Lisa Nandy knows what a woman is, wants to protect them, but also "twaw"?

[BuzzShitbagBobbly]

When I was doing my GCSEs, I had a maths tutor. She would sit with me and patiently go over and over a problem until I had an "OHHHHH!!!!" moment where everything suddenly fell into place, like a camera going into sharp focus.

That's how I feel about Lisa Nandy's inability to see the blatant nonsense of her position when she says stuff like this in the same breath:

“...We’ve failed a lot of women over recent years....It gives the green light to people who harass women"...She says she would allow a committee of women to determine what harassment is..."

"I care deeply about safe spaces for women. I know from personal experience there is a generation of women who fought very hard to create and protect safe spaces, that it matters....But that [debate] has to start with the recognition that trans men are men, trans women are women...”

She is so incredibly, tantalisingly close to having the penny drop, but inexplicably refuses to go there.

(Comments above are snipped for brevity. Full quotes are in the linked article: www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/29/lisa-nandy-if-labour-got-things-right-how-did-we-lose-so-badly-interview )

If she could explain how transwomen are different from other males in the regard of their eligibility for single sex spaces...

Wanting and being are very different

I won’t vote for any politician that states TWAW. Fuck em

I totally agree.

That would make a good Spartacus thread for a Monday morning, don't you think?

The minimum standard for trans inclusion of males in female-only spaces run by those who endorse transgender ideology and legislation is a verbal statement of "identifying as a woman".

So, I'd like to know how Lisa can square her belief that women's spaces are vital to the female of the species with the belief that all men should have access on their say-so.

Or are there criteria? If so, what are they?

And then I'd love to know what does she and I and every other woman on this plane, what do we have in common with a man claiming to identify as a woman that we don't also have in common with every other man?

Finally, the female residents of this country currently have the right - in language and in law - to define themselves in a category of their own, separately from males. To organise and assemble as a sex, with their own sovereign spaces, their own sports and scholarships and a whole range of other legal set asides that are for females only.

Does Lisa Nandy seek to abolish this right? And if so, how does she justify this?

It's been mentioned on FWR before, but this kind of 'conclusion agreed before debate commences' approach is almost identical to a variety of Christian apologetics called Presuppositionalism. You start by the position (the 'presupposition') that the bible is the basis for morals etc. and lo, your arguments all lead to the conclusion that it is true.

Now, you read that and thought "Well, duh, but that doesn't prove anything at all" and you're right, of course, but you would be amazed at the amount of people; clever, rational people, who find it very compelling and even intellectually satisfying. I used to be one.

Trans ideology works in a similar way, which is why TWAW is a primary article of faith, leveraged with such enthusiasm, because once that pin in the board is removed, nothing else sticks.

Which, boringly, is why we must keep challenging this dull, stupid, ridiculous mantra, because the only way to dismantle the presuppositionalist argument is to show that the starting point is not sound.

Obviously, dismantling someone's Christian arguments is neither here nor there, but trans ideology is embedding itself into the halls of power, and challenging the massive error at the heart of it is imperative.

It’s bullshit. She knows that the score is, they all do.

She is just willing to throw women under the bus just so she appears ‘woke’. I really do think these women/ or the party are receiving funding from pro TRA because no way would any sane politicians be saying shit like this -especially when they are getting a pasting for it and driving members away.

There is not even any back peddling. You would think they would be refusing to get involved in it because it’s so contentious but no - they are getting stuck in choosing their wrong side.

It’s just fucking weird.

I also think that they are targeting the uni lot for the next wave of labour supporters. Maybe they have thought ‘well we fucked this generation of labour up, let’s just all in and focus on the kids who don’t remember shit’

Ooo DuLang, please tell us more...?

Great post, Floral.

Keir Starmer not much better, anyone seen his retweet if his interview in Pink News, I despair of Labour.

Keir Starmer not much better, anyone seen his retweet if his interview in Pink News, I despair of Labour.

On the original PN thread, I see the Trans Pledge people are starting to turn on him now. He's not been supportive enough, not signed their pledge, which is obviously better than the other trans pledge, and he has not Bowed Down At The Altar Enough. He needs re-educating, surely.

Oh Keir. I can't say I am sad to see you get eaten alive though.

Original tweet thread: twitter.com/PinkNews/status/1234468091746308096

Thanks for putting the link up Buzz, Labour have got themselves in a right old mess over this.