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^

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.

This.

If KS is starting to become wary of the trans activist arguments, he is not going to come out and say this out loud at this moment, nor would it be politic for him to do so.

He is (wisely) making a vague non committal statement and then standing back to see how things play out. Changing the Labour party's stance on the trans issue will probably be easier in a couple of years time as more people hit their personal peak trans.

Totally agree with your whole post MissLawls, and yes they all have. But you'd think Amnesty staff, at least some of them, would have persecution of women on the basis of sex right in their faces every day, by the nature of their work.

I guess they just sacked those who could see it!

Trans women are not men! Jeez

As an actual female woman of the becunted variety, who happens to meet the terms of the descriptor "trans", thank you very much, New Poster, for agreeing that I am not a man. It's ever so validating, when people plop in to champion my right not be kicked out of the woman club just for not liking the feminine fripperies.

Transwomen are still men though.

Guess someone needs to tell Sadiq Khan. Picture with obligatory blue-haired fool. I miss the days of signalling how different you were from all those ordinary boring people by being a goth or an emo.

Amnesty has always had a high-handed stance, out of tune with reality and the will of their members. They wouldn't campaign for Nelson Mandela as a prisoner of conscience. They remained neutral on abortion rights until 2007 and have actively supported prostitution since 2013.

They got it wrong then and they have got wrong now.

He is (wisely) making a vague non committal statement and then standing back to see how things play out.
In that case he, as leader, needs to make sure his own party toes the same line - maybe starting with the Mayor of London. Otherwise he looks weak, not wise.

Totally agree with your whole post MissLawls, and yes they all have. But you'd think Amnesty staff, at least some of them, would have persecution of women on the basis of sex right in their faces every day, by the nature of their work.

Thank you very much @JoysOfString. It's very disheartening. Amnesty was an organisation I used to respect and support. No more. I never give money now to any large charities. Only very small ones that interact directly with their clients such as the benevolent societies that give money to people in need and tend to do it quickly because you can act quickly when you're small. I also give to my old college for the student hardship fund. I won't give to any of the large ones anymore. I'm becoming increasingly convinced they exist as all bureaucracies do for their own benefit and the original purpose has long been lost!

I miss the days of signalling how different you were from all those ordinary boring people by being a goth or an emo.

Or even being gender non-conforming, as so many fabulously were, without it having anything to do with their sex.

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

The BLM organisation was started by three black women who identify as "queer" and that "queer" agenda has always central to that movement. Blacks who do not support "queer" rights and Marxist gobbledygook support black lives matter, but not that organisation.

I think there are a lot of you expecting a lot from Starmer.

Have you forgotten that he signed a similar pledge to the other candidates, saying the same thing, but omitting that WPUK members were transphobic and should be expelled from the Party? Because he recognises libel when he sees it, being a lawyer. And isn't totally stupid.

JoysOfString

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.

At this point, I wouldn't judge JKR for using her right to "up sticks" and decamp to Monaco or some such place (leaving only holiday homes here) and taking her £££££££££££ income tax money with her.

She could then (if she wished to) repurpose what she would have paid in taxes to honest charities.

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

This, in spades. I have a good Labour MP who takes that view.

I wouldn't touch the BlackLivesMatter Org with somebody else's barge pole!

I care about Black womens (and mens) lives. A different thing to the BLM Org when you actually look into what they have to say.

He is (wisely) making a vague non committal statement and then standing back to see how things play out.

as may did. so we are here.

I think there are a lot of you expecting a lot from Starmer.
Of course I'm expecting a lot from Starmer. Why shouldn't we - he's the leader of the opposition.

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'.

This is heartening if true. I suspected it might be the case that many many people didn't vote Labour because of this - they're just (like me) all too scared to say so openly. When you employ a hugely aggressive and intimidating position which doesn't stand up to logical or fact-based scrutiny you risk the majority rejecting it but staying very silent about it.

The problem is the woke TRA crowd live in social media bubbles and don't know what real people think. Many of them think they're so liberal and want to help people but they don't actually want to hear from people who are really living life on the edge - whose reality is so painful and difficult that the idea you can 'identify' into anything just because of your inner feelings is frankly hugely insulting and damaging. And the fact that so much time and effort is devoted to this ideology in the political party which is supposed to represent them is a huge kick in the teeth.

Of course I'm expecting a lot from Starmer. Why shouldn't we - he's the leader of the opposition.
I'm just pointing it that I have seen no indication that he is sympathetic towards GC women and any signals that he has put out has indicated the opposite.

I was extremely torn, but gritted my teeth last general election and voted Labour.

Unless they pull some kind of 180, which I very much doubt, I won't be making that mistake again.

Sorry - in that case I probably agree with you MaMa
In fairness I don't hold Starmer responsible for the way the party has treated the concerns of GC women up until now. But he's the leader now and it's his job to sort it out. And it's no good the party asking for my patience or goodwill as it's all used up.

The thing is though by simply not bleating TWAW from the rooftops, and conspicuously holding back from full commitment, Starmer is IMO sending us a potentially pro-GC signal. It's very easy to go with the woke flow because there is no downside to that, and there will be a lot of pressure on him to do that - and he didn't.

I know it's depressing that he's not doing more, but I still see it as a good sign.

(Not that I'm trying to cling onto Labour as "my" party - those days are long gone...)

As an actual female woman of the becunted variety,

Just wanted to say how much I enjoy the word "becunted" and I intend using it at every possible opportunity.

Labour: take the needs of women in prison, in rape crisis centres, in locked psychiatric wards, trying to make a living from women's sports (or indeed - witness the current GMB fiasco - trying to make any sort of living at all), take the safeguarding of children seriously rather that pushing off-label prostate cancer drugs at them

People seem to be under the impression that locked psychiatric wards have been single-sex at some point… with exceptions for specialist units, they're not, and haven't been for decades. In more recent years, they claim to require psych wards to have "single sex accommodation" — what this actually means is that men's and women's sleeping areas have to be in different parts of the ward, that you don't have to walk past opposite-sex bedrooms to get to an appropriate toilet, and that there's a women's lounge (which, in the last ward I was on, you did have to walk past the men's bedrooms to get to — well away from the busy central part of the ward, down a long, corridor, with the lights rarely turned on in the lounge because no women ever went in there for obvious reasons, and plenty of parts of it not visible from the doorway) in addition to the main day room.

Hence all the sexual assaults (and not just from other patients).

All women plus the odd transwoman would actually be a dramatic improvement.

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.

Once upon a time, there was a mantra that political parties won from the centre ground. So Blair moved labour to the right and Cameron moved the Tories to the left. It is why the Tories introduced gay marriage. A sap to liberals knowing their own right wing had no other political home. To an extent it was repeated over Brexit as right wing remainers wouldn't vote for Corbin.

If Starmer is looking to win next time around, he needs to get the core vote back and attract Tories and Lib Dem's. The maths for that don't favour the TWAW position.

I wish I could take the credit for it, RoyalCorgi, but I'm pretty sure I picked it up from someone else around here.

It is an excellent word.

I was bloody lucky when I got sectioned - the place I ended up was all women, one of whom didn't identify as a woman. Some of the staff were male though, which was very problematic for at least one of the women there.