List the top 3 reasons you plan to vote for which party - 2 sentences for each point.

[PanicAttax]

I really am struggling to pick through what I actually want to vote for, rather than against in this coming GE.

I don't feel any party ticks all of my boxes but loathe to have more of the same with Tories killing everything off and sewage.

Labour I can't deal with the VAT on private schools and how they're rolling back on hitting tech companies for tax (seems to be picking on the little guy and parents who care about education).

I really don't know much about Lib Dem - trans seems to be their main concern/not very woman friendly? and Green - do they have great policies that they've costed for? Any other party you think deserves a mention?

So, what are your top three reasons to vote for your party?
Keep it brief and to the point!

You are absolutely DELUDED if you think it’s other people being nasty idiots. Your behaviour through this entire thread is bizarre and unpleasant.

I’m sorry the only way you feel the child in your family will get the education they need is by going private - which now might be unaffordable. But perhaps if private schools had been contributing more fairly then they wouldn’t be in this position.

i believe you should vote for the good of the majority so that’s what I will do. There are many children who need to catch a break, you are not unique.

Labour.

1. Because there is less evidence that individuals are in it to benefit & enrich themselves, their mates, and their families at the expense of the entire nation.
2. Because every labour government since WW2 has long term done a better job on the economy & reducing the national debt than conservatives.
3. Because they have a better idea of what life is like for the average British citizen - who they are supposed to be in Westminster to represent.

For what it's worth, we'll end up paying more tax as a family. Frankly, we've been undertaxed for ages. I'd quite like to see the millionaires & billionaires shouldering their share of the tax burden at the same overall tax rate as someone on median income though. - There's a better chance of that happening if HMRC is properly resourced under labour too.

Not going to get into dead cat discussions about sex & gender. The chances of me being assaulted by someone genuinely transgender in a female changing room are vanishingly small. The chances of a woman being assaulted by an agressive heterosexual male entering a ladies changing room is a very, very real risk. A government that actually increased the prosecution rate against agressive heterosexual males committing assaults against women would be a bonus though!

OP, respectfully, if you ask everyone an open question to state which party they are voting for & their top 3 policy reasons why:

A. Statistically over half the responses are likely to favour labour, based on current poll estimates.

B. It's likely a reasonable sub-section of those will support VAT on school fees as a top policy.

If you were always going to say "I can't bring myself to vote labour so I don't want to hear anyone's reasons about them", then you probably mis-titled the thread really!

If you can bring yourself to, maybe let the responses wash past without needing to respond to every single one which picks up on the VAT school fees thing...there may be more people prepared to sick their heads above the parapet with a few nuggets of wisdom where you gain what you wanted from a different perspective then?

Or if not, perhaps try a new thread called "Give me your top 3 reasons for voting for a party that isn't labour"?

This is an interesting perspective too @caringcarer because biologically, there has been male, female & at least 6 different variants of intersex (representing around 1.5% of the population) for millennia.

Indeed, how to classify talented intersex athletes into the binary options of male/female for the purposes of competing has been a decades-long problem for elite level sport!

So it's hardly surprising that there's a small (but now demonised) proportion of the population who don't feel quite right in their external genitalia & who would relish the opportunity to live their lives the way their brains are telling them they're wired!

The waters got muddied when 'gender' became the preferred term over 'sex' but I really don't feel that the person who's already spent half their lifetime being harassed about not being able to express their true self, and who is desperate to go quietly about their life wearing a frock while having as little attention as possible paid to their genitalia is who I need to be afraid of.

The national papers & right wing TV is chock full of tales to create confected fears about 'safe spaces' when actually, the only people women (both biological females and transitioned/intersex males) need to be afraid of in what should be safe spaces comes down to the same old problem - agressive heterosexual males.

Sir Mark Rowley (head of the Met) commented on a police chiefs' report yesterday that estimates we have around 4 million of them in the UK - rather more of a priority to deal with than some bloke who'd rather not get beaten up in the male changing rooms & just wants to keep himself to himself while he becomes a sheila...don't you think?!?

If a person has a penis whether they wear a dress or not doesn't make them female. Very few trans woman have surgery to remove their penis. If they really wanted to be female they would. In my world if you have a penis you are male and no amount of make up or wearing a dress makes a difference. Once a person no longer has a penis they should be welcomed into female spaces but still not female races because they have had the benefit of higher testosterone throughout training during formative years so would still be unfair to race against biological females.

@caringcarer I agree with everything you have written in your last post.

With the exception that once someone is living as a woman (gender) I don't see any reason why they should be forced to continue to use the men's (gender) changing room where their safety is significantly more at risk.

Any male (sex) who makes a anyone physically unsafe in a women's (gender) changing room is clearly not actually a trans woman (gender) and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of law as a male (sex) assaulting a woman (gender). No new laws are required to achieve that.

It would make sense to add a new law with harsher penalties for a male (sex) impersonating a trans woman (gender) who attacks a woman (gender) in a segregated space - covering the case of the Scottish prisoner who was jailed in a women's prison & assaulted someone and also the fear we might all reasonably have that anyone with a penis randomly walks into a women's changing room & uses it as an offensive weapon.

What I don't need to do to secure my own feeling of safety is force Barbara with boobs (and still - for now - a penis she'd far rather not have) to be forced into a men's (gender) changing space where she's going to be beaten to a pulp because of mens' agression & the continued monstering & othering of trans women (gender).

Ideally of course, public spaces can introduce unisex single stall toilets & shower stalls as they are refurbed & any individuals genitalia remains between them & the walls...as it should be anyway!

The problem is when the male aggression becomes more acceptable because the aggressive male has decided to put on a dress and enter female spaces. I agree there should be far harsher sentences for trans women who use trans to get into female spaces to assault women, but firstly, what about trans women who are not assaulting women, but intimidating them, openly standing in womens changing rooms with their penis out, issuing rape threats anonymously on the internet etc? Secondly, according to trans activists, anyone who says they are a woman is one. So Isla Bryson is a woman, by their own definition. Men who wear a dress 3 months of the year and say they are a woman is a woman. Sexual predators who transition in prison are women. They have changed their tune now or gone very quiet about that one, because the thing people said would happen, has happened. How can youvtell whether a person is a ' genuine' trans person, or a predator? 1.5% people are trans, but 6% of men are sexual predators in some way. That entire 6% knows they can more easily access women's spaces by saying they are trans.

@DramaLlamaBangBang, did you not read about the female who was raped in a women's hospital ward by a person who was a trans woman but penis in tact? Females have also been raped and sexually assaulted in female prisons again by males purporting to be trans women but who still have a penis. Have you not read about these victims either? If a person has a penis they are a male. If they get it chopped off fair enough they are no longer such a threat to females but as I said the vast majority of males just put on make up and a dress and are still a threat to females. Very few so called trans woman, actually want to have their penis taken off. So they are still males, and still a risk to females. Calling a man 'she' doesn't make him a woman.

There's a lot of "whataboutery" in all of the above when there is actually just one unifying factor. In fact, when it comes to it, how many column inches have been spent on the minutiae of trans issues, when really, there is only one significant problem:

anyone using a penis as an offensive weapon should be prosecuted

This is where the conservatives have a terrible track record. (Sexual assaults c.190,000 a year, rape convictions c.2%. Domestic abuse cases reported 890,000, convictions c.5%)

This is where the actual problem lies.

This is the mass issue not the fringe complication. Violent men impact hundreds of thousands of women every single year, not handfuls.

How many trans women have you ever met? For me it's 2 in my lifetime & one friend-of-a-friend. That's statistically about right. How many men do I know who are violent, a risk to women, or have actually used their penis as an offensive weapon? A hell of a lot more than 3, that's for sure.

And that stacks up as well, at around 10% (per police estimates) rather than 0.75% (genetically) at population level.

Yet we seem to be dancing around firmer prosecution on male violence & sexual assaults.

Is it because "not all men"? Maybe. But wouldn't it be nice if all of the 90% could get behind this too?

We'd be far better off as a society if we devoted the election hours & media coverage to what we need to do to de-risk the 10% of violent men in society who are out there every single day battering & harassing & assaulting & raping women, and belittling girls & female teachers in our schools, than concentrating on whether Jill with a bra AND a penis is going to use the same changing room as me once a year/decade/lifetime!

I'm no man hater, but let's follow the evidence & the statistics to the actual problem - and males transitioning their lives to live as a woman ain't it!!!

love this.

imagine if there was an additional sentence for those "pretending" to be trans to get access to spaces for the purpose of raping them....

oh wait, that won't work because the justice system and police can't actually convict any rape/SA cases anyway.

focusing on the big picture here is the best way to go. statistically, as women live (rightly) in fear of sexual assault and rape. This is because it happens o us so much. But statistically, we are not more likely to be raped by a transwoman. So which policy actually creates a more positive change for women?

More policing/Investigating and better justice system to improve the rates at which sexual offences are convicted
OR
stopping transwomen from using a female space.

And all of this talk about penis' in changing rooms? so if the penis is your only issue does that mean once a transwomen has had bottom surgery, you'd totally 100% fine with them suddenly being in your space?

but as for the main post.

Labour.

1. The Tories genuinely do not care to better the lives of the majority of the electorate, only their own specific kind of people.

2. As a woman, the Tories do not care for me. My healthcare has been f----d by the Tories. Waiting lists forever. Currently 600,000 women waiting for Gynae treatment with NHS England alone. I cannot trust the Tories with the NHS. Remember the complaints about how "long" NHS waiting lists were under the last Labour government? We'd be ecstatic about those waits now.
   They don't care about sorting out the fact that we still are underpaid, miss out on career opportunities and that the ridiculous childcare situation more often than not effects us disproportionately.

3. VAT on private schools. Why should any non charity have charitable status? It is literally in the name.

not to mention within healthcare, MH being more of a priority positively effects everyone.

I haven't decided yet, and won't until I have read their manifestos.

At the moment I am thinking mainly of reasons not to vote for particular parties.

Conservative:
Rwanda policy;
Mess made of the economy by Truss;
Mishandling of Covid (covers a lot)!

Labour:
Lack of clarity on how they will achieve many policies and on trans issues;
Worries about whether Starmer will be able to control the left wing of the party if in power (ditto the unions);
Votes for 16/17 year olds.

Lib Dems:
Views on trans issues

Greens:
Ditto

Am in England so no Scottish or Welsh nationalists or NI parties to consider.

My constituency has been Tory for years, with the Lib Dems the main opposition. We will get a new MP either way because of boundary changes. Both main contenders seem decent people from the little I have seen so far.

I also think both Sunak and Starmer are fundamentally decent and competent people. Similarly Hunt and Reeves. It's certainly a far better choice for PM than it was at the last general election!

focusing on the big picture here is the best way to go. statistically, as women live (rightly) in fear of sexual assault and rape. This is because it happens o us so much. But statistically, we are not more likely to be raped by a transwoman. So which policy actually creates a more positive change for women?

You think it's right that women live in fear of sexual assault and rape? Or am I misunderstanding your intention here?

i don't see how you could infer that i think its morally right to fear that.

more that we have the right to fear it as it's not uncommon. We have every reason to fear it because it's so prevalent. I wish we didn't have to have this very rational fear but of course, that's the world we live in :-(

I'm slightly intrigued by how far up the agenda all the fire-stokers have managed to get "trans issues". (picking up on hot top 3 topics mentioned by @Fifthtimelucky @caringcarer @Octaviathethird @Lifelikinotdothinki @CaveMum @HebburnPokemon @C8H10N4O2 @SiriAlexa @Angrymum22 @Garlicked

@DramaLlamaBangBang captured it perfectly when she said "The problem is when the male aggression becomes more acceptable"...

Every year over 190,000 people in the UK are reported to the police for sexual assault crimes. Less than 5,000 of them are convicted.

Let that sink in!

Only 2.5% of people who the police actively know about actually receive any kind of a sentence for sexually assaulting other people under existing laws.

That's 2 Wembley Stadium's worth of people who sexually assault someone and then go about their business untroubled afterwards. Every year. And over 90% of them are men.

So yes:

• anyone indecently exposing a penis in a women's changing room (or anywhere) should be prosecuted-under existing laws
• anyone threatening assault with their penis (in person or online) should be prosecuted-under existing laws
• anyone physically assaulting a woman with their penis in a women's changing room (or hospital ward, or prison wing, or anywhere else) should be prosecuted-under existing laws
• also, any male who physically assaults another male with his penis (in the men's changing rooms or in any other space) should be prosecuted-under existing laws
• furthermore, anyone who also has ovaries & a womb who physically sexually assaults a woman (or man) in any space should be prosecuted-under existing laws.

All 185,000 of them, ideally!

INCLUDING, 100%, all of the "trans" individuals perpetrating hospital rape/prison assault/willy wanging in front of the girls in the changing rooms which are quoted on this subject ad infinitum by the fire-stokers. THEY TOO SHOULD ABSOLUTELY BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF EXISTING LAWS AND FOR MAXIMUM SENTENCING.

But what would make me feel FAR safer than fixating on the handful of trans cases which keep getting quoted (which is far below the average rate of offending in the wider male population) would be convicting more of the 180,000 or so blokes who sexually harass women every year & get away scot free.

You might notice them - they'll be the ones hanging out in BTL comments firing off gems like "if all it takes to wander into a changing room full of naked women & help myself is to put on a dress for the day, I'm in! hur, hur".

THAT is the kind of unacceptable, sexually violent male attitude behind every single one of 180,000 unconvicted sexual assault cases that flies by completely unmentioned by Farage, Badenoch, Braverman et al
every. single. year.

We desperately need to stop focusing on a handful of extremely high profile cases where it is "trans" women who have committed these crimes, when statistically, there will be over 200 men who were reported to the police last year for sexual assault (but went unconvicted) among the crowd of EVERY top tier football stadium. Every, single, Saturday. They roam around, lurking in offices, stairwells, alleys & yes, unisex changing room areas - completely unchallenged & absolutely unmentioned as a threat to women by the culture warriors.

Let's get the 90+% of decent, honest men (and trans women) out there to stand with us and stamp out this inexcusable threat to women from unpleasant, sexually agressive men who are EVERYWHERE around us in society.

Over 70% of our daughters aged 13-21 have already been sexually harassed in some way online or at their place of education (Childwise/Girlguiding UK survey 2023).

We are all doing them a HUGE disservice for the future if we allow trans women to be become a major election topic for crimes which 97% of unpleasant, sexually agressive men are getting away with year in, year out.

It's the ones that aren't interested in understanding life as a woman that are a risk to us all, not the ones who are!!!

Let's get the 90+% of decent, honest men (and trans women) out there to stand with us and stamp out this inexcusable threat to women

Great idea, @MeandT. It's amazing nobody's thought of it before. What's your recommended strategy?

How long d'you reckon it will take to unwind thousands of years of patriarchal entitlement, misogyny and bro culture?

While the male revolution's in progress, it seems practical to minimise the inexcusable threat to women by limiting opportunities for the 10% to perpetrate their abuse, right?

One low-cost, low-energy means to that end would be for women themselves to decide how much male access to their lives and bodies they permit. Support a collective exercise of consent. Let women determine when, how and under what circumstances they share themselves with men (and trans women).

One would hope the 90% of decent men (and trans women) will help women maintain their boundaries. As the revolution progresses, perhaps more of them will do so.

Eventually, we should have 100% of men (and trans women) supporting women's right to consent. You'll have achieved a wonderful thing! Feel free to elaborate on the plan - and do you have a timescale in mind?
Thanks.

@Garlicked well one practical step would be for the vocal politicians & the journos who choose the headlines to focus on the inexcusable & increasing level of sexual harassment girls & women face in the UK.

And to commit to funding on education in schools, countering the toxic Andrew Tate bullshit all over the internet, and funding more police & CPS resources to prosecute the 180 thousand or so blokes getting away with it at the moment.

Rather than making the (I've lost count now, are we up to four?) instances of trans women attacking women into a top-billed election talking point.

Just a thought!

(I've lost count now, are we up to four?)

Fortunately we're limited to five images, or I'd have spent the whole night making you a pinboard 😬

Anyone wants further information, here are some non-exhaustive summaries:

More than 70 per cent of transgender prisoners are in for sex offences or violent crimes

578+ Male* Victories in Female Sports

Trans crime UK

Evidence and Data on Trans Women’s Offending Rates

This is obviously not the only issue at stake in a general election, so I'll leave it now. It's hardly a minor issue, though - which makes it all the more disturbing that the majority of parties refuse to acknowledge that being female means anything.

Pretty sure I’ll just make the tactical vote to get our MP out. They’re all shit and have no idea how to fix our crappy country.

We’ll be voting conservative.

I feel we pay enough tax already and at least they will be harsher on this gender nonsense.

I vote for Rishi Sunak, for the effort of banning smoking for next generation and the social service scheme.

@Garlicked OK. So 76 transgender women imprisoned for sex offences then, not 4. Call it 100 for the 4 years since those MoJ reports.

And 13,000 blokes locked up for sex offences.

And (checks notes) 65,000 rapists reported to the police last year but not convicted and a further 115,000 reported for other sexual offences but still roaming the streets.

There's a complex & nuanced & common sense discussion to be had about when someone should be recognised as a trans woman.

But a top election priority? Nope. Still can't get worked up about making the priority anything other than increasing the rate of prosecution & conviction of rape & assault cases put in front of the police. Full stop.

I'm politically homeless

Peace & socialism ✌

Conservative: Rwanda policy;Mess made of the economy by Truss;Mishandling of Covid (covers a lot)!

im not sure I agree Covid was mishandled, I actually think we did better than a lot of countries, and it was so unprecedented and they faced the unknown.

for truss they got her out quick smart when they realised how shite she was, it was weeks, and none of her polices were implemented. I am not sure I’d hang them for it to be fair.

rwanda I don’t disagree with, we are in a rock and a hard place here. We can’t afford to keep them. We are trying to smash the people smugglers but it’s impossible, what the hell are we supposed to do, they won’t stop coming.

the mishandling of covid covers multiple possible things though, including partygate, eat out to help out and the ridiculous PPE Scandals.

about the only thing it seemed that went 'well' when it came to Covid was the vaccine rollout being widely accessible and easy.