Sunak to drop legal plans to bar transitioning in schools?

Yes. Whether by accident or by design (as with all fuck ups, a little bit of both).

Political correctness has so tainted institutions including the government and civil service, that anything even hinting at limiting civil liberties and human rights is a non starter.

The Tories also have their own toxic history with Section 28. They're very vunerable to Labour calls that any legislation to "limit" trans is Section 28 all over again...of course, we know that's a false equivalence, but it'll be easily sold in a GE campaign.

However, the end result of interlocking of, and unintended consequences from, the evolution of GRA to EA, and their reciprocal enactment in the ECHR, means that room to be bold re trans is very limited, maybe impossible.

Certainly that's what the AG and likely Keegan is telling Sunak. Whether Badenoch and Cates via Sex Matters legal advice can win out, I wouldn't put money on it.

Thatcher's bureaucratisation of education in the 80s, followed by Blair's National Curriculum, GRA and EA legislation, Cameron's same sex marriage legislation installing Stonewall into govt, their mutation from gay rights to trans rights, the move to trust schools with so many areas outsourced, including RSE (back to Stonewall, Mermaids, Gendered Intelligence), and both main parties being captured by TRA wings.

This is where we are today, and one of the most critical decisions ever, not being made or made poorly.

Right now, under and because of the Tories the trans child rights trumps all other minority concerns and the majority of children's rights. Hence this thread.

"They (Labour) clearly don't want self ID either."

What makes you so sure?

On the current Rosie Duffield thread about the Labour Party, @RealityFan says:

"The other thing which is hugely relevant is that The Trans Child, in all its golden glow, halo, and suicide ideation preeminence, is absolutely the totem for the intersectional left.

At least three shadow ministers have trans IDing children including one with mastectomies, others hugely vocal online, and another half dozen or so shadow ministers very TWAW.

Right now in Labour, the trans child rights trumps all other minority concerns, and women are expected to give up some of their hard earned rights to allow trans their freedom."

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4890487-the-dark-arts-of-starmers-reshuffle-the-charade-was-powered-by-sycophancy-and-spin-rosie-duffield?reply=129059474

The advice should be to Labour

It us up to them to engage with voters not the other way around

And it looks like GC women have been making enough waves to have an impact. Which is brilliant

@Rudderneck - I agree that Labour have made a mess. And that it is difficult to engage because the line from them has been so severe for a long time.

However, I was told they would never change on self ID on here and even by suggesting it I was some sort of Labour shill.

Government is very different from opposition. You have to actually make things work. It wasn't a surprise when in opposition Labour gathered a collection of supporters including trans activists.

But I do think Labour are actively trying to change their support in voters. They clearly don't want self ID either. It won't be s useful sell to that middle floating voter they need to win.

Being gender critical is painted as some ersatz belief. I think that's wrong. For most people, this is such a basic idea of binary biological sex. And legally I do not see you can't legislate to ensure women's safety and single sex spaces.

The Tories know that they can do this, Labour will get the same advice when they get in. I can't guarantee this change in attitude but having worked in politics and law for s long time, all the stars are aligned to make s change.

Labour have divided the issue in the statement they made. Single sex spaces... okay. And then recognition of gender dysphoria by a GP. Separating the two is promising. Single sex spaces needs to be addressed first. The second is a debate that's being going on for 40 years or so. No quick fix.

This is a good post. And I agree

I’m not sure there’s a way to reverse it. They are not elected, we can’t vote them out.

Canada seems calmer than here on all this. We at least have the media which can hurt people politically, although again not those institutions in the background. Do you get much backlash?

I’m not sure what it will take to get out of all the weeds invested people have created and ensure cannot be challenged

The Tories have given up.

Malaga Airport! What a wonderful way to get around the word censors! Love it!

Labour hasn't really left any way for anyone to engage on this, from what I can see.

In general I think you are right pragmatically, you have to deal with the government you have. But they seem to have burned their bridges, and I don't mean that as a kind of psychological metaphor. I am not convinced they can engage on this issue.

I don't agree with everything you've said here, but I've had a similar general thought about the hands of legislators being tied.

Here in Canada it is actually worse, because we have a written constitution in the American style, installed about 1980 when that was the big trend, and because our courts have more power relative to Parliament compared to the UK.

But increasingly it seems like the whole concept of the primacy of Parliament is compromised, and decisions, or the scope of possible decisions, are constrained by a plethora or regulations that are too difficult to change.

So we get discussions here on MN about dealing with what beliefs are ok to have in the workplace, and it gets all into the legal weeds, and I am thinking, fuck, maybe the laws and regulations we are trying to work inside of here are actually just kind of shit in the first place?

I would never have thought it 30 years ago, but I now look at a lot of equalities types of laws and regulations, or things like human rights tribunal set ups, and think - it is so clear to me how these could go wrong, how they could become just another vehicle for asserting power or hierarchies of value. And they are determining so much of the scope of the discussion.

The other issue is that the government only has an arms length relationship with many parts of the state and their everyday function. In general this is a good thing and protective. But many of those institutions, like the NHS, were captured early on, targeted to create a culture that integrated and accepted certain policy directions. And the state is finding it very difficult to change the culture there because they are limited in how much direct power they have.

It’s only over when the law changes and women get spaces without men by law

Given Starmer is more a we don’t talk about it I doubt it’s high on the agenda

I'd put the chances of this between 0% and 0.000%.

I'm hoping this trans shitshow will die with the Tory government.

You’ve said this before but I think you’re speaking from standpoint of someone who works with politicians

Of course it makes sense for you to hitch your wagon to whomever for career purposes as I might a new client

What do you want exactly from a GC voter to ‘engage with Labour’

Sunak is finished. He's either going to the country in May or September next year. People have largely stopped listening to the Conservatives. The polls haven't moved in a year after the Truss mess.

My view is that people would do better to engage with Labour on this. Difficult yes but reflects reality. They will be in charge pretty soon.

I agree that this issue hasn't really cut through to the general public. And even those of us who care passionately about it might still vote Labour because of the harm the Tories have done.

So, who knows? If I were Sunak I might be inclined to attack Starmer's record on this. Elections are won or lost on the personality of the leader - look at how effective the attacks by the Tories on Kinnock were, or, more recently, Labour's portrayal of Theresa May as a ditherer. Starmer has flip-flopped like crazy over this issue and a variety of his frontbenchers have said egregiously stupid things. Make Starmer look like an unprincipled idiot and Sunak might stand a chance of gaining some ground.

I agree, I'll check my ones out. I'm in Liz Truss country, so there's that. Lol

MC women are in there too although agree on JSO vibe for latter

It doesn’t need to take much actual action. Just anger on social media

Look at that BBC presenter convalescing somewhere. And Sturgeon

One difference will be, that despite Ukip tapping into Euroscepticism, I'm not sure Leave was really a grass roots movenent.

There wasn't year after year of fevered discussion from young alpha footie fans on the ins and outs of regional funding. Maybe older Boomers and beyond who've always hated migration.

But Leave got magicked up by brilliant Farage campaigning and Dom Cummings data management.

I'd say Brexit was pure culture war, and having no philosophical rigour, it's been left to rot.

GC is true grass roots, based solidly in science, history, philosophy, human rights. Totally self explanatory, simple and complex at the same time. And broadly supported by 85%, way more than Leave.

It is the status quo, the only sensible choice. The institutions have had to extend more energy defying reality to go TRA than Farage ever did.

And so imho, Starmer may be able to sneak this past the electorate once, but when women wake up to the enormity of their rights at risk, all bets will be off.

This makes this battle way bigger than Brexit, way more centered in true grass roots feelings.

This is the end of the destruction test of professional politicians, high on theory and with zero life or real world experience, or with a passion in actually representing people and improving their lives and the country as opposed to enjoying their own personal career and gravy train.

Independent candidates are probably the way to go in the long term, and it will happen by the general public just getting less and less reason to bother turning out to vote. At the moment you can have blue and weak or red/green/yellow and insane with much the same policies. But it will be glacially slow.

Suffragettes were a grass roots movenent. I believe if things shift badly under Starmer, that 3% in polls on trans issues becomes top three.

And if JSO and IB avd ER can cause such havok, so can women a century on from their last existential battle.

It may have to take a Labour government with an unambiguous anti GC platform to be the final straw for women.

Put it this way, a bunch of private educated Jacindas and Sebastians blocking the North Circular for JSO will pale in comparison to working class women out in force.

I'm afraid the future will be
1...politicians as useful as a chocolate teapot
2...women will have to fight like they did to get the vote/contraception and abortion rights/divorce and marital rape rights
3...Generation Alpha will have to show us wisdom in not taking to this path to.

The world is reverting to type, geopolitical blocs, proxy wars. A new serfdom being imposed, not by industrialists, but those in charge of information and the methods of trade. And reverting of women and children again to being seen and not heard.

Well it might need an event but there are increasing and when they do happen it’s brutal politically. Who would have thought much could de seat Sturgeon

The right image is even more powerful and swift than a slogan

And yes that bigot line is a good example of how politicians can be taken out by a brief encounter in a way polls don’t pre determine. Or a bacon sandwich, I bet that wasn’t polling high either ;

I doubt antisemitism was either before Corbyn felt the heat on that

Timing is part of it, down to luck or lack of it. Until someone can get males out of female spaces something will crop up sooner or later

Yes, but it took a specific Isla Bryson moment to break the concocted spell. Sturgeon couldn't walk away from that. And it directly led to Starmer's apparent u turn on Self ID.

If we look at the gender propaganda in schools ongoing scandal as on a par with the poison of men in women's jails, there hasn't been a venting of public anger. Just a simmering via Daily Mail online exposes.

I'm not sure if a drip feed of these will cause another Isla Bryson moment where politicians have to account.

Because polls still show trans only being raised as an issue by less than 3% of those interviewed. Cost of living, waiting lists, housing, migration...all log much higher.

What could be fascinating is if KJK really gets the wind in her sails and gets right under Starmer's skin. She has the potential to be the 2024 version of 2010 Gordon "who put this bigot with me?" Brown pratfall.

So, I can't see another Isla Bryson moment. I mean, what would that be? A multiple rapist on a women's NHS ward. An unearthed grooming operation in schools from one of these Stonewall implants?

Why can’t you see it? I’d say the opposite. We get more each year. Men are just as motivated by a perceived injustice and will act accordingly. Violent threats increase year on year. Women are actually punched in the face and attacked. Men proudly walk through female teen changing rooms to show what they’re up against

Women may be justifiably angry at this point but men have no bounds to what they want

Starmer won’t be immune unless he gets males out of female spaces.

No one has said how that will be done. Yes he’s doing the I’m not saying a word which some like. It does not make the issue disappear.

Of course we can see another extreme event. It’s interesting people think the common direction will change at all unless stopped legally. Why would it?