Andrew Marr asking gov minister "So is a trans woman a woman?"

[Payfrozen]

On TV now. He's interviewing Corbyn currently discussing housing.

The problem is the Orwellian term 'transgender woman'. Since 'woman' is already in the name, it allows Corbyn et al to answer smoothly, without seeming ridiculous.

Now see how it would go if they were asked this:

'Is an adult human male a woman?'

Even Corbyn would find it hard to give a straight-faced 'yes' to that one.

The 'debate' is rigged by the media. They impose the Newspeak, and all that's left is for everyone else to repeat that 2 + 2 = 5.

Leslie, I don't hate you either an your post is eminently reasonable.

Corbyn, however.......But for this to have made it onto Andrew Marr must surely mean people are starting to wake up? I have written to my MP who I suspect will agree with me (he is a lawyer, pragmatic Blairite type) but won't dare say anything, saying I will leave the party if self-id for AWS and Women's Officer posts becomes party policy. But I assume JC talking about his beliefs is not the same as official party policy....yet...?

LangCleg, yes Marr should have pressed the issue a bit more.

but
WHY DOES NOBODY EVER MAKE IT CLEAR? (Sorry to shout.)"

Because, as I've already said (and it wasn't popular) opposition to the GRA is allowing itself to be bogged down in 'is a transwoman a woman' rather than stressing the practical implications of self identification.

The response should be - we recognise that some people have strong feelings that they are transgender and respect that. However allowing self identification in single sex facilities has implications that damage the rights of other people (because some men want single sex facilities as well, a man could find having a female medic perform intimate procedures embarrassing). For that reason we do not support the propositions for changes to the GRA to allow self identfication.

Just saying 'women don't have dicks' allows the other side to cry 'transphobe' and it goes on for ever like that.

The reason for focussing on "Is a transwoman a woman" is that it's a a distraction tactic.

Actually, I thought his "yes" was the kid of unconvincing squeaked "no" you get when asking a chocolate covered child if they've eaten your After Eight mints...

And he was careful to answer "Do you think..." questions with "the Labour Party's position..."

And he faltered in a couple of the things he said afterwards.

He was a bit wishy washy on self id.

I thought his body language was interesting. He as very quiet and closed. In the next piece (I've forgotten what it was now), he was far more animated vocally and physically.

I think he was wishy washy on self ID because he just talked about taking the person in front of you at face value and accepting the gender they said they were. But he wasn't not going to get drawn into any discussion on it.

Is Corbyn getting bad advice from interested parties and/or is he really this thick? Why is nobody in his inner circle setting him straight?

Either way, until Labour comes to its senses on this issue, they’ve lost another life-long voter here.

I really don't think I will ever vote Labour again.

Do you reckon we could get Corbyn on here for a webchat?

Or any senior Labour figure actually?

I suspect that they'd see the issues very clearly then.

Well there's the hill he's going to die on.

Twat.

I wish Marr would have got down to the nitty gritty and asked Corbyn if he supported the erasing and removal of the civil rights from 51% of the population.
And also gone in on the absurdity that is identifying as BAME or disabled.
That would have shown this bullshit agenda as the nonsense it is.
Corbyns answer didn't shock me though, Labour has gone so far down this path, I wouldn't be surprised if they started campaigning for the rights of people to piss on lampposts as they identified as dogs.
Rant over

The proportion of the Labour party that don't want Corbyn as leader seem to be happy to say nothing and let this happen.

Do you reckon we could get Corbyn on here for a webchat? Or any senior Labour figure actually?

Very good suggestion, although I'll be staggered if any one of them have the guts. The thing infuriating me today with this and with the article about 'Marie' the rapist pining away with sadness over not being allowed his hairstraighteners and to terrorise women, is that the information being given to the public is being so blatantly, unashamedly spun to remove all the information that represents women's voices. The public are being fed a strictly edited, restricted view that prevents any of them getting the full picture and God Forbid actually making an informed decision over who is right and who is wrong in this.

This is no longer about two valid sides of a debate, it is about a situation that is ethically and morally wrong, and against the law. And men in situations of high power are getting away with it.

I will ask on Site Stuff about the webchat thing.

I hit peak trans some time ago but I think this is probably the moment that'll spark me into writing to my (normally very decent, safe seat Labour) MP.

I’m no political animal but Thai doesn’t feel very ‘Corbyn’.

Random ‘Thai’ there

‘this’

2 men discussing issues that impact women in ways they cannot comprehend.

Fascism is what it is.
Male supremacy is what it is.
Privilege is what it is.

Do you reckon we could get Corbyn on here for a webchat?

Last time Corbyn came on, he avoided the question completely. And of course there were no shortage of people asking about favourite biscuits and such so he was easily able to avoid the more serious questions.

Just watched this.

Corbyn says "The whole point has to be about the identity and rights of the individual "

How can he be (to paraphrase) so caring-sharing, responsibility to each other, blah blah, yet suddenly individualistic on this? There seems to be a massive blind spot for lefty men where women are concerned.

I voted Labour in the last election. Never again. Why wasn't he pressed on this? Asked to define woman? Asked why Labour are trying to change our language to exclude women etc. Also the "feminists have nothing to fear"...What a patronising mansplaining twat.

Thinking back, the most abuse I got over political views (and I'm a green/moderate left sort of person) was from angry young men trying to force me to buy the Socialist Worker mag when I was a student. When I politely declined, I would get a mouthful of abuse, angry , aggressive ranting, and even stuff shouted after me as i walked away. This happened regularly. A lot of lefty men really don't like women at all, and they like women who disagree with them even less.

Corbyn says "The whole point has to be about the identity and rights of the individual "

But he is only interested in the identity and the rights of the individuals with penises.

Those without penises can shut up, hand their identity and rights over and get back in their box. Fuck that Jeremy.

But why are these men incapable of applying the same thought to sexism as to say, racism or classism?

WHY DOES NOBODY EVER MAKE IT CLEAR? (Sorry to shout.)

Exactly this.

The question should be so 85% of transwomen who keep their penis and are attracted to women, are women? And their penis is a female organ?

Corbyn says "The whole point has to be about the identity and rights of the individual"

And we're not supposed to notice that defence of individualism is a right wing position and about as far from socialism as you can get?