Starmer, JKR, what's most important to most women?

[PupInAPram]

In my more than 60 years, decades of being a single working parent, many experiences of being on the bones of my arse, Labour Party policies have made huge beneficial differences in my day-to-day life. Worrying if there is a man in the next toilet or feeling uncomfortable with a trans woman has literally never been on my radar. If I'm making a decision about voting for the politician who can bring about the greatest good for the greatest number, it's Starmer every time. I wish JKR would just pipe down.

It doesn’t matter whether a trans woman looks like a man or a woman, they are still men.

The logical conclusion to this line of argument is 'therefore, all spaces should be mixed sex'.

Is this your argument? If not, in light of what you've just said, why do you think there should be single sex (or gender, if that's your belief) spaces?

You probably think you have “gaydar” too don’t you 😂

It's just truth.

Calling it 'hate' makes you sound like you're in a cult

It's not hatefulness. It's a fact.

Human beings cannot change sex, any more than any other mammalian species.

Human sex is binary, decided at conception and impossible to change.

I agree, OP. Sick to the back teeth of hearing about this issue. It might loom large for some, not for me.

Transwomen are men.

If you think that fact is 'hateful' you need to take it up with Mother Nature. It's no one on here's fault.

Don't take out your frustration on the people merely stating facts.

I didn't mention anything about being "kind". I said the actions of some GC campaigners and politicians, and the kinds of measures they are pushing for, make an environment that is hostile to trans people and encourages gender conformity. Therefore it is reasonable to refer to this as a "trans issue".

In my opinion, some of the people insisting its "womens sex based rights" are doing that to obfuscate the impact on trans people.

In your opinion, it's all about "womens sex based rights".

Both are opinions. We are both equally entitled to hold them.

I have teenage girls and would currently not consider voting Labour which will
probably lead to me spoiling my ballot
paper unless I need to vote tactically to stop them in my constituency. No woman is safe from their ideologies 🤬
Crack on JKR and all who support her, me included.

It’s just the truth. There’s nothing horrible about the truth. You can’t physically change from having two X chromosomes to having an X and a y. You just can’t.

Oh dear God. Single sex spaces (not "safe spaces") are not a "new" development. What year did Elizabeth Fry campaign for prison reform, for example? Was the Geneva Convention or Mandela Rules wrong about it being a violation of human rights to keep female prisoners with male?

Where have you been? Why do we have single sex spaces in particular circusmstances? Why were they fought for?

And in 2019, she donated £15.3m to the Edinburgh MS research centre.

Risible nonsense Cassie

It's basically exactly the same message as the "safeguarding" that gets trotted out.

The biggest risk to women and children is men. Yet we aren't insisting no men cam be teachers, no men can be gynaecologists etc.

Regarding men, "safeguarding" means we do screening to identify high risk men and prevent them being in those positions, and we put in other measures to protect the vulnerable (e.g. chaperoning). Then we accept the remaining risk.

No-one is saying TW cannot be any of those things, but they are male and therefore should be treated and risk assessed as any other male would be.

For trans people, people campaigning for "safeguarding" appear to mean banning trans people entirely from any situation where there is risk.

No it does not, the same criteria should apply to them as applies to all other males.

Very striking double standards in how we treat the risk from violent men vs how we treat the risk from trans women. Which is ironicas they are the same thing.

You are the only one reaching this crazy conclusion. TW should be treated the same as any other men, why is that so difficult for you to grasp?

I've no idea what fantasy villain version you're constructing of me here, but I can assure you, you know nothing whatsoever about me. People like me marched against Section 28. What were you doing at the time? Were you even born yet?

Don't start whining about other people's supposed "hate" when it's clear you don't have the first clue and are a stranger to facts. The ignorance you're displaying here (to people who DO know more than you clearly do) is just... wow.

The sad thing is that there are some people out there who actually hate TW (and gay people, and GNC people, for similar reasons).

Calling a simple factual statement like 'TW are not women' hateful means that actual hate is less likely to be taken seriously when it happens. Everyone's too tired of all the crying wolf.

Ok, about "Gaydar" for just a minute, which is obviously a made up thing....

How are we expected to tell the difference between a transwoman who has genuine gender dysphoria and a man saying they're a transwoman again?

Does "transdar" exist? Are we all meant to have one?

YANBU
Her lack of awareness as regards her privilege and what is important to women in the real world is staggering.

No JK I don’t care more about women’s spaces that having a dentist, my dd getting the treatment she desperately needs, young people being shafted, the environment, the dire state of education….

Great you can just pay for private dentistry, private MH treatment for your suicidal teen, private education, private health care…. The rest of us can’t so I frankly will be focusing on the policies that matter far more for my daughter.

As I pointed out earlier. JKR was once a broke, vulnerable victim of domestic violence. She knows how the erosion of single sex spaces affects vulnerable women a lot better than you do.

I agree.

Calling a simple factual statement like 'TW are not women' hateful means that actual hate is less likely to be taken seriously when it happens. Everyone's too tired of all the crying wolf.

This is an important point

You probably think you have “gaydar” too don’t you

@SergeantDawkins we can tell from skeletons, from stick figures, craniofacially, from smell, from a whole host of markers what is a man and what is a woman. Humans are sexually dimorphic. Sexuality isn't dimorphic.

I know it's kind to pretend but it's not the truth. And truth is important. Some people pass, but the vast majority of women can identify the vast majority of men.

No. I think unfortunately the "logical conclusion" approach is the wrong one. Because either you end up with "all spaces are mixed sex" or "all spaces are single sex". I think most sensible people agree neither of those extremes are good, but the cut off of what's acceptable on that spectrum varies from person to person.

So for me personally it's about what is practical and possible to enforce, and what protects women as far as possible.

Therefore I'm quite happy with the sex based exemptions in the EA being used to protect single sex spaces as an approach, as long as they are correctly applied which isn't always happening at the moment. Both the Conservatives and the Labour position work for me; neither of those positions work for more hard line GC activists.

But my opinion is no more a factor than anyone else. And because both the main parties work for me, this isn't a voting issue for me.

My number one issue is reducing VAWG which Labour are streets ahead on.

YABU in saying JKR should “pipe down”
The issue is women, not trans women. Our right to safety, privacy and dignity, to our own exclusive category in sport, in female only jobs and awards.
My issue with Starmer is his misogynistic inability to credit Rosie Duffield with having the strength of character to go against the luxury beliefs of some of his other women MPs. He agreed with Blair, not Duffield, the man, not the woman. He’s a fence sitting turncoat who will blow in the wind of popular opinion.
He's also a lawyer, who uses weasel words to avoid clarity on any number of issues.
The women who have risked (and lost) their jobs to blow the whistle on the subtle and ingrained erosion of the rights I mentioned, deserve respect and admiration. It might be a minor issue to you OP, but you should value the rights my mother and my grandmothers generations struggled for. Liberal, left wing women, many Labour women. In the rush to join yet another virtue signaling bandwagon Starmer has thrown Duffield under the bus on more than one occasion. That speaks to me of a self serving politician, not a principled leader.
I’m keen to get rid of the Tories, but I can’t vote for a party whose leader is unable to even tacitly admit Duffield was right.

Therefore I'm quite happy with the sex based exemptions in the EA being used to protect single sex spaces as an approach, as long as they are correctly appliedwhich isn't always happening at the moment. Both the Conservatives and the Labour position work for me; neither of those positions work for more hard line GC activists.

Based on this point, are we right to conclude that you are happy for sex to be defined in these circumstances as 'legal sex'? I.e a man with a GRC to have rights to single sex spaces for women?

Then we need to call it "The Institute" and allow all men in, not just the ones with gender.

We are heading to a place where the only single sex spaces will be those needed for safety reasons. Women are happily giving up (other) womens right to meet and associate with only other women.