Labour Party confirm that all women shortlists are open to anyone who IDs as a woman

[CapnHaddock]

They did not consult as promised, they did not discuss. They just decided.

Jennifer James has instructed her solicitors.

Fuck the Labour Party. That is the final nail in the coffin for me. Anyone got any ideas about how best to spoil the ballot next month?

I think Sex not Gender really sums up the point in a nice concise way.
We probably need a new thread at least!

@OvaHere "The grassroots conservative statement was from last October so it's not related to that" Can you tell me where to find that, please?

@Weezol "So, what could we put as a unified action? Sex Not Gender?"

Better than what I was thinking ('this is bollocks', was what i was thinking!)

@Italiangreyhound

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3223785-Conservatives-not-on-board-with-transgender-policy

Thanks,

I love the idea of drawing an extra box labelled 'someone who doesn't believe penises can be female'

Party conference is sovereign, so buggering off right now, just before local elections means nothing will change. If you’re labour ‘through and through’ stick around, be active, coordinate and pass motions to conference, so it can be legitimately discussed. Don’t throw on the towel.
I’m still voting labour. I’m a gender critical feminist with 30 years in the labour and trade union movement and that means far more to me than AWSL being opened to self IDing men. When local services for children with Specisl Educational Needs are completely decimated, I will not stand up and say I didn’t vote Labour because AWSL weren’t to my liking. I will continue to campaign within my party to be heard.
I support Jeremy Corbyn as well. I obviously don’t agree with him on everything, but he is the BEST chance we have to get rid of this Tory government. If you want to discuss political
Parties bringing in austerity policies that affect working class women from a wider perspective, then you should probably consider waiting until after local ejections to make your point in a coordinated way at party conference.

A suggestion,
If you hashtag #SexNotGender on the ballot instead of just None

then you can add accompanying comments on twitter for anyone hearing about the campaign and wanting to understand what the heck is going on and why people are spoiling votes for it.

Good idea.

Thank you @itsallgoingtobefine. I want to make my spoiled ballot count!

But please don't vote Tory!
Truscum the Tories are in favour of Self ID, the GRA amendment is their bill. It's such a neoliberal/ individualistic ideal anyway.

I have already committed to leaving the Labour Party should they bring this in but I am very, very concerned that a Tory proposal (changes to Gender Recognition / self-id) is tearing up the Labour Party when it finally had a decent chance.

I am very torn on this. It's one issue. A huge one. But tories are worse not only on this issue but also everything else

Privileging gender over sex means cuts to women's services - Tories are in favour of this ideologically.

General cuts to public services are ideologically Tory policies and women are disproportionately affected by these.
Yes we are and should be asking What about Women and Girls but Women's rights are more at risk under a conservative government and conservative councils than under labour. Even with them chucking is under the self is bus.

I can afford not to vote labour as tories come fourth in my constituency but please think about it.

There is no good option though, I know that. This is why labour has been able to abandon the working class in the past - they've nowhere else to go, and neither do we and the Bastards know that and grab for the middle.

Many betrayed labour supporters went to BNP and similar groups and split British politics. What do we do?

Skipped through a bit so snapespeare hadn't read your post.

You probably said it better than me. I just don't know what to do.

Women have had a vote for 100 years All political parties seem to think that's long enough

Self defeating to limit women's lack of voting to one thing and one 'motif'. They will just use it to identify to themselves how few women care. I won't turn up to draw a penis, I just won't turn up.

Women have had a vote for 100 years All political parties seem to think that's long enough

Nail. Head.

I'd like to resign my Labour membership over this. I've been on the fence for awhile but I've just had it. They don't care about women.

No idea how to go about resigning, so if anyone knows, let me know - or if there's another en masse resignation protest coming up, I'd love to get involved with that.

Genuine question, because I don't fully understand the arguments here and have avoided getting dragged into the mud-slinging from all directions that's going on in twitter: what is it that's being objected to? Is it that some people don't want trans women to be included on AWS? Or is it just that Labour HQ didn't consult before making the change?

@radicalrise

You can email MayDay4Women or DM them on twitter because they are writing a mass resignation letter

[email protected]

That's what I am doing

Is it that some people don't want trans women to be included on AWS? Or is it just that Labour HQ didn't consult before making the change?

The short answer is both.

The law that allows political parties to discriminate against men and draw up AWS is specifically carved out in primary legislation, otherwise it could be argued to be unlawful to tell a man that he is not eligible to stand in a particular constituency.

Transwomen with a GRC are legally allowed to be treated as women in almost all circumstances (there are still situations where it is lawful to discriminate or exclude them, such as in a women's refuge). In the past, the law on AWS has been interpreted to allow transwomen with a GRC to be included on AWS.

However, Labour has decided to go one step further and allow anyone who self-IDs as a woman to be included on AWS (and stand for women's officer positions, though that's not something covered by primary legislation). Which obviously opens up an AWS to include individuals who have no legal basis to say "I am a woman" other than the fact that the Labour Party has decided to agree with them - in other words, self-IDed transwomen.

Women have complained about this and were initially just told to shut up, then Labour relented a bit and said that there would be a consultation. Now it appears that there won't be a consultation after all, as the policy statement that has just appeared has come sooner than most people expected and there has been no meaningful consultation first.

Does that help?

@OlennasWimple

"Does that help?" Immensely, very clear. However, what I do not understands is how we have a trans woman with no GRC as women's officer and this has not been legally challenged.

Very good point

I think it's simply because no-one has challenged it, Italian. I'm not sure what view a court would take, whether a GRC was necessary to avoid acting illegally or whether it's a matter of party policy on who is eligible to hold the post. Until someone takes it to court, I guess we'll never know. The difference with AWS is that it is specifically mentioned in primary legislation as an area where discrimination is permitted.

I used to wish that the person who came second in the CLP elections in Rochester had taken a legal case against the women's officer I expect you are thinking of (claiming that they had been deprived of a position because of an irrational policy on the part of the Labour Party), but a more interesting legal challenge might be from a man who doesn't claim to identify as a woman, as he is being deprived of standing for a position when there is no material difference between him and a transwoman without a GRC.

Also, I've realised that there are a number of elected women's officers in student unions that are transwomen - whilst on one hand student politics can be a bit of a joke, it can also be an incredibly useful stepping stone and learning experience for people who later take up more influential political positions. So, without wanting to sound over dramatic, the flow of talented female politicians is already being reduced upstream, and we will see the consequence of this in due course, I suspect.

I'm not from the UK, so I don't know how all the parities work, so I'm just speculating...

Could Jennifer James run an independent campaign? It sounds like she could pull in a fair number of votes.

I worry about the ballot spoiling as then you're stuck with whoever the rest of the public decide on, but then I don't know... do the spoiled votes make an impact on British politics?

Have the conservatives stated their position since the shite hit the fan? What party was David Davis (the one who let the debate occur at HoC) from? What was his party's stance?

Apologies for all the questions, feeling very ignorant here

@TotallyLibrarianPoo

"Could Jennifer James run an independent campaign? It sounds like she could pull in a fair number of votes."

That is a brilliant idea. If she had the good bits of labour and not the crap.

@CapnHaddock What's the source of that statement?

Yes Labour will soon have the line "can't comment on AWS as it's sub judice." The case meanwhile will take years to get to court. Gives Labour an out - they can continue their targeting of Millennium youth with rail passes and Pro Trans rhetoric assuming that the other end of the wage spectrum is lost to the Tories/loyal Labour voters. JC won't give up this position until he's lost the next general election.

I don't know where this leaves WPUK?

I think what's needed is a march around Women's Rights to single sex exemptions, the vote and the right to free speech - the streets are the only place that's listening now and the only place to take this debate to