To think Keir Starner is ignoring women and children’s rights?

[Greengablesfables]

Hello hello? Kier? We’re here. We are right here. We are Women. Are you listening to us? Hello? Hello?

Honestly? I don’t understand why people get in such a flap about this. Look at the absolute state of the country - failed NHS, failed schools, housing crisis, cost of living crisis, not to mention all of the knock on effects these things cause.

I want Labour in to sort these things out. I completely agree with these concerns, but cutting off your nose to spite your face is getting us absolutely nowhere.

Is it Keir Starmer, in his position as leader of the opposition who has brought maternity care and provision to its knees, endangering the lives of thousands of women and children? Was it Keir Starmer who closed one in three Sure Start centres? Did he single handedly destroy child trust funds? Did he create so much poverty that menstruating women and girls must get their period products from food banks? Is it he who has allowed a mental health crisis to develop, one in which children and their parents wait for three years, sometimes with no educational provision or other support, to obtain a diagnosis of, and support for, neurodovergence? Did he plunge thousands into uncertainty and poverty with his revisions to Universal credit? Did he target the disabled with his reforms of disability benefits, adding further stress and worry to their financial situation?

The debates about gender are important. I am a feminist. But the general election is so much more than one policy politics. There is a much, much bigger picture out there when it comes to women and children, starting with the NHS and education. Labour has its priorities absolutely right. I shall continue to lobby Keir Starmer and colleagues regarding gender identity. But they will get my vote because I believe that with Labour in power the country will be better for everyone who has been disadvantaged by the current regime.

Please do not forget how malignant the Tories have been for women and children's rights.

Yup. Eurgh. I'm. So. Fed. Up. Of. This. Shit.

I opened MN at this fairly early hour because I can't sleep because I'm annoyed about work which is currently feeling more and more like a boy's club (and it's not even this 'newer' threat to women and girls' rights and the trans issue, just your usual classic common or garden glass ceiling, women being passed over for opportunities, not being included in prime networking opportunities which are all very blokey etc. etc.). All our managers are men and your words could equally have applied to my bosses and my current work situation.

We're telling them what the problem is, BUT. THEY. JUST. DON'T. GET. IT.

Yes Stella Creasy hates women and never speaks on matters relating to women!!

FFS Tory HQ, get better interns to cover social media. Initially the ‘at least Tory’s know what a woman is’ thing on here was frustrating but now it’s just cringey and embarrassing. Will Sunak’s next reset involve having his wife front and centre to appeal to the wimmins?

They are not blinkered. They are paid employees of the Tory’s or US backed libertarian lobbyists. They have a clear agenda to create a ‘they’re all the same’ apathy to dampen voting which will help the Tory’s at the next general election.

You only have to look at the sleazy records of the Tory MPs to see exactly how most of them view women.

Who is ‘they’?

Who's paid?

Why is it ‘ramming’ when some click on every thread on a site where it’s optional to read or hide?

The anger from posters at reading something not pro Labour is… a bit idk odd

If women had just done as some would like you’d still have self ID and puberty blockers. Is that really what pp are after

You’d have thought Cameron would have had a vested interest in the NHS and disability, wouldn’t you? Anyone expecting that was disappointed.

I agree with you that Cameron showed an appalling lack of empathy here, when you might have expected him to feel some, both in his treatment of the NHS and for carers and disability benefits. However, the situations are not comparable, as the Camerons have the financial security to never need to rely on the NHS or benefits if they don’t want to (though they did claim benefits they didn’t need and then promptly whipped the rug out from others who did need them).

If Starmer has a trans child, this is very different, as they won’t be able to opt out of society, they will be subject to the laws and policies same as everyone else.

It is relevant for voters to know if Starmer is conflicted here, in the same way we wouldn’t allow a judge to preside over a legal case he or she had a vested interest in. Similarly, doctors can’t make medical decisions for family members. The conflicts of interest are obvious.

Moreover, you can’t expect voters not to want to know the truth of the situation when it is difficult otherwise to fathom quite why Starmer has been in approval of unregulated life-alterating medical experiments on children, and in favour of stripping women of the right to equality in the workplace and sports, and happy to put women at risk in prisons and changing rooms.

The anger is not about reading something that's not pro anger.

My anger is that Labour have not published a manifesto yet, and won't until an election is called, yet I am constantly read bullshit about what they plan to do written as fact.

My anger is that by pushing this made up bollocks as fact, the tories are not being held accountable for the genuine harms that they have done to women, children and the most vulnerable in society.

My anger is that by constantly dripping this issue in people's ears, people switch off from it as an issue, they stop listening, so when womens rights are attacked, people have stopped caring. You are damaging your own argument.

The Cass review and banning of beta blockers came from the anger a few years ago, people don't have the energy to remain at boiling pot, they need to simmer for a bit. Continual agitation is harmful and loses its impact.

it is difficult otherwise to fathom quite why Starmer has been in approval of unregulated life-alterating medical experiments on children, and in favour of stripping women of the right to equality in the workplace and sports, and happy to put women at risk in prisons and changing rooms.

It would be incredibly difficult to fathom if any of it was true. But it’s not.

No one minds labour being slated if it’s appropriate but most of these threads feel like gaslighting on a huge scale. To think that the Tories care about women is ridiculous. It’s just pointless political point scoring in the the face of damning reality.
Why some of these posters can’t just say that both parties are as bad as each other god knows but they don’t which means they are essentially posting in bad faith. It’s just a Tory pre election nudge very poorly executed. Most people can see the shit state of the country, I doubt this will influence votes. Like child’s 3 year wait for CAMS appointment or a child’s school loosing TAs v gender ID, mmmm which is more important for most ordinary wc people.

I disagree I’m fine with where we are. Women have spoken up and it’s taken Self ID off the table (the promotion of it anyway) and puberty blockers are now stopped and Cass Review is excellent. Dr Cass also has had threats due to it, because of anger.

At each step of the way there’s been backlash and stop or worse violence and threats.

Btw if you are constantly reading something that is a choice on this site.

I thought Labour went along with the Cass report ?

Re the son/daughter and ‘stumbling over his words’ discussion.

Linguistically, it will have been an active choice for him to say sons, because of the word ‘two’ preceding it.

Oh, he’s been vocally challenging the government on this since before the Cass report l, has he?

Calling for only biological women to be allowed into women’s changing rooms and toilets and explicitly stating that trans women should not be in there?

He’s spoken out against the likes of Emily Bridger and Lia Thomas and made it clear that no biological men should be allowed to compete in women’s sports?

He’s been clear that only biological women should make it onto all-women Labour candidate lists?

He’s campaigned against puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for children, has he?

Please provide links to back up your assertions, because I’ve never seen him say or do anything of the sort. There have been lots of weasel words about ‘safe spaces’ rather than single sex spaces and claiming that some women have a penis(!), though.

Where are your links to support your assertion that

Starmer has been in approval of unregulated life-alterating medical experiments on children, and in favour of stripping women of the right to equality in the workplace and sports, and happy to put women at risk in prisons and changing rooms.

Does burden of proof only operate in one direction?

No, it’s another of these threads where women who have voted Labour (or Green, or even LibDem) all their lives are expressing their desperation at having no one they can vote for now.

Unless I have a Communist or SDP candidate, which is very unlikely, I’ll have no one who will defend women’s and children’s rights.

This obsession with puberty blockers is just a bit repetitive. I can't see many posters, whatever their political leanings, driving support of them.

More conspiracy theory
the internet has been very bad for some people

You said it.

i absolutely do not give a shit about starmer’s family situation, but the determination of his fan base to explain away that statement is funny, and revealing.

is that meant to be some kind of accusation? You’re going to have to make it more explicit, if so.

That's what we said in 1997.