I'm asking Keir a question about women's rights on 5 live - how to phrase it?

[JanefromLondon1]

I want him not to be able to give me the flannel that we have to be kind to the woMen. I want assurances that we do t have to share our spaces. I want to not sound like the very nervous person that am I!

Any help appreciated?

He should so be wearing pink.

He also looks very stiff, uncomfortable and moves his head very little - which seemed to coincide with the permanent wearing of glasses?

To me he always seems like he's about to burst into tears.

Yes I said this to my husband. Lisa Nandy has the same pained expression too. Saying that I haven't heard much from her during this campaign.

I've just seen baroness Harriet Harmon on itv good morning show. She was asked a question by Suzanna Reid and she was very short and irritated by it, saying that there is already stuff in the equalities act.
She said there has been some "confusion" about this and it can be resolved that safe spaces for abused women can be for biological women.
That's it. That's all. She said it's been blown up into a political football.

Oh silly us! It was all a misunderstanding. If we’d not asked they’d never have had to say ‘no’ to stop us getting uppity! Of course men will never and never have been put in women’s prisons, wards, sports teams and refuges. Obviously women are adult human females and that’s widely known and carefully considered at all points. Crowing about it isn’t kind and we should stop. Or something like that.

Harriet "PIE" Harman can fuck off.

Amen to that

We need to keep asking.
I’m impressed with pretty much everything else Labour is doing, which is why I’m so puzzled and disappointed about their obduracy (and evident irritation) on this.
Incidentally, looking on the Labour manifesto online, there’s no mention of removing the spousal exit clause. I know that LWD is concerned about it, but is there anywhere a firm commitment to it in writing? Of all the egregious aspects of this issue, to me this seems one of the worst.

Women and reality still a 'political football' eh?

They're between a rock and a hard place. They're in, but without a lot of public support. It's dawned on them that this crap is not washing with the electorate or going away. They're in hock to a bunch of extremists while if they take the steps the extremists want, public support will plummet and a lot of very, very inconvenient publicity will pour out and make them look like a bunch of misogynist nuts.

They seem to be reaching in desperation for getting very cross with everyone and denying everything.

It won't work.

Question for any journalists wandering through (although you can't hold a candle to Jane, I'm sorry),

"If Labour disagrees with the judges and the EHCR who have said that the EA does not work, is this in fact because a fudge suits Labour and in fact also suits biological males wishing to use women's spaces? It permits the illusion and the capacity for Labour to claim that women are fine with accessible sex based spaces, while still ensuring any man that wishes to can enter and use that space. Leaving women who cannot use mixed sex spaces, or who want privacy, dignity and safety, to have to be excluded from all spaces and public access so that people who are male can have their preferred choice? How is this not just being very discreetly but really quite extremely sexist against women? Or just really quite cowardly?"

Honestly, if painting us all as hysterical bigots making a fuss about things that would never have happened is what they need to do to re-establish female-only language, rights and political legitimacy I'm kind of resigned to that. It's more important thing that we do re-establish female-only language, rights and political legitimacy than that TERFs are acknowledged to have been right all along.

The trick for us will be to recognise when the pendulum has crossed the midpoint so we don't inadvertently make it harder to make those quiet changes.

Harriet Harman and Labour will be protecting their 'legacy' - political parties set a lot of store by that. Remember that famous photo in Downing Street of Tony Blair surrounded by a sea of women - over 100 anyway - elected in 1997? He created the post and appointed the first Minister for Women, Harriet Harman, with a brief to embed equality for women as a responsibility for all government departments, and with an equality unit in the Cabinet Office. Next in post was Patricia Hewitt, followed by Jacqui Smith, then Harman again in 2007 under Brown, with the new title Minister for Women and Equality. She was also responsible for the Equality Act 2010 (someone tell Starmer it's not the equalities act). Meanwhile Labour had also brought in the Gender Recognition Act 2004. They won't readily concede changes to their legislation which they guard so jealously - while claiming the demand for change is just a political ploy got up by the opposition.

In that they keep on getting asked the same questions, yes it is.

Thing is the (ignorant) journalists aren't asking all the questions that they should, as we know. Now that Labour are in government, their views will be examined more critically and forensically. The incoherence and illogicality of their position will surely be exposed. Plus PIE will pop up again.

I thought Suzanna Reid did well, she repeated and did try and pin her down I think if SR was emailed some back ground and what to ask she would.

People we need to march. Every major city. Grab your placards and your family and get out there. There has to be more of us than the delusional TRAs and their equally delusional supporters.

Why can't journalists just repeat 'Can you answer my question please?' Rather than allowing them to answer like we're halfwits who are going to be confused by their talking round the question.

Politicians are trained in the art of not answering direct questions. The fact that a woman like HH with her extensive political record and acumen is unable to explain why she wants some sad men in women's spaces (including the bad rapist men) again emphasises how she's defending the indefensible.
So she has to avoid the question.

Yes that's why we have to cut through the bull, keep interrupting and demand a reply.