Labour’s pledge re exemptions is meaningless

[HermioneWeasley]

In today’s web chat John McDonnell confirmed that they will bring in self ID for your legal sex, effectively
making their manifesto pledge re single sex spaces pointless

This is what I always suspected

There is no safety in Labour for women and they have not had a change of heart

I've just googled my own question (previous page - about the obligation to publish consultation results) and this is on Govuk. 'Principles' rather than a statutory duty but interesting nevertheless.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/691383/Consultation_Principles__1_.pdf

I thought point I) was pertinent.
Consultation should facilitate scrutiny. Publish any response on the same page on gov.uk as the original consultation, and ensure it is clear when the government has responded to the consultation. Explain the responses that have been received from consultees and how these have informed the policy. State how many responses have been received.

And also J) Publish responses within 12 weeks of the consultation or provide an explanation why this is not possible.

I’m spoiling my ballot.

I would never vote Tory after what they’ve done to women and people with disabilities (both of which effect me and my family significantly). But i can’t vote labour, or any other option I have here, knowing I’m voting to support the erasure of women’s rights. I don’t care if labour would benefit kids when they’d only be benefiting boys, I just don’t. I don’t want to pretend to be grateful for crumbs and then work on the system from the inside out. I want my voice to be honest about what is imho the most important thing and I want that to be counted, even if it may not add up to much. I’m sick of the mentality that we have to politely swallow our feelings and think about the positives yadda yadda when I’m at the stage of being so angry I want to tear it all fucking down. Maybe I will feel differently in future, but I don’t feel like aiming for the lesser evil is any kind of free choice. It’s like a murderer given us a choice of how to be murdered, I’d rather refuse any and not buy into the illusion they are giving me any control.

Stonewall's fingerprints are all over the implementation of the trans agenda, egged on behind the scenes by Whittle and Press for Change. Stonewall came in to it, all guns blazing, with an exemplary record of their achievements for gay rights, so organisations, both private and public, bought into their training without question, picking up awards on the way for very little effort.

Question Stonewall? How very dare you? They're a National Treasure FFS.

They bamboozled the Select Committee into asking for the GRA consultation and nobody had the balls to stand up to them before this new LGB Alliance got off the ground. Questions are starting to be asked but I'm not sure the majority of people with influence are listening yet.

They won't listen TimeLady until the court cases and compensation claims start rolling in. And then they'll be as teflon as is possible....

I can't see any alternative other than to spoil my ballot - and I'm in one of those highly contested seats where every vote counts.

Lentil shouting at us disobedient women who have had enough of the LP will not make us vote for them.

As I said previously - they can fuck right off.

what strikes me as odd is that Labour think they can get away with this by appealing to us to think of the bigger picture, ignoring the fact that they've had a long, long time to sort this out. Would they take the same tactic with a male group? I doubt it.

As for the Labour Party, they have listened to women in the party and it's caused problems
is a massive understatement, when they have forced women to fund raise to challenge them over allowing men to self ID their way onto the Jo Cox program and All Women Shortlists.

If Labour actually wanted to win this election, if they really believed it was this critical, then why in gods name would they force 50% of the population to roll over?

Labour, along with every other party, are planning to change the Equality Act to remove our sex based rights.

If they can do it to us - the most despised group - who will be next?

If Labour say they are committed to the single-sex exemptions, then that means that we will still legally be able to have spaces that are for biological women only.

No way on this green earth will the TRAs accept any form of separate female category like
"Sex: Female(1)"
"(1: the male version)"

It will be "Sex: Female", full stop.

In which case, how can any differentiation be made in real life?

LentilHearted Sat 07-Dec-19 08:12:27
"Yes, Labour's policy re self I.D and single sex spaces sounds confused. Manifesto states commitment to uphold Equality Act but also talks about reforming the GRA. I felt like I couldn't vote for them until I read the manifesto and interpreted the way it is written to mean that sex and gender are separate things. Single sex spaces are decided on biological sex and gender 'identity' is whatever that is, so people can 'identify' as whatever gender they like, make one up, whatever, but we retain our sex based rights."
i disagree. The GRA allows people to change their legal sex. So when they say "single-sex spaces" it is as likely to mean single legal sex as it is to mean single biological sex. Remember, words are being redefined all the time here.

"Can we PLEASE take some notice of the FACT that the changes which have been happening around gender self I.D have ALL been implemented under a tory government. No one mentions this, we have had tory rule for almost a decade and during this decade, the transagenda has really taken off UNDER TORY RULE, so to all women saying they'll either spoil their ballot or vote to keep the tories in, things will NOT change, you are voting to keep the transagenda rolling over us with its current velocity!"
Well the UK Tory Government have had fuck al to do with the transagenda roll-out across the world. This is global. Had we had a Labour Government, I believe it would still have gained the traction that it has.

"I shan't be voting to keep 4 million children in poverty, any mum who does should be ashamed! "
Bull. Shit. Don't even think about trying to shame me. I can see a shit tactic at 100 paces, you can take this statement and shove it.

"As for the Labour Party, they have listened to women in the party "
No, they haven't listened at all. NOT. AT. ALL.

" ... yadda yadda yadda ... Please don't vote for more children going to school hungry, please don't vote for people who take free school meals from already hungry children."
I refer you to my previous comment which begins 'Bull.'

" ... yadda yadda yadda ... Please don't vote for more children going to school hungry, please don't vote for people who take free school meals from already hungry children."

Aka, BE NICE, LIKE ME.

The fake stats about suicide clearly aren't enough to guilt us into agreeing that men can be women, we now have impoverished children thrown in the mix.
All I have to say on that is once the legal definition of women includes men, that definition won't be easily changed back.
We already have employers who pay under minimum wage and ignore health and safety laws. We already have women sacked for being pregnant. Imagine how much worse work will be for those on the margins when Dave is promoted for being a great hardworking woman and Tracy is sacked for being the old-fashioned type of woman who has the audacity to get pregnant. It's not sex discrimination if they're now both women.
Also, as I've mentioned before, any exceptions that are made on a case by case basis are not worth the paper they are written on. What organisation, big or small, has the money to argue case by case which men get in and which don't?
It's not my fault the Labour Party don't give a fuck about women. It's their own fault. If they want to endanger those impoverished children by throwing away women's votes and failing to get into government that's on them.
Maybe the Labour Party should be looking at the bigger picture.

The GRA allows people to change their legal sex. So when they say "single-sex spaces" it is as likely to mean single legal sex as it is to mean single biological sex.

From the MoJ policy on prisons:

"all individuals who are transgender must be initially allocated to part of the estate which matches their legally recognised gender"

No mention here of biological sex. "Transwomen" with penises automatically go to women's prisons if they have a GRC.

Transgender people can't be excluded once they've changed their ID. It's unworkable. (Even without changing their id I think they can be allowed in sex-segregated spaces currently by self id all it takes apparently in law is an intention to transition. In practice don't even need that. Just claim you're trans, no argument). In my opinion there needs to be consultation with a Dr or counsellor at least, before GRC/change on ID, because there are other things, conditions and not, that are not gender dysphoria/transgender that people can mistake for being gender dysphoria/indicating transgender. Only after consultation with professional should they be able to get GRC and change any of their ID. That's for the wellbeing of that individual and everyone else. For sex-segregated spaces and programs etc. a form of ID could be shown if any concern. Though I don't know how this would really work in practice. Have someone on the door? Wait for complaints that someone thinks someone is really a man? How in real life will it work? All it can be is checking ID. It could be degrading, even to masculine women. tbh I can't see it being enforced. I know some people don't even want those with a GRC to access female spaces. How would that be enforced though? when they have changed their ID and with GRC are legally women? All ID says simply, sex/gender: F . No mention of their previous How would you assess people? It can't be done. I would rather no male bodies in female spaces, but surgery etc is not a requirement for GRC, isn't going to be, and this differentiation of surgery/no surgery can't be enforced or policed. Even without self ID and without GRC,.transgender women, surgery or not are entering women's sex-segregated spaces and have been for a very long time.

I'm not disagreeing that there should be single sex spaces, there should, I just don't know how it can work in reality. It's not happening now, already

August, it's almost as if being able to self ID as a part of a group with a protected characteristic is a bad idea?

It's cowardly to refuse to fight and instead to bend over and take what the tories have been giving us this past decade. I can only assume the majority of you are financially comfortable, never struggled, have no idea what it's like for anyone else. Don't bother fighting then, get your information second hand, wring your hands and look the other way when austerity kills more people and hold yourselves personally responsible. Focussing on one issue only whilst voting for the party under whom these changes are not being challenged makes a mockery of any statement of female liberation you may make. "Women go to university to find a husband" is your party. Enjoy your gilded cages. I'm not with you, I'm a fighter, I'll do what I can to make our society fairer and fight for our right to define the word woman to mean 'an adult human female'.

Why the dramatics Lentil? What right do you have to assume anything about any of us that post on this board?
I will not be guilted into anything not by you or anyone. What utterly ridiculous statements you make. Women's rights matter. It's not a single issue, it affects every single part of everyday life for women. Get over yourself.

Oh and perhaps have a word with the Labour Party about expecting votes from women after we have been treated with nothing but vile contempt. It doesn't work like that. You don't treat people appallingly then expect them to vote for you. Life doesn't work like that.

The one issue is GRA reform which from the labour manifesto and John's replies is not clear and needs work, a lot of work. If women abandon the party in favour of spoiled ballots and tory votes, then no positive progress can be made because only TRAs and lib-fems will be involved in the research and decision making. That's what I mean by one issue, women's rights affect us all, abandoning the left will make things worse. But that's it, I see the general 'I'm alright' attitude on this site and it sickens me. The 'dramatics' are due to my horrendous situation and my family's desperate need for change in how the country is run and how government decisions affect me and people like me, the people you probably wouldn't answer the door to for fear of poverty being infectious or maybe it's best to not even look at how life is for many many people, as long as you're ok.

You are making major assumptions and projections about people's lives and how they live them. In fact what you have said is downright rude.

'The people you probably wouldn't open the door too for fear of being infected by poverty'. Just who do you think you are?

You are making major assumptions and projections about people's lives and how they live them. In fact what you have said is downright rude.

Oh, it’s the usual Labour tactic. Insult people and then tell them to vote for you. As opposed to the Lib Dem one of insult people and tell them not to vote for you.

For the record, I have never voted in my own self-interest. I have always thought about society as a whole. But then I have never been asked by a left-wing party to vote in opposition to my own safety and rights. I can’t do it. I would vote for a genuine socialist party, but Labour can’t decide whether it is a socialist party or a bourgeois liberal one. It’s abandoned women, including some of the most vulnerable in society, for the woke student, misogynist and autogynephile vote. They can fuck off. It’s them that have done this, not women who refuse to vote for them.

I've also never voted in my own self interest. I've always gone by what I thought was right for the people and for the nation. I left the Labour Party last year over the treatment of GC women.

I fed up of being attempts to make me feel guilty about spoiling my vote. If you have been treated badly why would then want to put the people who broke your trust and help put them in power?

I may vote Labour. I've thought long and hard about spoiling my vote but I fear helping let a Lib Dem in. I'll tell you what though, I will make my own decision. Labour supporters trying to guilt trip us or dropping by to lecture uppity women on how voting works - not just you Lentil, you're just one of a long line - are doing their party no favours whatsoever.

I've followed most, if not all, of the election threads. Lots of us have talked about the treatment women got from Labour Party members in Brighton. A poster even wrote about being abused by a Labour canvasser who knocked on her door. Not one word of apology or regret have I seen from the party. And don't even think about saying anything now Labour because it's too late. You want my vote? Your best chance is to lie low and say nothing until the polls have closed.

FWIW, I actually received a lengthy response from my LP candidate (and previous MP) this week, to my e-mail asking for her views on the maintenance of single sex exemptions under the Equalities Act.

Whilst her response was far from perfect, it was better than I was expecting. It was long - not the usual TWAW, get over it response, and she did state that she wants to see and consider the results of the GRA consultation before proceeding with any change in law.

Most of what’s in any party’s manifesto never actually happens, and we need MPs who are on the GC side (or at least show signs of being open to actually thinking properly about the issues), to get the party to change tack. So on that basis she has my vote. But, I’m voting for her, not the party, and she’s only getting it because she made an effort to send a decent response to my questions.

and she did state that she wants to see and consider the results of the GRA consultation before proceeding with any change in law.

But what's with all this wanting to see the results? This was a government consultation - not by the conservative party but by the elected government of the day - and yet MPs think they can pick and choose whether or not to even read it? The results should be published.