Labour clarifies trans women and AWS

[crispbuttyfan]

Apologies if it is already being discussed, I didn't spot a thread about it.

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/05/22/labour-trans-women-all-women-shortlists-nec/

This was entirely predictable, and not before time.

I'm sure everyone will agree it's good to have some sort of closure on this issue.

Hopefully other parties will also swing this way.

I hope this happens sooner rather than later.

There are massive overlaps with free speech, press freedom and parliamentary process as James Kirkup identified in his Spectator article:
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/why-are-some-mps-trying-to-shut-down-the-transgender-debate/

The Labour Party is now run by the genuinely thick.

Sadly, that's my impression too. Not that they recognise themselves as thick. Dunning Kruger effect.

Why is the WEP wasting time on the Lewisham East by-election? The Labour candidate is a local black woman who isn't sponsored by Momentum, a fact that seems to have pissed a lot of Momentum members off . The best of luck to her.

They've abandoned any sense of logic and intellectual rigor, which after all can be hard work, and have gone instead for moral superiority. Who gives a fuck whether what you say makes sense so long as you can look down on your opponents as morally inferior with back slaps all round. This to be is the point at which I broke with the Left and went my own way.

The Labour Party is now run by the genuinely thick

Sadly seems to be the case imo.

nauticant

Perfectly put 😢

David Lewis was a man trying to subvert the process, it's not complicated... the fact that most of this board see's no difference between david lewis and a trans woman, is a problem and a feature of this board, that simply isn't shared throughout society.

All major parties agree with this stance, and trans support is now in the majority of people.

It's amazing that no matter how much support trans rights and accommodations improve a lot of people on here are convinced it can be rolled back without any evidence of harms....

jennifer james and her 'legal advisers' have been made very clear they don't have a leg to stand on.
If people actually accepted the equality act in it's intentions, and mainstream understanding, instead of dodgy wordpress interpretations, it wouldn't be so confusing to so many people on here.

and trans support is now in the majority of people

How do you know this ?

I have been assured by both verbally by Sophie Walker in a members discussion webinar (and some posts of hers on Twitter indicate similar) and personal emails from HQ that a working party on the issue will be formed. No timescale as yet.

Wow, nothing says strong, decisive political action like the intention of forming a working party at some indefinite point in the future.

If people actually accepted the equality act in it's intentions, and mainstream understanding, instead of dodgy wordpress interpretations, it wouldn't be so confusing to so many people on here.

We're not confused, thanks for the little patronising aside there.

Why should David Lewis be banned and not Lily madigan?

Please explain why they are different.

trans support is now in the majority of people.

Please provide evidence for this.

Sorry no. The vast majority do not support TAs position in this. Many haven't thought about it or think it is such a small issue as to be irrelevant.

You only have to ask about self ID for sport or hospital wards etc before people raise objections.

If the Equality act cannot protect female born people then it is not worth the paper it is written on. If it cannot protect females, who is it actually protecting? People who wear skirts? People with handbags? People with (insert stereotype here)?

theinconstantgardener

well everyone on this board claims to support trans people and not prejudiced BUT.... lol

but also theres other surveys www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/media/39147/bsa34_moral_issues_final.pdf

soapboxqueen

both sex and gender re-assignment are protected, one is not protected more than the other in the spirit of equality. They are equal.

Nonetheless the is a bit of leeway for exemptions in things such as dv centres.

The equality act including trans women, causes women no harm, as much as you seem to wish it..

Reducing trans women to your idea of toxic gender expressions, has no relevance to gender identity, i know thats a huge problem for people so uninformed, never the less the equality act has been working superbly for 8 years now.

the fact that most of this board see's no difference between david lewis and a trans woman, is a problem and a feature of this board, that simply isn't shared throughout society

The ‘fact’ that David Lewis, by virtue of “identifying as a woman”, IS a transwoman, is a feature of the trans umbrella ideology as promoted by Stonewall etc. I don’t agree with it, I think it is damaging to everyone, but radical feminists are not the ones promoting it. We’d rather get rid of the apparent social requirement to classify yourself according to gender stereotypes altogether. The whole issue is that under transgenderism, you don’t get to pick and choose who is allowed to identify as transgender based on whether you approve of their reasons for doing so. And that’s fine, but, hence the need to protect sex-segregated spaces/positions etc being based on sex, as distinct from any gender classifications or identities.

All major parties agree with this stance
AFAIAA not all major parties have all-women shortlists, so by definition cannot agree with this stance, surely.

If people actually accepted the equality act in it's intentions, and mainstream understanding, instead of dodgy wordpress interpretations, it wouldn't be so confusing to so many people on here.

It isn’t confusing - and we’re not talking about dodgy interpretations, the wording of the act itself has been quoted. If the act is no longer fit for purpose, in this brave new world, by all means campaign for its reform, but as it stands sex is the protected characteristic which allows exemption in this case.

People disagree with you, crispbutty, that’s all.

Crisp, I am morally superior and you’re all thick is not going to win your argument.
I think you might be missing the point of the stunt.
David applied to run for the women’s officer position on the basis that he is a woman on Wednesday. The LP excepted this because the system is self identification. David then outed himself in a press article saying that it was a publicity stunt to highlight the problems with self ID, so the LP suspended him.
If he hadn’t outed himself in the press he would still be running.
Please can you answer me this question
Now that we have seen that the system can be abused/subverted by a man who was only stopped by outing himself in the press, how can it be proved that any other man who tries to abuse the system Who doesn’t confess is not who they say they are, when the bar has been set at I am who I say I am?

I would imagine the majority of people would say it's wrong to be nasty to trans people. The majority of people though would not say that a person with a penis is a woman and that such a person should be permitted into women's safe spaces.

It's fascinating to see how the argument gets framed. When defending from "attack" trans people are defined as only transsexuals and people with gender dysphoria, especially young people. When lobbying and pushing for trans liberation, in march the cross-dressing men, fetishists, and violent misogynists, and any resistance to some of these people is shouted down as transphobia.

hotrocker
I'm not trying to win an 'argument' I know to a lot of people thats all this is, some silly thought exercise or debate, I certainly would not dream of thinking a board that has the opinions it does and obsessions over trans people are capable of being won over with common sense. I'm only here to ocassionally give a counterview to the madness should anyone more open minded pop in.

"Now that we have seen that the system can be abused/subverted by a man who was only stopped by outing himself in the press, how can it be proved that any other man who tries to abuse the system Who doesn’t confess is not who they say they are, when the bar has been set at I am who I say I am?"

Is david now a womens officer? I missed that..... I would say he failed to subvert the process, you can dress that up any way you like with more whataboutery.... but it is clear that someone who intended to subvert the process, has been suspended.... I thought that would be cause for celebration, ironically theres 12 pages of people who were cheering for a man to become womens officer..... it's so topsy turvy on here sometimes It's difficult to follow...

I've had a quick look at Mathew Wright twitter account this morning after his show that included a section on David Lewis' suspension. Have a look crispbuttyfan and consider whether people are really supportive of self id. There are many comments on there that would have been swiftly deleted on here (made by men though, so it's fine). Also surprised you weren't challenging DL on his thread? Just us wimmin that need to shut up obviously.

Crisp, you haven’t answered the question you’ve only reiterated part of it. Please answer the question.

I thought that would be cause for celebration, ironically theres 12 pages of people who were cheering for a man to become womens officer..... it's so topsy turvy on here sometimes It's difficult to follow...

Sorry you find it difficult to follow crispbutty. It's not really very complicated.

Why should David Lewis be banned and not Lily madigan?
Please explain why they are different.

I'd like to know, too.

Suspect that the end result of this complete nonsense will be that AWS and women's officers roles will be abandoned as well as any intention of support of women by the LP

Thus...job done.

James O'Brien on LBC discussing self ID and this story now

Only if you are determined to miss the point.

Opponents of self-ID say it's wide open to abuse and that it doesn't make sense. If anybody can say they are anything, where does it stop?

Why is it OK for a man to say 'I am a woman now' and be accepted at face value with no further checks on his sincerity, but not for a white person to say 'I am a black person now'?

Why is it OK for Philip Bunce to identify as a woman some days and as a man on other days but not OK for David Lewis to say much the same thing? How do you know that a part-time trans woman is sincere? Are transactivists completely writing off all the evidence that some people have a sexual fetish around cross dressing and the effect it has on those around them?

Why are transactivists uncritically accepting biologically male sex offenders who declare themselves transgender and ask for a transfer to a women's prison, but clutching their pearls at David Lewis's statement that he is female on Wednesdays?

Can you not see that there needs to be absolute clarity about something as fundamental as what determines whether someone is a male or a female. We have a perfectly good definition at the moment. Man = adult human male, woman = adult human female. Changing it is not a trivial thing.