going to be scared of.

The problem is actually that the Labour party has never engaged in a debate - and it even suppresses its own MPs who dare to try.

Btw I do not see self ID as a party issue. I am totally disgusted at the practical elements (sex offenders in women's prisons) and the ideological elements (TWAW).

Both parties seem very free to barter and play about with the rights of women. Both are highly misogynistic since they would not dare to do this with any other group.

The Conservatives both created this monster and defended it practically and the Labour Party lost its head by engaging in a debate which alienated many of its own supporters and they now find they are stuck with.

However, on criminal Justice that is firmly on the Conservatives for cutting the budget year on year to deliver convictions. It's like the health service. You have to fund it, if you don't, crime isn't detected, the evidence gathering fails and prosecutions fall.

No, it was not.