Trans women have a cervix, who knew?

Exactly. If these people really thought TWAW this movement wouldn't have got anywhere. They're MRAs in dresses and everyone knows it.

It's often clear from behaviour that someone thinks TWAM because they are prioritised and centred just like men in general.

Also the same people obviously think TMAW because they are treated as if theu barely exist and certainly don't matter, except occasionally to be deployed as some kind of gotcha in an argument. Just like these people treat the rest of women.

😳🤯

i think the stupidity is worrying, the ill-informed bluster is worrying too - it’s not as if you can’t find out exactly how various types of so-called SRS work with a quick google. But also I think this illustrates the total confusion going on.

When gender ideologists want us to say that not only women have a cervix, the group the must be trying to defend are trans men. They think TWAW so they can’t be talking about TW. They mean it’s wrong to say a man can’t have a cervix, because a TM can, and a TM can get pregnant etc, hence the campaign against talking about women and mothers etc in maternity services.

But some people don’t get this and because they know TW to be men (though they are trying to deny that) they think this means TW have a cervix. In other words, not just women have a cervix because TW (ie men) do too! Then they get all bogged down in trying to claim males can grow or somehow gain a cervix.

india willoughby famously responded to keir starmer saying it’s wrong to say only women have a cervix, by offering to show IW’s own cervix to Andrew Marr. But the issue has nothing to do with IW or TW at all, it’s about TM.

Both India and Lammy are clearly showing they think of TW as men, and trying to argue that men can get themselves a cervix. If Lammy wanted to support “trans rights” and GI he’d be saying that of course men can have a cervix as trans men often do.

Although it's three years old, it illustrates two things. One is that a lot of men know very little about female anatomy. (This is also true of women, unfortunately - one survey found that about half of women don't know where their cervix is.) This suggests our education system is failing in a major way.

The other is that some people are ignorant of what is involved in sex reassignment surgery. They imagine that a man who has SRS ends up with an anatomy that is broadly equivalent to a woman's. They have no idea that it is very very crude and doesn't go much beyond creating a hole that is meant to resemble a vagina - but is simply an open wound that has to be kept open artificially using dilators, and, if testimonies on Reddit and elsewhere are to be believed, often stinks of excrement.

It is particularly depressing that someone like Lammy who expects to hold a senior role in the next government is so clueless, but he is probably no more ill-informed than the average man or woman in the street.

Yes, exactly - and idiotic misogynists have no issue with that, because a fuckhole to nowhere is fine by them. They see women as holes, so it's no big deal for them if other men gouge holes in themselves. Accessibility to penis is all that matters.

That's all it is on a man. A tube of penile skin or colon, with no purpose beyond that. There's a multitude of horror stories online from those who regret it, enough that I don't believe anyone who claims they are happy. At best, they're in less pain cos they allowed the wound to close.

It says what misogynistic men think vaginas are - fuckholes. If it's capable of having a penis shoved in, it's as functional as it needs to be.

Anyone saying what's the point in bringing thos up as it was 3 years ago. The point is for all we know Lammy still thinks this untruth is a fact as he has never clarified what on earth he was saying back then. Poor David was probably hanging on the every word of India "I have a cervix" W. God help us when he's running a government department of any kind.

Why do you think?

He's got to get elected first though.
https://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/24419135.general-election-2024-labour-candidate-douglas-alexanders-statement/

Sorry @Shortshriftandlethal brain fail here
I meant Douglas Alexander.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/ministers-reflect/douglas-alexander

Have you any links on him? Not aware of him.

There's unconfirmed talk of Douglas* Alexander being brought back who worked for Blair and Brown,
f*ixing name

Boris Johnson did have some gravitas on an international level, though, being very much an international person. His great grandfather was an Ottoman Turk who was murdered during the Turkish War of Independence. Vlodimir Zelensky certainly seemed to think highly of him. Who does Labour have with that kind of heritage?

I think he's going to need some serious credibility for this role...what with war on several fronts and an internationally fragile situation. Who does he have that has that kind of experience and gravitas? I also suspect that Wes Streeting may be moved from Health.

Our recent Foreign Secretaries include Boris Johnson and Liz Truss. Lammy really won’t register on the laughing stock scale.

I'm sure he does because most of the time he's talking out of his arse.

Our next foreign secretary, probably. God knows what he'll get us into with that stupid gob of his.

Talking shite is not pro trans though is it?
It's just talking shite and if you talk shite as a politician then fair enough that it's called out.

Honestly, who cares? Why does someone start a thread everytime someone in the world says something pro-trans.

When somebody publicly states absolute nonsense as fact, it's perfectly reasonable to point out that they are talking bollocks. This includes, but is not limited to, 'pro-trans' statements.

Or his cervix

I'd like some evidence if that bold assertion, to be honest.

Would you like to rephrase that...😂

They're going with Wes Streeting as Health Secretary, cos he has a better handle on ladybits!