Starmer does not believe trans women are women, No 10 says

[NeedToChangeName]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crldey0z00ro

Oh happy days

He said this before the election. It's not news.

He said 99.5% of women don't have a penis.

It's not quite the same thing.

He's a politician, what do you expect?

I have principles. If you don't like them, I have others!

Couldn’t agree more.

Total politician. His principles that he was so clear on pre election have suddenly changed as soon as it became obvious the way the wind was blowing.

I know he’s a politician, I know he’s fudged it before. I just think it’s brilliant he can make this statement. It is a clear sign of how far we’ve come. This would have been unthinkable just a couple of years ago.

If this what makes your days happy you need to get out more

He said before the election that biological women had the right to single-sex spaces, separate from biological men. He's just repeating what he said last year.

That's still not the same as saying 'Transwomen aren't women'.

I'm glad he's said this. Better late than never! I'm no fan of Starmer, but if 'being a total politician' means being willing to ditch the nonsense you felt you had to pretend to believe, now that you can see which way the wind is (finally) blowing, then frankly I'm all for it.

When Starmer said that men have a penis and women have a vagina in June 2024, what do you think he meant?

I too am watching to see him twist this back soon.

This is what has been said by Keir Starmer in the past:

A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women, and that is not just my view — that is actually the law. It has been the law through the combined effects of the 2004 [Gender Recognition] Act and the 2010 [Equality] Act. So that’s my view. It also happens to be the law in the United Kingdom.

https://archive.ph/1ZZW5

So I am just waiting for the 'and in addition ...' because I suspect it will be something like: A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women in some aspects of the law.

Or something.

Personally I don’t care what he thinks privately as long as his public messaging and his policies align with the ruling.

Did he? I thought he said 99.5% of women didn't have a penis. As has already been pointed out, that is very much not the same thing.

With the advent of the internet, it's easy to do your own research.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/rosie-duffield-tony-blair-holyrood-basingstoke-canterbury-b2564637.html

He's an absolute feather for each wind that blows, but I guess public opinion is turning back to sense and reason, thankfully.

He needed Tony Blair to explain it to him? What a fucking idiot.

Yes, that's correct. He wasn't aware of women until Tony Blair sat him down. However, as you can see, this is old news.

Well he's a human rights lawyer and he appeared to misunderstand the Equality Act when he said it's 'not right to say that women cannot have a penis', or words to that effect.

Noticeably left Bridget Philipson to deal with this in parliament today but I do hope he'll be put to point tomorrow in PMQ.

Philipson declined to answer the question from the opposite bench asking whether a woman can have a penis.

Doesn't this make you question law?he knows the law and said, this is the law, basic scientific fact wasn't according to him because of the law but now it is??

What a Weasley sham it all is.b

Interesting that there had to be court ruling to define “ Woman”!
What about the definition for “Man”? What about “ trans” men … women who identify as men ?
Would they have been allowed to invade male only spaces ?

I’m glad that a common sense decision has been reached and there is no further need for Emperors new Clothes ! I think everyone, politicians included, was treading on eggshells around this subject.

And have we had arrests yet? Signs that are literal violence displayed publicly and no comeback?

I'm waiting

He's also a barrister who apparently didn't understand the law. Don't forget the Supreme Court has only clarified the law as it's always been - this ruling isn't new information, and it certainly shouldn't be to a barrister.

I guess we can either believe he's a barrister who is a bit thick, or a politician who will say whatever he thinks will win votes.

Just when I thought Keir Starmer couldn't be more mealy mouthed and vacuous.

So far we know they didn't like statues vandilsed but vicious violence incitement against a group already under daily attack; women and girls.... silence

Nice U-turn. But, I'm glad he's made it.

This period of time will be one that's studied and looked at in horrified awe, for all the wrong reasons.

Hopefully this latest ruling Is the start of the revolt against this gender madness. Because it is utter madness.

The majority of people are not in the slightest bit interested in males who wish to present feminine, or even be known as a female name etc. But bulldozing their way in female only sports and changing rooms, and demanding lesbians have sex with them , and demanding we lie on official documents such as passports and birth certificates - Is not equality - it's a strive for domination.

The worst bit about it is the school education surrounding it. This will eventually change , and it can't come quick enough.

I'm not sure what your issue with my post is. I saud that Starmer had said that almost all women didn't have a penis. Now he's saying no women do. The article you posted agrees with that.