Labour Losing women

I'd honestly respect them more if they said, straight out, 'we hate women and don't believe they should have equalities that get in the way of sexual freedoms of boundary breaking and misogynist men'.

At least they'd have the guts and integrity to own it. This whole shamefacedly trying to con it through is nauseating.

That would make an interesting thread, but this one is about what Labour plan to do. And two of their current suggestions are not lawful.

No. I mean changes to the status quo. Such as, for example, repealing the GRA.

When you say 'more GC friendly policies' do you mean Government upholding existing safeguarding and women's rights instead of undermining them, as they are currently?
Those policies are already legal.

I don't know whether this is the right thread to being it up on, but another aspect I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts is the international dimension. To what extent, if at all, would more GC-friendly policies by the UK government fall foul of international agreements and so on? Haven't we accepted other nations equivalents of GRCs as valid in the UK? What happens to that if a future government sought to repeal the GRA? And would it leave the UK falling foul of the ECHR (which might or might not be the end of the world, depending on your POW)?

I don't think they have any intention of protecting single sex facilities. I think they plan to 'realise' their proposals are illegal, announce 'its too complicated, there's nothing we can do' and crack on with self ID.

Why on earth isn’t the next question happening anywhere?

Which single sex spaces and how will you stop males with a GRC entering them?

Bloody hell

They are all over the place. It seems to have started with bekind and they came up with a policy position based on TWAW, then began to realise it’s more complicated than that but can’t back down so try to obfuscate with the 0.1% it’s too complicated for you mortals.

So condescending “It’s a rather technical area”.

Don’t bother to think about it, just be reassured and vote for us.

Anneliese Dodds thinks Labour can somehow introduce self ID, create a special class of men who have had full SRS surgery and protect single sex spaces.

At least two of their solutions are not lawful. It is not lawful to insist men must have SRS and it will not be lawful to remove the spousal veto from the GRA.

https://twitter.com/okaybiology/status/1771851608009085389

I'd say Raynor is a useful idiot for the TRA cause (don't forget her revolting, sycophantic simpering that she'd save a place on the green benches for 'Lily' fucking Madigan) but these days I suspect that's only half right. Long may her tax woes continue. She's a danger to women.

Think that might have been Andrea Leadsom. Mordaunt has no children.

Was she the 'Asamum' woman, or was that someone else?

I just can't see the Penny Mordant thing going anywhere. It was a total dud, almost embarrassing, last time. I think either she is trying to see which way the wind blows, or someone has brought it up to scare off some voters.

Adding that in the Angela Raynor interview in the Graun weekend magazine today, where she’s absolutely clear that trans women are women. End of. So we can see where that particular wind is blowing.

At the same time, I’ve never voted Tory, but wondered only to see this Penny Mordant for PM being bloody resurrected. So women are not safe with any political party… except the communist party? Now, there’s a thought…

Yes and there are posters who repeatedly quote these crappy surveys to back up the 'fact' that nobody is really that interested in this issue. It's just bullshit.

ArabellaScott · Today 10:56

FKAT · Today 10:42

+ + Did I just read on an FWR board that potholes are more important than women's rights? + +

Some people can't tell a woman from a hole in the ground.

It's tempting to laugh, but it's so true.

I also thought the MN questionnaire didnt really show what you thought on an issue. For example if you picked immigration it indicate if you were anti immigration or wanting to double immigration. Just that it was an issue important to you.

Yes, I thought the same.

Very limited as to what you were permitted to mind about and prioritise. And then they wonder why the poll results are such a poor predictor of actual results. It's almost like curated reality and actual reality don't jive.

I imagine the Angela Eagle announcement was partly a trail, to see how it goes down (with Eagle’s name on it, not the senior cabinet).

I think Labour will win with a large majority. Unfortunately changes based on GI will be cheap (in money terms, until the medical bills roll in) and there’s nothing in the piggy bank, so they will be attractive to a new government. On the other hand, I also think the problems with GI which have been industriously hushed up are becoming increasingly clear to the electorate and it will be difficult to pretend as a politician that you were unaware of them. I am hoping no election until November by which time more GI scandals will have received a press airing and the populace will be bored with its drag queen craze. I don’t think Starmer is a true believer. When he sees the growing problems hopefully it will put the brakes on the worst changes he might make. Hopefully. What a.state of affairs.

The points up thread about brain development in young people are very important. A lot of people assume we need to focus on protecting under 18s from gender ideology but young men are most likely to identify as transgender between 17 and 25. The parents in my support group have mainly got DC in that age group.

Although the Cass review is very welcome, we need to apply the findings to over 18s too. There's no magic switch ensuring vulnerable young people make rational and considered decisions the moment they become legally adult.

I filled out a MN survey about voting intentions. There was a list of issues to put in order. There was no box for you to type in other issues. No box for women's rights. I can't be the only voter who will decide what to do with my vote with women's rights as my top priority. I don't see what the point of surveys like that is. They can't be giving an accurate picture.

I know of a Conservative councillor in a Labour controlled place who personally mends those potholes he can.

<shifty eyes>

Look, potholes are very important!

Another concern is that their hands are going to be tied in terms of what they can do economically, so they'll be looking for some easy wins that won't cost any serious money..