Emma Barnett and Gillian Keegan.

Trans issues have been the undoing of those British politicians that have supported it.

Penny Morduant would've been PM by now if she hadn't so enthusiastically supported it, Starmer wouldn't have had tough TV/radio interviews if he was just able to say adult human female, Sturgeon it was the final straw (but there is the question of what her and her husband were up to), etc, Yousef's reign ended with that hate crime law (that seems obsessed with misgendering).

The left in Labour have more important issues than trans rights, I think Labour will delay any action on it until absolutely necessary, and as the days move on the trans trend loses power.

Some are opinions, some are facts, even if you, Starmer and everyone else in the world except the women on FWR pretend they aren't.

So many opinions. All legitimately held, but still only opinions.

Including my own.

Votes count for more. Opinions here will only prevail if enough agree. I agree, Starmer isn't bonkers. He'll come to a sensible arrangement, not least because to his left, are plenty waiting to hold his feet to the fire. I think Starmer will come out with what Keegan said to Barnett.

Hey, who knows? Maybe she is the next defector to Labour. Lol

I can imagine me voting Labour this time around.

'But the main threat to women comes overwhelmingly from men, not from trans women, who should not be penalised for the actions of predatory men.'

The author appears to be arguing that 1, Transwomen are not men and then 2, when a man identifies as a woman they are never ever predatory. This is demonstrably false.

1. You have to be male to be a man and you have to be male to be a transwoman. They are all the same biological sex.
2. The idea that TW are not predatory should have been blown out of the water with Karen White. Many, many more assults, rapes and attacks have happened since then.

I don't think that Jules watched the Skirt Go Spinny video.

I remember that. It was a shame that the Twitter thread was deleted as it had the video links that were active and all.

The number of male people who were filming themselves masturbating madly for the porn sites while in the female toilets was eye opening. And all with their estrogen grown or implant enhanced breasts bared as well as the fully operational penises.

I remember the one who was SO excited that a mum and her kids were in the cubicle next door all using the toilet. That male masturbater was extra thrilled.

And the stories of the faked periods all over social media.

And the conversation between the two prominent male social media influencers (was it Montgomery and Shon Fae??) mocking the sounds that female people made urinating.

Once you see that it is a feature and not a 'bug' as so many people want to believe and want us to believe, you never unsee it.

The overwhelming sexual attacks on women are from men who dont live in Peterborough, therefore any man who lives in Peterborough can use womens changing rooms.

This analogy deserves

Women are adult human female people. We're not a subset of our own sex. Women and girls are female. Males are men and boys. I don't accept "cis" as a descriptor because it presupposes I share your ideology, which I do not.

The overwhelming sexual attacks on women are from men who dont live in Peterborough, therefore any man who lives in Peterborough can use womens changing rooms.

Many cisgender women

Yep, you lost me there.

Well, life IS interesting. Even sea life. 🤣.

Here's a confession I'll no doubt get panned for. I'm a guardian reader too. And I've no doubt, I'll be panned again, for saying I agree with most of what's written in the following.

Will I now be banned, as well a panned?
-‐---

"With so many real threats to women’s safety, it is confounding that this much time and attention is being lavished on a largely hypothetical risk. Every single case of someone being attacked is unacceptable, and everything must be done to protect women’s safety. Many cisgender women who support trans rights, myself included, have personal experience of sexual assault and take the topic extremely seriously. But the main threat to women comes overwhelmingly from men, not from trans women, who should not be penalised for the actions of predatory men. As a result, trans women and non-binary people are being excluded from single-sex spaces, putting them at a greatly increased risk of violence."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/18/there-is-so-much-more-for-us-to-worry-about-than-men-masquerading-as-women-to-access-single-sex-spaces

Well having someone put forward the idea that laws should be based on fantasy is erm interesting.

There seems to be two unrelated issues being confused here - is trans a real condition that can be defined, and are sex segregated spaces needed, wanted and legal?

The existence of trans doesnt make sex suddenly disappear, make men female, or remove the reason why sex segregated spaces are needed and wanted.

Starmer is quite clear on this issue too - he speaks of supporting trans rights, AND the need for single sex spaces and services. Has he ever indicated that he intends to remove that level of safeguarding?

What the discussion is on this forum is not that Starmer is bonkers enough to remove much needed safeguarding, but if the law makes that safeguarding harder to maintain. And does he understand that.

It’s such a minority of men though I don’t think they’d get access

I get what you’re saying just do the right thing for safety and privacy reasons

Right now we don’t even get a say.

And my point about a biological explanation for being trans being a red herring is that whether being trans is biological or ideological is not important to the debate about women's sex based rights as in neither case does it make a biologically male person a woman.

And my point is that becomes irrelvant, if Keegan's opinion prevails, as seems likely it will with Labour being elected. And then we'll all wait to see if great harm follows.

Twylitette.
Ok, so just avoid anyone who looks like this and i wont be raped. Got it.

That's the trouble with assumptions based merely on appearances. Those are all women.

I haven't misunderstood anything. And nor did I say you claimed being gay was a choice. I asked. You've answered.

As for so called sealioning? , I'd never heard of that before either. Every day is an education.

Is asking questions and being ignorant in some things, some kind of crime now then? Is it against the rules here?

Is only one opinion allowed here? Is no dissent permitted? Is it not permissible to have a different opinion to others, or disagree?

Ok, so just avoid anyone who looks like this and i wont be raped. Got it.

24Jules
You seem to fail to understand both the studies you refer to and my post. Or you're misrepresenting both.

I have not claimed that homosexuality is either an ideology or a choice, I have pointed out that the studies are not as simplistic as you claim. Which, incidentally is what the authors state about their own reports.

And my point about a biological explanation for being trans being a red herring is that whether being trans is biological or ideological is not important to the debate about women's sex based rights as in neither case does it make a biologically male person a woman.

Sex is defined by the type of gametes that your body produces, will produce or has produced (or should do for those with DSDs) it is not defined by how you identify or what a brain scan says.

No-one has said that women do not commit crimes. We know that women prisioners exist and it is exactly for this reason that Prisons is one of the areas where sex does matter. No man (no matter how he identifies) should be placed in a womens' prison.

Figures about prisioners and their demographics are easy to find as official figures are published.

I think that Dungs is spot on. We are definitely witnessing some sealioning here.

Twylitette.
Just for you. Some of these drag queens are wearing wigs too.

Ereshkigalangcleg

That's something to look forward to then . Lol.

Well, not all trans women wear wigs for starters. 😅😅

I think it's going to feature in the run up. During the Labour leadership election a few years ago it was asked about in most BBC interviews.

How can we tell the difference between genuine transwomen and blokes in wigs please?

Bring on the general election. It's going to be interesting to seeif any of this subject features at all.