Women voting for Labour?

[bearsbritches]

To wonder why women would be voting for Labour when they support trans rights over women's rights? I am concerned we are going to descend even further into all of this 'woke' madness and it is women who bear the brunt.

Starmer has back peddled on the self ID policy all of a sudden before the election, shock, but we can't trust that.

I certainly won't be voting for the Tories and can't bring myself to vote Labour for many reasons. Where does that leave disillusioned voters?

Providers can theoretically limit services to biological females now, but because of the risk of legal action, and years of misrepresentation of the law by stonewall training programs, large numbers don't.
An amended law will rebalance the situation so more providers feel confident to deliver single sex services and more members of the public will feel confident asking for them.

Yes this is it

In sports there's just going to have to be DNA testing - you're either XX or XY and that's it.

There are a small number of people who are intersex. They are not XX or XY. I just thought it was important to raise that because these people get lost in society.

I actually don’t believe that trans women are women and I am concerned about female only spaces but there is absolutely no way I’m voting on one issue.

Because my children are going to be most affected by another 5 years of Tory bastards decimating free at the point of service healthcare and starving schools of money.

Perhaps all of you on this thread trying to say that Tory is a good choice use private schools? It’s fairly obvious you do.

The Tories take the position they do about trans women based on transphobia and bigotry, which they’re famous for. It used to be single parents and gay people. Now it’s trans people. If you think it’s because they care about women’s rights, you’re delusional.

@Onomatofear
The Tories take the position they do about trans women based on transphobia and bigotry, which they’re famous for.

Any evidence for this being based on transphobia?

Vs. the evidence many of us can provide of hundreds of individual feminists and grassroots women's rights and gay rights groups talking to any and every political party who will listen, being ignored, insulted or actually ejected from other political parties, before finally finding to their surprise that the Conservatives were the only large party who would slowly but surely take on board what was being said?

There are a small number of people who are intersex. They are not XX or XY. I just thought it was important to raise that because these people get lost in society

Intersex is quite an offensive term. And you do realise that these people are all either male or female don't you? That some DSDs affect women and some men?

The Tories take the position they do about trans women based on transphobia and bigotry, which they’re famous for

Not see/heard any transphobia from them - in fact the Tories have a trans MP, no? Unless you mean that they are trying to stand up for women (belatedly I agree) which for some people = transphobia for some bizarre reason.

Yes. That's good. It doesn't keep men out of women's spaces however, no matter how much the Tories pretend it does.

In fact it keeps less than 5000 "legal women" out of women's spaces where orgs used the EA exemptions but included "legal women" for fear of being sued, but continues to allow the 50,000 trans women (most of whom aren't "legal women") access to womens spaces as usual.

So yeah. Approximately 1% of trans women who are "legal women" are going to be stopped from using a very small number of spaces where the providers are using the EA exemptions. Well done Tories.

Mind you it is the same logic as saying "stop the boats" (45, 000 immigrants) will reduce overall migration (750,000 immigrants). Technically yes but not in any way so as you'd notice.

Bizarre logic there

This is a good post, agree with all of it

This doesn't sound right to me. I think one of us has misunderstood the Tory proposals.

Quite possibly me, but if so, in order to even the score, I'd just like to point out that 5,000 is 10% of 50,000 and not 1%.

critical thinking skills x

What does 'transition' even mean though? If you were defining it as having genital surgery you'd have a point, it's unlikely many men would go this far just to gain access to women's spaces. But I would be very scared of the few men who would take it this far, wouldn't you?

However the point is there is no definitive meaning of transition which can be used. Any man, literally any man who looks and dresses any way, can waltz into women's spaces and say 'I'm a woman today' and it is increasingly difficult for women to push back and say 'no you're not, you don't belong here, get out'. There are plenty of examples of women being targeted for trying to do this and there is no longer any clarity on whether they have the legal or even moral right to do this.

So effectively any man can claim to be transitioning and have a pretty decent chance of being permitted ongoing access to women's spaces whenever he wants.

This is not about the small minority of men who genuinely believe they should have been born female and have had surgery to try and mimic this as best they can. It's about anyone who wants to use this magic sentence on a whim. And there are a lot of these men, and surely you can see many of them will have harmful intentions behind this.

Labour have spoken about opening new courts specifically to deal with the backlog in rape cases. Rape has effectively been decriminalised in recent years.

Practical steps count more for me than “debate” that is largely there to distract and create scapegoats.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/08/labour-pledges-80-new-courts-in-bid-to-tackle-backlog-crisis

Men who enter spaces with ill intent are not kept out by rules. They've always rode roughshod over women.
the current moral panic has actually mainly resulted in gender non-conforming women being challenged. Because it isn't about policing sex it becomes policing femininity. Which is stupid.
Do you want trans men in women's spaces? Because if trans men are forced into women's spaces then it really will be possible for any man to come in whenever.
It has been proven again and again that you can't always tell.

Labour's plan to prioritise the rape trial backlog does far more for women's safety than the flawed proposed PSHE guidance from the Conservatives.

This is just one reason why many women are voting Labour

*Argh how embarrassing I meant Labour obviously. I have a 6 year old climbing on me and I just got in from ParkRun!

Forgot I was on here not Twitter and can edit posts! It's been a LONG week

the current moral panic has actually mainly resulted in gender non-conforming women being challenged. Because it isn't about policing sex it becomes policing femininity. Which is stupid.

I've been called a liar (and a man, and an MRA) on the FWR board for saying just this, despite it happening to two of my DC who are gender non-conforming. Prepare to experience the same thing. I agree with you.

Given there was a thread on here where the OP had to apologise for accusing a runner of being trans when they were not based solely on looks there's no way they can deny this.
It's rapidly turning into femininity policing and that doesn't lead anywhere good for women.

This is such nonsense.

Having the rule that female spaces are female only is clearly safer.
The men with ill intent may break rules to enter women's spaces and attack. But if the rules are there then they stand out and are easier to detect and stop. If we normalise absolutely anybody going in women's spaces then who will partly attention to a creepy guy following girls into public toilets?

How will they stand out if trans men are in women's spaces? And it is mainly gender non-conforming women who are challenged now.

I'd like to see your data regarding who is mainly getting challenged entering women's spaces.

We live in a society now where trans or not, lots of people are gender non conforming. Therefore the options we have are either to abandon all rules about who can use what space and never challenge anyone appearing in the wrong toilet or changong room for fear of causing offence, or attempt to maintain these spaces which will mean sometimes people will occasionally be asked if they are in the right space.

I think the second option is far far better.

I think the second option is far far better.

I don't. It's hard enough to be gender non-conforming without getting verbal aggression from someone who thinks you're in the wrong toilet. And make no mistake, aggression happens. You can dismiss this as 'unintended consequences' and 'casualties of war', but to the person on the receiving end, it feels like persecution. So basically that's OK for the greater good?

Of course men with ill intent will enter women's spaces more often if there are no mechanisms to push back and remove them or say no. How on Earth can you think they don't?
And more men in the edge and toying with the idea will feel able to if there is no clear way to stop or remove them.

Again I repeat what does 'transition' mean? How can we tell the good / genuine ones apart from the chancers?

Women, building owners and security have to be able to challenge people if it is thought they are in spaces they shouldn’t be.
This is for the greater good and protection of all women and girls.

A law legislating for single sex spaces will allow this to happen and, hopefully, stop people using spaces they have no legal right to be in.
The idea that no one can challenge someone allows for a complete free for all.

That is unacceptable.

Yes of course it's the lesser of two evils.

Many years ago, in my town a young teenager was raped in some public toilets. No one saw the guy follow her in. But he took a big risk, and if someone had seen him, they would have raised the alarm and he'd have been stopped. If that happened now people would probably turn a blind eye.

This seems more important than worrying if someone who looks a bit masculine occasionally being asked if she's male.

Many years ago, in my town a young teenager was raped in some public toilets. No one saw the guy follow her in. But he took a big risk, and if someone hadseen him, they would have raised the alarm and he'd have been stopped. If that happened now people would probably turn a blind eye.

Would they? A predatory man, presenting as a man? I very much doubt it.

This isn't as easy as you make it out to be. When you get someone who is gender non-conforming, what are you going to do? Because when it happened to my young adult DC, it was very much not a matter of a polite challenge. It was loud, it was aggressive and the person doing the challenging did not accept my DC's assurance that they were in the correct place. That kind of behaviour is going to provoke a backlash. You can legislate for single sex spaces until you're blue in the face, and I'd like legislation for third spaces too, but ultimately this is going to boil down to how people behave. Predatory men need to be kept out. Aggressive GC women need to learn better interactions. My DC is small, not muscular and quiet. Use that sort of aggression with someone who is in the right space, who has the skills to defend themselves, perhaps with alcohol involved, and you could end up with violence - and for no good reason. Either way, it's going to be horrific, it will divide women, and predatory men will still get away with it.