To not vote Labour because of their abhorrent views on the female sex?

[Lion400]

Starmer cannot represent women, he can’t even define us. Questioning a trans person is a hate crime, but misogyny is not. Sorry Labour, you’ve lost my vote. Have they lost anyone else’s??

‘On trans ideology, the vast majority of voters, and certainly a majority of traditional Labour voters from working class backgrounds, tend to cast a sceptical eye on the tenets of an ideological movement that asserts that biological men must be accepted as women – and be offered similar rights and access to women’s spaces and sports as women – simply by asserting their new status’

Simplifying the GRC so that it is easier for males to be legal women, thus weakening the meaning of women to include more males.
The GRC process already exists. They propose making it less bureaucratic but still require a diagnosis of dysphoria. This is not the same as "weakening it". It only follows that "more males" will be included if trans people without a GRC arent currently using womens spaces (they are) and if the current process is putting people off transition so more will transition in future (no evidence).
BTW the Tories are also planning this.

Making it an aggravated offence for women (or anyone else) to object. Not at all what they said in any way shape or form. They want to expand using hate as an aggravating factor in sentencing I.e. when someone's been proven to have done something hateful. I can't see how this is a bad thing. You've extrapolated to misgendering which is a conspiracy theory.

Acting in a way that opposes the Cass review on the treatment of children who are showing signs of gender distress by banning 'so called' conversion therapy. Made up bollocks. "Conversion therapy" is widely understood to refer to non-accredited interventions beloved by religious groups. There is no indicatiob whatsoever this applies to medical professionals or opposes the Cass review. You have extrapolated again by assuming the worst based on nothing.

Taking all three together, you've quoted Starmers words then added a load of extrapolation to it to make it seem like he's a threat. It is very strange behaviour.

Really? I honestly can't be bothered with you anymore, I have better things to do. But you're conflating two separate issues: simplifying the GRC process and making it less demeaning for trans people; and protecting single sex spaces for biological women. Read Anneliese Dodds' piece again for your englightenment.

It is very strange behaviour.

Not that strange. It’s depressingly common round here.

Why not answer instead of rudeness?

Oh I think we know why. Conservative Central Office playbook scaremongering

Meanwhile the transfolk I know think Starmer is far too lily livered and compromises with transphobes. Go figure.

What I'd like Labour to do is grasp the thistle and do the obvious -which is create third spaces, services and sports so that everyone can have dignity, safety and fairness. This is so obvious - why aren't they proposing it?

Also I'd like to see formal apologies to Rosie Duffield and to all of those Labour party activists and trade union reps who have been so badly treated down the years on account of desire to protect women's spaces and protect children from a harmful ideology. How difficult can that be?

Until then......

it feels like they have absorbed an ideology whole ( gender identity theory) and now intend to impose it on everyone else. Think of the mantras such as TWAW which would be shouted at people who even questioned gender theory

Paragraph 1 - simplifying the process will allow more males to be legal women thus weakening the meaning of the word woman. This is. not a misrepresentation it is a fact.

Paragraph 2 - misgendering has been treated as a hate crime by the police. The Labour party has said that hate crime will be treated as an aggravating offence. It is logical to assume that this will include hate crime when the LP has not stated that misgendering will not be considered as such. This is particularly reasonable given the way the LP has treated Rosie Duffield and the fact that female members of the LP were told that their views were not welcome.

Paragraph 3 - In the context of the paper in which this is published and in the absence of clarification it is reasonable to assume that Starmer means talking therapy in the context of trans rights.

I am sorry that you think I have misrepresented. In the context I believe it could be stated you are also misrepresenting to put the 'least worst' spin on it.

@Lion400 the SDP have been consistent in saying TWANW. Perhaps they'll stand in your constituency.

If men are legally female, how can you keep them out of women's single sex spaces?

Are you hard of thinking?

As Anneliese Dodds said, some spaces are for biological women only in Labour's plans. How they implement this in practice, diffrentiating between trans women and biological women, I obviously don't know.

This thread has gone the way of all of these threads and any meaningful conversation appears to be at an end.

Forgive me if I don't believe a word they say. They have lied and continue to ignore all the evidence of the harm caused and the way in which existing hate legislation has been used to abuse women. When they refuse to say EXACTLY what they mean by banning conversion therapy it isn't conspiracy theory to assume the worst. Hiding behind imprecise language to diguise intent is a well worn tactic and when pressed, instead of just saying what they mean, we get the flying monkies telling us to stop being paranoid and trust them. No. I want every i dotted and every t crossed.
So let's start. What is a women? And do you count transwomen as women when you refer to single sex spaces?
Or simpy, why won't you answer these questions?

Since you clearly can’t be arsed to read the article, this is the portion that answers your question.

We need to recognise that sex and gender are different – as the Equality Act does. We will make sure that nothing in our modernised gender recognition process would override the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. Put simply, this means that there will always be places where it is reasonable for biological women only to have access. Labour will defend those spaces, providing legal clarity for the providers of single-sex services.

Well, better to go with known liars I guess = the Tories. At least you know what you're getting eh?

That's disingenuous. On the basis that NHS funding isn't infinite how do you justify prioritising this over say, hip replacements, people needing a bypass or cancer patients?

Yes, but has not outlined which she intends those to be.

Are they going to firm up legislation, for example, which guarantees that women always have access to single sex toilets and changing rooms?What we're looking for is firm commitments, not vague non specific statements.

To be honest, I've watched Annalise Dodds on numerous occasions in the house and at the Women and Equalities committee - and it is always very clear that she, like many Labour MPs, have simply not taken the time to educate themselves on the full range of issues; nor has she met with any of the significant women's campaign groups to discuss their demands; though she regularly meets with Stonewall - as does Kier Starmer.

Iain anderson has been brought on board to massage the Stonewall message to make it sound more palatable.

Evasion noted.

Yep

Which spaces and how? No answers

No I'm not hard of thinking.

I do wish you would stop being rude. I am trying to have a discussion and you keep resorting either to being sexist or down right rude.

I will ask again if a man is considered female by law how can you keep him out of a single sex space reserved for females? Sex (female) is not defined as limited to biological females in the Equality Act as was pointed out in the judgement of Lady Haldene in 2022, it can be interpreted as including males with a GRC which states that they are female at all.

Labour have been chanting 'Transwomen are Women' for years. Which is why Starmer keeps getiing asked what his definition of a woman is.

It's so hilarious.
Labour have to explain every minute detail of their policy or we will assume they are lying and women are going to hell in a handcart

Meanwhile the Tories are a party of proven liars who have done fuck all about this (or even any other issues affecting women) for 14 years yet they are a safe bet for "knowing what women are"

Are you hard of thinking?

@lifeturnsonadime is the opposite of this. How is your conversation meaningful if you respond with insult

And knowing how is pretty much the key part

At the moment the definition of female under the Equality Act is as clear as mud.

Under current interpretation , in the Scottish High Court, it includes males with a GRC.

Hopefully the Labour Party will commit to the Equality Act amendment to exclude legal females, or perhaps it would be easier just to reverse the GRA!

I mean what's the point in an easier process to become a legal female if it is meaningless! ? !

Yes, that's right! They've been lying, manipulating and treating women very badly for years now. Why do you think people are so angry and mistrustful of them?

I asked you that earlier and you declined to answer 😂

No parties have a plan for that.

It's obviously escaped your notice Adam but this is a thread about Labour's views on this.