Lisa Nandy says child rapists should be in women’s prisons if they identify as female

[RoyalCorgi]

Extraordinary.

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=oUon9j1zJ_E&

I 'want in the Ladies' because it is the appropriate door for who I am.

I'm afraid that's not a good enough reason to put women and girls at risk and remove our right to privacy and dignity. But thank you for telling us so very clearly who you are and how little regard you have for women's needs.

TBH it sounded a bit like they'd realised it was a fucking minefield so they were all parroting the "take the heat out, important debate, trans rights important" kind of line. Sounded to me like they might have discussed in advance

Yes! The only time they all tried to cover for each other - and show a measure of unity.....they were all shitting bricks.

Oh the irony of a fly on the wall women's prison documentary on C4 now, right after the leadership debate...

Robin is welcome to come back and prove me wrong, but my impression from Robins posts is that Robin only wants to insist that as an upstanding transwoman citizen, Robin should have access to all women's spaces and opportunities, no questions asked.

Robin has not clarified what Robin thinks about that policy also letting in ANY male who says they identify as a woman into those spaces, including some who may be predators. (After all, under self ID, anyone can say the magic words "I identify as a woman").

I don't really think much discussion is wanted at all - but a mere hope that calling women only single sex spaces "like Apartheid in SA" will shame women into shutting up about it. That sort of comparison is simply a polite way of calling us bigots.

In a nutshell, they’re saying, “male bodied people who say they are trans are more vulnerable than actual females, no matter if those females have been raped, beaten or abused by other male bodied people, so move over women, because your rights don’t matter.” Three cowards.

And "we need to make it easier for people to change gender/sex (used interchangeably, natch) because the current process (which requires no physical intervention AFAIK) is so onerous and dehumanising."

They still didn't say women's rights are important. Do they really believe transwomen are more oppressed than women? Does Starmer know any vulnerable women? I could understand Reese-Mogg not knowing any vulnerable women, but Starmer? Surely Labour MPs should have some clue about oppression?

Do they really believe transwomen are more oppressed than women

It seemed pretty clear to me that yes, they do. They think the GRC process is dehumanizing/awful/other countries do more and that trans people experience awful abuse and vitriol.

They should try setting up a twitter account as feminist and see what abuse and vitriol looks like.

it seems impossible when the majority of the GC movement adopt a position that would deny me, a respectable, contributing citizen, the opportunity to go about my day to day business.

No-one is stopping you, you just get to use the facilities for your natal sex.

Only toddlers expect to get everything they want, regardless of the needs of others, and it doesn't usually end with them getting it, either.

You know what's dehumanizing? Being told that the fact that most women and girls don't want to be forced to share spaces where we might have to undress with male bodied people just doesn't matter at all. And then being told that our compliance is vital to the mental health of the people who're forcing that on us, because the only way they can "be who they are" is if a captive audience of compliant females is provided for them.

It's a worldview in which women are props, not people.

Julia Long is amazing

She is fearless. And I'll add from experience that she has a great sense of humour. I'm not sure I'd have been able to keep a straight face, either.

Does Starmer know any vulnerable women? I could understand Reese-Mogg not knowing any vulnerable women, but Starmer?

When he was DPP he presided over important changes in legal policy for rape victims. So I would have expected better tbh.

Dehumanizing:
-female prison wardens being forced to strip search male bodied people
-female children and teens having to share dormitories with people they readily identify as male
-female prisoners sharing cells with males
-female patients being denied the right to have a female health care provider for intimate exams
-females being forced to share a ward with males
-being told we must use gender neutral language about female experiences (menstruation, childbearing, childbirth, breastfeeding)

the people being dehumanised here are woman and girls.

Robin, I find nothing 'safe' or 'sane' about the utter contempt for females you've shown here today.

Indeed, Michelle, nor do I find Robin's behaviour respectable, and I most certainly don't consider repeatedly coming here to scold women for our concerns to be Robin just getting on with Robin's business without bothering anyone.

It's so weird how Nandy started her campaign by saying that Labour has to reconnect with communities, with towns, with popular opinion, and that it has no godgiven right to exist, and so on, and has been trying to appeal to the political centre (accusing her own party of having wanted to nationalise everything and of having had no idea how to pay for its promises) - and yet she comes out with this sort of extremist stuff.

The Woke don't have a single clue how this stuff comes across to the average person.

wellbehavedwomen I know all that, sort of, but it still shocks me about the openness of it. It shouldn't, but that's because I still believe that most people have humanity, despite increasing evidence to the contrary.

After all if her young trans friend who is trying to identify out of their female sex, is magically a man,

The child I think is biologically male, as she used the word "she". I can't see her misgendering.

So ch4 debate confirming:

As a UK tax payer, all political parties command unconditional access to and use of my body in public spaces requiring me to undress or otherwise be vulnerable, which will in some unspecified way, apparently enable them to repair the alleged abuse, vilification and general perceived deprivation of male born trans people. And if I fail to do this then I forfeit access to all public provisions. If I protest about this then I will receive a criminal record. And loudly insisting that I absolutely have no rights as a female, will never be recognised or supported by my government, and have no right to safety, equality or equal access before the law is somehow a declaration of virtue.

And not one word of that is exaggeration.

We're not supposed to lie and say convincingly there's no such thing as biology any more, but I'll tell you, it fucking sucks to be born female in this country in 2020. I have never been angrier or more determined that I will not in any way, shape or form co operate with this.

It's so weird how Nandy started her campaign by saying that Labour has to reconnect with communities, with towns, with popular opinion

Woke politico - I want to reconnect with communities, with towns, with popular option...

Communities, towns, the general populace - Sounds promising, tell us more!

Woke politico - By putting rapists in women's prisons, and making sure that there are no spaces that a male adult can't enter even if the women already using those spaces are alarmed and humiliated by that male adult doing so.

Communities, towns, the general populace - WTF? Are you huffing glue?

This surely has to be illegal?

There is no equal demand to use male bodies or to remove male rights to privacy and dignity at all, never mind in a comparable way.

This is wholly and disproportionately a disadvantage to having been born female.

Basic, extreme, flat out discriminatory treatment on basis of sex.

This has to go to court, this has to be fought. Its indefensible.

All this talk of getting a GRC being dehumanising- what do they think it involves?

There's something quite sinister about a woman being lauded by a room full of men about giving away women's rights.

It could have been a deleted scene from the Handmaid's Tale.

Is it being suggested that because of the especially challenging issues arising from the need to appropriately house less than 100 trans-identifying prisoners, I and the 12,000 to 20,000 trans women (still only 1 in 3,000 or less) living in and contributing to society should be prevented from using the female lavatories at my place of work or in Sainsbury’s?

No, it's being suggested that you shouldn't use the female toilets anywhere because you're not female. Simple, really!