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.

Isn’t it amazing what happens when a man highlights it.

I can't face James O'Brien today. Did he say:

1. it's so complicated I don't know that to think;
2. actually, there's a serious issue being raised that needs to be considered; or
3. TERFS and TERF-a-likes are nasty?

chipbutty The majority of women support trans women insofar as they don't wish for harm to come to them, that they have the right to live as they please as long as they don't cause harm to others (same for anyone really.) So your shitty research shows that obvious truth and it's nice to see that you realise that. However where is your evidence that the majority of biological women support self ID? Which is an entirely different thing and the issue that is important here.

This evidence was requested yesterday in another thread as I recall and wasn’t forthcoming. If Crisp is still looking for it after all this time then I suggest that they might be wasting their time.

I’m still waiting for the answer to that question by the way, Crisp.

Pencils: Labour are reinterpreting 'sex' to mean 'self-ID'd gender identity'

Yes they are, but the real point is that they are doing it before legislation changes, and therefore, discriminating against females and 'GRC transwomen'. The 'woke scramble' could get them into hot water, potentially, on those grounds. What they are doing is NOT supported by current legislation as it stands.

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?

Oh Gasp!
Didn't you know to look for the pinkly sparkly shit flying above their sincere pink LadyBrain? /snark How else could you tell, given it is a deep-down, highly invisible, sense of pink brainedness? /more snark

crispbutty the EA either protects women and women only spaces or it doesn't. A space cannot be women only if it also includes people who are not women. Being able to ask for a female hcp doesn't work if 'female' also means anyone who fancies a gander.

Yes the EA protects those with a GRC but that makes them legally female not actually female. Just as the government giving Santa dispensation to travel during the foot and mouth outbreak wasn't evidence of the existence of Santa claus.

Since you seem to believe that gender identity has nothing to do with stereotypes, please explain what it is. What is it people are identifying with when they say this?

No using stereotypes, circular logic or mystical inner souls.

crispbuttyfan

Recent polling on self ID here: wingsoverscotland.com/girls-and-boys/

If Crisp is still looking for it after all this time then I suggest that they might be wasting their time

I'm sure Crisp will come back with some other crappy research that doesn't actually answer the question at all. Smoke and mirrors and all that stuff. Either that or Crisp is busy conducting a quick face book or Twitter poll from their friends to bring it back and present it as evidence.

Oh yes that poll answers the question perfectly. So in fact the majority of women are not in favour of self ID at all. Which is hardly a surprise.

our poll also found what looks like a sharp drop in Labour support among women

you don't say?!

(The Tories, of course, are the ones who are actually bringing self-ID forward as policy, but Labour have deftly managed to draw most of the feminist anger about the issue onto themselves, and it’s hard to think of any other explanation that could be behind women’s sudden large-scale desertion of the party.)

Quite

jennifer james and her 'legal advisers' have been made very clear they don't have a leg to stand on.

Well no, what's happened is Labour's 'legal advisers' have responded to a pre-action-protocol letter with a strange justification of why they imagine they are not breaking the law.

I'm not going to share the leaked letter because it shouldn't have been leaked in the first place. I've read it though, and their justification appears to hinge on two things:

One is the definition of gender reassignment and the bit that says for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.

They are arguing that therefore any tw, grc or not, is kind of a bit like an actual woman because look! It says sex!

This is exactly what I mean when I say sex as a protected characteristic will no longer have any meaning.

The other argument they are using is that s104 doesn't specifically say that all members of an AWS must be women, just that you can only have a single protected characteristic shortlist if the PC is sex, and it's therefore fine to include some other people with any PC if they are underrepresented.

So by that logic we could have 'all women plus a few black men' shortlists, or 'all women plus some gay men' shortlists etc. I've no objection to reserved spaces on shortlists for male trans people, BAME men, gay men, disabled men whatever, but not at the expense of another underrepresented group - not on AWS. Let the men budge up.

And they're using both of these arguments at the same time. This is not 'very clear', this is a fudge. What is very clear is that they don't have a strong argument and so are using two weak ones instead which do nothing to support each other.

How does David Lewis fail to subvert the process when a certain other all woman short list self-ID trans person has successfully subverted it for months?

I imagine the Labour Party would say that LM is 'living as a woman' full-time and at the time of the election was counting down the days to getting a GRC (apparently). However, they seem very keen to accept Eddie Izzard as trans as well, and Eddie seems to be living as a female very little of the time. The real test is of course 'Have you drunk the Kool-Aid?'

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

Oh Lord it's just so disingenuous. It's like one of those North Korean TV reports about our dear leader...

I realise this many be controversial but right now I'd like to see Labour abandon AWS and women's officers rather than watch this travesty.

Whilst I'm a bit apprehensive about what the TRAs will go after next let's take away this platform and make them compete for spaces with -other- men for a political voice

My hope is that all of the political parties will recognise the need to have separate but much needed efforts to represent a) women and b) equalities.

Labour are losing feminists, many of whom man the phone banks, stand at the stalls on the high street and knock on doors.

Labour are making themselves look ridiculous to people not that interested in politics - if they make such a dog's dinner of what is perceived to be a fringe issue, what will they do with the economy?

Labour are filling right wingers with glee because all this is grist to their leftards are eating themselves mill.

And meanwhile, nobody would ever guess that the originating report recommending self-ID came from a Tory minister. What is it about the left that it takes an issue and tries to win it by overdoing the virtue signalling at the expense of policy detail, gets called out on the holes in policy detail and, instead of filling in the holes, would rather double down on the idiocy? Why does the left always, always, always, do this?

I realise this many be controversial but right now I'd like to see Labour abandon AWS and women's officers rather than watch this travesty.

I'd certainly rather no AWS than to see them abused by Oxbridge educated hyper-elite males purporting to be the most oppressed women in the country. It's a fucking farce.

For those calling me out and demand I play along to some bat-shit games based on the idea that that mumsnet feminist boards is a barometer for public attitudes.... I have a life and clearly not half as obsessed with trans issues as those on here getting constipated with rage because they can't understand something the wider public is increasingly supportive of.

I'll be around from time to time, but I won't be available to play games on demand, sorry if I gave the impression that I thought the general opinions of transphobes (not everyone, literally the transphobes) on these boards were important or relevant in any way....

Wot? No data set?!

translation

I can't answer these questions nor can I back up my assertions. I shall now flounce but while doing so I will point out that you are all sad little people because you expect facts and logic.

Was that Owen Jones?

Lol. Couldn't find that evidence then crispbutty. Thought as much ;-)