Keir Starmer interview responds to transphobia in the Labour Party

[GreenUp]

Not sure if this has already been discussed but saw on twitter, Keir Starmer gave an interview to BBC South East and was asked about what can be done about transphobia.

Q: Transphobia What needs to be done?

A: "I think we've got to improve the situation here. The Gender Recognition Act is a step in the right direction. It doesn't go far enough. But what we've got to do is detoxify this discussion. We've got people having a very bitter argument. If we're really going to make progress, and I think we can, we need to have a much better debate about it so we can actually make that progress."

Question starts at 01:33.

twitter.com/bbcsoutheast/status/1316778516222930944

All the quote tweets on this are from TRAs who are furious saying there is no debate and angry that he is "both siding" a civil rights issue .

I actually don't think these other parties want to be elected.

He only got selected because up til this point he knew when to keep his mouth shut. He thinks if he keeps relatively neutral he won't be thrown under the bus with the others.

The Gender Recognition Act is a step in the right direction. It doesn't go far enough.

The GRA needs to be repealed. It creates a falsehood in law. Kier Starmer knows this. I won't vote for labour again until they stop capitulating to a small, vicious bunch of bullies.

It's a politicians answer on a subject he knows is deeply toxic. He is never going to come out publicly and support the position of someone like Rosie Duffield, the fact that he hasn't outright gone TWAW is itself very telling, no?
Anything less than 100% support makes you a bigot and he is saying that 'we' need to have a better debate. That's not capitulation.
It's actually quite a smart answer. They are carefully chosen words.

This is a repeat of the anti Semitism debacle. We have a female MP subject to a torrent of abuse, in fear of her life, and Starmer is doing nothing. In fact he's tacitly siding with the opposition

Yes.

That thread is awful. I reckon it needs to be printed in a major paper. Ideally a left leaning one.

They are comparisons antisemitism to transphobia within the party and when the first person (terfsulike) posts that maybe women don't want men in their loos the response is to call her a "rat".

And no support whatsoever for Rosie Duffield, instead they bring up her private life to smear her further.

There needs to be Another New Labour, one that focuses on workers rights, women's rights and, well, sanity. The woke can stick with the actual antisemites and those without a backbone need not apply.

Beamur Anything less than 100% support makes you a bigot and he is saying that 'we' need to have a better debate. That's not capitulation. It's actually quite a smart answer. They are carefully chosen words. Not smart, I suggest this is what Keir Starmer does, he fence sits and hopes. The only trouble with fence sitters is, that when they do make a move, it is invariably the wrong one, because making decisions is not what they do.

@Beamur

It's a politicians answer on a subject he knows is deeply toxic. He is never going to come out publicly and support the position of someone like Rosie Duffield, the fact that he hasn't outright gone TWAW is itself very telling, no? Anything less than 100% support makes you a bigot and he is saying that 'we' need to have a better debate. That's not capitulation. It's actually quite a smart answer. They are carefully chosen words.

Yes that’s my feeling too. If he really believes TWAW he’d say it, if he really thought Rosie was out of line, he’d say so (though of course he should outright say the attacks on her are horrendous)

He desperately wants to take the heat out of it but the problem for him is that that’s a forlorn hope. It’s waaaaay too far gone for that. There is no way to reduce the heat for him unless he boots out a load of ppl from the party and he won’t do that, at least not yet

He thinks the GRA should go further? And do what, exactly?

Totally unsurprising comments from the Fence-Sitter in Chief.

Good point from nepeta though, and there will come a day, I think, when we'll have to take that line: our sexed identities are just as valid as others' identities, and they are being proper phobic bellends by telling us that woman: adult human female isn't a valid identity.

Hold on, the question wasn't about transphobia, the question was about his party being unable to stem the gibbering contempt towards women both in and out with the party. It could not be clearer that 'transphobia' is used as a handy merkin to allow this.

His answer essentially confirmed that it works, because his first fucking reference in the answer was about the GRA not going far enough, and he made no attempt to underline that women should not be subject to this, either in or outside of the party.

He didn't just 'both sides' this, he told women they were being a bit too bitter about all the contemptuous death and rape threats and that the GRA, the legal cudgel which has been used to allow this, should go further.

In a growing list of worthies, Starmer can kiss my bitter, strident arse.

I love Keir Starmer. He's amazing and did great things for women when he was Director of public prosecutions.
He's a lawyer, so he's reflective and not going to be drawn on a position until he's made up his mind. But I think he's also not afraid to take unpopular decisions and he will stick by them.
I'd rather have someone reflective who takes time to decide but then is consistent than a knee jerking flip flopping hot mess like Boris.
Also - I think he's right that its toxic and can't progress without becoming more objective. We want him to stand up for women, but there are a large number of people who want him to stand up for yrans rights. So he's got tofind thebalance that will work.
Good luck to him. Most promising politician we have had in years (and I'm not a labour voter)

women, get back in your box. Labours view of women since it's inception as a party

@ QuentinWinters I hope you are right. Perhaps everyone on this thread should email Keir setting out the issues for women. A similar exercise to the flowers for Rosie. A show of strength of feeling to Keir.

That question he was asked wasn’t actually a “on one hand, we have... and on the other hand, we have....”. What was actually said was - you have a labour MP who verbally attacked a domestic violence survivor and had to apologise and you have a labour MP who is a domestic violence survivor and is being attacked and threatened. It’s the same thing and he didn’t have to mention the trans issue/GRA. All he had to do was to condemn abuse and threats of violence.

@JoodyBlue

@ QuentinWinters I hope you are right. Perhaps everyone on this thread should email Keir setting out the issues for women. A similar exercise to the flowers for Rosie. A show of strength of feeling to Keir.

I emailed Keir Starter some time ago. I never got a reply.

I think he hopes that all of this will simply go away.

I think a lot of MPs genuinely believe that women are overreacting to the idea that trans rights pose a threat to women's rights. They think that all women need to do is meet a jolly nice male-bodied-person-who-identifies-as-a-woman. Then everyone will sit down and have a nice cup of tea and realise that we can all be friends. Any silly little concerns such as male-pattern violence, male anatomy in female changing areas, male-bodied people taking places in women's sport and the bastardisation of the English language will all just fade away.

Unfortunately, it's not working. Women are realising that this ideology, taken to its logical conclusion, is endangering women's safety, women's career prospects (in the field of sports) and the words women use to define themselves. Funnily enough, women aren't too happy about this. The more women learn, the less likely they are to be comfortable with trans ideology.

This is in direct contrast to other civil rights issues, where people normally seem to become more supportive the more one learns.

Writing is a good idea, though. Make it clear that this issue isn't going anywhere.

We want him to stand up for women, but there are a large number of people who want him to stand up for yrans rights. So he's got tofind thebalance that will work.

He is never going to come out publicly and support the position of someone like Rosie Duffield, the fact that he hasn't outright gone TWAW is itself very telling, no?

She said only women have cervixes for fuck’s sake. How much more basic does it need to get for this spineless man - who as previous DPP has forensic insight into methods of bullying/harassment/rape/murder of women - to stick up for women?

He needs to stand by Rosie Duffield. What's happening to her is not on. He's a weak coward of a man.

He is the leader. He needs to sort this out. The buck stops with him.

All he had to do was to condemn abuse and threats of violence.

I agree with the anti-semitism analogy, but it’s worth having a salutary reminder that in very recent history, a young women Labour MP was murdered on a British street.

Has he forgotten - or does he just not care.

Labour needs a leader that will get to grips with the Momentum activist types or things are not going to change. They have hollowed out the party.

Oh fuck off with this softyl-softly 'toxic debate' and 'both sides need to sit down' bollocks. It's patronising nonsense.

Women have been trying to discuss these issues, only to be attacked viciously online, demonised, shut down, thrown out of their political parties, and even prevented from speaking amongst themselves about their own fucking rights by been cancelled and kicked out of venues.

Women are being steamrolled over massively in a situation that is not even debatable (Stonewall). People are showing utter ignorance and denial over safeguarding issues because a tiny number of loud, extremely aggressive aggressive and abusive people have come after and lobbied our politicians and made them deny things they see with their oen eyes that they would have seen as utter truth a few years ago.

Holy shit, this is not hard. Condemning threats and intimidation of women for talking about their reality and rights is NOT something that needs nuance. It really bloody isn't. I fucking despair today.

EdgeofaCoin
I think you are right.

The Gender Recognition Act is a step in the right direction. It doesn't go far enough.

The GRA puts into law the idea that some people can choose which sex they are. It's nonsense which should be repealed, not taken further.

He is not a friend to women, but that won't stop me lobbying the Labour Party to understand the effect this is having on women and girls.

He's a lily livered twat. Shameful performance.

He totally failed to speak out against violence against women. He tacitly condoned it. When will he be asked to address misogyny in the Labour Party?

When will he be asked to address misogyny in the Labour Party?

Well - they do want misogyny as a hate crime based on gender and not sex.

So all they need to do it get rid of all the GC members women with an understanding of actual reality- and voila - misogyny addressed... oh no wait...

It was a very good question from the BBC SE Political Editor and a good interview all round. If you are reading, thank you for trying to pin KS down.

You'd think he'd have the basic human decency to stand up for Duffield.

What I'd like to know is how common pro-self-ID/anti-woman views are amongst Labour Party members. Are they just a very vocal minority? Or do they represent the views of the majority of members? I'm working on the assumption that Starmer needs to appeal to two constituencies: the ordinary voters (who mostly no doubt think the trans obsession is rubbish) and Labour Party members. Presumably he doesn't want to risk tearing the party apart again in the way that happened with anti-Semitism.

Thing is, at some point he's going to have to confront this head-on at some point. It's not going away.