Brighton shows why you shouldn’t vote Labour - Julie Burchill (and a mention of IamSarah)

Some of us will never forget that Penny Mordaunt - now considered a front runner for the post-Sunak Tories - was the original architect of Self-ID in England, and that she fought tooth & nail against the original GC feminists to ram Self ID through into law. Or that there have been many Tories on the backbenches who approved of Self ID and have been railing against "TERFs" and "transphobes" for as long as this fight has been going.

Genderism is deeply sexist and regressive. It appeals to sexists on both left and right, which is why women on both left and right have united to push back. The idea that suddenly the Tories (or even more hilariously, Reform) are going to our knights in shining armour on any of this is pretty naive.

Vote for the party that makes the most sense to you, but accept that you'll have to fight them on this topic no matter what. At least then you won't be disappointed.

Ah I see reading an article in the spectator is “siding with the right”

hyperbole much?

@Dinoland

It's not "turning a blind eye" to agree with one article from a news source whilst disagreeing with others.

This is exactly what's becoming more and more concerning in politics - the oversimplified, black-and-white thinking, tribal nature of it all.

Personally I can't vote labour whilst they continue to be blinded by this ideology and contribute to dismantling my rights as a female and pushing children down a path of lies and life long health problems. I can't agree with that. And they don't have diversity of thinking on this so if I vote for them I'm endorsing it. For the same reasons (but different issues) I cannot vote Tory. It's all too black-and-white. Labour have been letting the people down for a long time now, forgetting their roots, and this is the icing on their self-serving, self-destructive cake.

I don't think I'll ever forgive the Tories as most of them voted against equal marriage

This is factually incorrect because Cameron brought it in, whereas Labour actively avoided it and brought in the GRA instead. Precisely so they didn't have to equalise marriage. That's the truth, like it or not that is the history there.

“Because nothing says not being qualified to work on renewing city centres like believing in women’s rights.”

This sentence will have leaped out at anyone who’s read Invisible Women. Town and city planning is designed around men’s lives and world view. Such as transport systems focused on a single direct commute to and from work, rather than multiple journeys involving childcare and other responsibilities, designs which make women feel less safe etc.

I don't understand how you can turn a blind eye to the other articles published in the spectator just because they also back a cause you back. I don't think I could ever read the Spectator as it happily publishes Rod Liddle articles.
I don't think I'll ever forgive the Tories as most of them voted against equal marriage. What about austerity, the destruction of public services and the NHS, the pressure on teachers etc etc.
Maybe I'm being to black and white but I'll fight the GC fight without siding with the right thank you very much.

And yet the OP is linking to an article telling people not to vote Labour.
I'll vote for who I want to vote for m'lord.

Yeah, this.

Which papers brought GC issues to the public's attention, and helped stop rapists in women's jails, men in women's sports etc? Was it the Guardian, Indy and Mirror? Nope, it was the Spectator, Times and Telegraph. (Honourable mention for the New Statesman, but only while Helen Lewis was editor)

You do you, but I'd rather not wait for ideological purity while my rights are being given away. Janice Turner's take-down of Maria Miller in the - gasp - Murdoch rag that is the Times, single-handedly stopped the self-ID being made law, IMO. I'll take that over tumbleweed from the Guardian.

"I'm gender critical but"
It's a bit early in the morning for Mumsnet gender bingo. Come back when I've had my coffee

Perfect demonstration in first response.

It's a hate rag, think what you should be thinking.

Yes m'lord. I'll say 5 hail mary's. Amen.

Is the article the OP quoted itself racist?

Is there any chance this article could have been printed in a more ideologically acceptable magazine or newspaper?

Assuming the answer to both of these is "no", duck off with the guilt by association and purity standards and try engaging with the substance of the piece instead.

Oh for goodness sake. I'm gender critical but the Spectator is a stuffy hate rag and what the Tories are currently doing to this country is horrendous.
The answer is not keeping Labour out. Yes they are not perfect and I wish they'd rethink their views on this matter but this isn't the only important thing to think about when it comes to policies.
Fuck the Spectator with all its racism. Think again OP.