Voting to 'Get the Tories Out'

[DewHopper]

Pro Labour posters are all over this platform telling posters to vote for whoever gets the Tories out. It does not seem to matter who it is as long as voting for them gets the Tories out nationally.

It's a worrying voting strategy from my pov but I tend to vote at constituency level. If I had an excellent Tory MP who cared about the things I cared about and served their constituents well, I would vote for them. Similarly Labour ( I would absolutely vote for Rosie Duffield) or Independent.

Do those people who will just vote for anyone as longs as this will oust the Tories - and what could be a very good MP - ever consider the effects of this locally? They may have got the Tories out at a national level but saddled themselves with a useless MP who does nothing for the locality.

Take for example women's rights. I am a gender critical woman and care very deeply about the erosion of women's single sex spaces etc. I am sure that many of the 'Tories out at all costs' people feel the same. The pro Labour people keep telling us that Starmer will be better for women's rights BUT if you vote on a single issue - getting the Tories out - you may well elect a hopeless constituency MP who is TWAW and who will be standing up to every pro woman move that Starmer makes. I worry that there will be a lot of these in the next parliament.

So should we be voting on the single issue - get the Tories out? I don't think so - AIBU?

I may well always hold onto certain opinions that I feel strongly about (my dislike of the Tory party for example)

@Firefly2009 I completely get that but I can’t say I would never vote Tory because who knows what they’ll look like in a decades time.

If predictions come to pass the Tories will have little choice but to burn through the current membership and see what comes from the ashes. I suspect reform will mop up a lot of the current names we know. It’ll be interesting to see what form it takes at the next GE and if it can shake off the memories of the last eight years especially. Labour still gets smeared by the party that existed in the late 70’s.

Reform is building momentum in terms of popularity. The are hot in the heels on the lib Dems in that regard but I don't think they will have any impact on seats. I do think that once labour is in power then the popularity of reform will drive the narrative of the conservatives to the right. I hope what that means is labour can move to the centre and stop playing progressivist social policies and concentrate on economic reform. Now I'm being the optimist. You never know.

Yes well said

What do you think if would be, in practice? I'm not sure. But are you asserting that there can be absolutely no middle ground?

Again, holding onto one view without hearing more voices will only make things worse. The same will be true if the gender debate becomes a key point for the general election. And realistically that's not going to happen anyway.

Going back to the original point of the thread (probably?); I am! curious to know - and forgive my ignorance posters! - how new policies become part of law.
Is it:
-Voted on in the house by all MPs?
-Secretly decided on by the party in power, with no say from anyone else?
-Debated by lawyers in a court of law (as it is in the USA?)
-Decided on mostly by the party in power, but with say from the minority parties?
-A national referendum?

I'm not saying which one we would like, I am asking how such policies will be decided. My apologies if I've missed that being explained already.

When pp say they want a middle ground do they mean biological males in female spaces and sports so they become mixed sex or not?

And realistically that's not going to happen anyway.

Why can’t it be a policy in a manifesto at a GE?

Personally? I don’t subscribe to the notion that biology can be changed or that dressing/acting in a particular way indicates a biological difference from the body someone inhabits. I was disappointed in what the debate around the ban on conversion therapy became because of the drastic medical interventions available. Teenagers in particular are vulnerable to suggestions that they may find their sense of self by changing something. Therapy is something I believe anyone so unhappy in their own skin needs prior to irreversible steps or drastic lifestyle changes.

However, I am not trans and the people who identify as such will take drastic measures to demonstrate this in their presentation to the world. I’m not in a position to tell them they don’t feel what they do. I would like them to consider the reservations I outlined above with a sense of rationality not driven by an instinct that they’re being attacked.

I am concerned about the consequence of ‘TERF’ demands. There’s no consideration for the plain fact that people do identify as trans and are unlikely to just stop because it’s demanded of them. At this point what actually happens to ensure that only women are in women’s spaces? The only measures that come to my mind are draconian and intrusive to every woman and I’m yet to be convinced of why I should be signing myself and daughter up to voluntarily have to prove ourselves as women? There’s no reasonable argument against this happening that doesn’t lead to more draconian steps in my mind.

Oh please, do we have to play that game were we all pretend you can't tell the difference? Come on.

@EasternStandard I don't know what is meant by middle ground in terms of what that looks like in practice - I was asking you what you think it means in practice. When I talk about middle ground, I'm talking about having an open discussion prior to coming down hard on one side, even if you do end up doing that.

It could very well be that all parties include a gender/trans policy in their manifestos. I am just personally skeptical that any party will do so, regardless of how many (or how loud or how hard) from both sides campaign for them to do so. To take one side or the other, a political party knows that it will definitively gain supporters and lose others.

What I think is, if it is included in any political party manifesto, it will be a calculated move based on a popular majority. It doesn't mean the party is genuine about what it actually believes but I guess that's fine. Perhaps this is a reason to continue campaigning? In which case, you're way ahead of me! :-)
I guess I am skeptical that any of the parties will do so. It is safer to not declare this on such a polarised topic.

I don't think that it can't be, or necessarily that it shouldn't be; I just don't think it will be. Which raises the question of - in practise - how a women's sex based rights campaign will succeed. And I am questioning how this is going to be relevant to the general election.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/legislative-process-taking-a-bill-through-parliament#:~:text=A%20bill%20is%20a%20proposed,Parliament%20can%20introduce%20a%20bill.

I mean if people arrived into women's spaces as simply still head shots with filters you'd have a point. They can be convincing. But in 3d, real life, with the benefit of movement, women aren't fooled.

What does this mean and who is playing a game?

Made a follow on

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4979847-voting-to-get-the-tories-out-part-2

That's not always the case. I have known men who have fully transitioned and I wouldn't have known that they are biologically male.

I wish I could, my retention of parliamentary rules is patchy shit .

Your questions are excellent though but I would imagine it would very much depend on the MP. It would be perfectly feasible for an MP to declare to an electorate they’re one thing and then either fail to attend a vote or abstain. That could be by individual choice or under the threat of losing the party whip (which is just a way of saying they lose their own party’s support).

One issue for women currently is anyone has access as no one can check for a GRC. So males can access with little change.

But overall I think starting with the EqA definition, stop compelled speech, keep gender out of schools and plain English fact based language is good

Others may want to deal with the GRA which I could debate as it is a poor law but maybe start with the changes I have listed as a compromise

To add I don’t envisage any more demands on me or dd as most are law abiding and I’d be fine with that social contract

Not even just the unlikely one but men, plural. Colour me sceptical.

I know at least 2 people I think have transitioned but would never ask them as its very intrusive and completely irrelevant to my interactions with them.

Yes I would be totally relaxed if I bumped into them in the ladies.

My issue has always been about predatory men exploiting loopholes, luckily thanks to tireless and patient campaigning everyone is now much more aware of that as an issue and taking action to keep women sage.

@AdamRyan Yes and I would never ask unless I knew someone well. In my experience trans people have been sufficiently open about it that it was a well known fact. I totally get the loophole where predatory men can use the whole situation to their advantage. I just find it hard to believe that there are a significant number of men pretending to be women so that they can be predators.
I think this point and about how laws are passed are at the crux of the issue. But I may be wrong. I have, until this point, been more concerned about the impoverished, homeless, etc.

For those suggesting "a vote" I'm curious what the question would be and what happens after the vote for both winning scenarios? I think if we started discussing that it would pretty quickly become apparent whether a vote is workable or not

Yes we do because it’s already happened. I don’t know why you think it’s only trans women who would be under suspicion.

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/semenya-offered-show-her-body-officials-prove-she-was-female-2022-05-24/

For those suggesting "a vote"

A manifesto policy to amend the EqA to biological sex

It depends on how far someone is along the transition path I think.

Is it not the case that predatory men are not really trans women?? Being predatory surely means a level of deception? In which case, it is unlikely they will have transitioned.

Unfortunately my life experience is such that I think there are far too many men who will lie, cheat and manipulate to abuse women. Self ID would be a gift to them, luckily this is no longer on the table after a period where it was the policy of all the main parties, including the Conservatives.
Some more right wing people are late to the party and don't realise how far we've come in mitigating that risk.

What a strange claim. It’s down to all the women speaking up that this has occurred, which hasn’t been popular on this thread

The lengths that men will go to predate on the vulnerable knows no bounds. This is demonstrated time and again, everyday you read the news.

Matched only by the lengths people will go to damage children if it elevates their devotion to faith and ideology.

It's society's job to safeguard the vulnerable not hand them over on a platter.