Labour party invents new bollocks made-up non-existent definition for woman

[pisacake]

labour.org.uk/members/get-involved/national-youth-elections-2018/

Sixteen uses of the word 'self-defining woman'. Zero uses of 'female', 'biology', or plain 'woman'.

'Woman' is now literally meaningless. A woman can be a bog-standard heterosexual teenage male (Lily Madigan), if he says so.

And obviously with half the places reserved for 'self-defining women' (not 'women', 'self-defining women'), then there's not really any reason why men wouldn't define themselves a women, is there?

If misogynistic shits like Lily Madigan can 'self-define as a woman', well ALL men are women, aren't they?

The whole bloody human race is 'self-defined women'.

Stupid Labour.

The tweet I wrote yesterday asking the Labour Party to explain this has vanished!! Can they delete my tweet?

Pocket that was what that violent offender in ? Scotland did, insist of having female prison officers search, um, them. The one who insisted on a really stupid name. I'll try to find a link.

here doesn't mention the searches though maybe that was someone else

I have complained to my MP (non-Labour), to the Labour party as well and to the Equalities Commission.

Topshop Travis, would he be able to apply for the women only shortlists? ... But he doesn't identify as a 'trans woman', he reckons he is 'non-binary' so neither male nor female - I think trans women are a little too 2016 for him, non binary is where it's at right now.

I've been saying for a while now that the next innovation will be some trans people identifying both as a man and a woman, and no doubt other things too.

Obviously, being both all the time could be inconvenient so they could seek to have peaks of dysphoria for certain occasions when seeing themselves as, say, a woman, is extremely triggering. Like for example when there's some housework to be done.

It's becoming clear to me that non-binary (with a twist of both male and female existing simultaneously but also disappearing when inconvenient) is the true have-cake-and-eat-it state.

Dodo that is genius

Travis is fine as long as he self identifies as a woman at the point he ticks the box.

It doesn't even need to be fixed in time like that.

Where eligibility is restricted to self-defining woman this means that anyone who self-defines as a woman is eligible to stand for these positions.

This definition includes people who self-define as a woman every 29 February.

It's the obvious solution Dodo, but of course the prisoner/care home resident/hospital patient isn't risking their job to do it, whereas an employee doing it is going to need to have management prepared to stand behind them or face disciplinary I would have thought (since I'm pretty sure that mocking someone's protected characteristic is going to have to be taken pretty seriously if a complaint is made.)

I take your point. Maddening, because I could equally well say that Travis, Andrew Burns and probably LM are all mocking a protected characteristic, and doing it with absolutely zero comeback.

Lily Madigan confirmed that unless you drink the Kool-Aid and actively self identify as a woman you're not eligible for women's posts.

The public keenness to say yes anyone who says they are a woman is a woman,

Shows up that they don't see women as people at all, doesn't it.

We don't exist as independent entities, only in relation to, and as defined by others.

Labout should at least specify, for 'self-defining women', whether they permanently self-define as such, and if not, what proportion of the time they do so.

I would suggest that someone should only stand for a women's post once their self-defined womanhood has lasted longer than their previous male persona.

They can do what they like.

What they have decided to do is this.

But it's not clear what they have decided.

Are 'Women, plus permanently self-defining women' supposed to apply?
Or 'Only women who are prepared to self-define'?
Or 'Women, including those who declare no gender identity, plus transwomen, plus males who sometimes self-identify as female'?

It's a land-grab for young voters. Of course they don't want to make clear what they want or what they think. Their over-riding priority is how they are perceived by their target audience.

Maybe they could hire a member of staff who is officially non-binary, and then they could just change as and when they like it (and to help in these kinds of situations). It would be positive discrimination in action.

You have to actively self define as a woman. If you don't actively do that, you can't apply.

Sorry that was in relation to the Andrew Burns situation. This thread moves quickly

And of course, that leaves out women who don't actively identify as one and anyone who is non-binary.

You have to actively self define as a woman. If you don't actively do that, you can't apply.

This is one example of why I think Lily Madigan isn't stupid. They've grasped that point and were gleefully waving it around on twitter.

@gunsandbanjos - no they can't delete it but could they have reported it to Twitter as offensive or something? Are you sure it's not there?

Couldn’t see it, have retweeted it and copied in big Jeremy.

Guns How do I find your tweets and I will retweet as well?

It's a land-grab for young voters. Of course they don't want to make clear what they want or what they think. Their over-riding priority is how they are perceived by their target audience.

This is absolutely it, I'm sure of it.