How can we prevent the trans issue from being a gift to the right wing?

Yes they certainly are taking us for fools. Or trying to at least. I don’t think they’ll succeed. Most people can see that these are weasel words that deliberately disguise the fact that Labour’s underlying beliefs and intentions haven’t changed in the slightest.

They are the fools.

They are taking us for fools with their word games

It has been for a long time...didn't KS say something months ago about 99% of women not having penises?

And it’s fucking insulting and patronising of Labour to think they can weasel out of this with word games.

Because it's not about the words. It's never been about the words. It's about the people. Messing around with which people which words mean isn't changing anything real. Female people still exist. There will still be social and physical consequences (good and bad) to being female and only female people will experience them. "Fixing" that by fudging words changes nothing and it's a fucking insult for Labour to pretend it does and think we are too stupid to realise what they are doing.

As an aside Tracey is a name that has traditionally been used by both sexes, it just is now more commonly used for women. A bit like Dorian/ Dorien.

@AdamRyan you might want women to have rights to single sex spaces but that's not the labour party position, so your opinion is somewhat irrelevant as to whether what KS has stated is enough to make me confident to vote labour.

@Signalbox
Completly agree. I fear this is Labour's solution to the knot they've got themselves into. We get pulled deeper down the rabbithole from women's penises to female penises.

The more I dwell on it the more I think there is a sleight of hand going on here.

Labour are suddenly prepared to say that women are "adult females" and that they should be entitled to "safe spaces" away from men.

But at the same time they also want to make it a lot easier for men to get a GRC allowing them to change the sex marker on their birth certificate to female.

We currently have the likes of Robin White (high profile activist and discrimination lawyer) stating on Twitter that they are an "adult human female".

At this point Labour need to be explicit about what they understand by the word "female" and whether or not men with GRCs become female for the purpose of the SSEs in the EA, single sex services, sports, spaces etc.

https://twitter.com/moira_robin/status/1684346704793944066

The responsibility for increasing support for right wing parties lies with the left wing who have forgotten about the truly disadvantaged and marginalised members of society in favour of supporting straight predominantly white males with a word redacted but we all know what it is.

It’s been many decades since UK labour hasn’t sneered and looked down on working class voters. Libdems were proud of trading disability rights for Con agreement on a performative green policy they wanted to push through during the coalition.

If this was a side issue for Labour/LibDem/Green parties I’d vote for one of them but they are almost completely focussed on upholding what these men want to the exclusion of any good Social, Liberal or Green policies and action why would I vote for them.

@nothingcomestonothing

" How is using someone's name treating them as a man or a woman? "

Absolutely. This is what I would like to know. If MN could stop deleting my posts, maybe I could find out.

Disappointed (but not surprised) that my post was deleted.

For anyone who wonders what my crime was, I simply asked why a man might want to become transwoman.

I'll just leave it there this time without adding my suggestions of why he (she/they/it/meow) might.

You said, you are happy to treat men as women when sex doesn't matter. But the only example you've given is using someone's first name. How is using someone's name treating them as a man or a woman? How does one treat a man as a woman? If you call me Raj do you treat me differently if you think it's short for Rajani than if you think it's short for Rajesh?

Imagine I run a book club just for lesbians, or a feminist literary review just for women, or a lesbian dating club etc etc. Sex based rights surely absolutely are a bar for men/transwomen to enter.

Women join the WI and other women's only spaces for companionship away from men. Surely they should be able to keep it that way.

Go and form your own gatherings, the vast majority of women in these situations never had a vote to allow men/transwomen in, and if they did, the overwhelming majority would keep the status quo.

This is zero sum game on definitions, and totally binary on adherence to material reality ie the belief in trans is to thumb your nose at biological science.

I'll also throw natural justice in there as well.

EXACTLY. Gender is bollocks. It doesn't matter what pronouns people use or how they choose to dress.

Sex based segregation where it matters is what most people want.

If Jane then insists on using the women's toilets, on the grounds that everyone believes that Jane is a woman, and you're not one of the women privileged enough to be able to use a mixed sex space and kindly continue enabling Jane's personal fiction for their happiness, is there skin off your nose then?
Yes. Hence why I said biological sex should be protected 🙄

I wondered that. In this contest, provided they leave a clean seat that's down (which wasn't the case every time I used it) I'm not too fussed.

But I'm surprised the hosting company (they have multiple offices globally) doesn't see it as a one-sided look.

Because men must have a choice of all the options @grass321

It's not easy. But being nice and polite and kind and afraid is what got women into this unholy mess.

I was working in a large serviced office in central London today. There were two loos (each an individual cubicle/room). One had a mens sign, the other was gender inclusive (or similar wording),

Which got me thinking - why have one men's? Shouldn't it be either both inclusive or men's, women's and inclusive? From a practical point of view, they're individual rooms so it didn't really matter but it looked a bit strange.

I once met a 'Jane' at a party. He was dressed in a patterned, floaty frock and with a lot of bangles and heavy make-up. I was wearing straight-leg Levis, boots, chunky leather belt. a crisp white dress shirt and a waistcoat with discreet self-coloured embroidery. No make-up, no jewellery. 'Jane' spent quite a lot of time asking me why I didn't make more of myself because, apparently, I could look quite attractive if I tried.

What does it mean, though, to “treat someone as a woman”? In situations where sex is relevant, we agree that we shouldn’t be forced to treat him as a woman, right? And in situations where sex is not relevant, shouldn't we be treating everyone the same?

But that's not treating Jane as a woman, that's just using Jane's name I don't care what people call themselves. I knew a man called Tracey once, all that time was I actually treating him as a woman, because Tracey is (now) a female name?

I really scratch my head over the Euroskeptic -open borders thing.

It's pretty basic, isn't it? Which is why those parties who can't even adhere to these basic principles stick out like a sore thumb & are not worth voting for.

Tbf no one cares if other people try to register all pronouns correctly, it’s not that interesting

The issues arise when work or schools compel pronouns and gives sanctions if not followed, or allow males into female spaces, sports or take prizes

If pp want to chat to Jane and not mention their dress - why would you? Then up to them

If Jane then insists on using the women's toilets, on the grounds that everyone believes that Jane is a woman, and you're not one of the women privileged enough to be able to use a mixed sex space and kindly continue enabling Jane's personal fiction for their happiness, is there skin off your nose then?

When you have to state that you cannot use a mixed sex space, the reason being that Jane is actually male, knowing what is likely to happen to you, is there skin off your nose then?

If you don't dare speak out and just can't use toilets at work any more - or go swimming because Jane's joined your local swimming club, or go to your lesbian group because Jane's joined it and is keen to enforce that male people are lesbians too and for the attendees to express their openness to overcoming their genital preference, any skin off your nose yet?

This is the issue. It's the gateway drug. Its all very nice and polite to comply and enable a male person in this way, and yes it stops rows and bad feeling and tears and tantrums and threats and all hell breaking loose. But people do this thinking it's a social contract in which they pretend politely up to a point, and the person they are pretending for does not really believe they're a woman, and will not push their personal fiction to the point of harming women.

In a casual social situation I am not going to start WW3 by pointedly misgendering a stranger, particularly if they're nice to chat to and I don't want to offend them. But I will as far as I possibly can just avoid the pronoun they don't want, and I won't actively lie to them as they would like, because I'm not going to say Hail Marys I don't believe in or agree that this other person gets to control me and my perceptions. And I'm very, very aware that this nice person may be one of the ones who then takes that inch I give via pronouns and starts demanding the next mile.

It's not easy. But being nice and polite and kind and afraid is what got women into this unholy mess.