Starmer Radio 5 "A woman is an Adult female"

He hasn't gone back on that.

He's been told men are legally female with a certificate so they fit that definition.

I think politics became far more stage managed under Blair eg "the grid" came in then..? Anyway, ever since Blair, we have definitely had much more polish and shine, and far less public disagreements between politicians of the same party. We've also had a decline in Cabinet Members being sacked since the LD/Tory coalition. I cannot remember the last government sacking and suspect it would've been under Blair or Brown.

So Reeves' instincts in this case are to protect The Woman. But why? What thinking went into that? Was it zero and was it a reflex "quick let's say she's being attacked Because Female, let's deflect and protect the status quo"?

If so, how is that going to bring about change under Labour?

We don't need journalists we need someone like maya or Kathleen or both to do a TV interview. Someone who knows the law inside out . So he can't just do a word salad cop out

It's part of the box-set of tribal positions, few actually think it through. Or ever paid more than lip-service to the tribal positions on women's rights.

Just as I predicted. Get close to the election and do a reverse move. But how can you a few weeks ago say 1% of women have a Penis And now go back on it. Did you not believe what you said then or don't believe what you say now . It makes me even more angry tbh.

I very much agree with this.

Same.

I feel like this about Kemi Badenoch

I can understand what she thinks, she speaks clearly

Starmer - who tf knows, maybe he doesn’t either

I remember someone saying that John Prescott had been a fine, powerful speaker back in the day when he was a union activist. It was only once he was forced to toe the government line as a minister that he got all tongue twisted.

The Labour Party – and I don't suppose others are much different – rewards obedience, not talent or principles. So it's no wonder they end up with a bunch of talentless yes-men (and women) who will say anything they're told to.

Labour must also be working on the people who would vote for the Liberal Democrat’s but for their vehement stance that women should have no right to be seen as different from men who say they are women, and no right to separate spaces from them.

This latest possible fudge ( which is what it is if they won’t amend the EA to say say biological sex trumps GRC sex) will be very successful in setting Labour apart from the Liberal Democrats.

It all makes you realise just how rare it is for those in the public eye to have actual backbone.

This. The rise of the ivory tower, theory only, professional politician has been the absolute death knell on competence, morality or fitness for office.

I remember a few years back, seeing Anne Ruzylo speak at a public meeting, just after she'd been booted from a Labour post. My jaw dropped listening to her. You never hear a professional politician speak like that, without cards, without a SPAD script, from their own beliefs and values and life experience, with the ability to hold a crowd and to answer questions freely and willingly on the spot with real knowledge. She knew statistics, she knew references, she knew facts. She'd had a wealth of real life working experience and she knew exactly what she was talking about.

It was an absolute revelation that the Labour party HAS people of this calibre and capacity in its ranks. And yet appears to be preventing this powerful talent from getting anywhere near the top while raising up the kind of person you wouldn't employ part time at your local playgroup.

I too have respect for Jacob Fucking Rees Mogg

I don’t care what your opinion is, I just care that I actually know what it is

I know nothing about what starmer really thinks

I say, steady on. Let’s not forget Rees Mogg’s little passive aggressive notes trying to pressure civil servants back into offices where there weren’t actually enough desks for them

the man’s a copper bottomed ocean going twerp

Regarding the comment by @Beowulfa about Jacob Rees-Fucking-Mogg 🤣🤣 maybe the one good thing to come out of this shit-show has been the education it has provided in learning to spot basic principles and who sticks to theirs.

And who is a flip-flopping drip.

It all makes you realise just how rare it is for those in the public eye to have actual backbone.

IwantToRetire · Today 00:57

Labour’s Equality Act is not being used to protect women but to terrorise them

Maya Forstater (in the Daily Express!)

It was never the intention of those who drafted the Equality Act that it should become a weapon to threaten women’s livelihoods for simply stating obvious truths.

That it is sexual harassment to allow male colleagues to barge into the ladies’ toilets, showers or changing rooms. That is is totally inappropriate for a man whose womanly “gender identity” is based on enjoying crossdressing to be admitted to a women’s rape counselling group.

If Labour is serious about supporting women’s rights, it should say it supports this straightforward clarification, whether done by the Conservatives during this Parliament or by whichever party is in government after the next election.

^If it can’t make this commitment, then left-leaning women should understand that whatever their party says, it doesn’t really have women’s interests at heart*.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1795514/Anneliese-Dodds-Gender-identity-trans-transwoman-transman-womens-rights

Thank you for posting that. It gets to the heart of the matter:

What is needed to bring the Equality Act back into line with what was intended – and with common sense – is a small, simple amendment. That would make clear that protections against sex discrimination and provisions for single-sex services relate to biological reality, not to whether a person has got a “Gender Recognition Certificate” to change the sex on their paperwork.

and,

If Labour is serious about supporting women’s rights, it should say it supports this straightforward clarification, whether done by the Conservatives during this Parliament or by whichever party is in government after the next election.

If it can’t make this commitment, then left-leaning women should understand that whatever their party says, it doesn’t really have women’s interests at heart.

What a disgrace that it takes The Daiky Express to try to tell people the truth about what Annaliese/Labour has said about protecting sex based spaces
( the truth is it can’t happen while there is lack of clarity in the EA and Labour have so far shown no will to amend the EA).

I disagree with the position they took but Scottish Labour have been absolutely stitched up here. The bill was one of the most contentious in the Scottish Parliament's history and a lot of bad blood spilled on all sides. Furthermore, it will not actually be resolved until the court case is heard although there is little doubt to the outcome.

Dodds and Starmer have put all that to one side, leaving Scottish Labour in the lurch, they supported a policy that was unpopular at the time but supported by the national leadership. That leadership has now done a flip flop and pointed the finger of blame at them.

Sorry about the Twitter link, but at least one TRA says they think the new KS approach will only last until the election:

twitter.com/hespechristina/status/1684260416241664007?s=61&t=kGVJW3nqB0HwN7e30O6LKw

Obviously a lot of us reckon that too, but it's, umm, nice to have our cynicism supported.

If Labour is serious about supporting women’s rights, it should say it supports this straightforward clarification, whether done by the Conservatives during this Parliament or by whichever party is in government after the next election.

Yes, thank you Maya. In fact both Labour and Conservatives could clear up our doubts right now: the government by announcing that they are looking to clarify the Equality Act during the current parliament and Labour by declaring that they will support this move.

I find myself in the uncomfortable position of having more and more respect for Jacob Rees-Fucking-Mogg. I disagree with pretty much everything he says, but what he says is clear and consistent. He actually answers questions. He's picked a side and doesn't waste time fudge-pandering to the other side.

Come on Keir, choose your side and then let the electorate choose.

Well done Maya, talking absolute sense as usual.

@literalviolence re guardian comments. There were some GC comments allowed yesterday in the daily politics blog page. As they had reported the Starmer interview they couldn't moderate GC comments for being off-topic like they usually would. I have to say we were getting less upvotes than the "be kind" lot though. The idea that any concern about gender is hatred whipped up by Tories as a distraction is very well embedded into the average guardian reader.

Too much gaslighting

They scoffed and called us rights hoarding dinosaurs, no one is talking about it, and I’ll take the public with me - still think the latter is happening.

Then Drakeford used shrill and bigoted to shut down questions, and Labour in Scotland whipped for GRR

Misogyny runs deep in the Labour party so I’d go for Starmer goes, takes his cronies and Rosie Duffield takes over.

She was the only one who stood up against her misogynistic colleagues

I would like David Lammy to apologise for saying men can grow a cervix and biological women are rights hoarding dinosaurs. I doubt it will happen though.

It's a step in the right direction and I'm prepared to wait and see how they clarify their new position between now an election. Though I understand why trust is low and there is definitely more I'd want to hear before voting.

Unfortunately I'm in Scotland so even if UK Labour genuinely move to protect women's sex based rights there's always the chance that Scottish Labour will choose to differentiate themselves and double down on the self ID stuff.

We've got a long way to go. Perhaps the TRA backlash will let them see what GC feminists have been going through and that there's no point attempting to fence sit.

Labour’s Equality Act is not being used to protect women but to terrorise them
Maya Forstater (in the Daily Express!)

It was never the intention of those who drafted the Equality Act that it should become a weapon to threaten women’s livelihoods for simply stating obvious truths.

That it is sexual harassment to allow male colleagues to barge into the ladies’ toilets, showers or changing rooms. That is is totally inappropriate for a man whose womanly “gender identity” is based on enjoying crossdressing to be admitted to a women’s rape counselling group.

What is needed to bring the Equality Act back into line with what was intended – and with common sense – is a small, simple amendment. That would make clear that protections against sex discrimination and provisions for single-sex services relate to biological reality, not to whether a person has got a “Gender Recognition Certificate” to change the sex on their paperwork.

These certificates were introduced to make life easier for a tiny number of people, and are primarily bureaucratic. They would allow a man who identifies as a woman to get married as a woman, for example. But they cannot be interpreted as an “access all areas” pass to spaces provided for everyone else’s privacy.

If Labour is serious about supporting women’s rights, it should say it supports this straightforward clarification, whether done by the Conservatives during this Parliament or by whichever party is in government after the next election.

If it can’t make this commitment, then left-leaning women should understand that whatever their party says, it doesn’t really have women’s interests at heart.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1795514/Anneliese-Dodds-Gender-identity-trans-transwoman-transman-womens-rights