80 new rape courts

Oh no. Women are engaged in politics! Worse, the witches can fucking read and dissect policy positions!

Alert the village elders etc

its not our fault that Labour still can’t join the dots between their definition of women and girls including men and boys with special feelings and the knock on real life effect that has on operational policy & practice

you cannot defend what you cannot define

It's only pooh-poohed because of Labour's shocking lack of concern for 51% of the electorate.

Whenever I hear one of these policy announcements I just think 'sounds great, but how?'
Where are they going to magic up the necessary barristers and judges from?

It's the same with the promises of extra GP appointments, teachers, police officers etc

I don't see how he can do this without making the legal definitions of male and female clear. We cannot have the situation where women are having to refer to their male attackers as 'she' in a court of law.

Time will tell but I don’t think a man who says he believes that some women have a penis and has failed to call out the bullying and harassment of a female MP in his own party for saying only women have a cervix is likely to be the person who makes a dent in MVAWG

@Signalbox nails it.

Talk is cheap-costs nothing. I tend to go by what people actually do and I dont see any support in any way, shape or form whatsoever for Rosie, and (unless I missed it) Starmer has yet to retract the statement that "saying only a women has a cervix is not something that should be said". In which case Labour can fuck off- i dont trust them any further than I can piss.

Time will tell but I don’t think a man who says he believes that some women have a penis and has failed to call out the bullying and harassment of a female MP in his own party for saying only women have a cervix is likely to be the person who makes a dent in MVAWG.

What is the latest Starmer position on what is a woman?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/26845883/keir-starmer-transgender-women-define-is/

I completely include TM in the definition of female and woman and thus in the scope of reducing violence against them

unlike many services to support female victims of violence who help those who identify as women

Starmer has questioned the government on court backlogs. Yet Labour says there are free spaces. It is confusing at best. Plus there is Operation Soteria. What actually is being offered here? It is not clear

I just don't believe it. I find it hard to believe any politician these days, he's clearly trying to find a popular policy idea that will get him votes. When actually in power, no doubt this will slide onto the back burner, or it will be announced that because of XYZ issue left behind by the Conservatives, that it's no longer possible. Or similar.

And of course, if prison estate becomes essentially mixed sex/male instead of female/male, then there's one set of vulnerable women who won't be seeing an improvement in their circumstances.

the thing is this an actual, practical proposal which if carried out will actually significantly improve the chance of survivors getting justice

casting around for some way of discrediting it just looks petty

rape is a crime that can only be committed by someone with a penis

AKA men.

And you need to know who's committing the violence. Women women, or men with bits of paper women?

How can one halve violence against women and girls without

1. clearly defining what is meant be woman & girl ie are we talking biological women & girls or does it include biological women & girls and special men/boys too?
2. ensuring that risks to women and girls of the biological kind are reduced by ensuring single sex spaces are guaranteed?

otherwise It’s all just something that sounds nice but falls at the first basic hurdle