Labour don't think sex is a protected characteristic in the EA.

[weaverbirds]

Latest 'why equality matters' statement from the LP. No mention of sex as a protected category.
Is this ignorance? Seems unlikely since it's Marsha de Cordova. So it must be gaslighting. I'm beyond angry.

labour.org.uk/latest/what-is-the-equality-act-of-2010-and-why-does-it-matter/?fbclid=IwAR2LLcUNbSgFcMboVoG7UjNQE6XCpWf9VYpNf95-j8-7j4EO0nsu4aaNl60

Sorry Absinthe, x post.

@Collidascope

mobile.twitter.com/MarshadeCordova/status/1311993483973062661

She's now posted this which is interesting.

now that is interesting.....she's already getting the 'oooh i hope nyou're not going to turn into a bigot' comments for posting it

The Labour party are fucked.

Shame. But here we are.

@Collidascope

mobile.twitter.com/MarshadeCordova/status/1311993483973062661

She's now posted this which is interesting.

Maybe Starmer has been on the phone ..

I don't think it matters how much fudging does or doesn't happen in response to what I hope will be a massive outcry. It really isn't possible to view the LP as anything other than misogynist.

Respect to the women who are fighting this from inside the party but they really are up there with the 'soul of a woman' Lib Dems, the 'non-man' Greens and the 'woman = using female pronouns and having a female name' SNP.

So many women are politically homeless...

Quite correct .

I,ve just read it again because I simply could not believe the had legt out sex. But there it is, a bright red headline: The Act protects against discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, ethnic origins, faith, age and nationality.

They also emphasise gender reassignment, knowing that many people wrongly believe that includes self-ID.

So, the Labour s deliberately misleading people about the law. They really have doubled fown for the trans lobby, haven’t they?

There's a much more optimistic reading of the statement.

Businesses, healthcare providers or employers can’t single out trans people thanks to the act. Trans people continue to face stigma and discrimination but this Act has helped strengthen their legal rights.

Very noticeably omits the expansive Stonewall interpretation that gender reassignment gives anyone the right to use whatever facilities matches their genderfeeling on the day.

If you were a transactivist, you would read her statement as a dog whistle to transphobic bigots.

Along with Starmer's deafening silence on the GRA, this suggests that the adults in the Labour party are trying to extricate themselves from the extreme TWAW position that dominated under Corbyn.

Marsha shared a video about the Equality Act at the same time/just before sharing this article on twitter, in which she includes sex.

Is she hopeless or deliberately not telling the truth (or both) ?

Agree, MerchedCymru. I held my nose and voted Labour last year, and kept my Labour MP, but I can't so it again. Breaks my heart.

I also agree Merched . I can’t imagine voting Labour again, the misogyny, the anti-semitism, the calibre of candidates.

It's positive however that she is getting absolutely torn apart on this, unanimously

mobile.twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1311689833908105216

Thanks Showme - that thread cheered me up. At least until I spotted this reminder:

"the Labour Party manifesto of 2019 said 'Labour will put women at the heart of our government and programme' and 'ensure that the single-sex-based exemptions contained in the Equality Act 2010 are understood and fully enforced in service provision."

I feel another letter to my MP / Keir Starmer coming on.

There's a much more optimistic reading of the statement.

I also read it this way, as perhaps the beginning of a very, very careful walkback. "You can't single out trans people" is entirely compatible with a GC interpretation of the Equality Act. Not mentioning sex as a protected characteristic is very strange, but then again, deliberately emphasising breastfeeding and pregnancy seems like a way of subtly shifting the emphasis in the conversation.

It's rather odd whatever spin you put on it; but it really didn't strike me as full-on TRA language.

for the men, not for you is this to replace For the Many Not The Few

What's going on now? Is MdC correcting herself? Am I mad or does this show a commitment to single sex spaces or at my east recognising that sex exists?

twitter.com/MarshadeCordova/status/1311993483973062661?s=20

Some days my heads spins so fast...

Kantastic, I'd like to believe that but I saw Marsha de Cordova speak last week when Liz Truss was questioned and she reaffirmed Labour's commitment to self-ID.

Perhaps Labour's comms department need to forget subtlety and revisit the 2019 manifesto quoted by MerchedCymru.

For the Men, Not for You — to replace For the Many Not The Few

@Collidascope

mobile.twitter.com/MarshadeCordova/status/1311993483973062661

She's now posted this which is interesting.

Beat me to it. Yes, that's very interesting.

The only way anything changes is if political parties /companies
/ institutions worry just as much about upsetting women as they do about upsetting the activists. Maybe that's starting to happen.

A few weeks ago I wasn't confused, now, the reverse ferreting has taken speed. A statement is immediately followed by a sort of retraction followed by a full reverse. Is it just me?

Maybe that's starting to happen.

If that is what's happening we should show support, even if it's just a glimpse, we should show support as the pile-on going the other way has already started.

It really is whoever shouts the loudest atm.

I wish I was on Twitter so show support, also my head is still spinning and it might just be a matter of hours before tweets are deleted.

Interesting recent tweet. I rather like RollonFriday - they've been playing a helpful role in uncovering some of the bullshit. And the comments are everything that you would hope. But it's frankly odd that Marsha de Cordova would pick up on this (is she a lawyer perhaps?) It's not very on brand for Labour, even now that operation Reverse Ferret is underway.

Labour contact form labour.org.uk/contact/
Only takes a few mins to send them a note that the article is miss representing the law