To let you all know :Jane the mntter held keir to acct, brilliantly on radio today and it's viral.

[JaneVapeman]

Unfortunately I can't link to her clip, but she's a star and a hero. She pinned him down and cut through the "twaddle". I am a swing voter and would have been proud of a mntter holding any mp to account on an important issue like Jane did. Jane is/was even trending on twitter.

💥

Personally I don’t want to strip off in front of anyone who isn’t very close family. That’s why I don’t go anywhere that doesn’t provide cubicles.

Yes the paid male politician and a female caller and posters defend one over the other

Presumably they’re happy with taking away sex based rights under Labour and prefer to focus on tone policing women as if it’s the issue

Who's getting in a froth?

No she didn’t.

She was speaking as though all women think the same on the issue.
We don't all think the same.
Even if we do, we wouldn't say what she said.

So? As I said, whatever you think, it's a women's rights issue. The majority of the population are closer to her view.

Exactly

Why the name calling and sarcasm from some on this thread because some women have different priorities?

Let’s not forget that Starmer wouldn’t even speak to women members of the Labour Party when they tried to raise concerns.

He doesn’t think women are entitled to have concerns. So he shuts them down. And so, shamefully, do some women high up in his party.

He doesn’t think women are entitled to have concerns. So he shuts them down.

That is what this thread did to me.

It's not that she has "different priorities", it's that she's nitpicking that because some women (in the minority) don't agree with her she can't say it's an issue for the female sex class. Not having the vote was an issue for women despite the existence of the Anti Suffrage League.

Quite. He’s the one making the debate “toxic” - by refusing point blank to consider the “dignity” and “trauma” of a significant number of the 51% instead focusing on that of the tiny trans minority.

Absolutely. It's evidently fine for many posters to be rude and sarcastic to those who aren't in agreement with them.

Happens all the time. Posters pop up continually to say 'well it doesn't affect MEEE, you don't speak for all women etc etc etc'. If you aren't bothered why the need to make this point over and over. It's clear that it bothers A LOT of women.

I don't have kids so I wouldn't waste any energy highlighting repeatedly how VAT on private school fees doesn't affect me so just calm down about it. I just scroll on by.

"I have answered the question repeatedly."

No. No you haven't.

Or maybe you are Paula Vennells in disguise. She too has complete convenient amnesia. She can't remember anything anyone ever told her. Nor can she remember what her job as CEO of the Post Office actually entailed.

Happens all the time. Posters pop up continually to say 'well it doesn't affect MEEE, you don't speak for all women etc etc etc'. If you aren't bothered why the need to make this point over and over.

They do it because they think it's a gotcha. It's intended to shut down women's concerns. Sexism and misogyny are still sexism and misogyny when women go along with them.

Exactly

"I have answered the question repeatedly."

Starmer probably thinks so too

And yet he still doesn’t get why talking about biological women having spaces and men with a GRC having access is lying

Yes it is disgusting. Imagine the outrage if Sunak was doing this?

Thank you so much Jane

It is obvious from this thread that people feel Starmer comes across well, seems like a good person. So they want to believe him and they want to think that people like Jane are being unfair.

But you really need to LISTEN to what he's been saying on this issue. He's consistently and repeatedly failed to give any reassurance that he will protect single sex spaces.

All those women who need them - The prisoners, rape/domestic violence victims, disabled wanting single sex care and so on. Starmer doesn't value those women sufficiently to give them what they need. That is the bottom line. So you can defend him on that point or you can try to hold him to account.

I don't get the dignity/privacy thing if we are divorcing that from violence. How is it undignified? Any more so than undressing in front of another 'biological woman'

My sons are 22 and 15. I love the bones of them. We are quite physically affectionate as a family. It’s honestly not that weird that when we go swimming (which we do - ds1 is an excellent swimmer and is trying to help me improve my stroke so we do go together probably 3 times a month and ds2 is trying to be buff so comes too) that we don’t get naked together. My dds are 19 and 14. I don’t know any 19 and 14yo girls who happily strip for swimming in front of their 15 and 22 yo brothers or their dads, at the local leisure centre where boys they have known since nursery and the bloke next door are also present. Most women don’t want to change in front of male strangers, but male relatives, colleagues, school friends, neighbours, customers from work, friends, friends boyfriends and husbands etc who they may not fear violence from, are not much better. I don’t gaf is “Europeans” or “Scandinavians” or “Germans” or any other fucker “doesn’t give it a second thought”. KS is likely to be the prime minister of the UK - a country where the established social norms are single sex changing areas. We have single sex changing rooms. Why is this bloke so determined to use the female ones as dignity booths for men?

Of course he gets it. He's a smart man with a great legal brain.

He is deliberately creating a fudge because he's screwing these women over. He knows it, but he wants to fool people into thinking he isn't.

So what? This thread isn’t running for PM, a glaringly obvious difference.

@Bollindger 😱 you can really see it clenching.

Unfortunately coupled with the background of rose dufflield comments about him, the gas lighting, not interested /Misogyny she has experienced is out in the light for us all to see.

I agree. I don't like Starmer, but he isn't a stupid man.