Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Keir Starmer has now signed the 'trans pledge

115 replies

jadefinch · 13/02/2020 10:25

Every Labour leadership candidate has now signed a document that says women meeting to discuss women's issues is 'hateful' and something that must be 'fought against'.

twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1227878854183792642?s=19

OP posts:
Hullygully · 13/02/2020 11:09

cunt

they're all cunts

ahagwearsapointybonnet · 13/02/2020 11:11

Hmm, in some ways though I think the pledge he has signed could be even MORE dangerous than the other one.

The biggest bit that jumps out at me is the ban on "conversion therapy" - which we know, to trans extremists, includes any therapy aimed at investigating possible causes of children's dysphoria, and whether this can be resolved in other ways (or may resolve itself naturally by the end of puberty, as happens in the vast majority of cases), rather than declaring them trans and going full-steam-ahead to puberty blockers and the medical pathway. If this was enacted it would make it even harder to stop children being pushed down the path to eventual hormones, sterility and surgery.

Combine that with the education aspects, the requirement to consult LGBT+ Labour on basically everything, etc, and this is really quite sinister.

TinselAngel · 13/02/2020 11:18

Surely converting boys into girls and vice versa is the ultimate conversion therapy FFS!

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 13/02/2020 11:19

If i outright say exactly what this is like, what period in history and what party I'm probably going to get suspended again.

But it is, we all know it.

NormaSnorks · 13/02/2020 11:24

Grrr. I am so disappointed. I really hoped he had more common sense.

JustHereWithMyPopcorn · 13/02/2020 11:26

I agree with @Hullygully

Justhadathought · 13/02/2020 11:26

It is all reflective of this period in history...woke'ness has gone mainstream; identity politics and political correctness dominate......the radicals are now those that counter that mainstream narrative, or who refuse to conform.

One of the ironies, for me, is that Jeremy Corbyn has a visceral hatred of all things American; and is warning of threats to Britain from trade deals with the U.S ( which I also happen to agree with him, in large part ) - and yet he is over-seeing the rise to dominance of a movement founded on American narratives around race and gender. The British left has been colonised by American identity politics on Jeremy's watch.

Justhadathought · 13/02/2020 11:29

Grrr. I am so disappointed. I really hoped he had more common sense

Kier Starmer's main instinct is to people please. He is a wishy washy, fence sitter, and without firm principle other than 'being fair'. That is why he is seen as being a unifier of the party. To expect dynamic or bold leadership from him is a mistake.

Barracker · 13/02/2020 11:30

Yes, it is, CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost

No matter how people declare 'you can't say that, can't compare it to that!' we can, we will and we should. We should compare everything of such a disturbing nature to it, for fear that we might miss the evolution of another atrocious ideology. The act of comparison, between a historical ideology and a current one isn't the unforgivable thing. It's the act of dismissal, the forbidding of the comparison of any other ideology that leaves the door open to the next inhuman ideology.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 13/02/2020 11:31

I'll say it if you won't, Captain, though you may be thinking of something different. China under Mao, 1966. Cultural Revolution. Agree, and do so with sufficient show of enthusiasm, or there will be Consequences.

Many of the former Red Guard regret what they did in that decade. Some current Labour members will too. Problem is, by the time regret is felt the damage has already been done.

The left should have learned to stop repeating this pattern by now, but it appears that some people are constitutionally incapable of learning from history. And I say that as someone who is on the left.

hazeyjane · 13/02/2020 11:33

Oh fucking shiteballs

Balkinfly · 13/02/2020 11:34

No hope but it's like where I work. A non profit organisation, you have to tick the boxes to say you agree with trans rights to gender neutral spaces etc. I essentially will get the boot if I disagree? Confused

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 13/02/2020 11:36

Also, it was inevitable that Starmer was going to do this so I'm not sure why anyone is surprised. This is a problem for the Labour Party as a whole to tackle. I don't think there is any one person who can stop it by standing up to it - stopping it would take a collective effort.

Langbannedforsafeguardingkids · 13/02/2020 11:37

I'm wondering at what point they're going to look around and decide it's gone too far - when they're in meetings where there's only 1% uterus-havers for example? Will they have a think then?

They really are giving the country to the Tories on a plate.

stillathing · 13/02/2020 11:41

Hmm
I still think voting KS in might be the least worst option. I think the amount by which the others lose might be interesting and give an indication of how normal LP members feel about what's just happened. This is getting wide coverage right now and RLB and co are saying some sufficiently bonkers things that might just wake up those members who were asleep.

However there's no fucking way I could vote Labour in an election right now.

Mossyrock · 13/02/2020 11:45

We should compare everything of such a disturbing nature to it, for fear that we might miss the evolution of another atrocious ideology.

Absolutely. Examination, comparison, debate and discussion are safeguards against extremism.

Countries who have gone off the rails into inhuman ideology and come out the other side understand this. They usually promote comparison at every opportunity.

Kantastic · 13/02/2020 11:45

I'm wondering at what point they're going to look around and decide it's gone too far - when they're in meetings where there's only 1% uterus-havers for example?

The beardies will feel that this situation is entirely the natural order of things and as it should have been all along.

The women might regret it, but it'll be too late for them to do anything about it.

Lollygaggles · 13/02/2020 11:47

Someone here or on Twitter (I forget) said they're not cunts. They don't have the warmth or depth. They are spineless, self-serving, deceitful fools for sure.

Bananabixfloof · 13/02/2020 11:47

Doesn't make it right, but I'm not surprised he's done it - he couldn't afford to be the odd one out

Well if any thought was given to it, a whole lot of women would back him if he had refused.
What if he means it? Cant bloody vote for him not knowing if he means it. Honestly he wants to run the country, then you stand by your principles, you dont just cave in at a tiny bit of pressure.
We can't vote for him as it stands (I'm not a member I cant vote anyway) but if he were to end up as prime minister, hahahahahaha, this would all be brought out and no one could trust what he had to say. One really needs to trust a leader will do as they say, not whatever someone random wants that day.

wellbehavedwomen · 13/02/2020 12:34

It doesn't really matter, sadly. We have a Tory government with an 80 seat majority, while Labour tear themselves apart over issues that the general public just do not support. The Tories went through paroxysms (and several leaders in swift succession) after 1997, too.

Huge, sweeping changes that affect our rights across every imaginable area, and they say women seeking to even try to discuss it are hateful bigots and should be expelled from Labour. Transactivists argue "nothing about us without us". I agree. Why aren't women afforded that right, too? Why must our voices be silenced?

If they were wilfully trying to make themselves unelectable, they couldn't be doing a better job. It's miserable.

Throckmorton · 13/02/2020 12:43

Oh for the love of fuck!! Who the fuck am I supposed to vote for now? And do I resign my labour membership over this?

HPFA · 13/02/2020 12:45

I think people are being little harsh suggesting there's no difference between KS signing this pledge and the other one.

The one he's signed doesn't target particular organisations, there's no mention of any targeted action against "transphobes", anyone being accused of transphobia would go through a proper independent process. Even the "introduction of self-declaration" is not incompatible with having exemptions. You could certainly have a law that says "in these areas self-declaration is enough, in these it isn't"

I get that some people would like him to have gone further but there is nothing here that is incompatible with compromise. It seems unfair to just conflate it with the hate-filled document that was produced yesterday.

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 13/02/2020 12:49

Oh for the love of fuck!! Who the fuck am I supposed to vote for now? And do I resign my labour membership over this?

Unless you have a funny independent candidate running, you absolutely have the right to deface your ballot.

JustTurtlesAllTheWayDown · 13/02/2020 12:59

Oh for the love of fuck!! Who the fuck am I supposed to vote for now? And do I resign my labour membership over this?

Same here. I really was hoping for better.
I can't even begin to explain how pissed off I am about this. FFS.
His pledge is marginally better but only in the way that a pile of misogynistic shit is marginally better than a slightly bigger pile of shit.

Coyoacan · 13/02/2020 13:06

Also pledges to campaign for the end of parental rights to remove children from sex and relationship classes

This terrifies me, because these are unspecified classes, aren't they? Having seen an interview with the man who tried to stop his 14-year-old daughter from being given cross-sex hormones, it all started in the school.

They could be the classes that Tatchell wants to introduce, for example. At the moment it is seems like every school is deciding individually what to teach.

As for the defense of submitting to pressure, personally I can't be arsed with cowardly leaders. If I'm going to sign up behind a leader I would at least like them to have the courage of their convictions.

The only solution is a totally new left-wing party.