Voting to "Get the Tories Out" part 2

[AdamRyan]

Follow on to this thread to continue discussion

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4978642-voting-to-get-the-tories-out?page=40&reply=132044464

The Cass review demonstrated that high numbers of girls who attended gender clinics are autistic or otherwise from vulnerable back grounds.

My daughter was questioned about gender by CAMHS, because she wears boys clothes and doesn't communicate as girls normally do (because she has sensory issues and a communication disorder).

Autistic girls have been encouraged to socially transition either by peers or by services because 'they are not like the other girls'. Some of these are now going on to want to medically transition. I know this from the Cass review, from anecdotal experience amongst my daughters peers and from personal experience of questions and the direction CAMHs were trying to go down with my daughter. Signposting to gender clinics is good for camhs as it removes anxious children from their waiting lists.

I'm not voting for anyone other than Labour, they need to earn my vote. Starmer hasn't said enough of the right things to do so yet.

Agreed. Has Labour committed to third spaces or will they continue to allow males into women's single sex spaces.

At the moment it is entirely unclear what Labour's position is. Women who have raised it have been called 'right's hoarding dinosaurs' or worse (see Rosie Duffield's treatment).

Has Starmer apologised to Rosie Duffield for her treatment or stated that women who ask questions are not 'rights hoarding dinosaurs'?

If so can you provide evidence as that will be really helpful to me.

No idea about Labour.

I know the Tory anti woman stance and the damage they've done to us in the past 14years.

If the next government try to fuck us over, we'll fight it. Just as we've fought the Tories. Fighting governments for womens_rights is a never ending feminist thing.

I just really don't understand why you don't think this is the appropriate time to ask Labour their position if you understand it is an important issue?

They are going to get into power because the Tories are so shit so pre- election presumably is the best time for them to nail their colours to the mast on this issue. They know a number of traditional Labour voting women have concerns about this, why not put our minds at rest so we can vote with a clear conscious?

it makes no sense to me to ignore this now.

@lifeturnsonadime I've posted this already, but here is what I read from 23 Nov 2023:

"Allies of Keir Starmer claim he has the backing of Labour’s grassroots over his stance on sex- and gender-based rights after a new poll of members suggested they support the party’s updated position on the issue.
The party shifted its stance in the summer, abandoning its support for self-identification – which would allow people to legally change gender without a medical diagnosis. It announced the move alongside support for making the process of obtaining a gender recognition certificate far simpler and less invasive, as well as continuing to ensure some single-sex services and places could only be accessed by biological women.

While the issue remains a controversial one within the party, Labour Together, a group closely associated with Starmer, said a new YouGov poll of Labour members it commissioned showed broad support for the leadership’s new line".

I think all the opinions in the world about what political parties should say pre-election won't necessarily make it so. They may well say more, but my opinion is that they will likely be careful about committing only to one side, simply because it is so divisive.

Ok thanks for the link @Firefly2009 , it's not enough for me though. The issue is that the GRC will continue to allow some men to be legally women and this means that there cannot be single sex spaces. The Equality Act does not say that single sex spaces are reserved for biological females. This is turning their back on Self ID as a policy but self ID already happens as a result of the GRC, it is illegal to ask for a copy of it, not to mention unworkable, so this will still effectively allow males to self ID into some spaces.

Even the article says directly below the headline that it won't satisfy either side, it doesn't because it doesn't protect women or actually give us single sex spaces or introduce third spaces.

It also doesn't address the autistic children transitioning issue which is really close to my heart.

From the article "Perhaps Labour is quietly hoping such awkward questions will be resolved by someone else before the next election."

I would very much like to see Labour answer these awkward questions.

Women's rights v the wants of some males to access female spaces.

And they can't answer those questions because they might upset some males?

Labour have been questioned about this, given answers on this and have rightfully shifted their position towards women in the past few years. They are not ignoring it. Women's rights activists aren't ignoring it.

In contrast, the Tories have lied, sat on the fence and done less than the bare minimum to redress the damage they've done to us. The Tory party is a misogynist, patriarchal party with a terrifying rape culture.

A Tory vote is an anti-woman vote. If it takes tactical voting to get rid of them, so be it.

I'm not going to do that 'tactically vote for them'. It is a deal breaker for me.

We all have different priorities. I'm setting mine out.

If you have not been able to find via an online search what Starmer has or hasn't said, I don't think I will be able to do so either.

Rosie Duffield has said things that are widely considered as transphobic; I believe she also is anti-LGBT rights; this is pretty extreme especially in today's climate, whatever you think of that. There is no excuse for threats of violence; however, what do you want Starmer to apologise for? Even if he should, I don't think he is likely to - again due to the divisive nature of the debate.

Anyone coming in strong on one side or the other, along with stating such a view, is going to lose a lot of votes in one camp or the other. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, but just the likelihood of what is happening in politics pre-election. Starmer has already said his piece in November apparently. He may well get questionned further, but just in my opinion, I think it is unlikely that any of the main political leaders are going to give you the answer that you want.

Don't shoot the messenger though! That's just what I think is likely and I could be wrong.

What is a deal breaker for you? What is your priority?

So if Labour doesn't earn your vote, will you not vote at all?

Rosie Duffield isn't a transphobe, nor is she anti LGB. Good grief. The Guardian thinks she is. They have a very low bar on women who think that women's rights should involve spaces free from males. Look at what they did to Suzanne Moore!

What a world we live in where we can't expect politicians to categorically state that women should have spaces free from all males!

Possibly not. As is my right.

We are not obliged to vote if there isn't a suitable option.

I think I have been clear on what my priority is.

The way you see it is that trans women are men. They are biologically, but they don't identify as men. I agree with protecting women and their safe spaces, and especially with protecting children. But do you really object full stop to people identifying as the opposite sex? If so, what is your solution to that?

You want to sweep away with statements like "they might upset some males". A lot of those males are human beings with gender dysmorphia. And whilst there are valid points about women's safety and their rights, it isn't any better to dismiss trans people either.

Perhaps the answer are third spaces? But the debate needs to be had without extremes on either side, however strong the feelings are, because then nothing will be resolved. Take the pre GE campaign as an example. It is right to campaign, but it is precisely because of polarisation that adds to the possibility that political leaders won't take a stance.

Both sides have created the very problem they are trying to solve.

Ofcourse it is your right, it wasn't meant as an attack.

I am just trying to get my head around the fact that people feel so strongly about one issue that nothing else seems to matter.

And I don't really understand what the answer is your are looking for.

Labour have confirmed that single sex spaces are safe.

I feel sorry for males with gender dysphoria but they are not women.

I don't feel more sorry for those males than women who are displaced as a result of them being given access to our spaces which include but is not limited to -

Women of religious minorities,
Sexual abuse survivors
Rape victims
Disabled women
Women who need to seek women only refuges
Women who want to compete in sport at any level but especially elite level
Women prisoners

Perhaps not. What would your definition of anti LGBT be though? She has said and done things that make it look possible that she is; for example attending the LGB Alliance conference.

Where is the line between being a transphobe and anti LBG, and not?

Labour haven't confirmed that at all.

They have just said they will not introduce self ID and have made a comment about spaces under the equality act being for biological women which is completely unworkable due to the wording of the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act which grants some males a certificate which states that they are legally female.

There is no guarantee of single sex spaces at all.

The LGB alliance is not a hate group. It is a group set up by gay people who are concerned about gender ideology.

Some lesbians and gay people are rightly concerned that they have been told by Stonewall that they are akin to sexual racists if they have a 'genital preference'.

Trans ideology is considered by some to be deeply homophobic. Do you think lesbians can have penises?

I understand your point, and it is valid. However, if we are going to stand up for women's rights, there also needs to be a solution that will be respectful of trans people as well. Supporting trans people doesn't equal an elimination of women's right and those issues you mention are not all to do with the gender debate. What is the solution for trans women? They are not biologically women, but they identify as such. If women can be protected, what about them?