We haven’t forgotten Penny Mourdant- article in independent

[RepealTheGRA]

www.independent.co.uk/voices/penny-mourdant-mumsnet-gender-recognition-act-a8835621.html?amp#click=t.co/QpmoWBxEIS

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/penny-mourdant-mumsnet-gender-recognition-act-a8835621.html?amp#click=t.co/QpmoWBxEIS" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.independent.co.uk/voices/penny-mourdant-mumsnet-gender-recognition-act-a8835621.html?amp#click=t.co/QpmoWBxEIS

I thought it was odd to see something that could be gender critical in The Independent so went looking and was pleased to see this:

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1110895874140450816

Good article, but outrageous that the Independent changed the writer's words. They're men - not 'people who some women believe to be men'

Thanks. I did have a WTF at ‘believe to be men’ that explains it.

Already her office issues guidance telling businesses and public sector agencies that they should allow people to access “single sex” facilities such as communal changing rooms and dormitories based on their self-identified sense of gender, not their physical sex.

I didn't know this. How does this fit with sex being a protected characteristic?

Also, Similarly Baroness Williams, chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, argues that “the government absolutely agrees that maintaining access to single-sex spaces in some circumstances is important"

I think the government need to be clear when single sex spaces is not important. Women have the right to know when we can have single sex spaces and when we are not allowed tohave them.

Zutt , Mordaunt made it perfectly clear in her 'Q&A' (if you stretch a point) what the government mean by 'protecting single sex spaces'.

They intend to maintain single sex spaces but believe that men can be whatever sex they choose. So sex is identified by belief, not physical reality.

It's intended to deceive the electorate long enough to push the legislation through. They still have a fond belief that if they do this, after a short fuss it will all settle down and be fine, instead of listening to the many voices pointing out that it will not settle down, if forced through this will blow up in their fatuous, arrogant faces.

The deceitfulness and cowardliness of the whole thing is the most despicable part of the Q&A and government approach to this in general.

They don't even have the guts to honestly say, we intend to let men into any women's facilities they want to be in and to hell with women's dignity, privacy and safety, because they know what their voters would say. Protecting 'single sex spaces' is a lie, fully intended to mislead and deceive to their advantage because they don't have the guts to defend their own beliefs or to face the voters.

I have never been so revolted by the behaviour of a politician. And I'm saying this in full knowledge of the farce currently entering the 16th act in Westminster right now.

I can’t believe with a GE looming ONE of the parties doesn’t have the sense to throw the rest of them under a bus, explicitly point out to the public what is going on and then declare that they are the party of reality which will defend safeguarding of children, women’s rights, freedom of Speech and homosexuals right to same sex attraction? Surely that’s a vote winner? Or are they all so detached from reality they honestly think the average voter is a blue haired wokester?

I do not understand Penny Mordaunts position. The GRA consultation showed that self Id was wildly unpopular across the whole country apart from a few pockets in London and university towns. Why would a minority administration piss off their voter base in order to please a few voters who will never vote for them in a million years and are mostly holed up in safe Labour seats anyway? This must be the worst electoral strategy ever and I keep hoping that someone with more than a couple of brain cells in government will realise this.

Probably too much to hope that The Independent Group might be on our side, though I hope GC groups are lobbying them to point out that they’d gain an awful lot of supporters if they did come out for women.

This must be the worst electoral strategy ever and I keep hoping that someone with more than a couple of brain cells in government will realise this

It's mindboggling. Not only that the Tories haven't realised, but that apparently no one within the Tories has realised it. What's even the point of having a socially conservative party full of backstabbing bastards if they won't be socially conservative when we fucking need them to be and they are all ignoring this incredible opportunity for backstabbing?

This is a perfect opportunity for some swaggering Tory nincompoop to break ranks, stand out from the backstabbing pack and ride to popularity on a wave of "saying what ordinary people are thinking." It would fucking work. I've never voted Tory in my life but I'm so concerned about the Handsmaid's Tale style dystopia we're headed towards that... god, I still don't think I could personally do it, I don't want the NHS to be sold off to Americans and I don't want disabled people left to die on the streets. But I think a politician could win a lot of votes and popularity that way. Why aren't they? Just waiting for Brexit to be sorted one way or the other? Too many influential AGPs in their gentlemen's clubs? Afraid of coming across all "nasty party" and "transphobic" even now after so much sunlight has been shone on this movement?

This must be the worst electoral strategy ever and I keep hoping that someone with more than a couple of brain cells in government will realise this.

I'm a paid up Conservative member and I've said exactly this to my Conservative MP. I think they're so tied up with Brexit, they don't really think this is important right now. But it's stupid, beyond stupid.

What's even the point of having a socially conservative party full of backstabbing bastards if they won't be socially conservative when we fucking need them to be

Genderism is socially conservative. Why wouldn't the Tories be happy with heterosexual, class privileged, white males running the show?

The question is more what the everloving fuck Labour thinks it is doing.

The Power of Lobbying.

I can recall Mandelson's Digital Economy Bill which was going to have us all locked up for sharing mixtapes and owning DVD recorders.

The offending clauses were in the end quietly dropped in the hope no one would notice.

TimeLady

I too have told my conservative MP this. I’m not a Tory but I’ve still explained to him in words of one syllable how he can easily extend his narrow majority. He agrees. Then we get that shitshow from Penny Mourdant?

and the Liberals and the Greens why is it such a priority with an environmentally focussed party? (although TBH I have never rated them on environmental concerns, even when they were the Ecology party)

Genderism is socially conservative. Why wouldn't the Tories be happy with heterosexual, class privileged, white males running the show?

I agree that genderism is conservative in its underlying philosophy, but it's currently not marketed that way. And many socially conservative men want to protect (some) women from wronguns.

Donald Trump has seen transgenderism as an opportunity to enhance his brand at no cost, what stops any of the Tories from doing the same?

Sadly I feel like Labour is too far gone. The woke misogyny has spiralled out of control and it's not even tempered by any right-wing protective instincts.

The question is more what the everloving fuck Labour thinks it is doing.

I no longer believe that anybody at MP Level in Labour has the capacity for thought.

"We'll tell you what's true. You can form your own view" says the ad for the Independent on the page.

Yeah right. It's great how words like "true" can mean anything these days, much like "woman". They've not published a single one of my mildly GC comments over the past few years and actually I've mostly given up reading them because of their anti-science stance on the transgender non debate. If I can't trust them to be impartial with that subject how can I trust them with climate change, foreign affairs, politics, poverty etc?

Knicknack I wanted to quote part of your posts but then realized it was all quotable. You are on FIRE on this thread. RepealtheGRA and everyone else, too.

Why would a minority administration piss off their voter base in order to please a few voters who will never vote for them in a million years and are mostly holed up in safe Labour seats anyway?

I think they are hoping that it's not a big enough issue to influence voting.

I'm intrigued why it's so important for people in power across all political parties to change the definition of women and remove sex segregation. I'm also interested in how they think they are going to implement a policy that few want without anyone noticing.

One things for sure, whatever the benefits of removing sex as a protected characteristic are, its worth the potential harm and backlash it will cause. This is very important to done people.

With a bit of luck, there'll be a change of PM soon and that would mean a new Cabinet. Sensible option, as I've said before, would be to drop this discreetly to try and avoid a backlash by moving Mordaunt elsewhere

Dropping this discreetly isn't enough.

If the government have been issuing guidance to service providers to allow male people into women's spaces, the public need to be made aware.

If everyone is happy about that, why the secrecy?

The Conservatives don't like equality between the sexes as a policy. They are more than happy to lump women together with cross-dressers and bury the Equalities Office in whatever department will have it.
Remember the furore over women in the GEO earning more than men back when the Cons got into power? Dominic Raab called feminists 'obnoxious bigots'.

The question is more what the everloving fuck Labour thinks it is doing.
This^. I fear it's terminal.

Thanks for posting this RepealTheGRA

After much wrangling with Indy sub-editors they corrected the article to something I can live with, although still more hedged around than I would want e.g. "(biologically) male"........ (as opposed to what, spiritually? )