Starmer Radio 5 "A woman is an Adult female"

Guardian article on the divide between labour and Scottish labour on women's tran's rights

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/aug/03/keir-starmer-policy-split-scottish-labour-gender-recognition

Hilariously, at the end it seems to suggests that trans people aren't that arsed about self id anyway.

Am just adding this as a bit late LBG Alliance have made a statement re shift (really?) in Labour Party.

Our statement on the Labour Party's stance on Self-ID.

It's time to talk.

We have long argued that Self-ID would allow predatory men to claim a trans status in order to access women’s and girls’ spaces. And that it’s insulting to suggest a man can self-identify as a lesbian, or a woman can self-identify as a gay man. We ran an ad, back in 2019, to explain our position.

At that time, our ad was cited as ‘evidence’ of our bigotry and meant we were refused a stand at the Labour Party Conference.

It was extremely disappointing. We’ve always found that face-to-face conversations at conferences and events are ideal opportunities to exchange constructive ideas on achieving equity for all. It’s how we’ve won so many friends in such a short time.

Now we are pleased that Self-ID looks likely to be shelved. And we are encouraged by the fact that politicians, on all sides, have signalled a willingness to debate, discuss and consider the evidence before making up their minds on these important issues.

We say bravo to all those who have realised that ‘no debate’ leads to bad policy making. And thank you to all those who, having listened to the evidence, decide they will do the right thing and tell the world they’ve changed their minds.

This shift has come too late for this year’s Labour Party Conference. Our application for a stand was refused. But we’re determined to amplify the voices of same-sex attracted people regardless. That’s why we will be holding our own event, along with our friends from Lesbian Labour and The Gay Men’s Network, in Liverpool on Sunday 8 October. Please check our website for details in the coming weeks.

We hope that next year we will be attending all of the party conferences and we look forward to many positive discussions about issues of vital importance to lesbians, gay men and bisexuals.

We are delighted that the time to talk has truly arrived.

Kate Barker, Chief Executive Officer
https://www.facebook.com/LGBAllianceUK/posts/pfbid02mW3ivyZErLdA1N7vZPmb9CcYpCq9AaWDmcTu1MvnUDnKfeR3hqJxSHWLspJzzBAMl
(Even if you are not on facebook you should still be able to see it. But have pasted in all the text)

Apparently Wes Streeting has said on radio that he's sorry about Rosie's treatment. Obviously carefully planned - different people dropping different things around the place. Little crumbs to keep the ladeez sweet.

I want a clear and unequivocal statement from Starmer, using proper language, promising support for clarification that EA2010 means biological sex, and all the other things people upthread have said plus recognition of the harm being done to young people and action to counter it.

Obviously Labour want to know if they have fooled women yet -the answer is clearly no. You want women to give up safe spaces because the desires of a small number of men matter more to you than women's safety, dignity and comfort. Your only response is that women shouldnt be concerned - but you refuse to admit that there are many examples that show women were right to be concerned.

No-one with any sense is going to believe a single doctor is anything like an adequate safeguard. It's only marginally different to self id.

@Froodwithatowel I think I’ll print that off and leave it next to my front door so I can ask canvassers. I’m so looking forward to KJK v KS in Holborn & St Pan.

I will vote Labour again when they have satisfied me that they will ensure the law recognises that humans can't change sex, women need protection from male sexual violence, and that nobody should be forced to be an unconsenting participant in someone else's sexual fetish.

And since we'll never get a straight answer to that, (and I'm banning the terms 'dogwhistle', 'complicated', 'kind', and 'inclusive' as unacceptable bullshit before we start) I'd like to further ask him:

How do you feel that this abuse happened to these women, and that women are daily being put into situations of abuse such as these, because of wankers like you in positions of power, either could not find the guts to say no to men and face up to the consequences of doing right, or worse, deep down, believed these women were getting the treatment they rightfully deserve, and which all women should bow down to.

Which is it?

Starmer needs to be faced with the Lia Thomas situation.

Women saying they do not want to undress in front of someone who is a man, however he chooses to define himself.

The man requires that they abandon their feelings, personhood and autonomy, and get their kit off to prove his power and validation of his power with their bodies. This is their 'respect' to him. He has no duties whatsoever to reciprocally care about or respect them: merely to demand.

Women protesting this are offered conversion therapy to convince them to control their humiliation and resistance to baring their bodies for this man's requirements.

How is this right?

No weaselling or hiding behind words, Starmer.

How do you justify this as anything utter than the abhorrent stuff of male supremacist porn fantasy?

I believe every hard earned step of the way, I mean GC women forcing this issue to be visible rather than being buried as Labour and the Left managerial class want, is a step forcing Starmer to address reality and the absolutely real fears and anxieties of women.

As the left scream at us that we're GC stooges for the Alt Right, we calmly answer back, sort the sex based rights over gender ideology priority, and we'll back Starmer to the hilt on a new program for the country.

But if we see Starmer being bold in taking principled action against Corbyn and the anti Semitic poison that had infected the party, but pretty much AWOL on female sex based rights preeminence, then we can be sure he's to be found wanting here.

I don't recall him announcing his steps to purge anti semitism, then not put a senior party spokesman forward to talk about it, instead deflecting to social media posts on football.

For me, this speaks volumes. He just wants to not address the women/TRA dichotomy and zero sum game. Every step of the way he arrogantly feels as the alpha male pack leader in the argument for a change of govt that he's done enough, and women should be plenty happy.

And every step of the way, he's been shown to be an old school sexist, ignoring women (even now, no olive branch held out to Rosie or LWD), hoping you'd all just roll over and just shut up, already.

And disappointed and pissed off each time he's stymied. His body language and choice of words are so telling.

So, right now, the pressure needs to be upped and sustained, right to the GE and beyond. Labour need to realise they've just reached the bare, bare minimum for policy in this area, that no self respecting GC woman could happily accept in its current, July 28th 2023, form.

Just remember one thing. Starmer modified his Brexit policy to suit circumstances, and he brazened out the purging of Corbynista anti semitism in his party, with zero pause on his part.

Why can't he do the same for women's rights?

Feeling unable to vote Labour because they’ve lost their mind over what a woman is and would therefore happily put us at risk of harm, regardless of Starmer’s weasel words, does not automatically mean I’m voting Tory. One of the tragedies of this whole shitshow for me is that I am completely political homeless now.

Do I want to believe Labour has genuinely seen the light? More than anything. Do I actually believe it? No further than my dog could spit. And my dog is dead.

Deeds not words, Keir. Deeds not words.

But not an adult human female.

Does he want to open the definition to all mammals? After all, that would be great for those who call themselves furries.

This is not a win at all. Starmer is dangerous. As a lawyer he knows the importance of accuracy when using definitions. This is deliberately misleading.

He has to actually say sorry to us actual women who have been fighting to protect our rights before I would vote for him.

I note he hasn’t been in touch with Rosie Duffield

he’s got to try harder before I’ll trust him

deeds not words

There's not really a GC movement. There's just a lot of people who understand that the gender ideology ideas which labour have supported are right wing, authoritarian and anti-women. There's also a lot of people who understand that Starmer has been playing with words and appears to be doing so here again. He's not made a strong commitment to keeping males - of all identity and regardless of GRA - out of all women's spaces. When he does, we can talk. Until then, I'm not letting a pseudo-left wing woman hater pull the wool over my eyes. Good luck to you though if you are.

Not appreciating the 'how can you not vote Labour now after all they've done for you' tone. At all. Given that 'reflection' appears to be word of the week, maybe the party faithful would like to reflect on why so many of us remain sceptical and distrustful.

Perhaps you should let go of the idea of a GC movement then?

@catsfleasandbabies this is exactly what I think! Starmer's word of the week is 'reflection'. They've reflected on the Scotland situation; Khan is reflecting on the ULEZ.....All it means is they know these policies upset some of their voters. He really doesn't intend to change anything, it's just fluffy sentences. Until he engages with Rosie Duffield and Labour Women's Declaration rather than standing supporting Tatchell etc then I don't believe he's changed at all. Having said that, I really wish he would come out with an unambiguous statement of what a woman is, how Labour will protect single sex spaces, defend women's sport and protect children form affirmation in schools. Then I could happily vote Labour. 15 years ago, all of that would have been a given.

Starmer is throwing those of us who are very uncomfortable voting Tory a bone. The party hasn't changed overnight. I think it's quite cheap actually to say 'Oh well then, great - now I can safely vote Labour and henceforth deny any responsibility for the mess they will create for women and children because Starmer once said women are adult human females' - while he probably had his fingers crossed behind his back muttering 'which includes those with a GRC'

I e seen some on Twitter resigning in outrage. As long as Starmer doesn't panic and change his definition of a woman again to placate them.

I wonder if all the raging Labour men are going to stand by their principles and leave the party.

Nothing. After all the main justification for having a Labour Government again is that the Tories have had their 13 year stint and it's Labour's turn again in our FPTP system.
No one forced the Labour Party to alienate 51% of the electorate. They chose to do it because it suited them.

You Labour cheerleaders never read the room do you? Why should I support my former party ever again when they wanted to expel me for knowing that there are 2 sexes. Freedom of speech is now what matters most to me.

don’t you think that it’s wise to be cautious until the definition of “adult female” used by Starmer is absolutely clear?

I admire your faith and good will in believing that he is planning to make this absolutely clear. Or even vaguely clear.

The benefit to him is to fog this as much as is possible. It's been tried by all the political parties for years. 'We are definitely protecting single sex spaces (and men are any sex they choose.)' To the uninformed, it sounds like the problem has gone away. To the informed.... you're left wondering what they're smoking.

RMW doesn't even have a GRC.

This newly proposed GRC will be easier to get, and anyone who wants to source a doctor willing to sign it off for them will get one.