Labour against transphobia group - thread 2

[QuentinSummers]

Follow on from
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3144285-Labour-Against-Transphobia-Facebook-group?msgid=75082467#75082467

it's beyond parody!

You'll all be glad to know it's not really an article

I can no longer tell parody from real life.

Just to finish you all off, sorry, here is the LP video released today for LGBT History Month. Four talking heads, no lesbians, no mention of lesbians.

and Paris Fucking Lees get the most time.
Oh and 'We'll reform the Gender Recognition Act and the Equality Act to ensure they protect trans people." (Doesn't say which trans people. )

Here's their twitter thread with some dissenting voices.
twitter.com/UKLabour/status/959106122996158465

The day after tomorrow in the Independent: "Lily Madigan and Shon Faye on how transphobia is rife because they weren't allowed to play the lead roles of Carey Mulligan and Meryl Streep in Suffragette" - with an introduction by Danielle Muscato, on why he would have been best placed as researcher and script writer, coz he's a real woman an' all.

Followed by Lily Madigan "I can get pregnant and have babies too."

2020 - "Suffragette" re-released with an entire transgender cast. Produced by Owen Jones.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/01/labour-to-clarify-policy-over-trans-women-on-all-female-shortlists

I'm not a member, members may wish to respond to the consultation though

Here's what Dawn Butler has said:
"The Labour party policy on self-identification is clear. It follows that all-women shortlists are open to all women, including trans women. And that trans women do not need a gender recognition certificate to participate in an all-woman shortlist."

Quentin;
But
'some labour mp's are anxious to make sure that there are some safeguards written in to the policies to stop,for example.a mens rights activist attempting to stand as a woman to test the legalities'.

You can almost hear the communal hand wringing from the mp's who can see what is coming.

So the policy is "clear" although they're consulting on the wording but they've sent template letters to MPs to use in donning off constituents?

Fobbing ^

It's illegal. If a job is open to women ref an Equality Act exception that they are traditionally under-represented, then it can only be open to women. We have to take transwomen with GRCs as women so they can join AWS. But self-ID does not provide exception.

Getting on an AWS is intended as fast-track to a £75k+ a year job.

LP has never discussed this at conference or anywhere else that I can find. How dare these handful of arrogant shits decide to change party policy like this? Just wait for the relevant committee to change the law if that happens. What's the urgency, is this all about Lily?
.

I think it was mentioned by a lawyer in an older thread that the bog standard men might have a reasonable case to challenge why they are excluded if self ID is enacted for AWS.

There are quite a number of men I could see doing this and I think the conclusion of all this nonsense is that AWS are dropped completely.

I do sometimes wonder if that is the real end game here for some. Not necessarily trans identifying people themselves but the brocialist types who are heavily championing them perhaps for their own gain.

I'm not a member, members may wish to respond to the consultation though

That guardian piece actually links the gofundme page More donations wll be incoming I reckon.

Labours position on this is ridiculous. But 'But she also said that the party had further work to do on the exact wording of the policy' I think is promising. They have decided to break the law on AWS but are having issues on how to word it to avoid breaking the law..it seems.

some labour mp's are anxious to make sure that there are some safeguards written in to the policies to stop,for example.a mens rights activist attempting to stand as a woman to test the legalities

They cannot stop this in reality. If they are going to push forward with self identification, then it is ANY man who can declare himself a woman. Thats the whole point of self ID. I am sure they can see this. And if they can see this, then they can surely see that self ID is a load of bollocks. The only way to stop MRAs 'testing the legalities' by applying for AWS is to state that self ID is not a labour policy, or get rid of AWS. Those are the only options. You cannot make a policy that says 'any man who says he is a woman is a woman, except for MRAs'

And if they can imagine that some MRAs might pretend to be TIMs in order to stand on an AWS, and there’s already an exception in law to prevent women pretending to be TIFs so that we can’t steal peerages, it’s surely not beyond the wit of MPs to imagine that men might pose as TIMs to gain access to women’s toilets, showers, prisons, sports..,

I am one of those who joined LP because of corbyn and just feel SO embarrassed, ashamed and gullible. Hes just a total conformist to pc thought. I peaked transed about a month ago-it was the first I heard about Madigan and how they shafted Anne. I got kickout of my corbynsupportover50s FB group for admiring Germaine and posting JaniceRaymond so naughty-didn't realised at time how provocative I was being. I agree with an earlier poster that brexit was a backlash against PC and the establishment as much as it was a rejection of EU and that they may well be going too far with the GRA. This is a poll about the GDR wingsoverscotland.com/ which I think you will find interesting.

It's exposing the issues alright.
If trans women ARE women then some of them will be MRAs.
If you believe in "gender identity" as the only characteristic of a woman then of course you have no leg to stand on when you find rapists, murderers, voyeurs, and people of questionable politics are asking to be recognised as the women they are although they are male bodied.
This is good. The party are going to have to think through the issues properly. No more hiding behind the mantra.

On a tangent, this article is long but interesting (and relevant)
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/09/how-modern-addiction-identity-politics-has-fractured-left%3famp

'some labour mp's are anxious to make sure that there are some safeguards written in to the policies to stop,for example.a mens rights activist attempting to stand as a woman to test the legalities'.

Haha what "safeguards" do they think those will be then? Self identified is self identified right? Do they mean they intend to do some sort of gatekeeping? How exclusionary!

And judging by the Race for Life questions, doesn't Lily qualify as an MRA?

Rushing. But found this.

www.tatler.com/article/trans-toffs

From 2016 but covers some of the arguments regarding peerage.

I notice the Guardian article pretty much confirms that Labour already has TIMs with no GRC on AWS and therefore has already broken the law.

The thing that astounds me about all this is that Labour knows this and is happy to say in public that it intends to impose a self-ID policy throughout the party even where it is illegal to do so.

It's bad enough that they intend to impose self-ID where it is legal without discussion and a vote at conference.

But they also intend to impose it on AWS where it is currently illegal. A major political party in the UK has no qualms in announcing that it does not feel that the rule of law applies to it.

This is shocking beyond belief. A main political party is openly saying that it intends to act outside the law.

It's the final straw for me. I will be leaving the party and I will not be voting Labour in the foreseeable future.

If trans women ARE women then some of them will be MRAs.

Well, yes. But they are all so thick they don't recognise an MRA staring in their face. Lily Madigan, for example, is a bona fide, glaringly obvious, MRA.

Labour's position makes no sense whatsoever.

• We've made our decision
• We're ignoring the fact that it's illegal
• We're now going to consult on it even though the decision is made
• We need some way of gatekeeping wrt mras even though the whole point of our policy is to do away with gatekeeping

-all of these problems will be solved by an adjustment or two to our wording

Translation:

1. we're so clueless we shouldn't be allowed to run a whelk stall let alone a country Or
2. we never liked aws anyway and we hope this will render them so unfit for purpose we can get rid of them altogether

Translation:
1) we're so clueless we shouldn't be allowed to run a whelk stall let alone a country
Or
2) we never liked aws anyway and we hope this will render them so unfit for purpose we can get rid of them altogether

I'm thinking a lot of supposedly progressive men in the party think b) but overall the answer is more and more looking like a)