If we have to vote this year or the next, women who will not vote Labour due to the GRA raise your hand

[TerraNovaTwo]

As above

The Conservative Party could make this go away today. They simply scrap their own proposal with their 80 seat majority in HoC.

Why have they not?
What makes you think they'll do it in their next term if they wont do it now?

[quote EeeICouldRipATissue]@madlam
Fucking great, Tories forever it is then. That'll be cracking for women.
Exactly! How the fuck people think Conservatives are better for women is beyond me.[/quote]
I don’t.

What I think is that if Labour cannot be made to see sense on this, we are sunk, because the Tories certainly do not support women, minorities, the poor, public facilities etc etc.

I felt the same way about Corbynite anti-semitism, and that is now apparently in abeyance, though not disappeared.

All parties are on board with it for reasons unkown. We will have to engage in a permanent battle to retain the rights we have, and watch them undermined by underhand methods. Its infuriiating and exhausting.

The ease with which womens rights have been erased should be a wakeup call to other groups. There's no end to purity spirals, they just result in one purge after another.

@TooBigForMyBoots

The Conservative Party could make this go away today. They simply scrap their own proposal with their 80 seat majority in HoC.

Why have they not?
What makes you think they'll do it in their next term if they wont do it now?

That’s EXACTLY why the Labour Party, who should be natural supporters of equality, women’s rights, social fairness, public services, welfare state and so on, need to see that their natural and habitual followers don’t support Self ID. They’ve lost their way.

Raising my hand wearily.

Raises hand.

At recent elections I researched how to properly spoil my vote so that it would be properly counted as a spoiled vote.

@DottyDoge

Imaginary???? Has the poster quoted had their head under a rock for the last decade. This is the biggest threat to women's rights, safety and representation for a hundred years and the quoted poster is saying it's "imaginary". You're blind.

Or, I just see things differently and I perceive your point of view as hyperbolic. I get the rhetorical argument (if anyone can say they're a woman, than being a woman becomes meaningless), but I just don't think things will turn out the way you think. I don't see that (in the UK) women's rights are going to be curtailed in any signficant way as a result of trans-rights, I just don't see it happening.

Huh? It's already happening. It's not only north of the border that women no longer have useable rape crisis centers, it's here too. The inclusion of the male 'women' is celebrated directly where it does the most damage. Women with Rape Trauma Syndrome cannot access suitable group therapy because their trauma gives them a fear of men. Services set up by women for women are already unusable for women, that is real not imagined.

@Nemorth

Raises hand.

At recent elections I researched how to properly spoil my vote so that it would be properly counted as a spoiled vote.

@Nemorth Where did you find this information please. Thank you 😌

@elodie77

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

Very cute but do you think the Tories respect your sex? Boris Johnson? Dominic Raab?

Raab thinks that men can be victims of misogyny.

@Skinnytailedsquirrel

I certainly wouldn't vote for a party that hates women.

Well that should surely include a party that votes against misogyny being defined as a hate crime.

Never

I don't see that (in the UK) women's rights are going to be curtailed in any signficant way as a result of trans-rights, I just don't see it happening.

I'm afraid you seem to have missed quite a lot of information on this. It's not a possible future outcome; it has come to pass. It has happened, and is happening. It would be naiive to believe that the damage done is as bad as it is ever going to get - which would necessarily involve believing that a certain percentage of females are justifiable collateral damage in extending the freedoms and wellbeing of males. Which by extension would mean interesting binary and sex based ideas of value.

Which begs the question, how many females - what percentage - is ok to see harmed in the pursuit of better wellbeing and freedoms for males?

Are you willing to be one of them? Your mum? Your daughter?

I'll argue against the erosion of sex-based rights for ever, but the disgraceful "austerity " policies brought in by this corrupt shitshow if a government hurt women and families much more. I dont trust the Lib Dems after their last attempt at government. Labour it has to be.

All parties are on board with it because it is a really powerful group. Look at the simpering mess Nicola Sturgeon was when she thought she'd upset them
Women are threatened and party leaders do not speak out even against the threats. Labour MPs actually call women bigots for speaking about their own rights

@TooBigForMyBoots

The Conservative Party could make this go away today. They simply scrap their own proposal with their 80 seat majority in HoC.

Why have they not?
What makes you think they'll do it in their next term if they wont do it now?

They aren't trying to pass self-id, and they've made lots of indications they are not going to be pursuing other legislation of this type, or at least are reconsidering it.

They are also letting MPs have their own views on this which is crucial. As opposed to the other parties who try and push people out who disagree, even just regular party members.

Time will tell if they draw that out or what, but it really is quite different than what we are seeing from the LP and others. It's possible to imagine the Tories replacing the GRA with something more sensible in a few years time, but not the LP, unless they renounce their current approach.

@Artichokeleaves

I don't see that (in the UK) women's rights are going to be curtailed in any signficant way as a result of trans-rights, I just don't see it happening.

I'm afraid you seem to have missed quite a lot of information on this. It's not a possible future outcome; it has come to pass. It has happened, and is happening. It would be naiive to believe that the damage done is as bad as it is ever going to get - which would necessarily involve believing that a certain percentage of females are justifiable collateral damage in extending the freedoms and wellbeing of males. Which by extension would mean interesting binary and sex based ideas of value.

It's happening under the Tory government though so I'm confused as to why this is aimed at Labour. The Tories are the ones in government with the power to stop it.

Labour have been quite upfront that if they get into power they will immediately implement all the desired bits Stonewall wishes, including self-ID.

The Tories do not have clean hands, but at least are not committed to galloping female rights into oblivion asap.

@Artichokeleaves

Labour have been quite upfront that if they get into power they will immediately implement all the desired bits Stonewall wishes, including self-ID.

The Tories do not have clean hands, but at least are not committed to galloping female rights into oblivion asap.

Very concerning

I can't vote labour because of this issue, others have worded it better than I can, but whilst it might not yet be on an official manifesto, the leader and many others have been quite vocal in the push for self id, there is nothing to suggest this won't be their official position, they have had plenty of opportunity to come out in support of women but have refused to do so, so I don't for one second think they will make any kind of U turn now.

Me. Spoilt my paper last time because of this.

In my view the difference between a conservative and labour government in terms of the positive impact on women's lives over a single term in office is likely to be marginal (though I don't discount the importance for individual lives improved). Once lost, sex-based rights would not be recovered any time soon and the damage done to women (as a class, those in poverty and those who are not) would be immense, both immediately in terms of single sex exemptions etc, but incrementally to all women in all areas of life as we lose the ability to record accurate sex based information or even to openly discuss women as a sex class and the particular difficulties that they exclusively or disproportionately face.

It's not only north of the border that women no longer have useable rape crisis centers, it's here too.

Do you have a link to this? While I don't deny there might be isolated incidents of clashes (e.g. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10249633/Rape-victim-forced-quit-therapy-sessions-feels-threatened-6ft-trans-woman.html), is it really the case that women can't access services intended only for women?

@DottyDoge

It's not only north of the border that women no longer have useable rape crisis centers, it's here too.

Do you have a link to this? While I don't deny there might be isolated incidents of clashes (e.g. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10249633/Rape-victim-forced-quit-therapy-sessions-feels-threatened-6ft-trans-woman.html), is it really the case that women can't access services intended only for women?

You linked to one. How many, exactly, are needed before it becomes a problem? 5? 50? 100? For me, personally, one woman being forced away from support aimed at females because a male's feelings trumps her trauma is too many. How many do you need?

I'm still a party member - and a GC feminist - I am so torn - I wont campaign, leaflet or attend meetings at the moment - I've been a party member since 1986 so it's very hard finding yourself in the wilderness

BUT as others have said - I am a single parent, working in the public sector and witnessing first hand the devastating impact on people and services under this shambolic shit show of a government - I can't vote anything but Labour - through very gritted teeth