Julie Bindel blistering article in Spectator

[BovaryX]

Julie Bindel gives a scathing review of Labour’s trans double speak. She cites Dawn Butler insisting there will be absolutely no self segregated spaces exempt from this colonization.

And there is no way spaces will be permitted to discriminate against trans people. That is illegal and it will stay illegal.

As Julie Bindel correctly points out, these policies are being promoted by the momentum faction which explicitly elevates the rights of this aggressive lobby group above women’s rights. Great article

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/women-are-the-losers-in-labours-trans-equality-fight/

Good article that highlights the frustrating shadow boxing going on at the moment, if the issue is highlighted at all! Why are none of the political parties responding intelligently to women's concerns over this? Why is discussion so shut down? I watched the Question Time Leaders Special the other night and wondered if it would be mentioned, particularly when Jo Swinson was on the stand. Have I got an over-inflated sense of what a big issue this is? Why is it not being discussed in a wider forum? I speak to my female friends, knowledgeable feminists, and some are completely unaware that this is going on. Why?

I speak to my female friends, knowledgeable feminists, and some are completely unaware that this is going on. Why?

I think the answer to this is because a significant chunk of the media isn’t reporting it. In addition, this lobby group has managed to achieve extensive regulatory capture without having a recognizable figure head, without appearing on television explaining their motives. Contrast this with Brexit for example. Who is leading them? Who is financing them? What is their motive? Why is this happening whilst a majority of the public are in complete ignorance? It’s profoundly undemocratic

Butler is simply wrong. She no doubt chose the wording she did in order to emotionally manipulate the listener, but the fact remains that technically speaking the Equality Act does allow spaces to exclude trans people (on a case by case basis, which is a terrible way to do things and which I would like to see changed) on the basis of sex rather than gender

If hell were to exist there would be a special circle in it for women who betray other women the way Butler is eagerly and enthusiastically doing.

^in it for women who betray other women the way Butler is eagerly and enthusiastically doing

You know what I find so incredible? That these policies have completely colonised two of the main political parties and the third, which once upon a time would have been unequivocally and vociferously against them, seems to frightened to mention this issue at all. All of this without any identifiable figurehead or widespread support. It’s truly frightening

Too not to blast this predictive text!

Thanks - superb article in which Julie captures this doublespeak perfectly.

I don't trust Butler one bit.

I think that because there is so little awareness of how insidious and dangerous what is happening is, when it is brought up (in my experience at least) other women immediately seem to jump to 'transphobia'. It's like there has been a subtle conditioning whereby any criticism renders you automatically a bigot and not worth engaging with. So discussion is shut down. I don't know how to get the message out when there is this brick wall. On the other hand I think it's amazing how women have mobilised social media to shine a light on what is happening.

there would be a special circle in it for women who betray other women the way Butler is eagerly and enthusiastically doing
This. It takes sooo much effort and personal sacrifice to give away rights women died to achieve, rights that address the discrimination and disadvantage women suffer because of our biology, rights that benefit in particular the most vulnerable women

It's like there has been a subtle conditioning whereby any criticism renders you automatically a bigot and not worth engaging with. So discussion is shut down.

Bardonnay, I think that’s exactly what is going on and it’s not just on the trans issue. Debate is being silenced on a whole range of issues by demonizing anyone who questions the current status quo. The word ‘bigot’ increasingly says less about its target and much more about the authoritarian tendencies of those who hurl this word around to permanently prevent discussion

Did Dawn Butler used to write for The Guardian or am I getting her confused with someone else?

Another powerful article from Julie. Yet again the Labour party throws women under the bus - but they'll be knocking on my door this week wanting my vote .

“....momentum mates are trying to override it because Butler has been called out by trans-activists. She can’t think in two dimensions, and is very opportunist, playing to a crowd”
Policy determined by whoever is able to raise an aggressive Twitter mob. As others have said, this is being done with the active participation of women like Dawn Butler. If she can’t see that this policy is inimical to women because it permanently removes our right to sex segregated spaces? She shouldn’t be anywhere near government.

@TheProdigalKittensReturn there has been clarification from EHRC that the term "case by case" refers to each location/ space/opportunity being assessed for how important our idea to be single-sex.

it emphatically does not mean "case by case" in terms of assessing each individual to decide whether they are sufficiently female to be allowed into an ostensibly female space.

Really fighting with myself wanting to post that excellent article to Facebook, versus personal safety and my job (University)

“This is now a matter of frontbenchers and senior staff over-riding the decision of the party at Clause 5. Unprecedented, in my view. If they can do it on this, they can do it on anything and there’s no point in having a democratic policy formulation process.”

Facebook, versus personal safety and my job (University)

Myfavoriteterain,
Your comment is such an indictment of the current climate. Freedom of speech is under serious attack and the academic institutions which should be promoting it are one of its biggest threats

When I met women who are very willing to throw other women under the bus to be seen as "a good sport" by the guys, I always think
A) that they are very immature and self-centered.
B) that they will ultimately find that the seventh circle of hell is reserved for traitors.

Excellent article by Julie B. I don't have much faith in a shadow equalities minister who doesn't think it applies to women.

@BovaryX You're thinking of Dawn Foster who writes for the Guardian from time to time and is in a similar tedious vein to Owen Jones and Ellie Mae O'Hagen.

Great article.

I am still astonished at the near news blackout on these topics. I expect better of the BBC.

It should be huge news when political parties are pushing anti-science, theological type beliefs about gender identity without seriously thinking through the consequences. If they can be pushed around so easily on this then what else might they be willing to push on us? It should be a major news item.

Last year there were events honouring 100 years of women's suffrage. I watched Amber Rudd give a nice tribute in the House of Commons. Dawn Butler stood up and had a rant at the Government. At the time I thought it was ill judged and disrespectful. I have a low opinion of her.

similar tedious vein

Ha Queen, thank you for clarification! Yep, that’s who I was thinking of....

towelnumber42 Andrew Marr asked Angela Rayner, Jo Swinson about their policy re: selfID on his show this morning. Rayner was taking the "you can't question this" line putting words in his mouth like "it's not a lifestyle choice" and saying trans kids have high rate of suicide. She came across as dismissive of women's concerns at sharing facilities with men. Marr not able to tackle this subject properly (unlike his persistence on getting a coherent answer on scrapping marriage tax). But it was raised. Swinson said you'd need an impact assessment to stop, say, an abusive husband accessing a women's refuge under "SELFID" where his wife was also seeking refuge - not something I had considered, has this happened? She didn't address women seeking refuge just having the right to say no to men in their room - which is the main issue. She seems to be using "case by case" to mean individuals, not service providers.

BovaryX I don't know whether I dare. I've already been shut out of a women's committee after proposing an event for staff/students.. I won't say what on but unrelated to trans. I mentioned a well known GC academic as a potential speaker. I was told we couldn't invite someone like that because they don't believe TWAW. My counter point was I don't either and we should not no platform senior female academics because we disagree with them on any one issue. The committee was disbanded and different leadership put in place.

Separately I've been told by an academic colleague that we are all cis women, and we can't use dictionary definitions because the dictionary was written by men.

That's pretty revealing if you are one of a handful of people. Nothing but the truth though.

My counter point was I don't either and we should not no platform senior female academics because we disagree with them on any one issue. The committee was disbanded and different leadership put in place

Your post makes me sad and fricking outraged to be honest. The dictionary comment says it all really. It’s just appalling that in the place where freedom of speech should be the paradigm, you can’t offer a dissenting view. When people like Germaine Greer, arguably one of the most fluent, analytical feminists of the last fifty years is no longer welcome in the academy? And mediocrity prevails? Grim times. It’s awful what you are dealing with and it’s designed to intimidate you.