Kier shows his colours

[averylongtimeago]

From Facebook, I guess he has picked a side.
51% of the population just don't count.

@Quaagars

Blah my flowers failed should be

I appreciate them I don't see my viewpoint as unusual, I have said it is the minority of trans people that are harmful. My honest view is the ability to identify as female is harmful. Wearing a skirt does not make a female. The ability to sculpt eyebrows does not make a female (good job as that would make me a fella )

My honest view is the ability to identify as female is harmful. Wearing a skirt does not make a female. The ability to sculpt eyebrows does not make a female

Same, never wear make up here and wear what the heck I like.
Doesn't make me any less female

My honest view is the ability to identify as female is harmful.

This is what I can never understand, the insistence on identifying 'as a woman' (which is nonsense) rather than accepting that there are many ways to be a man.

Certainly it should never have been made legal for anyone to falsify their birth certificate and passport etc. I had no idea about this until recently and I think the majority of the population have no idea still.

This is what I can never understand, the insistence on identifying 'as a woman' (which is nonsense) rather than accepting that there are many ways to be a man

See, this is where we presumably differ.

Why automatically many ways to be a man?
It's possible to be a woman and no having to be for stereotypes
Bollox to that

In other words can just be "you" without being stereotypical man or woman.

Why automatically many ways to be a man?

Because if you're a man, and you develop a fixed belief that you're a woman, you're still a man. So you can be a man who relieves the stress of this belief by acting in 'womanly' ways but you can't actually become a woman.

Nothing bollox about that.

@Quaagars

This is what I can never understand, the insistence on identifying 'as a woman' (which is nonsense) rather than accepting that there are many ways to be a man

See, this is where we presumably differ.

Why automatically many ways to be a man?
It's possible to be a woman and no having to be for stereotypes
Bollox to that

Erm, nothing to do with stereotypes.

If you are an adult human male who likes feminine things, you are a man.
If you are an adult human male who likes masculine things, you are a man.
If you are an adult human male who likes feminine and masculine things, you are a man.
If you are an adult human female who likes feminine things, you are a woman.
If you are an adult human female who likes masculine things, you are a woman.
If you are an adult human female who likes feminine and masculine things, you are a woman.

There are many many many ways to be a man, or a woman. As the only thing that makes you a man or a woman is your sex. Stereotypes do not come into it.

@gardenbird48

Did he manage to name any of the trans people being remembered on trans day of remembrance?

Seeing as 0 transgender people were murdered in the U.K. in 2020 and 0 transgender people in 2019 it might be tricky.
Or do they include the poor teenagers who may have died because they were taking unlicensed, unregulated drugs prescribed by certain suspended doctors in Spain?

Highlighting again this excellent post.

I see the thread has gone awol.

My twopenneth:

Kier is, as said upthread, parroting. He has to appease the furious hard left after the JC stuff. (JC was always going to be reinstated in the party. KS had to show a hard line on that one.)

"Fight" is an ironic term of phrase as possible have said.

Yup awol indeed.
What we have learned:

1. Trans day of remembrance didnt remember any trans people, and is thus a nonsense
2. This was deliberate to create a sense that trans people are unsafe here in the UK, which they are not. Teenage girls are though, as gardenbird48 points out.
3. Keir starmer probably isn't with the TRAs, or he would have said TWAW/TMAM
4. KS is however pretty spineless, and God knows what he would say when asked who he's 'fighting ' against....

Spineless. That's the word I am looking for.

Spineless. That's the word I am looking for.

Agree. There's nobody there. No idea what he thinks, what he believes, what he stands for or what he'd do in power, it's a manufactured image parroting carefully designed stuff by an advisory team.

But that was it in the run up to the leadership election. Three women speaking out clearly about what they stood for (all of them insane, but honest that this is what they believed) and Starmer saying nothing at all. I had more respect for any one of those women.

Thank you Neurotrashwarrior. I was thinking about this earlier and checked for other ‘Days of Remembrance’ as I couldn’t recall hearing of this being used for anything other than Remembrance Sunday to remember the millions of people killed during war.
Interestingly Wikipedia was updated in October and placed Transgender Day of Remembrance in the list just above Remembrance Sunday (for no apparent reason ie alphabetical, chronological etc) and is the only other uk event like this.

I honestly find it quite concerning and dare I say insulting that commemoration of the deaths of tens of millions of people in conflict (wiki says just military but I always thought it was for everyone) is being aligned with this cause. Are we saying that the regrettable deaths of 8 transgender people in the last 12 years (I haven’t got any info for prior to that) should be treated in the same way as deaths of millions and millions of people? (I watched JoJo Rabbit last night which was a bit of a tough watch)

We don’t have remembrance days willy nilly- it would dilute the hugely important message.

Actually I don't agree with spineless. I think it's more that he's cautious, hard to read and picks his battles and when to start them.
At some point he'll have to show his hand, but there was no way he was ever going to do that either during a leadership election or on a day of remembrance.

Transgender people have the same human rights as the rest of us. But ‘trans rights’ that they push/demand/fight for go well beyond human rights and actively destroy the human rights of others: the right to demand others see you as you would like to see yourself; the right to compel the speech of others; the right to be considered part of an oppressed group that you are not part of; the right to have safeguarding rules removed; the right to selectively hide their past; the right to destroy women’s sports and single sex spaces; the right to destroy the statistical base which women rely on for everything from services to appropriate medical treatment; the right to prosecute women standing up for their human rights for ‘hate’; the right to censure the speech of women; the right to use women’s bodies for babies; and the right to demand women lose their franchise.

If this post is deleted then that is a example of how ‘trans rights’ go far beyond their human rights to the destruction of the human rights of others.

Aesop I have copied and saved your post.

With your permission, I shall use it when I see people I know posting about trans rights.

If they then decide to drop me, that's their loss and I'm better off without them anyway.

Any death is to be regretted, no one here I'm sure wishes harm or murder to trans people despite the many threats from TRAs.
However compare the stark difference between the actual numbers of trans people killed (detailed up thread) and the horrific statistics for the murders of women and girls and the political interest in both.

I will look out for Kier's response to the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women this Wednesday.

Lots of depressing (and upsetting) information here: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/22/if-im-not-in-on-friday-i-might-be-dead-chilling-facts-about-uk-femicide?fbclid=IwAR3Rr44YwRjCdNJ0FTvJ2kmyVKBBaECBAeLRrvWMLRRknUZg5qRm5-mgk

Maybe next year a little sense will kick in, when the comparators have been thought through. I live in hope.

i don't see my viewpoint as unusual

No i think its one held by a lot of people on here, certainly by me 😀

But its good when people state their views like you have

The Remembrance Day is a really good point - can anyone just set them up. Why not a Remembrance day for all the women who have died due to childbirth. That has more in common with Remembrance day; they have given their lives for the future of humanity.

"Actually I don't agree with spineless. I think it's more that he's cautious, hard to read and picks his battles and when to start them. "

I agree with you. "Spineless" would be a full capitulation to the TWAW mantra.

I think I've managed to gather a few of my thoughts into a sort of coherence that makes sense to me at least. I agree that safe spaces are needed in some contexts. I agree that there is something quite problematic about the narrative that if one doesn't fit a particular gender norm then one must be trans, and any attempt to change that perception must be transphobic. I do have a lot of concerns about treatment and the lack of proper scrutiny and debate about that.

I do though think that in many instances an inclusive definition of woman can coexist with women's rights, and that not to explore what this territory is is "anti trans" in that it fundamentally denies the experience of gender dysphoria. I do feel that on this board people get shouted down if they think, for example, that perhaps Guides and office loos can be inclusive of trans women. Being trans is a protected characteristic too so really it's not ok to say that trans people just have to lump living in a binary world or always be "othered" and viewed as a threat. There is imo space for discussion and debate about what the respective needs are and where the balance of harms lies. I don't always think this board fosters that discussion. I do not expect everyone always to be "nice" but there's no real need for the browbeating that goes on sometimes. I felt properly upset yesterday and I am not normally a delicate flower when it comes to debate. One of the posts I particularly objected to has since been deleted so perhaps the mods also felt that some posts had crossed a line in terms of the generalisations that were being made.

Fwiw I agree KS is polished and perhaps too inscrutable. I also think that he has to be- JC wore his convictions on his sleeve at all times and it was an absolute disaster for the labour party. He is perhaps also undecided. "Fight" was a poor choice of word, but then I think this board always feels unnecessarily like a fight too. It's a shame imo because it causes a lot of people to dismiss the arguments as anti trans rather than engage with them. A lot of posters said that was kind of fine by them as the issues speak for themselves. I disagree. I don't think it's black and white at all.

@Babdoc
Brilliant!

Longestlurker
I don’t think many people object to the quiet, dysphoric transwoman quietly going about her business. This is not the person I and many of us on these boards object to. It is the very male behaviour of TRA’s threatening to rape, kill and erase us. If anything TRA’s also hate the quiet, dysphoric transwoman. She is often on the side of natal women, a feminist herself. Consequently TRA’s see her as betraying them and have nicknamed these transwomen TRUSCUM.

Why are you conflating the two?