Keir Starmer Sky News

[AppleJane]

Keir Starmer refused to confirm Lloyd Russell-Moyle will be sacked.

God you single-issue feminists are tedious.

They said the same about the suffragettes.

As the working class now vote Tory (thank goodness) I am hoping Labour will be so right on/woke they will not regain power so anything that helps that be achieved so much the better.

If the issue is sacked RLB for forwarding on a tweet on trans issues and did not sack some chap who wrote about something to do with domestic violence and then apologised I don't think the lack of apology is the reason for the different treatment - it is that certainly issues seem to be top of the list like trans and BLM and women's rights as ever come right down the pile even though we are 50% of the population rather than 3% who are black and the tiny number who are trans.

I am disappointed but I understand Kier’s position. I hope my email and the others he has received on this subject helps him to realise the strength of feeling.

I think that it is sensible to dodge the issue at the moment. The GRC is off. There are two major court cases coming up. JKR has opened a lot of people’s eyes. I am one of the 87% of people who would say they support trans rights and disagree with transphobia. I don’t agree with a definition of transphobia which means includes talking about FGM and rapists in women’s prison. You can have trans rights and women’s rights and with a conversation we can have both. There is one group who wants to shut down that conversation and it isn’t us.

Slightly confused by some of the replies to your posts

Im very confused merry, not slightly...very

grabthars is a fantastic poster, certainly not bigoted

Well let it split then

Why are we coddling a political party cos it sure feels like it

They get paid to do a job. Representing their constituents not just some

All of them

Why are we asked to coddle a bunch of politicians

“There is a lot of debate on the theory of gender and sex, it’s all terribly interesting and there are a million PhD theses to be written about it,” said Kelley

Sure, some of it is 'interesting' and entertaining to read, but it generally has little or no value in real world application, or it leads to disastrous policies like self ID and "gender-affirming" treatment of nonconforming kids with hormones and surgery.

"What you see instead is that the overwhelming majority of people [83%] don’t see themselves as transphobic and don’t agree with transphobia. And the majority position around things like bathrooms is that women feel fine about it.”

What do you think?

It's not so much what I think but what I know. Yes, most of us are indeed not transphobic in any sense of the word. Not even here on the feminist chat. Not even us wicked old witches. Because we are not motivated by animosity towards people who identify as trans, but by concern for women and girls who are suffering when an ideology that teaches that the root cause of our oppression is non-existent leads to the erosion of our rights.

And as a lot of surveys have shown by now, the majority of women do have an issue with both self-identification of legal sex and with turning female-only facilities into mixed-sex ones by granting access to males who identify as trans. Even one commissioned by Pink News. Much to their chagrin.

It's all in how you ask the question.

Do you think anyone should be discriminated against for identifying as trans?

Of course not, what a horrible idea.

Do you think all women and girls should lose their existing rights to protect a group of vulnerable males?

What the fuck? Hard no.

But the latter is exactly what Stonewall campaigned for. Publicly. For years. So until the new head of that organisation acknowledges this and equally publicly declares they no longer seek to do so, what I think is, see the new head of Stonewall. Same as the old head.

And the majority position around things like bathrooms is that women feel fine about it

This is a deliberate attempt to focus on 'bathrooms' (for goodness sake just make sure that there is adequate unisex provision), conflate US right wing religious opposition to trans rights with UK left wing feminist campaigning for women's rights (we don't have 'public bathrooms' in the UK) and direct attention away from discussion of refuges, prisons and sport.

Or he could be a man of principle because this would be an ideal opportunity to say new leader & I'm welcoming women into the party

He could, but this is politics and it doesn't work like that. Trans activists and the other extremists have spent years building their factions within Labour and Starmer can't just dismantle that overnight. You can see how deep this shit has gone when even someone like Angela Rayner - who talks all the time about the importance to her of women's rights - is brainwashed enough to sign the Labour Trans Pledge!

That said, I definitely think he should have publicly rebuked LRM and apologised to JKR himself.

LilianBland I must have worded my original post extremely badly because you seem to have interpreted it as saying the polar opposite of what I was trying to say. To clarify, again, my post was directed not at GC feminists, but at the previous poster who believes that TWAW. My position is that GC feminists are from many diverse backgrounds and consider the needs of all women, whilst the feminists who believe TWAW are mostly from a white MC background and have only considered the issue of how it will affect them and not how it will affect disadvantaged women. Therefore GC feminism most closely aligns with what is often described as "intersectionality" while the TRA position most closely aligns with what is often described as "White feminism", but which would probably more accurately be termed something like "privaledge feminism". I hope that clarifies things and I apologise for any offense caused by my clumsy wording.

Do you think all women and girls should lose their existing rights

This is on the Stonewall website:

www.stonewall.org.uk/women-and-equalities-select-committee-inquiry-transgender-equality

"A review of the Equality Act 2010 to include ‘gender identity’ rather than ‘gender reassignment’ as a protected characteristic and to remove exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces"

Without single sex exemptions that allow for specific services for women, or any clear understanding of what 'woman' means, women are effectively removed from the Equality Act.

Thanks rufus and merry!

Tantie she’s minimising and maximising.

It’s not just bathrooms is it? I’ll keep listing this forever- prisons, rape crisis centres, hospital wards, army barracks, boxing rings, rugby teams, elite sports, lesbian groups, schools etc.
Spaces women have limited autonomy, funds and peer support. Situations where women will have no options if they feel uncomfortable. Situations where women express a preference. Situations like pregnancy (and all the employment discrimination that comes with it) which affect the same people whatever you want to name them.

She’s maximising one groups vulnerability and then minimising that it’s a theoretical issue for another ( rather than a very practical, real life one)

We do need to agree on womanhood.

Surely the difference is that RLB repeated something that could be seen as a criticism of the state of Israel and RLM didn't. That he is a man helps a lot too. That they both seem to despise ordinary women is neither here nor there. That doesn't even make it to the short list of things that matter to Labour.

Perhaps one day I'll be able to support Labour again, but not anytime soon

ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings My sincere apologies. I completely misunderstood what you were getting at. I couldn’t understand the concern for vulnerable women, followed by the ‘white middle class women’ comments. I understand now, what you were getting at.

Hi. Help please. I read a brilliant Medium article about Lloyd Russell Moyes earlier, which was linked from a thread here (not sure which thread) and I can’t find it now. Can anyone direct me to it or re link.Ta.

The feminists pushing the idea that TWAW are, from my observation, coming from the same place - they are almost exclusively white MC highly educated, well off, and highly privileged.

I've been active on the issue IRL for over two years now and I've been in a room filled with hundreds of underprivileged, young women of all ethnic backgrounds enthusiastically cheering on the destruction of our rights. It's honestly a disconcerting and worrying feeling to hear a young black woman tell you that her experience of racism has been so horrendous that she feels more kinship to a vulnerable white male who identifies as trans than to the white women fighting for our rights.

There are women from all ethnic backgrounds, political persuasions, ages, classes, sexualities and beliefs on both sides of this debate. I think it's unhelpful to buy into the "white feminism" trope typically employed by the other side against us.

I do understand where you're coming from, and you're right that many influential women endorsing and promoting transgender ideology and legislation are indeed highly educated white and middle class, but that's not because underprivileged black women who agree with them don't exist. They simply are less visible in a majority white society where having a platform still depends on having access to power.

You’re problem is the fact that you’re viewing the women in here through your white middle class eyes

I find it interesting what people mean when they say 'middle class' in the first place. Middle class means different things to different people, and in different areas of the country. to some it simply means educated to a higher level, it does not mean being able to afford private health care etc.

I'm not even sure what social class has to do with the issue of women's spaces, services and sports, anyway. We all use at least some public facilities and services, and so do our children.

Besides, the issue of TRA ideology also transcends social class. It is about women as a class, regardless of their skin colour or socio-economic background.

Impatiens I know but it's same old for a very long time if he doesn't take any sort of stance. Not strongly condemning/sacking LRM makes a mockery of having a shadow minister for domestic violence....who also seems to have been silent over the hate aimed at JKR.

RLB was sacked be a use they wanted rid of her anyway so it was a good excuse. I'm glad RLB is sacked from her position. I dodnt vote Labour because of folk like her. Most women aren't that affected by trans peoples rights as far as I can see. But I do see the issue of women's spaces and competitive sport.

@littlbrowndog

Well let it split then

Why are we coddling a political party cos it sure feels like it

They get paid to do a job. Representing their constituents not just some

All of them

Why are we asked to coddle a bunch of politicians

Totally agree

I'm absolutely done with Labour. I was almost there but hoping Keir might have a brain and the bravery to stand up for women but he's a twat like all of them.

@Justhadathought

This X 1000

Ramping antagonism up by X1000 is what has got us to this position in the first place. this is a democracy, and the public need to have full information and broad discussion ( that they are currently not getting) in order to form a view.

Is this aimed at me? I was supporting BovaryX against a plopper who thinks women speaking is tedious.

It's not GC women who have ramped up antagonism. We tried talking, meeting, we asked to be invited to speak to politicians reforming legislation. We got de-platformed, attacked and picketed, and barred from a seat at the table to discuss legislation that could significantly harm us. Antagonism is rape threats and being called Nazis for speaking about periods and FGM. Women have continued to respond, despite all this provocation, in a measured and rational a way; through discussion, and by taking non violent action, making it clear we will not support businesses, institutions and political parties that want to trample all over our rights, and that we will go to court to defend those rights. We have thrown no fists and we have threatened no one.

Please point out the antagonism? Because antagonism is not asking the leader of the opposition to do his bloody job and answer a simple question.

medium.com/@GappyTales/misogyny-lurks-on-the-shadow-front-bench-e3fba8379149