Angela Raynor

[Pixxie7]

I think her comments today were spot on, although not really professional she makes a valid point.

One reporter made the comment that sometimes a leader allows his deputy to say what he fears to. Keir Starmer has tried to get rid of her already but failed to do so and now she is emboldened. How they can work together I just do not know. He saw off Long-Bailey and now he has her mate in post.

I did a bit of research about her and we come from similar backgrounds, from the same place etc and should be someone I could admire for their tenacity. Yet I find her to come across as a bully who is completely unable to consider anyone else's point of view. She feigns empathy but is motivated by power. Sorry, but she detracts from a moderate Starmer making him look weak. She does not own her mistakes, but deflects. Starmer lowered himself yesterday with the Boris tool joke as by definition he is one too.

@elodie77

*Elodie77 you do only offer sound bites. We should of course "be kind' and use pronouns but in some circumstances sex based rights need to be kept - regardless if most transpeople are not sex offenders/preditors. Its to protect the women from the ones who are. The same goes for womens sports, which the Uk sports councils have just admitted it needs a serious review because of the unfair advantage and safety of men competing against women. Men should also not be allowed to insist on being female rape councillors - which we are seeing in Scotland, which will happen here too if Labour have their way. So its much much more at stake than males in female toilets of prisons.

However do you really think your rights are safe with Boris?

I think Boris is a bumbling knob however the Tories are the ONLY party not bending the knee to the tran right activists. And they are clever enough to know that the many many Labour women supporters that Labour told to leave are now seriously considering voting for them just to keep Labour out. Because it means that much to them.

And really - it isn't a difficult topic, its only difficult if you know fuck all about the situation. Discussing womens safety should never be a difficult topic.*

Whereas you seem to find it difficult to debate without constantly resorting to personal attacks. And I think you haven't read all my comments here.

I think your view that giving some people more rights takes away from others is flawed and a very divisive way to look at it. I would be interested to know what your view is on LGBT rights in general. Also on other things. You accuse me of using soundbites, but I find your use of the term 'bending the knee' pejoratively potentially suggestive of your other views, especially given the criticism Keir Starmer has received for bending the knee in solidarity with BLM. Do you take issue with that too?

I think your view that giving some people more rights takes away from others is flawed and a very divisive way to look at it

What does this even mean? You keep offering sound bites with no actual insight.

Do you believe that males should be put in to womens prisons?

Do you believe that males should compete against women?

Fuck yeah - its taking womens rights away to place male rapists in a womens prison.

I would be interested to know what your view is on LGBT rights in general

• well for a start I believe that females dont have to shag women with penises. I think a lot of Lesbian and Gay people have massively been fucked over by TRA and stonewall - this is why there has been massive movement away from Stonewall from the LBG community. Same sex rights and sexual orientation discrimination are not the same as identity 'rights' . There is no 'trans rights' although they are protected characteristic under the equality act. And so they should. But males going in to women prisons is in direct conflict with the single sex spaces which is also in the Equality act.

Keir Starmer has received for bending the knee in solidarity with BLM. Do you take issue with that too?

Keir Stamer can do what the fuck he likes.

There are only so many f...s I can give about a poster whose 'insights' are limited to profanities.

@elodie77

There are only so many f...s I can give about a poster whose 'insights' are limited to profanities.

Still digging?

I would rather this pandering handmaiden joined David Lammy in a desperately needed biology lesson...

I think your view that giving some people more rights takes away from others is flawed and a very divisive way to look at it

I think you need to think more about rights.

Most human rights are not absolute, they are qualified or limited and must be balanced against other needs.

Specific rights like right to maternity leave interfere with an employer’s right to choose who they employ. On balance we as a society decide it’s better to have statutory maternity leave, but that doesn’t mean that the employer doesn’t therefore lose some rights.

I think that perhaps you are confusing situations where a specific group is being oppressed for no logical reason - women can’t vote, black people must sit at the back of the bus - with situations where people have different and or conflicting needs that should be balanced.

Specific rights like right to maternity leave interfere with an employer’s right to choose who they employ. On balance we as a society decide it’s better to have statutory maternity leave, but that doesn’t mean that the employer doesn’t therefore lose some rights.

I don't think these are remotely comparable.

I think that perhaps you are confusing situations where a specific group is being oppressed for no logical reason - women can’t vote, black people must sit at the back of the bus - with situations where people have different and or conflicting needs that should be balanced.

No, what I'm talking about is that the debate is often framed as 'us against them' which I maintain is the wrong way to look at it. And many posters here deny trans people basic dignity, such as the poster above referring to trans women as 'males' throughout.

No, what I'm talking about is that the debate is often framed as 'us against them'

I’m not sure how else you can talk about a conflict of rights. It generally involves some level of disagreement.

And many posters here deny trans people basic dignity, such as the poster above referring to trans women as 'males' throughout.

The poster is not referring to specific people, so it’s difficult to understand how anyone’s dignity is harmed. They are just using clear language to explain why there is a conflict of rights.

You (and others) seem to have invented a new right - the right to have identity affirmed by others. However that doesn’t exist now and it’s not clear how it could ever co-exist with other rights.

@elodie77

There are only so many f...s I can give about a poster whose 'insights' are limited to profanities.

I see you couldn't/didnt answer any of my questions.

But still you continue to hedge for free private school places for your child yet promote equality and fairness & refused to discuss the appalling situation regarding womens sex based rights because it 'difficult'.

I was a life long labour support and so was my family (some still are) but they have really really let me and millions of women down. The betrayal is much deeper than the fuckery the tories do because I believed in this party my entire life. I can't vote for the Lib Dems because they are receiving millions in donations from the big Pharma company that makes the hormone suppressants they are feeding the kids - that why they have taken the 'transwomen are women stance'

And now I can't vote labour because the top tier women are trying to fucking gas light me in to believing that a man can magically change sex and his feelings matter more than my safety.

@elodie77

There are only so many f...s I can give about a poster whose 'insights' are limited to profanities.

Taking the knee which is what starmer did is not the same as bending the knee

I'll start by saying I'm not a Tory I'm a floating voter. I don't like Boris Johnson however I wouldn't call him scum. I have voted Labour in the past.

What really annoys me about some very vocal Labour voters is their hypocrisy. A lot of my friends are socialists or so they say. Here are some of their actions:

Friend A tutored his dc for a grammar school 30 miles away when there is an outstanding school on his doorstep in his catchment. He pay circa £1k a year to send his dc there by train. If he's such a great socialist why isn't the local outstanding school good enough? I haven't asked.

Friend B voted remain - naturally and avoids Wetherspoons/Dyson etc and a few years ago berated a friend for buying a Dyson vacuum cleaner but during lockdown he proudly displayed his new Dyson robot cleaner to all and sundry.

Friend C bangs on about how terrible the Tories are which I agree mostly and talks about kinder politics however why is it that Rosie Duffield felt she couldn't attend the Labour Conference?

Friend D bangs on about Tory cronyism/corruption and how all that would disappear under Labour but what about the ex Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson? Are Labour exempt from these actions?

Friend E is a property landlord. Enough said.

Labour is suppose to foster a more equal society so why did Diane Abbot, Ruth Kelly - ex education secretary and Shami Chakrabarti feel the need to send their children to private schools?

As I said I'm no fan of the Tories at all but the hypocrisy of some Labour supporters just make me want to eye roll. They are all socialists but don't seem to lead very socialist lives.

I do like my friends, I don't call them out on their actions as they don't affect me at all but I do often eye roll when they quote from The Bible The Guardian.

Interesting thread in Chat right now:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4362630-previously-undecided-voters-would-you-vote-for-starmer-s-labour-now

@Lykia

I'll start by saying I'm not a Tory I'm a floating voter. I don't like Boris Johnson however I wouldn't call him scum. I have voted Labour in the past.

What really annoys me about some very vocal Labour voters is their hypocrisy. A lot of my friends are socialists or so they say. Here are some of their actions:

Friend A tutored his dc for a grammar school 30 miles away when there is an outstanding school on his doorstep in his catchment. He pay circa £1k a year to send his dc there by train. If he's such a great socialist why isn't the local outstanding school good enough? I haven't asked.

Friend B voted remain - naturally and avoids Wetherspoons/Dyson etc and a few years ago berated a friend for buying a Dyson vacuum cleaner but during lockdown he proudly displayed his new Dyson robot cleaner to all and sundry.

Friend C bangs on about how terrible the Tories are which I agree mostly and talks about kinder politics however why is it that Rosie Duffield felt she couldn't attend the Labour Conference?

Friend D bangs on about Tory cronyism/corruption and how all that would disappear under Labour but what about the ex Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson? Are Labour exempt from these actions?

Friend E is a property landlord. Enough said.

Labour is suppose to foster a more equal society so why did Diane Abbot, Ruth Kelly - ex education secretary and Shami Chakrabarti feel the need to send their children to private schools?

As I said I'm no fan of the Tories at all but the hypocrisy of some Labour supporters just make me want to eye roll. They are all socialists but don't seem to lead very socialist lives.

I do like my friends, I don't call them out on their actions as they don't affect me at all but I do often eye roll when they quote from The Bible The Guardian.

I think you summed up the left in a single post there. Virtue signalling is the favourite hobby of ‘progressives’. Do as a I say, not as a I do

How anyone can defend Bojo and his cabinet is astounding.

I haven’t voted Labour for a long time. But between them and the Cons, they’re the lesser of two evils - one being very evil.