The Times: Labour plans to simplify ‘dehumanising’ gender change process

I got another email today from the local Labour Party Women's Forum woman I briefly crossed swords with last year. An invitation to a fundraiser:

Dear duc,

We are holding our Women's Forum fundraiser on 28th June, from 7pm, at [redacted]

Tickets, which include a fish and chip supper and pudding, are £15.
We'll be meeting for chips, chianti and (political) chat this summer – please save the date. Speakers are TBC. Tickets are £15. Please call/text/WhatsApp [redacted] and state how many tickets you would like. Payment details will be sent back. All genders welcome and kids too. Raffle prizes would be appreciated! Please note this event is upstairs.

This is the same woman, who, when I asked for their take on the treatment of Rosie Duffield and other women, invited me to reflect on my prejudice and read the LP policies on inclusion. it seems genderism is pretty well embedded in the LP. at local and national level.

@Needmoresleep

You're absolutely right. As Tony Benn said

“What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?”

Labour sure wouldn’t be exercising their power in the interests of the women in this country. Quite the opposite.

My answer to the "why are we in this mess" is the reduction in quality of our politicians. Too many have little outside experience. I know the Care/Protection/Probate system is in a mess because that is my lived experience. Others know that disability support is no better. Or SEN or a whole range of other things.

Our parents might have, but normal people no longer have the time, or the stomach, to engage in politics. Couple with the social media and and the narrowing of experience, and younger politicians may well think that trans is an urgent societal issue. And they well dominate discussion in constituency associations, with older members staying quiet to avoid a row.

(The Tories won't be any better, though they too have their problems, with a predominately male, aging and falling membership. Hence why it has been so hard to persuade so many of their MPs that women's issues matter.)

Who represents us? What do we need to do for our needs and priorities to be woven into party pledges?

This issue to my mind is so important and is the reason I will not be voting labour

I think Yvette Cooper's son is gay.

You can spoil your ballot with a message explaining "this is my only option"; the message will be noted. If you vote for the no-hope candidate they won't get your message. And your no-hoper will count your vote as validation.

This

You don't allow people to falsify their age on their birth certificate, so why allow them to falsify their sex?

Presumably it's mainly financial. If people could falsify their age there would be all sorts of financial benefits they could claim. They could go back to school or get a pension early or make use of saving schemes aimed at children or young people.

Now that that the pension ages have been equalised for men and women, men can't get a financial benefit from claiming to be a woman (well apart from when they claim women's awards and prizes but that isn't the state that pays) and the state aren't that bothered about things that only adversely affect women so here we are.

Help! I don’t know who to vote for!

Isn't it strange that they can't see it? While they're about it, why don't they make it easier and less dehumanising to register as disabled?

But the real question is why would you want to allow someone to falsify a core component of their identity in the first place? When government and other agencies collect data from people, the two demographic pieces of information they typically require are sex and age. You don't allow people to falsify their age on their birth certificate, so why allow them to falsify their sex? If you just came to this as an outsider who knew nothing about it, you'd regard this as quite mad.

I find this such a baffling stance. Why SHOULD it be easier and less formal? Changing your legal sex (esp since we know there is no route back again under the GRA) should be a big deal!

Agree with this

A thought on voting and why spoiling your ballot
or tactical voting isn't the best idea

TV channels (BBC, itv and C4) have to consider balancing aired views in line with the popular vote.

Therefore there is logic and reason to voting for someone who 'has no chance' in your constituency.

Just saying.

There are two dangers:

1. Labour get a big majority. Lots of new MPs who don't have life experience beyond student Unions and activist politics.
2. Labour have a small majority and need LibDem/Green support. Not unlike the position Sturgeon was in in Scotland.

Either way our next Government will be in hock to activists. And women's rights are the sort of bauble they might give away for support on things Starmer et al deem more important.

Ok but if this is the direction this discussion is taking then I'm out. I want nothing to do with it.

This proposal is just another method to abuse heterosexual women who can't pretend the man who got them pregnant is a woman, and don't consent to being recorded as a lesbian by the state when she is heterosexual. It is forced state sexual orientation conversion for spouses- usually heterosexual women who married men.

When the state issues a GRC saying a man's a woman, the marriage also becomes registered as a same sex marriage in law, unless the spouse has already used the exit clause.

And it will have significant interference with freedom to practise religion for those who don't consent to their marriage being changed to a 'same sex' one in law, and who will face lifelong religious consequences eg not being able to remarry within their faith etc.

Misogyny, cruelty and contempt for female human rights on steroids.

Exactly, thank you.

His motives are irrelevant to me. HIs children are quite possibly still minors and one of the few things left that I still admire about him is that he protects their privacy.

Harrop and Webberley will be throwing themselves at that gig.

Some do but I’d focus on the words and actions

His lawyerly approach to screwing over women is where I think the problem lies

Plus appeasing TRA lobbyists