Janice Turner on Labour u-turn

Dinosaur bloke. As much understanding of biology as a dinosaur.

Thank you for your shout out LoobiJee although I feel like I should underline that I am most definitely an adult sloth female, just in case there was any doubt about that.

It might be enough to stop me voting for the stories, because Sunak is fine words and no action. If he actually DID something I might have to hold my nose and vote for them.

It's not enough to persuade me either to vote Labour or make a contribution to election expenses. Lots of talk about votes but they've also lost membership and donations.

If Labour move further I might feel I can vote for them again but the answer to the question is no - women cant trust Labour yet.

OK nobody has to vote Labour or for anyone else if they don’t want to. Don’t vote or spoil your paper. That’s absolutely fine.

But please don’t insult other posters intelligence by wanging on that Labour are ‘only doing this to win votes’. Of course they are. They’re not unique in that, though, so what is the point with that? It’s not a gotcha. Every time it is said I just wonder, why the fuck anyone thinks the Tories in government rowed back on introducing self ID to the whole UK? They easily could have done it, with their Parliamentary majority.

Because they gave the tiniest shit about women? Obviously not or that idea wouldn’t have gone to public consultation, the first stage of law making.

Or did they change their minds because women from across the political spectrum got together and protested and the Tories finally realised it was a giant stinking vote-loser for themselves? Maybe that emboldened some of the principled ones to stick their necks out a little further for women too. All of that is great and welcome.

At this point whether any individual MP is ideologically pure or not is not of much interest, we are so far behind the men’s rights campaigners on terms of getting around the political table.

Let’s get as many MPs as possible of all parties on side to simple principles of recognising biological sex matters, manifesto commitment to reform EqA and abolish GRA. I don’t think anyone is in any position to relax until that has happened.

It’s not ideal, but it’s good start.

I can't speak for anyone else but I've never voted Tory in my life. I used to vote Labour at every election until the first Blair government was elected. I was very disappointed in them and started to vote election by election, using my council election vote for the Green Party, for example. I live in a rock solid Labour seat in a London borough that has hardly any non-Labour councillors. My vote counts for very little. I can still withhold it or give it to someone I think is a better candidate on the policies. My Labour MP is a good woman who as far as I can make out has worked hard for her constituents and her Shadow Minister role. When I went to see her with a group of other concerned women some years ago, she listened, but didn't promise anything, and one of the others present told us afterwards that her research team included several young people known to be very pro trans rights. I should think there are lots of MPs in a similar position. It doesn't speak well to their strength of character that they've been so unduly influenced by activists with no real experience of life that they've shut their ears to other points of view.

This is good enough for me. I'm a lifelong Labour voter and this is the only thing I really disagree with their stance on. Get them in power or it won't matter what rubbish the NHS DEI teams publish - there won't be an NHS.

Put, not out!

Look at this clip where she says she's perfectly ok with a male child rapist being out in a women's prison...

Good point but the timing of this Labour u turn suggests this is very much political manoeuvring rather than a genuine change of heart. If they were interested in women's rights they would have been in conversation with people on BOTH sides of the issue way, way before this.

This

this is actually what I look for in a political party, people who can be ‘unduly swayed’

very reassuring

oh and I also like intelligent politicians, like people who think that men can grow a cervix

I certainly won’t be voting tory but I can’t see me voting labour either, and I’m not sure what it would take to ‘unduly sway’ my vote….having said that I’m in a tory safe seat

No political party have covered themselves with glory on this issue. I don’t think any of them are likely to. You only have to consider how far things have got under the current government.

But this is enough for me to vote Labour again as this is where my political beliefs most closely align.

Doesn’t mean I’ll ever be an ardent Labour supporter or god forbid trust a politician. As per the article though I’m not sure how much Labour cares for GC votes .. they’ve just realised their stance was indefensible. Took them long enough.

I think there will be those who can no longer support Labour because of their idiocy/incompetence on this issue. Equally there will be those who would never support Labour & just use this as a stick to beat them with & deter voters no matter what.

Yes, absolutely. I don't think Labour can be trusted at all on women's rights. As for Wes Streeting and Lisa Nandy words fail me, scary. I voted for Lisa in the leadership election and feel so let down. I can't see me believing anything they say on women's rights. Two in our household definitely not voting Labour who did last time.

Almost as bad as the male TUC activist on the ITV news in a 50s style apron and pinny with breast pump tantalisingly soft focus alongside the washed dishes, lol.

Now that's as hardcore genderised as watching Bridgette in a fetching red dress.

I think the exact quote was “shrill arguments”.

But we all know that a male politician would never use the term “shrill arguments” against a male political opponent.

Labour’s most senior gay man, the shadow health minister, Wes Streeting, a former Stonewall education officer, has “been on a journey” in recent years, alarmed by LGBT policy overreach, such as the case of Sarah Summers, a Brighton rape victim denied a single-sex support group.

So he’s trying to make out that his transition from member of a secret group campaigning to get disobedient women ejected from the party to now being the frontman for media-placed overtures to women in the party who’ve been abused by members of that very group is entirely down to his own journey of discovery of thinking and reflection on the impact on women - and absolutely nothing to do with the successful campaigning by the Conservative Women group and Miriam Cates and Kemi Badenoch securing their party’s support for bringing an end to no debate, thus enabling the Conservatives to start ruthlessly targetting Labour’s open goal, ten months before a possible election?

Anyway, whatever his motivations, as slothtoes said in their clear-headed post, now’s the time to build on their new comms campaign and press Labour for some meaningful commitments.

Give them a chance. They're still adjusting to women's shrill voices.

Good question borntobequiet and I bet you’re right.
I couldn’t agree with you more Theeyeballsinthesky

I see it's not taken long for the, 'if you're not convinced you were obviously Tories all along' narrative to start up. I have to say, it's not helping to persuade me that this change is being made in good faith.

If Labour stalwarts really want help things along then may I suggest that a 'We-understand-why-you're-still-suspicious-but-we-will-do-whatever - it-takes-to-regain-your-trust' kind of approach would most likely have a better outcome? That, I think, would be the smart thing to do.

I thinkit might be harmful and counterproductive to trash their U-turn

There’s quite a few posters who were keen on stopping women saying anything at all 🤷‍♂️

They now seem to be welcoming change but not due to their own input

Plenty said stop criticising Labour before this, party before women

I wonder how the LDs will react to Labour’s apparent change of stance. Will they start moving too, or will they double down? My guess is double down because they’re generally more captured and will see it as an opportunity to single themselves out as the “be nice” party. It would fit with Ed Davey’s persona, beliefs and leadership style too.
However, it might be a big big mistake.

Lets just stick to pragmatism and maybe we might (just might) get somewhere.
MPs don’t have to agree with me on everything, I don’t agree with them on everything. They just have to vote for some sensible laws occasionally where it really matters. So I will encourage that.

Was it in the main newspaper or in one of the weekend supplements?

The styling will have been done by The Times. For all we know it could have been part of the ‘deal’ to get a profile article in the paper. But of course The Times would never ask a male politician to dress up like James Bond or a red carpet attendee or something in order to do a profile of them.

So easy to say this about TRAs. Who cares anyway. They’re not going to stop using whatever

No need to do anything because a TRA wants us to

I thinkit might be harmful and counterproductive to trash their U-turn

I daresay a few activists will already be pointing to many recent threads on this board and saying "nothing you give them will ever be enough so why give them anything?"