Oh god, Labour again.

[fakenina]

They are really determined to jump the shark on this, arn't they

labour.org.uk/about/how-we-work/nec-statement-women-shortlists-womens-officers-minimum-quotas-women/

Starmer has had plenty of opportunities to signal that he is not on board with this nonsense.
I think he will leave it until the next GE, at which point he will either go full on TWAW like Corbyn & McDonnell did, or the manifesto will include something vaguely sensible which will trigger another unedifying public wrangle with the TRA wing just before the election.
Actually, to be fair to Corbyn and McD, they somehow managed both.

We recognise that there is a diversity of views on what can be a complex and emotive issue for many members, but discussions within the Labour Party should never take the form of abuse or intimidation of anyone.Labour’s Code of Conduct is clear on acceptable behaviour by party members. This standard of behaviour will be enforced

These standards of behaviour will only be applied to anyone who disagrees with the party line, however; and this means that we have the right to impose a double standard where we see fit.

ListeningQuietly, I am a Tory voter and happy to support a party that has had not just one but two female prime ministers.
How many have Labour had? Oh yes... none.

Starmer has had plenty of opportunities to signal that he is not on board with this nonsense.I think he will leave it until the next GE

Don't count on it. you will just be very let down and disappointed. Starmer will do what he needs to do, and say what he needs to say to keep people on board with him. That's his role. He was elected to try to unify the party. But he will fail in that anyway...because the far left have their knives out and well and truly sharpened.

because the far left have their knives out and well and truly sharpened.

They will never forgive him for not supporting their Rosie Duffield witch hunt.

In adopting this approach, the Labour Party has verified that it is acting consistently with both the letter and spirit of the relevant legislation, the Equality Act 2010.

I wonder with whom they have verified that they acting in the 'spirit' of the law i.e. the Equality Act. Are they saying that the intention of the Act was actually that self identified trans women were actually deemed to be actual proper women when the Equality Act was written in 2010? If so why didn't the Act just say that it just protects anybody who says they are one of the groups in the list? Or am I missing something.

AWS are controversial to begin with, but they can be justified on the basis of specific structural barriers and prejudice faced by women, and on the basis that women are 50% of the population, therefore equal representation is a reasonable aim.

If women could simply identify out of being female, there wouldn't be any need for AWS.

Labour are of course free to push the fringe view that 'woman' is just a catch all term for 'minority group facing oppression', but they will relegate themselves to being a fringe party.

Oh great. Still politically homeless then.

Starmer is being useless over this issue but that statement dates from October 2019, or earlier, when Jeremy Corbyn was leader.

at which point he will either go full on TWAW like Corbyn & McDonnell did, or the manifesto will include something vaguely sensible which will trigger another unedifying public wrangle with the TRA wing just before the election.

Agree - and there won't be any avoiding the question because the Tories know this is a weak spot. Like it or not, GMTV has the audience that Starmer needs as voters, and Piers Morgan or equivalent will be looking for something that is clippable on Youtube. AWS that you can identify onto is like catnip.

Starmer is being useless over this issue but that statement dates from October 2019, or earlier, when Jeremy Corbyn was leader.

You are right and thanks for checking. But I think it's also relevant that the statement is still up. Starmer has tried to ignore the issue, but I don't think the Tories and right wing journalists will let him.

@nauticant

Starmer is being useless over this issue but that statement dates from October 2019, or earlier, when Jeremy Corbyn was leader.

no, there is a significant change. The policy under Corbyn was to keep the act with the exceptions for areas where it was reasonable to keep out transwomen but they are now committing to change the act to include gender for sex, meaning the concept of women as adult human femailes is meaningless in law.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

I might have to re-join just so I can resign my membership again... for the same fucking reason!!!!

Gaaaaaaaaaargh!!!!!

Ain't that the truth?

I left during the first AWS debacle. (Plus the sight of Corbyn laughing with his mate about the complete whitewash report on Labour's antisemetism while Luciana Berger left the room in tears.)

It's the whole "all women including vulnerable women" bullshit that annoys me.

Adult males are not vulnerable women ffs.

labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/news/

"Anyone attempting to breach Labour Party rules and subvert the intention of All Women Shortlists, women’s officers or minimum quotas for women will be dealt with via our established safeguards, selection procedures and disciplinary measures."

I remember being "dealt with" at school...

Honestly, Labour pick the weirdest hills to die on!

@NonCisWoman

Honestly, Labour pick the weirdest hills to die on!

They sure do.

[quote fakenina]labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/news/[/quote]
Now that’s a statement I can get behind :(

I spoilt my ballot last GE, time before held my nose and voted Labour. At this rate I’ll be getting very drunk and voting Tory next time

This and Liz Truss are making a Tory out of me. Never, ever thought I'd say it.

Me too.

Labour are discriminating against women on the basis of their sex.

Anyone attempting to breach Labour Party rules and subvert the intention of All Women Shortlists, women’s officers or minimum quotas for women will be dealt with via our established safeguards, selection procedures and disciplinary measures.

anyone except transwomen and you can become one of those by self declaration

They've fallen into that habit that TRA activists have of labelling working class, disabled, black women as somehow not primarily women - but as types of women. We are supposed to believe that biological males can be just another type of woman.

That's a really good observation, I hadn't really cottoned on to that before. It is such a sly trick, tacking something controversial onto the end of a list of things that everyone understands and agrees with. Putting things in a list together to imply that they are a group of things with the same characteristics.

Just like sticking the T on to LGB really.

So just to clarify: that sliver of a concession in the 2019 manifesto, where they undertook to protect single sex spaces (although they didn't spell out what they meant by single sex) and on the basis of which they got my vote again - that's gone?
And yet they also say they haven't changed their policy?

I'm not sure why people seem to think it is only the far left who support this nonsense, what about Lisa Nandy, Jess Philips, Lib Dems, SNP. I was going to vote for Lisa Nandy in the Labour leadership election until she signed the trans pledge. In the end I didn't bother voting and have left the party.