Labour’s NEC Set To Confirm Trans People Allowed On All-Women Shortlists

[busyboysmum]

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labours-nec-set-to-confirm-transsexual-rights-to-all-women-shortlists-for-parliament-trans-women_uk_5a66782ae4b0e5630072d118

Where?

What were we taking about?

Dogs? Scatter cushions? Handbags?

Nah, its all lipsticks, high heels, make-up tips and big hair. With a little light frottage at the thought of myself in a bra, innit?

This from the GoFundMe:

Update: Bizarre comment from the Labour NEC on self-id, given to the Huffington Post yesterday:

'A Labour party spokesperson said: “At the NEC today it was confirmed that all women shortlists are and always have been open to all women, which of course includes trans women.
“The party will consult with key stakeholders about the wording of this policy and will issue guidance to CLPs.”

From JJ:

There is no policy on self-id & never has been. No policy has been written, debated, discussed or agreed. No consultation, no impact assessment & no key stakeholders have been approached on this policy because IT DOESN'T EXIST. If a policy existed the NEC could check the wording of it in minutes.

The only people who get to decide if self-id is party policy or not are CONFERENCE DELEGATES. The party conference will be held in glorious Liverpool, this September. Come say hi. A gang of us are going. www.labour.org.uk

_

So they are going to go self-ID without actually saying that?

The statement could refer to TIM with a grc or to self iding TIM. I think the failure to specify is deliberate and just means they haven't resolved this yet.

Or that they're hoping everybody has forgotten about this by the time they climb down so they end up with less egg on their face?

What Tallulah said. They have declared nothing.

I think the failure to specify is deliberate and just means they haven't resolved this yet.

Or that they're hoping everybody has forgotten about this by the time they climb down so they end up with less egg on their face?

Exactly my view. The one thing they're desperate to avoid is having to say to the TRAs "you can't have this" whatever this would be, however innocuous, because there'd be a shitstorm.

I'm coming to the view that much of politics is being in a muddle of self-contradiction and waiting for something to turn up.

I bet they'll turn away any self identifying TIMs who do apply in order not to face a legal challenge, but will pretend to reject them on grounds other than their trans status. A bit like young women getting knocked back from jobs 'because there was a lot of fierce competition this year' when actually it's cos they suspect they'll get pregnant and take maternity soon.

Agree aollidascope

However unlike young women who often took those knockbacks at face value and thought, I'm not good enough yet, must try harder

I don't think that rejections of TIMs for stuff will be quietly accepted.

I not think it will be quietly accepted either.

I also suspect there are some in the Labour Party who would happily flout the law anyway and accept a self IDing TIM regardless. How would anybody know if they had a GRC or not? Who regulates the administrative system for these lists? As long as they don’t publically announce a policy that flouts the law, I suspect that they will just carry on as they want to.

By God but they are sneaky bastards. Who think that we are actually dim.

"which of course includes trans women".

That bit really sets out their stall doesn't it? It is the "of course" that does it. Men will be allowed to take women's places. And already have taken women's places. Of course. Because men are entitled to them. And women should STFU about it.

Transwomen are women

#nodebate or you are a violent rapist.

"Transwomen are women"

And of course, it's the acceptance or non-acceptance of that premise which determines whether the ideology lives or dies. Which is why it's so frustrating -and understandable- that no TRA will define what a damn woman is!

I also suspect there are some in the Labour Party who would happily flout the law anyway and accept a self IDing TIM regardless. How would anybody know if they had a GRC or not? Who regulates the administrative system for these lists? As long as they don’t publically announce a policy that flouts the law, I suspect that they will just carry on as they want to.

I've been wondering about this too and whether the GoFundMe money could be used to test this. But that would mean going after an individual and it would be very easy to look vindictive, even if a "told you so" result was achieved.

it's the acceptance or non-acceptance of that premise which determines whether the ideology lives or dies.

This. It absolutely comes down to this.

How easy is it to obtain a GRC as things stand at the moment and how long does it take? Is it something that could be done under-the-radar retrospectively if a challenge was made and presented as a fait accompli?

considering that they have let these conversations take place with little to no involvement from MNHQ (not that I think this is due to their own personal views on GI, but more taking the stand of impartiality)

Whatever their thinking, I think HQ have been seriously brave over this issue. Especially after they were hit personally during the whole Jeffrey business.

I can't believe they haven't had shit from trans groups.

I'm positive that the Labour Party have never asked for birth certificates to confirm eligibility for AWS. I'm positive that they have no idea whether or not they have already broken the law with respect to the TIMs they have already selected onto them.

I don't know how you'd test this without looking vindictive to a particular person.

How about forcing Labour to disclose their selection and verification criteria? Like an FOI request but for a political party? Would there be a legal way of doing that? In order to force them to institute proper verification?

How easy is it to obtain a GRC as things stand at the moment and how long does it take? Is it something that could be done under-the-radar retrospectively if a challenge was made and presented as a fait accompli?

You have to have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. You have to be over 18. And you have to you have lived as the opposite sex for two years.

And it is all three of those criteria being eliminated that has cross-party support.

LangCleg: can you imagine the shitstorm that would result if a Labour trans candidate were to be elected as an MP and the Tories responded by mounting a legal challenge that they had become a candidate as a result of a misrepresentation, ie entitlement under the EA2010?

Of course, one way to avoid encountering this problem would be for Labour to ignore EA2010 but to put trans candidates forward for unwinnable seats.

That would be a gutsy move though, unless you 100% knew that a GRC definitely hadn't been issued... imagine if you challenged publicly and a GRC was swiftly (and publicly) produced.

If someone has a GRC their birth certificate would state their legal gender. Aren't birth certificates are public record?

When I ordered a copy of mine I just had to put in my name and where I was born and then pay a tenner or something. I ordered my husband one too. I could have ordered anyone's.

This was a few years ago, may have changed now.

TLDR; you can find out what is says on someone's birth certificate fairly easily.

Jennifer James (created of the fundraiser) has now been suspended