Fears Rishi Sunak will renege on promise to clarify definition of biological sex

where would a lesbian be treated/helped? LGBT services or a rape centre...?

Obviously at women’s services since she would be a woman raped by a man.

Don't know, where would a lesbian be treated/helped? LGBT services or a rape centre...? Hopefully the place where best support can be found.

Either way, these services are increasingly reliant on charity as more real terms cuts bite, thankyou Mr Sunak.

https://rapecrisis.org.uk/news/we-join-80-womens-orgs-in-calling-for-urgent-action-on-the-cost-of-living-crisis/

A Trans women can be raped & i would want them to receive help too, its not really helpful to exclude TW from rape services and the health system, do you think Gay men should also not receive help if subjected to rape?

Shouldn’t that be within the remit of LGBT services, rather than women’s services?

So it's women who can't get funding for rape help and dv not tw!

Exactly.
That is why JKR opened Breira’s Place for women.

A Trans women can be raped & i would want them to receive help too, its not really helpful to exclude TW from rape services

Yes men can be raped too. Men who identify as trans, gay men and straight men can all be victims of rape and there needs to be rape services available to them. Women need separate services from men though.

Also do you think gay men go to women's rape centres? There are male support systems tw just refuse to use them as it doesn't validate them.

You seem very confused. It's not that the funding hasn't been provided for tw victims, it's that it's only provided for them. Any rape crisis centre that has applied in the last 5 years for funding for only bio women has had that finding refused abd to access any gov or charity like lotto funding said they will treat tw as women. If they say they treat separately funding I dropped. Because the entire point I they want to be validated as women even when victims themselves help isn't enough, it has to be in a group of bio women.
And gov charity etc has all agreed this funding basis and refusal of funding. It's entirely known and deliberate. So it's women who can't get funding for rape help and dv not tw!

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there.

'will Labour be any better'

No party can lie this hard, and this badly, and have my trust.

Labour have proven themselves to be extremist in position, yet weak in action. Virtually incapable of speaking straightforwardly.

The over riding outcome of this whole farrago has certainly left the Conservatives looking like the reasonable, sensible and sane option, whatever their policies are.

There should be dedicated rape centres - and shelters for domestic violence victims - especially for transwomen. I'm talking about services for women - actual biological women - where they are not forced into contact with biological men. Can you really not see how women might need those? And that they should be funded?

As for rapes in hospitals, yes, the figures are horrendous. In Wales, where Labour are in charge, there have been at least 178 rapes or sexual assaults in hospitals on the last 3 years. 44% of them were on wards - the figure in England is 13%. (https://nation.cymru/news/freedom-of-information-request-reveals-178-rapes-and-sexual-assaults-in-welsh-hospitals/)

No one will make you vote any particular way, you do you.

But to be clear none of the political parties will keep promises they make. History shows this over and over.

Torys are currently the best bet, that may change. It may even change for the better (I very much doubt that but still)
If you think any party cares about women, you are mistaken.

The only power we have as a class are our votes. At this moment in time I'll vote Tory
If a different party wants my vote then they just have to have policies around this matter to appeal to me.

However all that said, with kier in charge of labour and the fact he is a complete wuss means even if he said the right things, I would not vote for him. When he (ironically) grows a pair of balls I might change my mind.

I know for certain he knows what a woman is, he's just too cowardly to say it. No one needs a coward running this country.

One way of looking at it, is that it's easier and indeed cheaper to make grand social gestures, than it is to spend the money and drive policy, to create meaningful outcomes and results.

It's easy for Starmer to say he's going to "halve VAWG in first term of a Labour government", yet what will he actually do? He'll legislate for further freedoms for males to access female spaces.

Easier, more eye catching, more social justice award-winning.

What it won't be, is progessive towards less VAWG.

Cameron? Content to create some of the greatest levels of family breakdown and consequently VAWG, and poverty-inspired misery. But he can virtue signal by saying his Equal Marriage legislation made him a social champion.

You can ignore everything the parties say or don't say about making things genuinely better for women.

It's what they're not saying about gender policy that to me speaks the loudest.

Yes as you say "Speak" i don't want anymore talk, i want laws changed to protect females and the Tories record is dismal.

From my own experience, in England, not Wales, female patient in a MH setting, sexually abused by a male patient, funding for MH services still being cut in real terms.

A Trans women can be raped & i would want them to receive help too, its not really helpful to exclude TW from rape services and the health system, do you think Gay men should also not receive help if subjected to rape?

Whose fault is it if the funding has not been provided to treat TW separately and thats across the UK.

As I keep saying, look at Wales to see an example of what Labour does when it's in charge of policy, organisation and funding (and has been for 22 years).

There are some things people will agree with, such as free prescriptions. But in most fields the NHS is in as bad a state as in England or worse. And transgenderism is pushed everywhere, including in schools, the health service and rape services (where those which don't include transwomen are refused funding).

..and my post was in response to someone else's musings.

If the Tories don't give a fuck about women - given that it is mainly Tory MPs speaking the most sense on the issue, then Labour certainly don't. It is all window dressing - talking about VAWG whilst simultaneously pushing for male access to female spaces.

I'm an ex Labour party member, and I think you are in for a big disappointment if you think that Labour is going to be that much better. Admittedly, we'll be free of Boris, for a while, and seeing the likes of Rees Mogg lolling around in his entitled way on the benches, but when I look at any number of Labour MPs - including my own - I feel as much dejection.

The majority of men don’t gain benefit nor want this, or it’s not on their radar. They are also not as impacted by females in their sports or spaces, should females feel safe enough to want to do so

It’s the tiny minority of men who are pushing for access and some men but also plenty of women support them

I don't support Trans ideology, the exact opposite.

But this is a thread about the Tories and Rishi Sunak breaking his promises.

& on this i firmly believe the Tories don't give a flying xxxx about women, the public services we need, the sports we play or the children we bring into the world, they had 13 years to show us differently.

Will Labour be any better? i believe so (on public services) but atm the signs on the Trans side of things are not looking good.

That women are often the mst vocal supporters of trans ideology suggests to me the kind of view of women's rights which seeks equality as sameness; which seeks to eliminate all differnce in favour of convergence along the established model of full time workers outside of the home; with children in full time state care, or else women not having children at all.

But even then sexed differneces will remain. Men, as a group, are driven in different ways to women as a group, I suggest. Until you get rid of human biology that will always be the case. Personally, I see transhumanism as a dystopian scenario, not as a liberating one.

Men are not our enemies. I don't think there are hordes of men actively searching for a method with which to oppress women.

A woman is an adult human female or she is nothing. Biology matters.

I'm imagining a scenario where transhumansim becomes even more of a thing; total detachment from the human body - aided by a kind of feminism which sees pregnancy and child-rearing as a burden to be endured, or at best avoided.

Then there will be babies incubated outside of the human body as some sort of solution. The erasure of women will continue until people get to grips with the fact that are differences between the sexes and learn to live with and accept that, and society can then accommodate those differnces in an equitable way.

So I wonder if this overall now more secular Western world has got some men anxiously looking around for a tool to enforce social oppression and to give men back their place at the top of the tree socially and financially.

Now they have found a belief system in gender identity politics which has successfully borrowed a ‘progressive’ cloak because it didn’t directly arise from religious conservatism (though it can fit in well with it- see Iran)

And so they don’t want to let go of it however irrational it is,because it offers a modern put-down to women and lesbians and gay men, and what’s more it is also the perfect men’s sexual access campaign to get in to previously forbidden public spaces with women and children, for any men who want to do that- which doesn’t require the woman to hold any belief system at all. It’s as much of a disaster for safeguarding as religious extremism would be too.

My take is that misogyny and sexism and homophobia have never left us, but that the great gains of the 20th century for women arose from the huge events that society went through- Women’s Suffrage, then the seismic shocks of the two world wars and then the resulting human rights frameworks being built and the European Court of Human rights giving more rights to women democratically. Thank goodness for those frameworks and institutions, I hope they go on forever!

Plus some of the post war baby boomers then changed their expectations away from their parents’ experiences which had been shaped by war, and this was seen in what we now call the successive ‘waves’ of 1960s, 1970s and 1980s feminism. In those societies, democratic Parliaments all gave womens’ rights and lesbian and gay rights big leaps forwards.

But even in those years, religions used to provide men men a socially acceptable free pass to try to replace the restrictions on women and gay people or to think up new ones as society and technology moves forward. I think of how many times abortion rights have been challenged in Parliament, or Clause 28, or lack of lesbian and gay rights to adoption or marriage etc.

In todays’ much more secular democracies religion has lost its grip over huge swathes of the electorate (not all of it). It’s also important to note that some of the most staunch feminists support women’s rights because they are religious. But with that overall loosening grip, plus the pressure of the advance of technology and capitalism into all areas of our lives, we have a future where men in theory could be less socially dominant because their physical strength isn’t so relevant to survival or material success these days.

they belong to

It won't take long at all for the wheels to start coming off the Labour Party in government. They'll not be able to give the unions all they demand; they won't be able to heal the NHS; illegal migration will continue.......

Yes the US is a big factor. Trump seems to be going up in the republican poll stakes, despite criminal case

Individual MPs are no more or less trustworthy whatever party that belong to. Theer are good and bad eggs in every batch.