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.

💥

didn’t help move things forward

Got trending on Twitter, two massive MN threads and coverage in multiple media outlets. Plus Starmer was asked in explicit penisy detail as follow on from Jane's excellent use of scant radio time.

But sure, she achieved nothing

He was trying to answer it and her questions were not trying to get his perspective they were attacking. She was bloody rude and I wouldn’t bother listening to anyone that conducts themselves in that manner.

Superb job of what? We still don't know what he plans to do. Or was the aim to put people off voting for Labour so that the Tories stay in power?

Disappointment in the way that he has continuously obfuscated and dodged any questions with regard to this topic was why I text in my question.

Just in case you missed it. He is going to keep women's sex spaces safe. Sadly he is also going to make getting a gender recognition certificate easier therefore making it easier for men to say they are women and so are allowed into these safe women's spaces.

So he did eventually answer my question but without me constantly having to badger him to do so he wouldn't have.

Yeah Jane. Who do you think you are getting obviously moderately angry at an oh so clever man blatantly dodging your question? You should have placated him and then he’d have ignored you and done exactly what he wanted to, but you wouldn’t have appeared exasperated for a few minutes. You really did let yourself down there.

sparticusoctopus. Seriously. Stop worrying about what people might say. Listen to what they actually are saying and do more than worry.

Christ I feel a "silencing women" game of bingo coming on.

I'll start with angry rant.

Have I missed shrill?

Wombat15 my question would have been the same if it were Rishi Sunak behaving as he was. I would have interrupted him and demanded he answer my question just the same.

He has though answered the question clearly and suscinctly so I didn't need to ask it of him.

It wasn't a political stunt at all. I don't care how you vote. I had already voted by post before I asked the question and I didn't expect it to blow up as it has. If people choose to change the way they vote based on this then that's their choice. But they had every right to get an answer to this question before putting their cross in the box.

I presume you're aware of women who have children who don't have a husband or partner. They're called single parents and they have to struggle alone in keeping down a job and paying for childcare, such that they are working almost for nothing just to stay in the workforce. It's very much a woman's problem. I don't get your suck it all up comment, that didn't even enter my head but you chose to interpret it thus.

You have misinterpreted what I’ve said. Whoever is in a conversation, talking crossly over someone is rude and unhelpful. I found the whole thing massively frustrating. I’m certainly not ‘worried about what people might say’. No idea where you got that idea from.

Abusive men, and not-quite-abusive-but-entitled men, rely on women not wanting to be rude and not wanting to be seen as arrogant when they talk over us and push over our boundaries. We try and find nice ways to say "stop, I know what you are doing and I do not accept it" because we know, we know, that anything other than the sweetest of expressions gets flung back at us, turned into our problem. "I'm just being friendly love" "It's only a joke" "he'd be nicer to you if you were nicer to him"

We are so used to this being the way it is we don't even notice it. We see the woman being rude to the man but not his rudeness in treating her as a fool and expecting her to let him. We know he is twaddling on yet still think she owes him the courtesy of alllowing him to finish his twaddle before she calls it out.

Great, why dont you go try getting changed in the Male changing rooms next time your out.

Come back and tell us how that went for you.

Jane, you are a bloody warrior of a woman and you showed him up for the coward he is. Thank you.

This isn’t about silencing women. I’m a woman and a feminist but that doesn’t mean that I think women have special dispensation to talk angrily over someone. Male or female, I’d be frustrated by that kind of behaviour. It’s rude and I tend not to listen to people who do it. I switch off. Male or female.

He wasn't answering my question. It was why they asked me to go on, to ask my question

Yes the first time you do it, absolutely to point out we are not hear to listen to previous things.

The second time he says "we do want to make the process more dignified but that does not mean........
You jump in with "No, it's not about dignity, it's not about being kind etc etc
So I had no chance for what it didn't mean, you may already go in with the pre conceived idea of what he will say, but I would have liked to hear his response.
So you made your statement, then he carries on to talk about biological women spaces, goes to link it to a case he worked on "protection of women, who had been subjected to domestic violence, sexual violence......"" just getting there
Then you jump in with "this is daily, this is toilets, hospitals"
While he is saying "Jayne just hear me out"
You then just carry on,

It just seemed pointless, obviously it's great for the supporters on here and a great little bit of PR to be the one that got to shout him down, but for actually getting answers it was frustrating.

And that's not because I don't agree with your questions and holding him to account, I absolutely do, I just don't think the way you went about that did that. It had nothing to do with nonsense of "it's a man" you are a woman...come on

Of course I interrupted him. I wanted an answer 🙄. I wasn't going to sit on my hands, lips pursed not letting out that sigh whilst he just waffled on.
No one would expect you to, but instead it ended up being 2 mins of you just talking at him or over him so wasted.

Every time he spoke he tried to not answer my question which is why I tried to bring him back to doing so.

That's not how it is seen at all by lots, looking back a lot of people, who are not supporters on these threads just see it as a bit rude.

But it's done and at least it's can go down as something not many have done.

Thank you, I completely agree.

@Sparticusoctopus but we do know what he thinks 😂, we know about his past history and how important it is to reference that, his work with violence and rape. All very noble, we know he said he has strong and powerful women on his team and so on. We know he champions us all and wants to be treat us all with respect and dignity.
But that doesn't stretch to a clear and catagorical assurance to women that they will be protected from this threat

But I now don’t know what he actually thinks and what he actually plans to do because you didn’t let him speak.

It was a simple question that required a simple straightforward answer which Keir Starmer had no intention of giving hence the waffling about what he did as DPP 20 years ago.

As for talking over, that is the art of a politician and was exactly what KS was doing only this time he didn't get his own way.

He wouldn't even have said as much as he did if Jane hadn't stepped up and pushed him into it.

Luckily for you, he will have plenty of oppotunity to volunteer whatever important information Jane prevented him sharing. He could tweet it right now if he wanted to, if he felt it was important to get it out there.

I wonder if he will do so?

But I now don’t know what he actually thinks and what he actually plans to do because when he was asked again, he fucked off

x.com/addicted2newz/status/1807058069941027227?s=48&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

HTH

So if you know all that why bother asking any questions. I’m sorry, I think it was really brave to do what you did (and I wouldn’t have the guts) but I think you were rude and I found it frustrating that he wasn’t able to talk.

He was dodging the question.

Have you watched the clip in the post at 21.07. If you're frustrated that Jane denied you the opportunity to hear his answer then that should satisfy you. He has plenty of time to answer.

A superb job of exposing his intentions and his desire to not have them exposed.

And if it puts people off voting for Labour, that’s Labour’s fault, not Jane’s.

@Thinkbiglittleone and all of that could have been different had he not started to trot out the same rehearsed lines.

Some people are alert to this issue and have seen him answer this question quite a few times now. Perhaps others don't worry about it as much so his response in the clip is the first time they have heard him talks about it. Which is why they can't understand why Jane interrupts him.

Because if this isn't the first time you have heard him respond you would immediately hear him trotting out what he's said "many" time before which, doesn't, answer, the question.

He wouldn't even have said as much as he did if Jane hadn't stepped up and pushed him into it

He didn't say anything I hadn't heard before

There are no simple straight forward answers in politics. Everything can be misconstrued. He has said he wants to get people around the table that represent the different perspectives and who hold relevant expertise to plan policy. He wants to get away from the vitriolic and toxic debate and collaborate and work together on solutions. Seems sensible to me. Any black and white statements would be unhelpful.