A woman is a woman

[EmotionSickness]

For those who have been following the Tory conference and general themes of their speeches…

How do you feel about Sunak’s speech?

I know there has been a lot of discussion on here from those who didn’t want to vote for a party that didn’t know the definition of a woman.

Rishi has stated clearly that “a woman is a woman and a man is a man.” While I’d argue that still isn’t a definition, per se, he is appeasing this way of thinking.

So I’m just wondering. Is this enough for you to vote Tory at the next election?

This is my thread from 2020 where I link to all the threads with WEP founders where they make it clear that they are TWAW.

The Big Lie - how the WEP was always about gender rather than sex www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4058470-the-big-lie-how-the-wep-was-always-about-gender-rather-than-sex

OK thanks :)

Currently it seems Rishi hasn't actually committed to saying what a woman is.

Would be good if he would answer the question 'what is a woman' without referring to the word woman.

'A woman is a woman' but unless we define what a woman is, the phrase is meaningless. Which is in no way a mistake from the Tories.

I will be voting labour.

Even though he hasn't actually stated what he thinks a 'woman' is?

'A woman is a woman' means literally nothing. It means 'I will later define what a woman is depending on how the tide is turning'

He won't soundbite 'a woman is a biological female' just in case this doesn't work for the tories in years to come.

He's made himself very clear previously. Possibly he may want to walk this back in the future but more likely he just didn't want to discuss penises at the party conference so chose 'a woman is a woman' as the most PG rated option.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rishi-sunak-transgender-penis-b2319675.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1729985/rishi-sunak-piers-morgan-adult-human-femal-talktv

Without wishing to be overly simplistic about it.... they are called 'single SEX spaces', not 'single GENDER spaces'.

That's not overly simplistic, it really is that simple.

There are entirely valid reasons for needing single sex spaces.

There are none, that I've ever heard of, for needing a 'single gender' space. Indeed it's a meaningless concept as while there are 2 sexes, there could be as many 'genders' as there are people. If you changed mens and womens single sex facilities to 'masculine people' and 'feminine people', where's the androgynous 'nonbinary' or 'agender' person supposed to fit in. It's a nonsensical idea.

Keir Starmer obviously does not do logic - or biology.