Sex Matters meets Anneliese Dodds

Fair enough!

Decided I'd better listen and see what I thought before I lost all hope....

Oh dear re strong and well-informed on her brief re the Evan Davis interview. He utterly wiped the floor with her 🤦‍♀️

Looking at the timing of that interview, she was Chief Treasury Secretary at the time of the interview, so she really should be better informed than this.

However, as a small glimmer of hope, as good as Evan might be on fiscal understanding, he's utterly useless on gender identity stuff. Hopefully this experience gave her a kick up the bum on making sure she understands her subject area fully before going on air.

It would be great to hear her back on Radio 4, with Evan, in her new capacity... with her running rings around him on gender identity in schools.

Come on Laura. Do it for Marjorie and show her what you're made of (🤞 I really hope you are made of something good 🤞)

I am GC. I also dislike all incompetent, self serving politicians!!

I'm assuming you're coming from a "GC" angle here.... in which case....

Bugger.

Why, Kemi? 😭 Surely you had better options?!

@BonfireLady - you are in for a real treat if you look up Laura Trott being interviewed by Evan Davies. ‘Strong and well-informed’ isn’t my first thought!

This is what slays me about the "Trans rights now!" placards. They already have more rights than anyone else! There was a meme thread in the Old Place some of us used to frequent called "Free Weed For Blacks". You can imagine. This is much along those lines.

Oh Bridget 🤦‍♀️

Sadly, I am not surprised.

I really hope Laura Trott is a strong and well-informed Shadow Education Secretary. I'd not heard of her at all but it's promising to see that she has previously headed up strategic communication. She's going to need a lot of strategy and a lot of communication to call out the harms being done on the school to gender clinic pipeline, given Phillipson's seeming determination to maintain it. Come on Laura, please show us you can do this 🤞💪

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Trott_(politician)

I see Bridget Phillipson has been visiting this 6th form college busy promoting the social transitioning of 6th form students. Evidently Cass has passed them by:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14066109/School-trial-gender-affirmation-fund-clothes-makeup-trans-children.html

They're welcome across that golden bridge - but we shouldn't pretend that they didn't sign up to regressive transactivism for years and have done so much damage.

Agreed. However, I also agree with PPs who say that we're seeing weakness and a desire to hide behind existing laws (and watch them be tested) rather than strong leadership. The only exception I've seen to this is Wes Streeting. He's certainly come a long way since the days when he was part of the FB group that targeted women who spoke out about the impact of gender identity belief.

I'd like to see far more from Labour though, particularly on the school to gender clinic pipeline. Bridget Phillipson is dangerously silent on this. And by dangerous I mean that her inaction on telling schools how they should be approaching approaching this is filling up the hopper of children who are tumbling towards Wes Streeting's Cass-led approach. It's far too late for far too many children already. She needs to intervene, urgently.

Edited for typos.

The nurses case does pass the buck to the courts because Parliament have made a hash of the law. There case is not without peril. What if God forbid they lose? We will then have a legal precedent for the TRAs to crow about and employers will be none the wiser and imposing mixed changing rooms everywhere. The court could always find that the use of the alternative office, though inadequate, is sufficient to balance the competing rights. We might hope that the nurses win in the court of public opinion but it could still backfire. If only we had political leadership. Labour really are a dead loss. I'm hoping Kemi does to Starmer what Trump did to Harris.

Thanks for the update, op.

I think this could go either way. I've still not forgotten Dodds declaring (in a Guardian article) that Labour was proud of the Gender Recognition Act, but today I will choose to be optimistic.

Hmm. I'm not so sure that they haven't changed their views? I look at the vitriol directed at women insisting on the rights of girls and women to single sex sports, spaces etc coming from too many labour activists - especially but not solely men. (see Rosie Duffield, the LWD etc)
They've got themselves completely on the wrong side of history and it's only since Cass & the steady stream of court cases that they're frantically trying to reverse ferret without it being noticed. You've only got to look at Starmer's own drivel about never saying only women have a cervix suddenly morphing into 'of course sex is biological as Blair has told me so' (I'm paraphrasing). And I'll be kind and not mention Lammy's emotional incontinence about the cervix.

Now I'm relieved that they've finally noticed that their wholesale commitment to sterilising children and wedging male sex offenders into women's spaces is not good for society. But their acknowledgement of the law is very recent and only as a result of all the hard work from women (plus the embarrassment of appearing to be clowns when they spout transactivist slogans).

They're welcome across that golden bridge - but we shouldn't pretend that they didn't sign up to regressive transactivism for years and have done so much damage.

I don't think labour has changed view.

They always have supported the law - that single sex spaces are legal. Just as they support the law that allows men to change their birth certificate to a female one. Thats why dobbs is comfortable talking to womens groups and TRA.

What they find it difficult to clarify is real life situations. They want it decided in court rather than speak clearly.

It shouldn't be up to nurses to take legal action against the nhs about changing rooms. Rather than just support the nurses, politicans should be acknowledging that there is something seriously wrong and be saying what they are going to do about it.

But they want to give men the status of being female and give women the opportunity to have single sex spaces. They want these to to work together without saying how its possible.

I wonder whether the inevitable fudge to come ( in my view ) will be justified by claims to be 'on the right side of history' unlike the U.S.A - where " trans rights will be rolled back by Trump". Labour is more likely to look to, and refer to, Europe - to Ireland,Spain and now Germany where such measures have already been passed.

Thank you. Hopefully this is the direction that Labour is being dragged towards.

Article: 'Labour must learn from Kamala Harris’s transgender muddle'.
https://archive.is/sFYjo

Its not necessarily about whether you trust them or not at this point.

Its whether they can see the political danger or not, post Tuesday.

IF they fail to protect single sex space OR attempt a fudge to make it easier to get a GRC to bypass this, then there WILL be political fall out at some level.

I agree with @Shortshriftandlethal and @Redshoeblueshoe . We have had years of Labour lying that women have no human and legal rights of our own as men are women too, that we have no right to bodily privacy, dignity and safety from men. I would not trust any of them as far as I can throw them.

And sadly that includes some female Labour MPs who pretend they speak up for women, whose behaviour has shocked me more than most.

Dodds is trying to be nice to everyone as far as I can see.

Then she needs to understand that to make any progress, that just won't work. 'Both-sides-ism' isn't going to get us anywhere.

I'm not ready to forgive Labour. This hasn't happened by accident. They may have started out on a 'be kind' platform but as the evidence mounted against it there has been wilful blindness on the part of the worst of them. They aren't thick so they are either stubborn and malign or they are cowards because they don't want the treatment that was meted out to Rosie. The cowards will switch when the wind changes. Both deserve our disdain.

People - even those in government - used to listen to both sides of a debate before making up their minds. Up until now the Labour Party has only listened to trans activist lobby groups. If it's redressing the balance a little it's about time!

Trump's win - and the way some left leaning women sat on their hands and refused to vote Democrat - is reinforcing the message from women in Scotland. The many discussions here about women abandoning Labour over this issue will have played their part.

Wins in the courts are significant. Whatever Wes Streeting is he has the sense to see the compensation claims that will be coming if the NHS persists in harming people it should be helping. Even if those cases lose the optics are bad.

I no longer trust Labour one bit but I do trust they want to stay in power. Trump's win does have a silver lining.

Labour have done and are doing what the Dems conspicuously failed to do - put themselves alongside the average voter rather than activists. They've reaped the rewards of that.

I like seeing Anneliese Dodds meeting with Sex Matters but I wouldn't want to see the government hand over policy making to them just as I didn't want to see them hand over policy making to Stonewall. It's governments that are elected, not lobby groups.

I’m genuinely devastated about Trump being voted back in and what it means for US women - but the daylight it’s brought to the issues with gender ideology have been helpful.

We’ve been told that Americans don’t care about trans/gender issues but I’ve seen it mentioned by many.

Every cloud has a silver lining, as they say!

Dodds has been a public supporter of gender identity ideology - she’s made strongly supportive statements in the Hoc and in media interviews and public statements. She was supportive of GII in the general election campaign during the summer too.