Labour 'stands back' from transgender war

[BovaryX]

I haven't seen this already posted, apologies if it has been. The Times reports that Labour is 'standing back' from the transgender issue in recognition of the fact its threats to expel members with 'transphobic' views during the last election contributed to a collapse of Labour support in the 'Red Wall'. Meanwhile, an Amnesty International spokeswoman claims that the Conservative proposals amount to a 'hostile environment' for trans people in the UK.

^any such proposals would cause a headache for Sir Keir Starmer after disputes over the intersection of trans rights with feminism overshadowed the Labour leadership election. Sir Keir was the only candidate not to sign a pledge calling on the party to expel members with “transphobic” views. He instead tried to take the heat out of the issue.Last week JK Rowling was criticised by the stars of the Harry Potter films after she used her experience of domestic violence to express concerns about female-only spaces and warn against attempts to “erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class”.
Labour has committed itself to reform of the Gender Recognition Act and David Lammy, the shadow justice secretary, said: “There’s now a change of view that people ought to be able to self-identify and not over-medicalise.” But he declined to go further, telling the BBC: “We would have to look at the legislation when it comes forward in detail^

Could you explain what you mean?

Most people make a distinction between men who've undergone some degree of medical transition and those effectively saying "I'm a woman because I say I am." It's very difficult to define this exactly of course but the beauty of Labour not being in power is that they don't have to. If they come up with something that suggests to the public that they're on the side of the Jan Morrises and the Debbie Haytons but not the Jessica Yanivs then most people will find that reasonable.

I know I'll get replies saying "oh but in practice you can't do that" but, to repeat myself, Labour are not in power so they don't need to worry about that. All they need to do is to convince people that a consensus position that reflects how most people feel in reality is possible.That's what they're doing on all these "culture war" issues like the statues row.

Labour can sod off for now, for my vote.
#LabourLosingWomenWhoVote98%OfTheTime

And I am one of the most floatiest of floaty voters.

Political parties have to spend millions gaining the votes from us women.

There are hundreds of thousands of us.

I don't experience politics "mentally" as a line from Left to Right, but the voter as a person in centre of a circle turning round and seeing all parties from all sides.

Strict tribalism in politics is a downfall. Our voting system is a joke.

I know it doesn't seem it but this is actually quite a big leap forward for them.

I agree. To me this is quite promising. It's unrealistic to expect Starmer to do what some here are demanding straight away. He's trying to consolidate his position with both the party and the electorate and it would cause civil war in the former if he were to totally disown those who think they are supporting trans rights, much as we here would like him to.

But I also agree it would be great to have just a single mp or leading party figure openly stand up for sex-based protections or acknowledge that there is a clash between TRA demands and women's rights, for example.

The problem for any mp who might secretly agree with our concerns is that after the vehement and orchestrated reaction to JK Rowling they will be even more petrified of the potential consequences of doing so.

"Standing back"? Not good enough. At the absolute minimum they must condemn the bullying and intimidation of women that has gone on over the last few years. Most of this has been done by their own party members and even senior Labour politicians. Until they do that I've no time for them.

I am optimistic that Keir Starmer will actually listen to all the voices in the Labour Party and outside. He must have realised how toxic and polarised this issue is. He will have realised self-ID is a vote loser despite the loud support for it, especially within Labour.
My MP is Conservative although the LP candidate was a good, decent person. If my vote choice was someone who had been loudly pro self-ID I could not vote for them. This is a big issue for me. I couldn't actively support something which I think has the potential to do serious long term harm to women.

@HPFA

Could you explain what you mean?

Most people make a distinction between men who've undergone some degree of medical transition and those effectively saying "I'm a woman because I say I am." It's very difficult to define this exactly of course but the beauty of Labour not being in power is that they don't have to. If they come up with something that suggests to the public that they're on the side of the Jan Morrises and the Debbie Haytons but not the Jessica Yanivs then most people will find that reasonable.

I know I'll get replies saying "oh but in practice you can't do that" but, to repeat myself, Labour are not in power so they don't need to worry about that. All they need to do is to convince people that a consensus position that reflects how most people feel in reality is possible.That's what they're doing on all these "culture war" issues like the statues row.

There was one country (maybe Japan?) that last year ruled if you are to be considered legitimately trans you have to have the full op.

I don't know if I can get onboard with the idea of compulsory surgery because so much can go wrong and outcomes aren't always good.

I can see why they drew a line in the sand though.

It's very difficult to define this exactly of course but the beauty of Labour not being in power is that they don't have to.

Yeah, after all we have been through, that kind of nebulous position won't win back my confidence.

Labour "stands back"?
Not good enough.
Six months ago prominent Labour figures were happy to denounce WPUK as a hate group and put their names down in support of self ID.
They need to lance this boil now.

the problem for any mp who might secretly agree with our concerns is that after the vehement and orchestrated reaction to JK Rowling they will be even more petrified of the potential consequences of doing so

MPs who are petrified of challenging a Twitter mob are unfit to represent anyone. They are unfit to be in any position of power.

Labour and the Trade Unions were very late to equality for women and I fear they are still trying to catch up. Why are we still under attack? Labour will need to convince me they have my interests at heart as a woman before I go back to them and I come from a long line of Labour voters.

Yeah, after all we have been through, that kind of nebulous position won't win back my confidence.

It won't win back anyone who feels very strongly about the issue. And the compromise position I think they'll end up with will lose votes on "the other side" too.

We've got so used to Johnson and Corbyn doubling down on divisive issues we've forgotten what appealing to the middle ground looks like.

I've long thought all MPs should come off twitter. It would make life a lot easier for them and I think if it became policy most would sigh with relief. Just leave up the official party twitter accounts.

They'd still get criticised on there and in the media but it would remove some of the personal aspect where people pile on and notifications ping like crazy. I imagine it induces a huge amount of anxiety which in turn hinders their ability to do their job.

MPs should be able to speak their minds freely in day to day parliament and twitter is a huge impediment to that.

I must admit I wonder how all the "TWAW" men like Daniel Radcliffe would react if they found out the woman they kissed goodbye after their first date actually had a penis. Would they still want a second date? Or would that suddenly be different?

Labour resisted Women's rights for years, it trailed behind and I don't think it has ever really caught up. I am waiting for Labour to get off the fence - I doubt they will because Sir Kier seems to be a good fence sitter. I have only ever voted Labour until 3 years ago when I spoilt my ballot

This is slightly off topic, but I read that Boris is going to desist with the 'self ID' laws that were started/progressed under Mays government, and the leaked plans showed that self-ID wasn't going to be legal in England and full gender reassignment under the sign off of two reputable doctors was going to be the only way to legally change gender.

Is that right/can anyone confirm that? I was sent a snippet of a screenshot from a newspaper so I can't reference or link it, sorry. Very intrigued to know if this is correct though.

I've long thought all MPs should come off twitter. It would make life a lot easier for them and I think if it became policy most would sigh with relief. Just leave up the official party twitter accounts.

I’ve long thought that too. Most people in the UK don’t use twitter and it’s very much a male dominated forum. MPs think they are speaking to the electorate but they are really engaging with a self selecting group who really, really enjoy arguing.

If you aren't affected by an issue its easy to take a step back and pretend it doesn't affect anyone else either.

Ha ha. Still not voting for them. Not until they know what a woman is

I agree! No chance, and in spite of whatever Kier Starmer might say the Labour party has been captured by American style Identity politics, and Momentum have inserted their own candidates into local constituency parties as MPs and councillors.

Mother

This is from the Telegraph

^It was confirmed on Sunday that the Government is preparing to announce a ban on “gay cure” therapies, which would end controversial church group and therapist conversion courses.Plans are also understood to be underway to set out new safeguards to protect female-only spaces including refuges and public lavatories.A Number 10 source said: "There is a consultation on the Gender Recognition Act. We had 100,000 responses to the consultation that will report back in due course probably before the summer.
"The top priorities are the protection of single sex spaces and making sure that transgender adults are free to live their lives as they wish without fear of persecution whilst maintaining proper checks and balances within the system. That will report back in the summer^

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/06/14/boris-johnson-could-scrap-plans-let-people-change-gender-leaked/

For me, it seems Labours core values are identity politics, the narrative of the oppressed versa the privileged

Yes! And which is so ironic given the lefts automatic hatred of anything American, they've imported this sort of politics, wholesale.

Yes! And which is so ironic given the lefts automatic hatred of anything American, they've imported this sort of politics, wholesale

Well said. Some examples of American cultural imperialism are clearly okay.

Trans women are not men! Jeez

They are 'other'. They are certainly not women.

I am optimistic that Keir Starmer will actually listen to all the voices in the Labour Party and outside. He must have realised how toxic and polarised this issue is. He will have realised self-ID is a vote loser despite the loud support for it, especially within Labour.

I agree with this. I know a lot of people want a full reverse and apology from Labour, but I don't see it happening without the membership turning in on itself. The best thing Starmer can do at this stage (and let's remember, he didn't sign the pledge and has only ever made woolly statements about human rights etc.) is to stand back, watch the argument play out and dissipate without adding any fuel to the fire.

There's a long way to go to fix the misogyny problem in Labour, but this seems like a sensible start. I'm not convinced that the Tories are doing this out of some amazing commitment to women, so it suits all of us for Labour to strengthen their own position and provide a credible opposition in the future.

Until Labour are able to define woman, I won't be voting for them. 'Stepping back' is preferable to parroting a mantra, but it's no-where near enough to reverse the damage they've done to their credibility.