To think the article about Angela Raynor demean all women.

[PupInAPram]

I don't care what shade your politics are, you should be disgusted by the Daily Fail article claiming that Angela Raynor 'distracts' Boris Johnson by crossing her legs because her debating skills aren't as good as his.

If labour succeed in their bid to obliterate the word 'woman' as referring to women, no-one will be able to protect women's rights

What bid? What evidence can you give me that Labour wants to obliterate the word “woman”?

We're just going round in circles here. Labour want self-ID. That means a woman is just someone who says they're a woman. There is no link with biology. Woman will no longer mean 'woman' as we know it.

They find it complicated or disrespectful to say that a woman does not have a penis. Of course they're not saying that they want to obliterate the word woman but as with all politicians you have to see through the spin to see what is actually happening. They are dressing it up as 'be kind' and maybe they have actually come to believe that is the case but their direction is no less dangerous.

I know tories are just jumping on something they see as a vote winner btw before you accuse me of not seeing through their spin.

Of course they're not saying that they want to obliterate the word woman

So you admit you’re talking rubbish. Good.

I know tories are just jumping on something they see as a vote winner btw before you accuse me of not seeing through their spin

So you know it’s only spin but you’ll vote for them anyway. Give me strength.

If labour succeed in their bid to obliterate the word 'woman' as referring to women, no-one will be able to protect women's rights.

whatiswrong was perfectly clear that she specifically meant ‘referring to women’ not that the word itself would completely disappear

just that if woman no longer means adult female but would also include adult males

I know tories are just jumping on something they see as a vote winner btw before you accuse me of not seeing through their spin.

So why support them, @Whatiswrongwithmyknee? They've had twelve years to sort out the law and haven't done it, you blatantly can't trust them to do it now, so what on earth is the point in wasting any time on the fact that occasionally they pay lip-service to what you want to hear?

So you'd vote Tory even though they will continue to obliterate women's rights, along with shafting the poor and buggering up the economy? Especially when you know perfectly well that Labour has no intention of doing what you claim.

Dear god. It's not in the least an admission of talking rubbish. What a childish thing to say! Most people are able to thin beyond literal interpretations.

Yes I'll vote for them anyway as spin or not it protects the word woman.

How about commenting on the Self-ID point instead of making up 'gotchas' which only exist if you strategically misinterpret what others are saying?

So you'd vote Tory even though they will continue to obliterate women's rights, along with shafting the poor and buggering up the economy? Especially when you know perfectly well that Labour has no intention of doing what you claim.

I believe labour has every intention of doing what I claim as do many other people. This to me is a much more dangerous situation than even anything tories can dream up.

So why support them, @Whatiswrongwithmyknee? They've had twelve years to sort out the law and haven't done it, you blatantly can't trust them to do it now, so what on earth is the point in wasting any time on the fact that occasionally they pay lip-service to what you want to hear?

Already answered this loads o time too. Lip-service or not I believe it will ring-fence the word woman to actually mean woman so that's what I'd vote for them.

Anyway I don't think I'm saying anything new here. Just re-stating views which people can already find if they choose to read the thread. I'm starting to think that people are deliberately wasting time but perhaps it's just that I can't express things well enough. Either way, I respect people's rights to come to different political conclusions even when they don't respect mine and I hope we all get to our shared desired outcome of protection of rights for women and equality for all (and a labour government people feel they can vote for). I won't be posting on this thread again.

How about commenting on the Self-ID point instead of making up 'gotchas' which only exist if you strategically misinterpret what others are saying?

But the Tories aren't planning to remove the GRA so self ID is still there, indeed the Tories are opening up 3 extra NHS centres to speed the process up... this isn't for surgery, but counselling.

A tory minister watching porn in the commons, 58 MP s being investigated for sexual mis conduct, almost ALL are Tories.... your flying with the crows there, i'm afraid.

Though TBH if they are watching Porn, maybe its so they know what a woman is?

I know I said I would not add more to the thread but I can't leave the thread with the false impression PP has just given. GRA does NOT allow self-ID, see commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9079/

It is a complete falsehood to conflate the GRA with self-ID (not defending the GRA, I think it never should have come into being).

Just didn't want anyone starting to explore this issue given the wrong information which the above suggests.

@Whatiswrongwithmyknee Hang on, the Tories are NOT getting rid of the GRA and they are building 3 additional gender recognition centres.

From your link The GRA allows transgender adults to apply to the Gender Recognition Panel for a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) which is self ID isn't it?
... goes on to say... The Government has explained (PDF) that applicants who are granted a full GRC are, from the date of issue, considered in law “to have the gender they identify with (man or woman only) rather than the gender that accords with the sex that was recorded at birth.”

They have reduced the fee from £140 to £5 and the number of applications has increased, hence more Gender centres.

So i am not sure why you have such faith in the Tory party.

The Government does not intend to change the criteria in the GRA for legal gender recognition, meaning a system based on self-declaration is not being introduced. Elizabeth Truss said: “it is the Government’s view that the balance struck in [the GRA] is correct, in that there are proper checks and balances in the system and also support for people who want to change their legal sex.”

From the above link

support for people who want to change their legal sex.

But you object to people changing their sex at all @Whatiswrongwithmyknee. Surely a change of legal sex means trans women are treated like - oh, women? So there’s no point in voting Tory if you care about only natal women being in women’s separate spaces.

Already answered this loads o time too. Lip-service or not I believe it will ring-fence the word woman to actually mean woman so that's what I'd vote for them.

You believe that a party with a proven track record of U-turns, backtracking, and blatantly doing what they promised not to to do will keep their word on something as insignificant (to them) as womens rights???

Bizarre, but you do you, but don't moan when the tories do what tories do once they decided Self-ID is a vote winner.

Lip-service or not I believe it will ring-fence the word woman to actually mean woman so that's what I'd vote for them.

And it will ring-fence it to mean women without adequate maternity and abortion rights, without adequate equality protection, without adequate property protection, without adequate policing and prosecution of rape, etc etc. And, for you, that will be absolutely fine?

The tory policy is no different to the Labour one... ie it follows the GRA.

...State you are a woman, attend a gender clinic, get a GRC.... become a "woman" or for that matter a "man"

No protection of biological gender whatsoever... indeed the Tories are making it quicker, easier and cheaper.

So, i guess the people saying "The tories know what a woman is" don't give a shiney shit, they are dyed in the wool Con voters and will use anything to beat up on Labour.

I've said again and again that gender politics is affecting all political parties and I cannot comprehend these people who claim they'll vote Conservative, citing gender politics as a reason, when we can see their track record.

However, that doesn't mean the concerns raised should be ignored or dismissed.
All the political parties should be acknowledging the effect on women and girls and their rights and giving clear statements about what they intend to do to improve the truly shocking statistics.
Right now, none of them are doing this. They're getting away with weak, careless soundbites and that's why it's important to challenge all of them.

The irony

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Critic_(modern_magazine)#:~:text=The%20Critic%20is%20a%20monthly%20British%20political%20and%20cultural%20magazine.

Contributors include David Starkey, Joshua Rozenberg, Peter Hitchens and Toby Young

The magazine was founded in November 2019,[4] with Michael Mosbacher, former editor of Standpoint, and Christopher Montgomery, a strategist with the European Research Group of Eurosceptic Tory MPs,[5] as co-editors. It was funded by Jeremy Hosking, a Conservative party donor[6] who had previously donated to Standpoint.[7]
Reception

Oh do grow up @Whatiswrongwithmyknee. Both parties are sticking with the GRA. However much you might want it not to be true, it is. Anyone sufficiently interested can do their own research, just like you have(n’t).

Labour are looking to reform GRA as I've demonstrated. They want self-ID.

If you have proof to the contrary, do share so people can make up their own minds.

Or just have a tantrum and call people names if that floats your boat.

If you find yourself on the same side as David Starkey and Toby Young and you see nothing wrong with that while telling PP's the conservatives, who have been in power for 12 years, are the ones who support women off the back of nothing more than Johnson saying he doesnt think that men should be in womens sport while refusing to answer who has a cervix beggars belief

David Starkey - previous contributor to the webzine you linked to - In January 2015, was criticised after calling political journalist Mehdi Hasan "Ahmed" and saying that "nothing important" had been written in Arabic for 500 years. He was also criticised for appearing to imply that a female victim of a child sexual abuse grooming gang was at fault for the abuse she had experienced.

Toby Young -
Young has come under criticism for comments he made on Twitter, most of which were deleted upon his appointment to the Board of the Office for Students. Young said that he posted more than 56,000 tweets, of which 8,439 remained as at January 2018.[10]
These included what an Evening Standard editorial called "an obsession with commenting on the anatomy of women in the public eye".[96] He referred on Twitter to the cleavage of unnamed female MPs sitting behind Ed Miliband in the Commons in 2011 and 2012. When later challenged by Stella Creasy on Newsnight he said of the second such incident: "It wasn’t my proudest moment".[97][67] Other remarks included slurs described as homophobic, including a claim that George Clooney is "as queer as a coot".[98][99]
One tweet by Young was in response to a BBC Comic Relief appeal in 2009 for starving Kenyan children.[100] During the broadcast, a Twitter user commented that she had "gone through about 5 boxes of kleenex" whilst watching. Toby Young replied: "Me too, I havn't [sic] wanked so much in ages".[78] He has expressed remorse for his "politically incorrect" tweets.[101]

Thats some solidarity with women right there

No-one has said tories support women. I have, however, asked for evidence of pp's assertion that labour is sticking with GRA. Posters, if it can't be provided, draw your own conclusions.

Reeves, the MP for Leeds West, ruled out a Labour government changing the Equality Act, which among other things protects the rights of trans people to access single-sex spaces. A service can only exclude a trans person if it is “a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”.
“The Equality Act says that there should be safe spaces for people and so no, it wouldn’t mean those things,” she began, before Newman interrupted: “Then that’s not self-ID… self-ID is someone saying: ‘I am a woman, therefore I’m entitled to all the services that any other woman is entitled to.'”
Reeves continued: “The Equality Act explicitly – and we wouldn’t change that – says that there should be places for people, where necessary, for people of a biological sex.