Will Gender Ideology influence how you vote?

Same here, although I've not come to any conclusions yet.

I voted for PR, botched as it was, because I thought it was at least a start. Now I think we probably dodged a bullet.
And I used to think coalition governments were more sensible because it meant opponents were forced to talk to each other. Now I'm thinking about all the wheeler dealing involved and what compromises are made - and who's most likely to lose out.

This thread has really made me think. I've been against changing the Lords since all this kicked off as I think it's either the only reason or a key reason why we haven't seen wholesale removal of rights like elsewhere.

I'm now against anything other than FPTP. PR would be the Trojan horse that ends our rights. I think we've a right to know what we are voting for. Tony Benn said it best:

"...it seems to me that people want a representative when they vote. The idea that every Liberal or Labour voter supports every item of Liberal or Labour party policy is absolute nonsense. People want to be represented. Introducing proportionality completely destroys the idea of representation.

…Every person whom we meet in our constituencies is our employer the bus driver, the street sweeper, the home help, the policeman - and has the power to remove us. Our constituents expect to be represented. They decide whether they agree with our views and whether we have done a decent job.
Any element of proportionality, which destroys that link, could lead to people being governed by a Government whom nobody had voted for, because nobody would know the basis of the coalition on polling day. At least the coalitions of the parties are transparent: people can see them developing and know what they are voting for and what their own Member thinks."

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmhansrd/vo981105/debtext/81105-17.htm

This
SDP have no candidate in my constituency, yet. If they manage to field one I'm certain they will appeal to the demographic here. There are many politically homeless people.

Well. Look at the SNP. Already down that road but then along came coalition and the Greens...

In both cases (Tory/LD, SNP/Green), women and children were the first thrown under the bus. What for? Mollifying in the former(?) and thinking it was the route to independence in the latter (that is the popular theory for Scotland anyway).

Women and children already get ignored in central government thinking and policy. Seems that may get worse, the more men-focused parties are at the table arguing over what they want.

It's a theory anyway!

Yes ResisterIRex, I remember thinking the same at the time, hmm....

I've had an uneasy feeling for a while that I might be over-focussing on a Labour government and self ID legislation when the real threat might lie somewhere else.

This is how I end up going round in circles. I've lost so much respect for Labour but, if push came to shove, I'd take a Starmer government over a hung parliament any day.

Lynne Featherstone was out the blocks early doors on this IIRC. Arguably they had undue influence, since they didn't win the vote. At the time - as a general thought not about this but about them in government - I recall people thinking they would temper the worst of the Tory excess.

How wrong that was.

That's a good point - how much of the civil service and institutional capture happened between 2010 and 2015 (Cameron/ Clegg government)?

This is my concern. There’s only got to be a situation where the majority is small, or where Starmer wants to get a piece of legislation over the line that is unpopular with his MPs, and MPs will be able to call the shots. That’s when there's a risk that accepting self-ID becomes the trade-off.

There have been so many Labour MPs who have been vocally TWAW and anti-GC that I just don’t trust them.

See also the Noah thread for the faith in which Doja appears to be posting. Would be a shame to derail this one in particular

I forgot about the malign influence of a coalition. Which might be what gave self-ID rocket boosters to begin with.

DojaPhat I hear what you’re saying, but in truth I’d rather be cold and hungry than forced to choose between transing my child or having them removed by the state. I agree it’s all shit

Yes.

I've written to my MP (Tory) who is fully GC.

Also to the Labour and LibDem candidates (fully TWAW). They don't care. I'm just a big old meanie whose concerns about child safeguarding and women's rights are "scaremongering" against the most vulnerable/oppressed trans women men in the country. They'd look at a picture of Isla Bryson's ill concealed todger in pick leggings and still say "woman".

Former LP member here. Left over the issue of self id.

I'll be voting for my Conservative MP who knows and is unequivocal in stating what a woman is.

The alternative candidates (LibDem and Labour) are both full on TWAW.

Do I want to vote conservative? Hell no, but I'm done spoiling my ballot (which has been my tactic for the last 5 years now).

I'm also "over" people telling me to think of the greater good and the bigger picture. To me, the erasure of women's rights IS A BLOODY BIG PICTURE.

Labour has come some way from endorsing self id but not far enough. Not by a long shot and I'm not convinced that in power (with the current cohort of MP's) that they won't make huge concessions to the TRA lobby when they do get in power.

If they need to strike a coalition deal with the LibDems then the outcome will be worse.

I do think Starmer has been a bloody coward on this issue and has so many splinters in his arse I'm not surprised he cannot sit down long enough to reflect on his own incompetence.

Gut feel is that Labour will win the next GE but that's because the Tories have handed it to them on a plate. But there's still an opportunity to press Labour on this issue and Starmer to soundbite safeguards for women's rights on record.

I know for most of the population this isn't a voting "gotcha" but come the GE run up I absolutely expect the Tories to hold Starmers feet to the fire on this issue and I'll admit I'll enjoy them doing it.

I'm not a 'member' of any party, ie I've never taken a paid membership or affiliation.

But for those women here who have, no matter whether you're red or blue, please can you tell me - are you able to express your concerns to your party ? Local Cllrs ? MPs ? Is there a way to flare 'key issues' or do you get to fill in any sort of questionnaires?

Should we all be doing this? Letting them know that the trans issue is affecting our vote?

The biggest danger is if Stamer needs the LibDems to prop him up.
Yes this worries me too. I also think anything less than a good majority would leave Starmer seriously weakened within his own party, and that's when I start imagining some kind of Angela Rayner / Ed Davey double act in government...It might yet convince me to vote Labour, if only to try and avoid a hung parliament.

I also agree with Zut's point. I think it's quite possible that Labour will abandon self ID but instead bring in hate speech legislation that would seriously restrict our ability to defend single sex spaces.

But the main thing for me is that I've always been a true blue - it's just I never could voice it openly so I'm grateful this gender stuff has come along! The sheer relief is immeasurable! I can be blue vocally blue in peace! At last!

I do think Tories will get my vote as they seem to be the only lot to give a damn about women's lot. It's like during lockdown when single parents of whom women make up the majority were struggling to make ends meet. Rather than let them go without the government bullied by Marcus Rashford fed the kids.

It's like how women - of whom tend to be in lower skilled, less paid jobs, are always at the center of government policy. I have to date not met a woman who struggles to afford bills, childcare or suitable employment. I do think it's great the tories know how to define women tho!!

The lab party are on shaky ground with the trans ideology anyhow. As I said I live in a labour stronghold, always has been probably will continue to be so, KS is my MP.

There's huge swathes of devoutly religious communities most especially muslims of all types, sikh, greek orthodox, and jewish. Plus there's a long tradition of old skool 'womens' lib' and feminist activism in my area going back to the 70s and those women are very much alive and still kicking.

I can't see how anyone wanting to retain the vote in my area could possibly promote the trans agenda and win... it would be a turning point.

I agree. The biggest danger is if Stamer needs the LibDems to prop him up. Though he himself knows what a woman is, I fear he might be willing to trade women’s rights as part of a deal to get LibDem and Labour left wing support on things he cares about. (Probably centrist economic policy.) He may be less confident that he will achieve the thumping majority that the polls predict, which is why he is not committing.

There is some history being repeated. It was apparently the LibDems during the coalition who brought the notion of self ID into Tory policy. Theresa May was lead with a LibDem counterpart and they met with Stonewall. May did not seem to understand the implications or dangers, and liked the praise for being progressive. The captured Civil Servants did not warn her, so self ID was proposed. It was only the consultation results that caused the Tories to think/rethink. Keir, in contrast, will know exactly what he is doing if he gives away women’s rights. He needs to reassure voters that he won’t, otherwise there will be a group of voters who may decide not to back him.

Remember even the SNP didn’t put Self ID in their manifesto but did commit to talking to everyone - which they had to be shamed into and only after they had already drawn up their bill.

I suspect starmer wants the tories to bring in some reform or at least guidance around trans ideology, and he intends to kick any pressure to row back on that into the long grass. I dont think he'll bring in self id, but unless someone is willing to do something about men without a grc getting female passports, self id is going to continue unofficially anyway. The only politican ive heard who seems concerned about how easy it is for men to get female passports is Miriam Cates.

The new problem for women will be around hate speech and the possible introduction of a definition of misogyny. Itll be used by men to prosecute GC women.

That supposes that Labour see the manifesto as a binding document with accountability and will behave honourably.

As opposed to seeing it as a don't frighten the horses/ enticement to get your vote document resulting in ha, you can't stop us now for five years once in power.

Which is the model that Labour have gone for in their most recent time in power. With not much respect for law, or ethics or morality on the way.

They will further not be honest about their intentions about self ID, because it would risk losing them the election. And frankly will make them look like a bunch of insane muppets, because it doesn't hold together in the slightest and requires you to say out loud that you don't care about women's rights, homosexuality, child safeguarding, parental rights, yada yada, and you're heavily into male supremacism (at best, I could add many other things there, PIE among them) and totalitarianism. Or to identify as not seeing any problems or evidence and look insanely delusional: we've had politicians try that way out but it doesn't look any better. The guts to openly own this stuff out loud is missing in most people with a grain of self awareness for obvious reasons.

If you want to know what a Labour government is most likely to do once they have power, look at the SNP and Wales. And Canada.

I don't believe Starmer actively wants to bring in self ID. But I'm not convinced he wouldn't concede it as part of a deal, if he thought he could get away with it. This is why there's no way I'll be telling Labour my voting intentions until I've ie manifesto - I don't mean their mission statement (or whatever they're calling it) I mean the real thing. it's only one vote but it's all I've got to bargain with.

I live in a Labour strong hold and was happy about that until Tony B-Liar went all nu-Labour stealth tory and then attacked Iraq off the back of no WMD after millions of us marched in town and protested. I said I'll never vote Labour again.

I will never vote Tory so that left me with a dilemma.

As the Lib-Dems allied with the Tories then I'll never vote for them either, they trashed their own party when they did that IMO they're dead duck in the water already.

I wouldn't have a clue what Green's manifesto is but I'll either not vote or vote for an outlier.

I do believe the trans agenda is driven by huge global corporations though and they are already dismantling our democracy. So my vote would be for any party prepared to push back against the political control that the wealthiest entities on our globe are taking from local politics.