It shouldn’t be said that “only women have a cervix”.

[Paddingtonsmarmaladesandwiches]

Watching Keir Stammer on Marr this morning scrambling to answer whether or not it is transphobic to say “only women have a cervix” was the final nail in the coffin for me this morning with Labour. In the aftermath of The Lancet calling women, “bodies with vaginas”, I think I’ve finally figured out that the current belief system is that transwomen are women, but women who were observed female at birth are “bodies with vaginas”. Clearly Labour aren’t in need of the votes of bodies with vaginas, brains and a spine.

[NotABody]

I don’t know why some women wouldn’t be offended by being referred to as a body with a vagina though. What has happened that they are not offended?

It's because of liberal feminism. My body, my choice. You do you. Sex work is work. No kink shaming here.

[LondonJax]

@PhiRhoSigma

If you don't respect my sex, don't expect my X, Labour.

I'm amending that great quote @PhiRhoSigma to

If you don't respect my sex, don't expect my X (chromosome) Labour.

[LittlePearl]

He is such a disappointment.

I have no one I can vote for. I have never voted Conservative and will never vote for a party led by BJ. I can't vote Labour or Lib Dem because of total ideological capture.

I brought my children up repeating the mantra: Every vote counts, you MUST use your vote! But I'm now faced with no alternative but spoil my ballot paper.

I'm gutted.

[Mayra1367]

As a woman I will never ever vote labour again. Trans rights are in danger of airbrushing women’s rights . A trans woman is not a woman , have a separate category if you want but leave the definition of women alone. Fed up with it all .

[NCBlossom]

I'm donning my hard hat for this next comment but I think you're in a position of privilege if who shares the changing rooms at the local swimming pool is your most pressing concern rather than how to afford to pay for your children's shoes and food

That is a reasonable thing to argue. Although how it doesn’t relate to ‘bodies with vaginas’ which is read by medical professionals, such as myself, and the article is one in which women are supposed to be seen more clearly and fairly so that their menstruation is better acknowledge by medics, and the repressed and ignored parts of their woman hood, namely menstruation, are better assisted and supported by the medical profession. So yes the language used in this case is extremely important as it counters the whole premise of the article!

However… back to your point. One argument back… it is predominantly women with lower socioeconomic status who are at most of risk of being abused as women, often in the home, but also these are the women often most vulnerable out of the home. They are the girls who will be in the swimming pool changing rooms, more likely to have say body issues or vulnerability to being groomed. Or even are being abused and changing rooms are a particularly sensitive area for them.

For me, an older woman, honestly it won’t affect me if a man with a beard walks into the changing room while I have my towel around me. I couldn’t care. But other girls, yeah, I do care.

[LoislovesStewie]

I'm wondering how I can cause the most mischief when I next have to complete a form which asks my sex etc. Not any medical form obviously, but some general government rubbish information form. Any ideas?

[NCBlossom]

@NotABody

I don’t know why some women wouldn’t be offended by being referred to as a body with a vagina though. What has happened that they are not offended?

It's because of liberal feminism. My body, my choice. You do you. Sex work is work. No kink shaming here.

Yes but that is in a context where you are mutually OK with being referred to in that way. It is an agreed, acceptable term if you are in that context I imagine? This is an article for all women, about women (mensturation), from a respected medical journal. Even if you were OK about being referred to as a body with vagina in a particular (sexual is it?) context - why would you not be offended by being referred to that in a journal? I’m not being tricky, I genuinely do not understand.

[ScribblingPixie]

Yeah, I'm done with Labour and so's my DP - massive Labour family on his side too. These politicians actually disgust me - nothing to say about anti-semitism, and now it's misogyny. They're not fit to represent their constituencies. And yes, if I had a decent Conservative candidate I'd vote for them - never thought I'd say that. No more polite conversations about it either. I'm going to take the masculine route and call out the idiocy and dishonesty in blunt terms.

[purpleboy]

It's amazing the ways they can come up with dehumanizing women. And now we can't even talk about basic biology. I would love to know how he thinks we are supposed to educate children on these topics whilst not being allowed to use sex specific words. The next generation are going to be so messed up.

[4BlueTowers]

I ran screaming from the Labour party with the whole Corbyn and Momentum anti-semitism shit show.

I was waiting and carefully watching KS to see if he could lead Labour back from the brink.

How depressing.

[BedTed]

I don’t like that trans women are called “women”, but women who are female from birth have to be called cis women. Why do we have to now have a prefix? Why can’t we also stay as women and trans women be women?

[WatchWait]

It's clear, I think, that KS knows exactly what a woman is or isn't. He's got his knickers in a knot because of all the game playing.
I wish JKR was prime minister

[4BlueTowers]

@NCBlossom

I'm donning my hard hat for this next comment but I think you're in a position of privilege if who shares the changing rooms at the local swimming pool is your most pressing concern rather than how to afford to pay for your children's shoes and food

That is a reasonable thing to argue. Although how it doesn’t relate to ‘bodies with vaginas’ which is read by medical professionals, such as myself, and the article is one in which women are supposed to be seen more clearly and fairly so that their menstruation is better acknowledge by medics, and the repressed and ignored parts of their woman hood, namely menstruation, are better assisted and supported by the medical profession. So yes the language used in this case is extremely important as it counters the whole premise of the article!

However… back to your point. One argument back… it is predominantly women with lower socioeconomic status who are at most of risk of being abused as women, often in the home, but also these are the women often most vulnerable out of the home. They are the girls who will be in the swimming pool changing rooms, more likely to have say body issues or vulnerability to being groomed. Or even are being abused and changing rooms are a particularly sensitive area for them.

For me, an older woman, honestly it won’t affect me if a man with a beard walks into the changing room while I have my towel around me. I couldn’t care. But other girls, yeah, I do care.

And to be honest I am also quite concerned about the existence of male bodied sex offenders cycnically identifying as women and being put in womens jails ready and waiting to abuse exceptionally vulnerable women who literally cannot physically get away from them.

[AngelicaElizaAndPeggy]

And that's labour just lost 51% of its vote - well done Sir Kier

[ifIwerenotanandroid]

'I'm donning my hard hat for this next comment but I think you're in a position of privilege if who shares the changing rooms at the local swimming pool is your most pressing concern rather than how to afford to pay for your children's shoes and food'

Isn't this known as whataboutism? Trying to minimise women's concerns in this area by attempting to portray them as privileged (i.e. shame them into shutting up) is a low move, popular among wokies.

Needing toilets which are safe & private is hardly a position of privilege. It's something common to all animals, let alone all humans. My tomcat wouldn't - ahem! - eliminate his waste in his own garden if I was standing there watching him or if a dog, fox or badger wandered in.

[NCBlossom]

@BedTed

I don’t like that trans women are called “women”, but women who are female from birth have to be called cis women. Why do we have to now have a prefix? Why can’t we also stay as women and trans women be women?

This is the most sensible and respectful solution I agree. It used to be the case for many years. And no we don’t have to have a prefix, I refuse to be told what to call myself!

[WatchWait]

@AngelicaElizaAndPeggy

And that's labour just lost 51% of its vote - well done Sir Kier

They haven't though. So many people think all this is perfectly reasonable. But it's completely bonkers!

[Skinnytailedsquirrel]

It must be the end of Starmer (and of Labour)

[Skinnytailedsquirrel]

The mad thing about the interview was that he wouldn't answer any previous questions, he just ducked and dived and blamed Boris (as he always does) then he answers this question. What a fool. A dangerous fool.

[Hapoydayz]

I just can't understand how any woman could possibly vote Labour. Why is the term man not under such scrutiny? It seems they only want to erase women and degrade women to body parts.

[ShoppingWomble]

I’ve done this, with my own Labour MP, who is excellent and who I have voted for, for the past 13 years.
But this is the straw that broke the camel’s back. And whilst she is a great MP, I cannot vote for a party that is so obviously against women.

Yep, ditto. Just emailed her to say so. I'm gutted.

I've said I'll vote for her if she stands as an independent candidate as I think she's great. Or if Labour ever get a leader who stands up for women's rights (here's hoping...)

[Wheresthebeach]

I will be emailing my MP too. She’s quite good and supportive locally but I can’t vote Lib Dem or Labour anymore. I’m not sure how any woman can.

[TrainedByCats]

@SpindleWorld

Ffs.

So he wants a debate, but we're not allowed to express certain beliefs and facts that are, in law, actually protected, because men like Keir Starmer and Ed Davey say so?

What kind of a fucking debate is that, Keir? Because it sounds very much like totalitarianism to me - and that isn't protected in this country. Call yourself a lawyer? Call yourself a socialist?

This^

[RedDogsBeg]

Ninjawannabe I'm donning my hard hat for this next comment but I think you're in a position of privilege if who shares the changing rooms at the local swimming pool is your most pressing concern rather than how to afford to pay for your children's shoes and food

You think women who are the victims of domestic violence and cannot access a refuge due to the fact the refuge admits male bodied people and said women is traumatised by being around men is privileged?

You think Muslim women who cannot access female only spaces, such as all female changing rooms for swimming, due to the inclusion of male bodied people into those spaces and therefore self exclude themselves thus shrinking their already limited world even more are privileged?

You think women who are victims of rape having to address their attacker as she in Court because said attacker now identifies as a woman is privileged?

You think women prisoners locked up with men who identify as women and are convicted rapists are privileged?

Dehumanise women hard enough and long enough and then you can do what you like to them, that's where this is going.

[BlueRaincoat1]

I was actually really upset to hear him say "it shouldnt be said". Who is he to say what should an should not be said. And int he next breath to say thatbthere should be a respectful dialogue or some other meaningless platitude. I am so massively sick of this 'there must a a respectfully conversation' crap from people in positions of power who refuse to then say anything meaningful. Have the bloody dialogue! SAY SOMETHING!

Instead he said "it shouldn't be said" that only women have cervix, but didn't go on to elaborate on what should be said instead. About his views on whether there should be a word to define the female sex class and why this is important. Does my head in.