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’

Trans people are protected in the Equality Act by the protected characteristic, of Gender reassignment, that applies whether or not they have had surgery. This means that, rightly, trans people should not be discriminated against when it comes to employment, housing, health care, social care etc.

With regards to Equal Pay, trans women often transition later in life so have had the benefit of being male in the workplace and the social advantages that brings when it comes to pay scales. In addition the biological reality is that trans women are male which means that they will not be discriminated against due to the fact that they may need time off or have gaps in employment for child birth or child care. It is therefore highly unlikely that trans status will affect pay, especially MtoF. I don't deny the ethnicity factors in pay but these are different from sex/ gender equality.

The Equality Act allows for discrimination in certain places on the basis of a person's sex. The problem is that it doesn't distinguish between biological sex and legal sex (created by the GRA) this is what needs to change, or alternatively (and my preference) the concept of the legal female needs to be abolished altogether.

That's the problem, there isn't a party for me to vote for to 'make society less shit as a whole', genuinely. This issue is not 'one thing', being a woman and what that means physically, legally, literally and figuratively affects every part of my life and affects the impact of every part of public policy on me.

It isn't my fault that no political party wants to protect women's rights, women's very existence as a group. It would be so easy for them to capitalise on the widespread unease about men in women's prisons, hospital bays, sports; widespread concern about children's mental and physical health, about the erosion of children's boundaries and safeguarding, the indoctrination in schools by dodgy groups. They are all choosing not to do so.

I'm under no illusions that the Tory party has my best interests at heart, of course it doesn't. I mean it when I say I am politically homeless. I didn't leave the left, the left left me.

This with bells and whistles on.

Interesting. My concern about any of these issues is dwarfed by concerns about widespread poverty, homelessness, NHS waiting lists etc, all while the Tories do everything they can to help the rich get richer.

So why can't Labour deal with both things?

Why are women's rights to be treated as a sex class independent of males a price to pay for your concerns?

I did. When I resigned my membership. They ignored me.

For “my concerns”? 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️ Look at this country now. It’s a disgrace.

I didn't mean to be dismissive but I can see how you have interpreted it that way.

But my point remains. Why should women's right's be the 'price to pay' for a better society?

If Labour is really interested in the greater good why don't they also protect women?

Why can't we have a less 'disgraceful' country whilst also protecting women's rights?

So why can't Labour deal with both things?

Because time and resources are limited, added to which the current government is operating a scorched earth policy and seems intent on leaving the country in the worst state possible. Starmer’s already been clear that repairing the damage to the economy and public services will take two terms. There isn’t the bandwidth to address an issue that the majority of the electorate don’t care about.

Defending women's rights won't cost a lot.
its requires some clear statements and a willingness to repeal the GRA

So women's rights are acceptable collateral damage?

Repealing the GRA doesn't cost anything in real terms, not compared to the cost of repairing damage done to public services etc, which the Labour party have already admitted they can't fund, hence the two term statement on public services.

It is truly disappointing that you maintain the stance that the majority electorate don't care about women's rights, the final voting figures on this thread suggest otherwise. Speaking freely in the outside world also suggests otherwise, it's a shame the Labour Party has had a policy of silencing women on these issues otherwise they might have a better idea of how the electorate truly feels about it.

Once the broader electorate realise that the Labour Party could have protected women but declined to do so on the false premise that it would cost too much or women's rights don't matter enough, etc, etc, they will have questions. Let's hope the Labour Party are prepared to answer them.

Just look at the queue in Bristol for registering with a NHS dentist

Why?

This is the best post on this thread. This. Exactly.

To protect everyone, we need clarification in law.

Yes those things are real and hugely worrying but so too are what labour's anti women stance actually means for women. It's awful to feel like no party actually stands for true equity. I think rather than slate women who feel unable to vote for a clearly misogynistic party (labour), we need parties to actually start hearing what women say. In no other area of life (nowadays) would we do to and oppressed group without any effort to try and understand their concerns.

It is truly disappointing that you maintain the stance that the majority electorate don't care about women's rights, the final voting figures on this thread suggest otherwise.

I don’t think a thread on MN can be seen as indicative of the views of the UK electorate. This shows the issues voters see as priorities.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society/trackers/the-most-important-issues-facing-the-country

It's really not spinning its. Clarity matters. Women can't have penises. Transwomen can. Those are two different groups of people and when we muddle them up, women pay the price. Starmer knows this but refuses to take a moral stance. If the Tories get in again, he has blood on his hands.

Thank you Justean,

Everyone needs protection in law and it should be achievable if we work together on it.

But then equally, will you be responsible for the increased number of women raped in former single aex spaces and all the women who can no longer play, or no longer win professional sports? Will you be responsible for the trauma of the women who can't access rape supports or domestic violence supports because we don't offer female only spaces any more?

Will you be responsible for the trauma of the women who can't access rape supports or domestic violence supports

No, that will be the Tory government that’s cut all their funding.

the reason is valid to yourself op

I refused to vote Labour while Corbyn and Co were destroying the party

but I am quite sure if we were both Conservative voters we would probably overlook such issues it’s a Labour issue that their supporters will make a stand come election time

pointythings · Today 18:45
Do not blame politically homeless women for the left selling us out.

If the Tories get in again because of your kind - hell yes, I'll blame you. And so should every human being who will be pushed deeper into poverty.

A spectacular display of DARVO there.
If the Tories get in because Labour refuse to drop their support for self ID just remember; no one is forcing them to turn their back on women's rights. They are choosing to despite the dire state of the country.

It's not all about funding. It's about labour supporting the effective abolition of women only spaces. More finding makes no difference if you choose (as labour are) to only serve males and women who are happy in mixed sex spaces). You can sink the entire GDP into it and you're still offering fuck all to most women.

I.e. these things will happen if labour get in, even if they fund things appropriately.

It's about labour supporting the effective abolition of women only spaces.

And your evidence of this is?