Keir Starmer "not naming my children"

[Misthios]

Respect his stance not to allow pictures of his kids, fair enough, that is the decision he and his wife have made.

But the whole "i'm not publicly naming them" - you'd think as a former lawyer he'd know birth records are public record and anyone can find out in 30 seconds? So not the big secret he thinks it is?

I have never had any desire to know the names of, or indeed to visually identify, any prime minister or politician's children.
The only reason would be presumably to mock or scrutinise them for their parents behaviour. Which is pretty pathetic really.
So of course people can find out. Presumably the other kids in their school and their parents all know them. But to say he won't name them or involve them I think is admirable.
I mean look at that cunt Rees Mogg, wheeling out his kids like Victorian dolls, accessories to his 'image'. If I was them I'd be suicidal!

It looks like phishing for public opinion and is totally inappropriate and the timing on a Sunday is suspect too.

Why is it? You don't get to decide whether something is universally funny for everyone else just because it is for you. Ricky Gervais isn't the arbiter of what is funny either; he's just very loud and gets a lot of airplay.

Where does the line get drawn. Do we laugh about wheelchairs and the like? Some might, others wouldn't. There are some really gross 'comedians' that make jokes about disabled people too.

What if there is something that you wouldn't find funny at all yet others do? Will you be so super-tolerant and understanding then?

Best to have some respect and some personal responsibility for what you fall about laughing over. That way you won't get caught up in the flipside yourself.

Up to him and his family isn't it? Good for them.

It’s up to him, but by declining to do so people do speculate what it might be - and they don’t choose nice names. I’ve heard people referring to them as Kevin and Murgatroyd, which is pretty foul.

Yes, stupid vacuous people will do just that.

This is patently untrue. Many parents do not have choice in which school their children attend. A child who is not able to pass a selective exam, cannot attend a grammar school. A child whose parents cannot afford the million plus price tag, cannot attend the school Keir Starmer’s kids attend.

i understand as a parent he wants to protect his kids privacy, However the impact of this is that it impedes the electorates ability to assess whether he is being hypocritical in his choices for family versus what he imposes on the the rest of the country.

My friend’s kids are at the school his children are at. They are not rich. A friend of mine used to teach there. They have a very varied intake of kids. It’s got a good reputation, sure, but it’s not serving some rich enclave.

What kind of school do you think Starmer's children attend?

I disagree. What Keir Starmer has said is the ages of his children, so there is not about to be the choice at 11 of which school to go to.

Though I agree about the limitations of school choice in general.

This has nothing to do with his work, it’s his private life. KS’s children have the same choices in life as anyone else when it comes to their identity.

So, no I’m not bothered about KS’s children’s names, gender or how they identify. Can you imagine the change in their world over the last 2 years. Adolescence is tricky enough without your parents being exposed on the world stage due to your Dad’s career choice. I’d do exactly the same in his position as a parent.

🦇 💩 to tie Labour’s position on gender identity to KS’s children’s identity. Warped.

@senua is really going to blow a gasket.

Time for some fresh air.

I disagree.

This. Of course he knows people could look them up but he is trying to give his children as much of a "normal" life as possible

1. Who knows whether this rumour is true?
2. Who knows what his personal feelings about it are, even if it is?
3. Do you know him well enough to know how much it would influence his policy stance?

It’s his child’s privacy and they deserve it, no matter what.

There is zero evidence that either of his children is trans.

I know little to nothing about any PM (current or exs) children except that one forgot his in a pub like parent of the year (couldn't name the kid though or even be certain on which of the countless idiots we have had in my lifetime that it was).

He's setting a boundary that he has every right to do. Whether people can look for themselves who cares, most people won't look because they cba and don't care. What he's doing is making it explicitly clear that he wants it to be private, let's hope people respect it, most of all, the press!

Bye.

Cameron! I'd forgotten about that! (no idea what the child was called)

They’re entitled to privacy even if they are “up to anything”. They have not asked for this life. Plus even if they are up to anything what does it matter? It won’t affect the running of the country. 🤷‍♀️

Famous phrase

”the personal is political”

https://www.britannica.com/topic/woman-suffrage

I find this topic interesting. Putting aside Starmers particular decision on his kids privacy, surely individuals in politics have strongly held beliefs on all sorts of issues? That is why they are in politics.

I think the electorate understandably want to know who their leaders are and this includes some knowledge about the choices they make about their families.

We cannot separate the personal from the political. Our politicians wield such power and deliberately seek these positions . We need to know who they are. As much as anyone can, of course.

A few recent examples -
Rishi Sunak, many thought his billionaire status made him a poor choice for PM. Valid? His wife’s non dom status was wildly criticised. Did it tell us something about them as a couple and their values, yes it did in my opinion.

Boris Johnson - his affairs and multiple children. Dud it tell us something about his morals and values, yes it did, in my opinion.

Keir Starmer? - I have no idea if his child has transitioned. If they have, does it tell us something relevant to the electorate about his perspective on this wildly debated issue, in my opinion yes it does.

i was no fan of Johnson or Sunak and did not vote for them. They did not hide what they were though. I remember Sunak being very upset about what he viewed as attacks on his wife over the non dom thing. Yes I am sure it was upsetting on an individual level, but a PM and his families choices are rightly open to scrutiny.

The more I think about it, I find Starmer very controlling on this issue. Not sure how I feel about it. He is saying ‘I have decided this” when he has no right to decide this. He has put himself willingly in a public position and that includes his family whether he likes it or not.

This is a properly weird thread.
Private doesn’t mean secret.

There’s lots of things in my life that are private. That doesn’t mean secrets that I’dgo to court to keep that way.

Why are people pretending not to understand the difference?

@Misthios what are your children called?