Starmer, JKR, what's most important to most women 2?

[PupInAPram]

@pleasehelpwi3 said it best.

I might choose not to do your research for you. I'm sure you know better than to accuse me of lying

The sensible approach would be to ask them and consider their reasons, rather than attempting to smear or shame people for their choices.

Why should people accept your post if you don’t back it up with an example?

I haven’t seen what you’re talking about

https://x.com/theattagirls/status/1804251391067570592?s=61

Archived, free-to-read article by JKR

It's difficult, right.

However, there aren't many options - only really Labour/Tories are viable in my eyes at a national level. Voting for a good independent is a good solution if that's available, but it's not really relevant to what will happen at a national level.

And while I think the Tories are much better than Labour on this issue, for lots of other reasons I think it's time for them to go.

However, I'm very glad JKR has set the cat along the pigeons on this, because i hope that we can all ramp the pressure up on Labour on this topic. Perhaps that's naive, but there aren't a lot of good options.

What's the line? That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence

Unfortunate indeed.

The point being that they have the right to request same sex care and, if possible, they will be given same sex care. But if self id is brought in, they can request same sex care and be sent Sarah, a trans woman. And the provider can pat themselves on the back and tell the LGO that they’ve provided same sex care because Sarah identifies as a woman.

It’s a big difference.

erm, the threads on twitter on women discussing their reasons. it's not a list of women going 'im voting reform'....have you ever been on twitter?

Accept it or not - please yourself. I'm sure you can use the search function as well. And I'm sure you also know better than to claim I posted an untruth.

I haven't seen anybody saying they're voting Reform over this issue. People saying they'd never vote Reform and discounting it as an option, but not actively voting for them.

@ilovesooty

And I'm sure you also know better than to claim I posted an untruth.

that sounds a bit threatening.

😂
"I haven't seen it, therefore it doesn't exist"

You only make yourself look a bit silly. Lots of posters claiming they will vote Reform on this issue over the last couple of days. Lots of GC, suffragette hearts posters on twix retweeting and posting anti Muslim, far right stuff.

Oh and BTW I follow accounts of both sides as I like to draw my own conclusions.

I'm referring to the talk guidelines. It would be a personal attack to state that I was lying and I'm sure posters who've posted here for a long time know that.

It’s the internet people post stuff, I’m not aware your posts have a guarantee - the same as any other

I do know you haven’t backed up your claim and others say the same as me, they haven’t seen it

As for emoji hour down there no I haven’t seen it hence the request to back up the claims

I know people are a bit delete happy and it seems an attempt to get to that but no I’ll take statements with a back up

@CassieMaddox says she's seen the posts too.

It can be verified easily enough. I just don't care to do the search for you.

Oh I see, you're looking for someone to snitch on!

Fine by me don’t. I’ll choose whether to take your word or others with similar aims

This is the whole problem
Labour are not bringing in self - ID. They are going to support the sex exemptions in the Equality Act- the ones that allow care agencies to recruit a single sex to meet certain care needs. And they are going to make getting a GRC less bureaucratic.

Secondly, caring is work. It's hard and badly paid work. If a predator wanted to sexually abuse women there are much less difficult routes they can take. Being a police officer for example. Or nightclub security. Working in a bar. Especially as under the current government sexual offending is barely criminal.

This idea that hordes of men will suddenly rock up saying they are women to be carers so they can abuse people is scaremongering.

I'm sure that most women were utterly preoccupied trying to make ends meet, keep themselves and their children housed, fed, healthy and safe during the period of the womens's suffrage movement. No widespread entitlement to any existence level benefits in those days.

Thank goodness therefore, for the suffragists that did have the energy, or perhaps just the luxury of education, time and resources, to be able to put their heads above the parapet, and repeatedly did so on behalf of others of their sex.

IMHO it's insulting to infer that women should be too busy thinking of bigger day to day issues/struggles to consider the erosion of their needs based rights. I'm sure many women had their thoughts thus directed by the males in their lives during the time of women's suffrage too.

You do realise that men prioritising themselves and their own requirements is one reason why many women with children struggle to make ends meet, especially following the breakdown of a relationship ? Transwomen's rights are rights given to men be treated as women, biological women's needs being eroded to give 0.1% of men what they want. Do you not see any correlation here ?

Transwomen, as you say, are 0.1% of the population, so why is it important to potentially reduce the safety and freedom of 51% of the population in order to win the trans vote ? Could it be because men are more vociferous and forceful at getting what they want in life regardless of the cost to others (others generally being weaker men or women and children) ?

Sometimes I do answer these questions and then get called obsessed. It's lose-lose.
I think its pretty obvious to anyone even vaguely interested in politics threads on here that you are right

I think that’s inevitable. It fits with views

If something is true, multiple people will say it.
Hth