Labour have committed to single sex spaces

[flumpetto]

Excluding trans

This is a step in the right direction at long last....

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-trans-women-labour-b1924832.html

Even if he backtracks, it won't be enough for a fair few. Even Lisa Nandy, who wants to base policy solely on one "young trans girl" in her constituency, was getting shit because she had a very mild attempt at sticking up for Rosie Duffield.

But but but... You can change your sex through self ID.

Aye right... is that right, no?

I would advise caution about voting for Labour again, and Im actually in the party!
But I do wonder if the penny has finally dropped in the top ranks that Genderism is toxic to the electorate?

@averylongtimeago

It's only "some" spaces "when justified". They haven't won my vote back yet.

I need details.

I shouldn't, but I need:

– a definition of woman that endures and is not the subject of lobbying to change the meaning even in dictionaries and mainstream media;

– an understanding as to who is making the decisions concerning 'some spaces' and 'when justified';

– an unequivocal commitment to single-sex that isn't open to being end-run with 100+ other genders.

I want clarity on all of these before Labour merits any further consideration from me or the use of my time in working to understand their current policies and perspectives.

I suspect Keir might be taking the “might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb” tack. Whether he’s about to go out in a blaze of flaming, frothing Momentum/TRA glory is the question…

I do like the idea of this. He could say something really controversial like "women have cervixes" and really set the Internet ablaze, and Jesus Christ how did we get to this point?

I found this article facinating on social panics and their causes and ends -
unherd.com/2021/09/swedens-cultural-revolution/

He obviously doesn't know how the other side react to anything other than TWAW

If he doesn't know this by now, after this long in charge of the Labour party, he's an idiot. TRAs may not be rational, but they are predictable. And they are one of Labour's biggest liabilities right now, he should have devoted some time to figuring out how they work.

@teawamutu

Gosh. And he didn't say the cis-word either. Accidentally or purposefully revealing he knows what a woman is?

Did he actually state TW are men?

Pardon my French but fuck me this is unexpected. I had pretty much given up on Starmer and was starting to feel embarrassed about all my, 'He's a lawyer, he picks his battles' excuses. But it's also true - he does pick his battles carefully - sometimes infuriatingly so - but, if he really has decided to pick this one, then that's very welcome indeed.

Female people who cannot access mixed sex spaces and have been failed, excluded and discriminated against to allow male people freedom of choice are actually going to be considered?

At the moment in the press it's all screams of 'TW excluded ' as if the issue ends there.

I trust Starmer as far as I can spit. I'll wait and see if actual understanding of diversity and the need for solutions that meet ALL needs and not just male ones at female expense is dawning.

Like others, I'll wait.
But it's an interesting development after creepy Ed Davey's announcement that there must be no more single sex spaces which went down appallingly and led to numerous men openly challenging him.

Dawn Butler is already backtracking for him.

The other thing I have never heard anyone explain how you can practically implement the single sex exemptions if males are allowed to change their birth certificates to say female. If self ID is allowed and the numbers of men identifying and women increases significantly how do the single sex exemptions work in practice. You have to rely on male people respecting boundaries which obviously isn't going to happen.

Given the TRAs slippery use of language around this and that of politicians, I do not trust this.

Wow interesting. When he was elected leader I did expect him to be GC/pro-women's rights and opposed to transing children, at least to some extent, because he's a leading legal brain and there's no way he wouldn't see the holes in the genderism arguments and the potential for a future epidemic of detransitioners/regretters suing. So I thought that his silence since then basically spoke of cowardice and reluctance to cause a massive ruckus in the party - but we've certainly waited long enough.

Interesting also that RD asked to meet him - I'd like to be a fly on the wall in that conversation.

I hope takes the plunge, makes labour the party of actual women's rights and lets the fallout happen. However cross the TRAs are, that would win Labour a shit load of votes back.

The usuals losing their shit on twitter I see. All it looks like is they're sticking with the single sex exemptions, as in equality act.

Then a bunch of people have a whine who think it's not in the equality act (mainly because they don't want it to be and they're having a tantrum about it), or people who know it is but want it scraped, because, you know, males should go everywhere obviously 🙄

Dawn Butler Brent has weighed in to say the headline doesn't warrant the article (fuck knows how?), and most likely no word from Keir who is far too busy adding to his arse splinter collection.

Honestly I don't know what Labour are doing here. I still wouldn't vote for them on the back of that flimsy announcement, now neither will the activists throwing their dummies out because their demands aren't being met. We'll get some MPs coming along to chant some placating mantras in a bit, representation groups within Labour will release statements about how disappointed they are, and blah blah blah.

If they aren't going to come down hard and either back women or chuck them under the bus I'd rather they not say anything at all.

Yeah...no.

Does his definition of “woman” include males with GRC’s? If it does and he is still promising to make obtaining a GRC easier.... then I am sorry but he is no friend of womankind.

Going on how cross John McDonnell was on R4 Today this morning about the electoral college proposal (proper bosom hoisting huffing)

Yes I loved it :o You could hear him thinking "oh FFS get over yourselves"

@Highwind

Yeah...no.

Does his definition of “woman” include males with GRC’s? If it does and he is still promising to make obtaining a GRC easier.... then I am sorry but he is no friend of womankind.

Good point. Sorry Keir, more info needed before you get my vote back.

Ah I meant to say Dawn Butler, Dawn Butler Brent is her twitter handle! My kingdom for an edit button!!

Still not voting for Labour though.

I'll say that even here, on this thread, we end up using the 'excluding trans' wording, which is unpleasant and untrue. Single sex spaces if used where relevant don't exclude anyone, given that everyone has a sex. They prevent exclusion of those who need single sex provision. There may increasingly be more sex neutral or third spaces in the future as we work out when that operates best for everyone, and that's a good thing.

I shall wait and see.

Policy remains the same policy that was in the last manifesto.

He is still trying to sit on the fence. Possibly hoping that some of the remaining genderist “left” will resign in fury and make it easier for him to get his rule changes through.

@allmywhat

He obviously doesn't know how the other side react to anything other than TWAW

If he doesn't know this by now, after this long in charge of the Labour party, he's an idiot. TRAs may not be rational, but they are predictable. And they are one of Labour's biggest liabilities right now, he should have devoted some time to figuring out how they work.

he should have devoted some time to figuring out how they work

Just adding to my own comment that I think this is why I always had some hopes re Starmer. Someone who understands how TRAs work understands there's no possibility of compromise, you either capitulate to them completely (and destroy your electability in the process) or eventually you are going to have to take a stand.

I thought he had capitulated. But apparently not?

Either he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing, or he does know what he's doing, and he's decided to fight the fuckers. I suppose there's still the possibility of his own team sabotaging him here even if he does want to take a stand.