RLB on Marr this morning

[Cwenthryth]

He’s got it completely and is tackling her head on about signing the trans pledge. He’s quoted Jess Philips, Karen Ingala Smith and Laura Pidcock at her. She really doesn’t understand. She doesn’t even know what she signed. And now she’s just cited suicide rates. 🤦🏻‍♀️

She is utterly lacking in either passion or charisma.
I found it chilling when she said "it's right to talk about the safety of women ... but not at the expense of trans rights"

Really?! She's willing to throw 30 million women and girls under a bus for the sake of -what?- a few thousand trans people?

It's such a monumentally incoherent mess. The density to the lack of logic is breathtaking.

This would always be a risk to any campaign that gambled on using the (presumed) relative innocence and acceptance of trans youth as a cover for a quiet, subtle, under-the-radar campaign. As those youngsters grow and gain power of their own, they were never going to keep quiet.

The combination of that coming of age and women campaigning to shed light on the issues is what will blow this wide open.

@Tombakersscarf

Amending the EA to allow self-id...
Why is it only self id into the protected characteristic of sex? Why is there no demand to self id with a different race, religion or disability?

THIS! ^

What is a woman? What exactly is meant by self-ID? What constitutes transphobia?

‘What is a woman?’ wouldn’t necessarily be useful, as there’s a pat answer to that within the rhetoric. The fact that their definition is circular takes too much explaining for a short interview. Asking whether some male bodied people fit under their definition might be a useful clarification.

‘What is meant by self-ID?’ is more important. The reality: that there is to be no gatekeeping of men who want women’s rights, is so astonishing and unbelievable that it needs to be spelled out.

‘What constitutes transphobia?’ Also useful. If the general public realised so-called-transphobia includes such innocuous beliefs as people can’t literally change sex and that intact male bodied people should not be allowed in women’s spaces it might give pause.

Just watched it. God, she was dreadful. Evasive and parroting mantras with a snug, virtue-signalling grin.

Good

Smug not snug, obvs.

I so wish that interviewers would insist on clear definitions.

Absinthe I agree - this is a key point.

Terms are not agreed - some Labourites are just accepting, at face value, that WPUK is 'transphobic' and so is a hate group. But what is transphobia, how is it being defined? Women talking about their rights, their oppression due to their biological sex? This is now transphobic according to the Labour leadership.

Is it really "hate" for women to say "just a cotton picking minute, natal women are born with female bodies, and have female socialisation, which produces a unique female upbringing that males simply can't just "identify into" ?

Some Labourites are presuming that they "will uphold women's single sex spaces" - but lo and behold, then you find out that they include transwomen (on the basis of self ID) in that category. So - it's not a women's single sex space, is it?

I was very pleased to hear Andrew Marr read out Karen Ingala-Smith's statement on vulnerable women in refuges - only to heat RLB dismiss it out of hand 3 seconds later, and blarb on about transwomen. WHAT ABOUT WOMEN REBECCA?? The born female kind?

We need more from political leaders than just an obsession with holding power.

So true, and we also need politicians who think it's important to listen to voters not preach to them. Remember Alan Johnson's anger at Labour "playing schoolboy politics" after the election results? I wonder how he's feeling with this sorry lot as leadership candidates.

Why is it only self id into the protected characteristic of sex? Why is there no demand to self id with a different race, religion or disability?

Having seen endless twitter bios from trans activists over the years I'd say a substantial proportion do identify as being disabled.

It seems like the no-go areas for self-ID are race and religion. At least so far.

Spartabix Agreed. The Self-ID definition is where I find discussion is particularly muddy and obscure. On the one hand there's this hand-wringing about the need for removing the 'humiliating' scrutiny and questioning, and simplifying the process so people easily can live as their authentic selves etc etc. And on the other hand, there's indignation about the suggestion that removing scrutiny will mean any man could take advantage of this for easy, legitimate access to women's safe spaces, as if there's some invisible force field that would prevent this. I'd really love to see the like of RLB really being asked to clarify this utter contradiction.

" I think Keir is hedging his bets, keeping his powder dry, seeing which way the wind blows.
Would I trust him?
No"

Nor would I but at least he is not fully embracing this lunacy

They aren't even trying to hide the fa t they dont even bother reading anything and just "do as they are told " now do they.

Not one question was answered and perfectly valid points that no one could argue were offensive , ignored heading instead to sympathy vote.

She looked a complete idiot and there is no way that as she was speaking, something didn't click inside making her realise shit I've been had
Course she chose to carry on any way but you can almost see the "oh shit" moment t

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/east-ham-clp-hire-white-head-of-bame-forum_uk_5d270667e4b0583e482c7dbb?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAHP4yvmYULk5eqM3cX-PR4oXlGfcchr8MAJ9kMmzMcwhZMX-OYN4IKAyE1mCV1RNolmtgK6ngAmD4SZGPFppGLi9-VuwVyQcrHjNCIevyMnOa_I5DmBJKTPzQ73DlDpPiDXODAB5aln0A24l1PkbGqnfsuqVT1sD7eK8lf_fz5pP

This is interesting on the "identifying into minorities" topic.

A white woman who is Irish and identifies as a minority was given a women's officer role for BAME members forum.

And a straight white male was given an LGBT Officer role.

The latter, I remember at the time, and an awful lot of women were of the opinion "ah, you don't like self ID, and straight white males taking your political positions, so much now...?!"

Trying to get someone to define terms usually goes nowhere. Often there's a meaningless, typically circular, definition we would immediately see through but that sounds plausible enough to the audience. Entering into a discussion over such a definition simply comes across as pointless angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin debate to many of the audience.

Better is to give specific examples and ask whether they are within or without the line. So should a male-bodied male-presenting rapist who merely claims the identity of being a woman be housed with women in women's prison? (Although better examples are available because many people would see this solely from the perspective that this would be useful to teach those nasty women criminals a lesson.)

I just got the text from Team Keir. Chose UNDECIDED in the hope they'll contact me and I can press the point.

I think Keir is doing the only sensible thing right now. To say TWANW at this stage would completely derail his campaign. He'd still win but would begin under a glittery unicorn shaped cloud and possibly never escape it. For an "oppressed minority" these genderists sure are good at getting the press to dance to theur tune.

Just got a text from RLB - doesn’t give a ‘no’ option! Just yes or undecided. So that’ll be ignore then. How bloody presumptuous.

I think Kier Starmer's approach is probably the most sensible to be honest, however 'on the fence' it might seem.

He has 'given a nod' in the direction of the TRAs by signing the 'other' pledge, but at the same time is keeping himself out of the way of the self-imploding mess that we're now seeing with the others.

If he becomes leader then perhaps we should get his wife on here and see what she thinks and if she can bend his ear!? They have a son and a daughter I believe.

" They aren't even trying to hide the fa t they dont even bother reading anything"

Its a 12 point pledge, must take all of a minute.

The Andrew Marr Show
16/02/20

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000fk19/the-andrew-marr-show-16022020

Andrew Marr
Rebecca Long-Bailey

[50:00]
AM: Now, you signed up this week to a series of pledges from the Labour Campaign for Trans Rights. One of them says that you should accept that there is no material conflict between trans rights and women's rights. So does that mean that if a Labour - a woman in the Labour Party wants to debate the rights of trans women to enter spaces like women's refuges, that conversation now cannot take place?

RLB: We can all have legitimate and comradely debate within the Party and I'd encourage that but in terms of the position of trans rights, I've been very clear on this. I support the right to self-ID and we've got to recognise the amount of transphobic hate that there is out there, both within certain elements of the media and coming from our communities ...

AM: Right ...

RLB: ... and the difficulties that trans people face, and as a party you would expect us to be at the vanguard of tackling that transphobic - er - behaviour.

AM: The pledge that you have also signed says it's important to organise and fight against transphobic organisations such as Woman's Place UK, LGB Alliance and other trans-exclusionist hate groups. So to be clear, you would regard Woman's Place UK as a hate group?

RLB: I'm not regarding any particular group as a hate group but what I ...

AM: But you've signed something that says that.

RLB: ... but what I would say very clearly is that there's no place within the Labour Party for transphobic behaviour, in the same way that there should be no place in the Labour Party for any form of discriminatory or racist or antisemitic behaviour. I've been a strong advocate of an independent disciplinary process and any member, whatever group they're from, if they display those kind of behaviours they shouldn't be in the Party.

AM: So you would regard Woman's Place UK as a transphobic hate group. If you become leader, do you start to throw people out of the Party [inaudible] on day one?

RLB: No, I've not - I've not, no, let me be clear. I've not - I've not referred to any specific organisation as a hate group, but what I would say ...

AM: I'm sorry, the pledge ...

RLB: ... what I would say ...

AM: ... does say specifically ...

RLB: ... what - Andrew, what I would say is that any member of our Party who goes through our disciplinary process, which will be a new process under myself, an independent one, if they're found guilty of being transphobic then they shouldn't be within our party. It's as simple as that.

AM: So, well, let me give you the example of Jess Phillips for instance, former leadership candidate herself, who retweeted Woman's Place UK and said she could find it's demands completely reasonable. Jess Phillips could be kicked out of the Labour Party if Rebecca Long-Bailey becomes leader.

RLB: No, unless Jess Phillips has said anything transphobic and I don't understand that she has. But there's no conflict - no, let me be clear - there's no conflict between the rights of women and the protection of women and safety in particular places, and trans rights. And we need to stop having this debate within the Party on that basis. It's right to stand up for women's rights, it's right to stand up for the rights of trans people. There doesn't need to be a differentiation between the two.

AM: You have signed a pledge, which you must have read before you signed it, which says that people - organisations such as Woman's Place UK, people who support that should be kicked out of the Labour Party. You signed that pledge.

RLB: I don't - I don't think it says that. I think it says that anybody who's found guilty of transphobic behaviour should be kicked out of the Labour Party and that's my firm position, in the same way that any member found guilty of discriminatory behaviour or racist, antisemitic ...

AM: Organise ... organise and fight against hate groups.

RLB: ... Islamophobic, they shouldn't be in the Party.

AM: Well, you've said that, so if - if those are organised - if those are hate groups, then they should be kicked out of the Labour Party. I mean, what I'm saying to you is an awful lot of, as it were, good feminists inside the Labour Party would be caught by this. I'm going to quote somebody else, Karen Ingala Smith, who is a Labour Party member, who runs a charity combating violence against women and women's refuges. She's worked on this for a very, very long time and here is what she says, forgive me, it goes on a bit. 'Women experiencing trauma after violence and abuse will, like most of us, almost always instantly read someone, who might be the most kind and gentle trans identified male in the world, as male. And they may experience debilitating terror, immediately and involuntarily. I've lost count of the number of victim survivors of men's violence who've told me how important a women only service was to them. They're often upset and emotional when they start to talk about this.' Now, does somebody who thinks that stay a member of the Labour Party or not?

RLB: I think it's right to understand and listen to the concerns of women, particularly those who've suffered from domestic abuse, and we don't have public services that are capable of dealing with those issues at the moment due to the vast range of cuts that this government has brought into place. But we can't use that as an argument to discriminate against trans people. And that's my point, is that if people are saying transphobic things they shouldn't be in the Labour Party. But it is right ...

AM: Do you think that was transphobic?

RLB: No, it's right to talk about the safety of women. No-one would discriminate anybody in our party for doing that, but it's not at the expense of trans rights.

AM: So coming a little bit closer to home, Laura Pidcock, a friend of yours, former Labour MP, says, 'I think there has to be the enforcement of single space exemptions for women, to heal and recover, and it's absolutely crucial that there are spaces, that there is provision for trans people to also get the help and support.' Is that the kind of view that is welcome inside the Labour Party?

RLB: I think women and trans people all need support and I think we meet in agreement on that point.

AM: Now, all of this, I mean the law overall arching this is the Equality Act of 2010 ...

RLB: Yes.

AM: ... which is therefore of course a Labour Act, and that says that trans people, even if they have got identifying documents, can be excluded from certain women only spaces. Given what you've said, would you change that law?

RLB: I do, and I want a right to self-ID for trans people. It's not an easy journey to go on as a trans person to determine changing your sex, if you like. And we know the mental health issues that many within our trans community face, they've got extremely high suicide rates and we should never underestimate the pain that those individuals go through and that's why it's right ...

AM: So you'd change that law?

RLB: I want the right to self-ID and I want that enshrined in law.
[55:35]

I also just got the RLB text, so I replied with an explanation of why she doesn't have my vote. Don't know if anyone will read it.

She doesn't know the difference between the GRA and the EA.

At least it sounded like AM had read the pledge, she did not seem to have read something she was willing to put her name to.

Is Jess Phillips a new supporter of WPUK? That surprised me