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.

💥

Stop telling Jane how to speak

Oh behave 🤣 I have not told her how to speak at all. It is a conversation and I was saying how I felt she came across.

She did brilliantly

It's great you feel that way - that's the joy of having the right to express your opinion. I also say where it was good, I'm not sure of your point.

Starmer still hasn’t answered where those men with a GRC will have access

Do you know?

He said yes to will he protect biological women's spaces. No, I don't believe he gave a list.

No, he did not answer my question
He did try to.

He trotted out the same when I was in the DPP I did this and that for women. I knew he was going to do this as it's what he has done every time this question has come up so far. so told him that I didn't care about that. I wanted to get an answer to the question I asked

Of which I have already said it was good you told him that 🤷‍♀️ but then continued to interrupt him.

In case this hasn't been posted...

https://x.com/addicted2newz/status/1807058069941027227?t=jCiuyZRD3T7iZ1OCOE3lMg&s=19

Starmer again can't answer a straight question

Except how does that work if 'biological sec' can be changed on a birth cert very easily? Thats the question he needs to answer

I know exactly why Jane tried to stop his answer....

Filibustering is to deliberately waste time during a debate by making overlong speeches or raising unnecessary procedural points. In this way a Bill or a motion may be 'talked out': stopped from making progress within the time allowed.

A Commons definition. Only in the house the Speaker has to give permission to another... twaddle works so much better.

The only trans people I know are people who were born as women and now identify as male.

It's a lot less complex that way round, for many reasons.

Well he wont, he hasn't yet. But we will soon find out.
Because next week I've no doubt he will be in no 10.

But not from my vote.

So when no woman can call a man a man, when a fair chunk of the population have to stay home because all toilets are mixed sex, when women en masse wont go to any hospital appointments and womens sports is no longer a thing, you can't blame me.

I'll see you all in prison. Because no matter what I will not be silenced.

Did...did he run away? Fucking hell

He said yes to will he protect biological women's spaces

He also said he would make it easy peasy (and somehow “dignified”) for every man to get a wee certificate saying they are a “biological woman”. The law already allows the sex marker on official documents and official records (such as your NHS file) to be changed to the sex that you aren’t and KS will open this up to all men with very little trouble or inconvenience. Your birth certificate doesn’t say you were born a man and now would like people to pretend you are a woman please - it says “female” - it means “biological woman” (well, it means “baby girl” but you know what I mean). We can say “that’s a man, he shouldn’t be in this ladies rugby team/changing room/prison” and he will say “here is my birth certificate showing I’m female” - and then what? Who gets listened to? The man who says he’s a “biological woman” (which plenty on men do say), or the women who say he’s not?

KS could solve this in 5 seconds with a <140 character tweet - “For clarity, when I say “biological woman” I exclude all male people including those who identify as women and those with a GRC or altered birth certificate, NHS record or other documentation”

What is reasoning is to allow people to alter their sex on their official documentation is known only to him. He just says to make it “dignified” but why? What’s it for?

Yes, he did.

Bravest of the brave, Sir Keir.

Faster than Forrest Gump, I'll give him that.

What use is a GRC anyway? It's legalised fiction. Live in your acquired gender? Like Freddie McConnell did then proceed to birth two children. Because that's living as a man 🙄.

Also makes me wonder of the intentions of those who pop up with 'oh think of the 50k men who have different gender feels' rather then listen to the voices of women of who self ID have and will negatively impact them massively, in all areas of life. Who cares about them eh.

Women (the ones with vaginas) no longer have the right to be called women, and don't have the right to single sex spaces without whataboutery and being shouted down, in 2024.

What a time to be alive.

What is reasoning is to allow people to alter their sex on their official documentation is known only to him. He just says to make it “dignified” but why? What’s it for?

In the interview, he basically said "because it's been the law for 20 years". Yes Keir, it's a shit law, I don't recall being asked if I minded, and there is no reason to make it easier to lie about your sex on official documents and many reasons not to.

I'm guessing what you want is for any business with a transgender employee to tell them they're banned from using women's spaces at their work?

No, just the men.

Good god. We are fucked.

Though the effects of medication and surgery can be horrendous. Testosterone is toxic to the female body, and phalloplasty can result in serious complications. The friendly sounding “top surgery” is more commonly known as a double mastectomy, which in normal life would be considered something to be avoided unless suffering a potentially fatal condition such as breast cancer.

We weren't.
And as the reason for that law (to allow two men or two women to marry when one of them feels they are the other sex) is no longer necessary it should be repealed but instead it is going to be expanded.

Only you’d think a lawyer - a human rights lawyer - would know that the Equality Act isn’t protecting SSSs thanks to the GRA and confusion sowed by SW law.

Any other politician might get legitimately confused as many people do, but Starmer does not have that problem. His problem is the opposite in that we know that he knows exactly what are the problematic issues and why re the existing conflict between biological vs legal sex.

yes, this

she was brave to do it but I don't think we are much wiser- rather than saying he was talking twaddle it would have been better to ask 'how exactly are you going to make sure biological women's spaces are safe'

And his whole turning away says it all. I can picture him going home to his wife and saying ‘can you believe it I was asked another fucking question about bloody toilets again. I’m sick to death of them.’

Yep @DrBlackbird - the body language speaks volumes.

What 51% of the population do you think she was speaking for when she said "You need to think about 51% of the population who are sick of the absolute twaddle that comes out of your mouth when we ask these questions."

Well if anything she was underestimating - most people are sex realists and I know lots of women AND men who are sick of Starmer's twaddle on this. I'm guessing it's a lot more than 51%.

Some of them are still voting Labour to get the Tories out, but they still want Starmer to stop with the flat earth adjacent biology denying twaddle.

So she didn't mean women, she meant 51% (or more) of the general population?