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^

Why? Because, unlike Mrs Browns Boys, the Labour Party was a big part of my life for a long time, and it hurts to acknowledge that they have treated women like shit. If you don't have that history with them then fair enough.

Floisme

Exactly the point for me. I'm 62, a coal miner's daughter's sister and granddaughter and brought up to support and believe in Labour.

I'm politically homeless since they decided to centre men's feelings above women's privacy, safety and rights in general.

At times it's felt like grief.

Labour is a misogynistic, anti-semitic, anti working class party mired in identity politics and wokeness. Who was the woman who was up for leadership who said babies are born without a sex ffs?! I dislike the conservative party but Labour scare me.

Her name is Dawn Butler and I no longer have any respect for her and find her deliberately stupid, eminently untrustworthy and anti-woman.

I think many GC women cling to their vision of Labour, hoping to somehow square that vision with the reality of Labour you have described so perfectly.

It's like longing for an abusive boyfriend who love bombed you at the start of the relationship.

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.

Totally agree with this but the line does have to be drawn somewhere and I am happy to let someone without a penis into women's spaces no matter if they are male or female. If they have a penis they are not welcome. It's that simple for me. I am astounded by how women are treated in this matter and thankful that people like JK stand up for us. I honestly do not understand how anyone can accept women's erasure as a good thing - yet many females do

i'm pretty sure they will stand back with some woke cookie when women and kids and parents being thrown under the bus by gender theory too. as they used to be.

James Kirkup writes about this in the Spectator and says Labour has a choice to make. He also praises WPUK and the grassroots organisations that many denizens of this board have been actively involved. He states this was key at applying the brakes to a lobby that seemed to have captured most institutions and dominated the narrative. Great article.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-the-government-s-shift-on-the-gender-recognition-act-means-for-trans-rights

Totally agree with this but the line does have to be drawn somewhere and I am happy to let someone without a penis into women's spaces no matter if they are male or female

I'm not. How do you enforce it in practice?

Thanks for the article Bovary. It's good, as I have come to expect from Jame Kirkup.
However I disagree with him on this bit:
Some, on both sides, might now hope that Sir Keir Starmer will pick a side.....I expect and even hope that he will not do so. It doesn’t make political sense for him to inflame a party row on an issue that’s still marginal for most voters.

He might be correct about it still being marginal for most voters but I think Kirkup is under estimating how much the Labour Party have pissed off some of their female members - the ones who do the thankless but essential work of persuading people to come out and vote.

I remember a number of threads before the last election about rude and totally clueless party canvassers who clearly weren't up to the job. I don't think that was a coincidence.

James not Jame - sorry if you're reading JK!

Labour is definitely in a bind with this one and props to the Tories for setting this elephant trap for them. That's politics.

Whose vote does Labour care most about courting? Does it want to win back those Red Wall seats - three of which are very close to me, Stoke on Trent, and all used to be fervently Labour. They didn't like Corbyn and they wanted Brexit which partly accounts for them switching to the Tories last December, or not voting at all. They tend to be fairly traditional in their views. This isn't an issue that will bring them back.

The young people whom Labour seem to court the most will go for it for sure. But you can't win elections just on young people and the woke crowd. Labour has to decide.

I was a member of Amnesty for decades until they allied with Mermaids and I ended my membership - and sent them a (calm, not ranty) email explaining why. I got an email in reply full of patronising tosh explaining to me that TWAW etc.

That is one of the most infuriating things - the belief (or dogma) promoted by a lot of "be kind" type woke people, especially younger ones, that anyone GC is that way because they're old and clueless and don't understand proper modern-day enlightenment and the One True Path - along with the total misrepresentation of us as the same old bigots who objected to gay rights in the 70s and 80s. (Conveniently failing to acknowledge that we're largely made up of feminists,lefty liberals and lesbians... doh.) This attitude seriously afflicts a lot of Labour members / MPs too.

A man who has his genitals removed is not a woman. Our entire bodies are different, skeleton, muscles, hormones, physical strength, size. When we make new humans our bodies achieve things that males are simply not capable of. We are different, no worse, no better but different.

We have to really lose the notion that a woman is a man without a penis. It’s misogyny.

Amnesty International. The wonderful group that loves to tell women, what women are while being very certain what the difference is, when encouraging the prostitution of them.

I am so old I remember when Amnesty International was just an organisation for trying to get prisoners of conscience freed from jails overseas. Now it's all about telling women what to do with their bodies and centring men and men's needs.

What the hell happened?

I see the Mayor of London isn't standing back:

I’m dismayed that the Govt has made a u-turn on its own consultation to make the Gender Recognition Act more straightforward.

twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/1272505849181810688

I find it flabbergasting that Amnesty of all organisations has gone down this path, because they deal with, and supposedly oppose, sex-based persecution of women around the world, and should have a detailed understanding of it. Why the hell do they think women are persecuted as they are and lack so many rights around the world? Would they like to send Karen White to join Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe in her cell? Or would they maybe not do that to her?

So Khan thinks the votes of the TRAs and those who support them matter more than the women who've raised genuine and real objections to gender self ID? Glad I dont' live in London so won't have to not vote for him.

Sadiq Khan has been consistently useless on this issue, going all the way back to 2018 when he condemned the lesbian protesters at Pride for ‘controversial’ slogans such as ‘lesbian = female homosexual‘.

I think some of the party leadership are becoming spooked by the unpleasant behavior of many trans activists, and it's making them "think" about the issue.

Good.

Baby steps....!

There are some good articles on Amnesty and how funders influence their policy, especially regarding prostitution. That was a top-down decision, from what I have seen. Amnesty are going through a major funding crisis so can’t afford a ‘conscience’ - ironic if it were not so sad.

I find it flabbergasting that Amnesty of all organisations has gone down this path

They've all gone down this path. All the big charities. And government departments and many private companies too. They all want to look Woke because they've been cleverly convinced that not to support this is to be homophobic and old fashioned. It's so obviously Emperor's New Clothes. No one dares speak out or say anything different. It's obedience and conformity. It's Milgram and Zimbardo. It's so fecking obvious to me. Why isn't it obvious to everyone?

I suppose they were infiltrated. I don't support them any more either.

Sad about Labour.

Hating the way BLM is getting hijacked by TLM. They're really pushing it.

I also think JKR's efforts are extremely important too. When a clearly left-leaning, compassionate, extremely charitable and thoughtful person of her stature refuses to tow the woke line, it helps others to think "why would she stick her neck out to say that - she doesn't seem like a bigot generally" and start to open their minds to the issues.

I think some of the party leadership are becoming spooked by the unpleasant behaviour of many trans activists, and it's making them "think" about the issue.

One can only hope! Taking the side of the abusers is not a good look for a party that is supposed to be for the underdog the unequal and the minorities who needed protection!