Oh sod off David Lammy!

[deadleaves]

labourlist.org/2021/09/anti-trans-members-are-dinosaurs-who-want-to-hoard-rights-says-lammy/?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Its hard to describe how angry this article made me. I am sick to the back teeth of the lies and slurs being told about women who want to protect absolutely basic rights and safeguarding.

Dinosaurs who want to 'hoard' rights. That's the contempt that the Labour party has for women in prisons who are assaulted and intimidated by the males they are now being housed with. Dinosaurs who want to hoard rights are traumatised women who are too scared to access refuges that males might be in. Dinosaurs who want to hoard rights are women athletes who reject being told to 'be kind' and hand over what they have worked their hold life for, to males who have an inbuilt biological advantage.

Women really aren't entitled to anything but insults when they try to speak up for themselves in the Labour party. Ironic really that we are called Dinosaurs when the Labour party is clearly reverting to its unionist roots when unions wanted to keep women in their place to protect male members advantage.

But most disgusting is the utterly unself-aware and hypocritical way Lammy advocates for positive discrimination for black men, a group of people he can understand face disadvantage (being one), so he wants to increase HIS social groups rights rights whilst gleefully not only removing women's basic rights but throwing insults at us for objecting to this.

That's it. Not only will I not vote for Labour again but I am going to become an active campaigner against them. They are beyond disgusting in their utter misogyny.

You could CC a few people on the email. Maybe Starmer, Cherry and Duffield along with many others. This Rachel Burden from the BBC (and Emma Barnett from women's hour, Justin Webb). Also Sex Matters or similar orgs.

At least DL won't be able to launch into BS, saying nobody is mentioning this, without fibbing. Whether his little red guards chuck it would be immaterial then, as there are witnesses.

I'm not using 'little red guards' in any socialist or left wing sense there. They aren't idealistic, they are little foot soldiers enforcing this authoritarianism and anti science cabal.

And re the 'inern' thing, which should be illegal, unpaid work, many of these are US Students.

He won't read his own emails. His woeky young researchers and interns will filter it and present him with whatever he wants to hear.
The Gillian Duffy incident: GB got cross and blamed a female assistant for letting a life-long-Labour-voting female member of the public tell him that his policy was backfiring. GB didn't listen, just doubled-down and said that disagreement with the Party line was "bigoted".
If he'd listened and taken on board comment then Brexit may never have happened and Labour wouldn't have spent eleven years (and counting) in opposition.

I think Lammy is a man of some considerable decency and integrity. Despite everything, there are a lot of Labour politicians who are not evil people! I think he's just really lost the plot on this one. It's worth emailing him.

I don't think anyone thinks they are 'evil'. They seem to be idiotic or gobshites. Maybe both. The decency and integrity doesn't seem to extend to women. The offensive rubbish they have come out with and kept pushing with a brass neck. Even DL's tone while speaking to a female presenter.

They are politicians. Voting is where to hit them. If emailing, I'd make sure to CC many others in on the email. I don't know if you can keep them honest on this, but at least there will be records to show up any false denials.

The decency and integrity doesn't seem to extend to women.

No. it doesn't. So a well placed, omnidirectional kick up the arse suggests itself. I've emailed.

@JustSpeculation

I think Lammy is a man of some considerable decency and integrity. Despite everything, there are a lot of Labour politicians who are not evil people! I think he's just really lost the plot on this one. It's worth emailing him.

Why is he insisting that thing he knows not to be true are true then? Doesn't sound like integrity to me...

Why is he insisting that thing he knows not to be true are true then? Doesn't sound like integrity to me...

I will live up to my name and speculate. He's ignoring the cognitive dissonance, perhaps? I'd put put money on it that he hasn't really thought about it. I bet that thinking about women as women is not something he does a lot. Thoreau said "It's not what you look at that's important, it's what you see" (I was looking for an Orwell quote earlier this morning, and came across this!). I think it's more than possible that he doesn't really see women. Lots of men don't. But that doesn't mean he won't read his emails or that he employs the kind of assistance that doesn't respect him enough to show them to him.

@JustSpeculation

I think Lammy is a man of some considerable decency and integrity. Despite everything, there are a lot of Labour politicians who are not evil people! I think he's just really lost the plot on this one. It's worth emailing him.

He's not wasting any of that decency and integrity in regarding women as basically human.

I'm afraid I think he's an absolute arse.

And I sigh, with regret but appreciation at this thread proving yet again:

male people treat female ones in the most overtly appalling ways.... and you can still rely on female people trying to understand them and make excuses for them.

I think it's a wonderful trait in women. But it's the one that landed us right in the muck with all this. There's been way too much being kind and understanding and unpicking and trying to relate to the deep inner mind of the abusive so and so mugging women's rights, and not nearly enough loud, clear, No.

More bollocks tweets from him today apparently passionate about VAWG.

Fkn hypocrite.

I googled the earlier comment about him thinking the papal smoke was racist as I couldn't quite believe he didn't know why it was white or black and found in the same newspaper article in the Standard that
When the MP appeared on Celebrity Mastermind he answered Henry VII when asked who succeeded Henry VIII in 1547.
He's obviously easily confused!

@senua

He won't read his own emails. His woeky young researchers and interns will filter it and present him with whatever he wants to hear. The Gillian Duffy incident: GB got cross and blamed a female assistant for letting a life-long-Labour-voting female member of the public tell him that his policy was backfiring. GB didn't listen, just doubled-down and said that disagreement with the Party line was "bigoted". If he'd listened and taken on board comment then Brexit may never have happened and Labour wouldn't have spent eleven years (and counting) in opposition.

This. And if she had been just an unsavoury racist, he could have said something statesmanlike and powerful about diversity.

In people's concerns about immigration there are racist aspects and there are practical, reasonable aspects. It's not impossible to publicly refute the former whilst looking into the latter. Don't forget all the non-EU immigrants and children of immigrants who voted for Brexit, for example, or the fact that illegal migration puts pressure on the housing stock and job market many legal immigrants rely on more than it affects the better-off.

DL is obviously not alone in parliament. Christian Blount appeared apoplectic that anyone would (i)give a sh1t about women and (ii) take their interests/concerns into account to push back on men's wants.

Even women are complicit in going along with the idea that anyone/anything can be a woman. They are being 'good' women. Madonna women. Supporting male wishes and policing other women on behalf of men's interests.

His interests seem even to prioritise black men. Biological sex seems to be immutable when it is in his interests. He says 'as a black man'. Imagine if someone said to him that you can grow melanin in a sun bed and go to the hairdresser for a perm and his 'identity' was really no more than that. That is what he is saying to women.

Crispin Blunt, not Christian Blount.

The ethnic minority Leave participants in this study raised concerns about immigration, particularly Eastern European, which they felt increased pressures on public services and strained community relations. There was also resentment concerning the apparent ease with which European migrants could enter the UK, but also get work and access benefits.

For some, this stood in stark contrast to the situation of immigrants from the Commonwealth, not least when it came to the right to bring spouses or staff from non-EU countries. As such, the referendum revealed tensions between longer-settled BAME groups and newer Eastern European arrivals.

Europe was conceived of by some as a ‘white Fortress’, permitting white immigration while obstructing the entry of non-whites. Some respondents saw evidence of this in the EU’s response to the refugee crisis.

There was also criticism of specific EU policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy, which were seen as disadvantaging developing countries in Africa and Asia. Leaving the EU, it was felt, would increase trade and migration between the UK and the Commonwealth.

From ukandeu.ac.uk/minority-ethnic-attitudes-and-the-2016-eu-referendum/

Not trying to derail, just make the point that sweeping generalisations almost always miss the detail. Brown may have dismissed a single voice, but Labour are happy to make sweeping generalisations as we've seen. Bigots, Gammons, Rights-hoarding Dinosaurs, whatever.
The 33% of BAME people who voted Leave have been written out of the history books, the established narrative says it was all down to uneducated racist white people who didn't understand what they were voting for.
There was no nuance in understanding the Leave vote, and the Red Wall can read the Guardian too. Being told you are stupid, racist, uneducated and uninformed over and over again can't have been nice. Lammy wants to try the same trick with women? It'll be the same result.

Labour need to learn that you can't patronise people into voting for you.

Between listening to all the interviews and reading through his contributions to the GRA debate in 2004, I now no longer have any faith in Lammy's integrity.

@FlyingOink

The ethnic minority Leave participants in this study raised concerns about immigration, particularly Eastern European, which they felt increased pressures on public services and strained community relations. There was also resentment concerning the apparent ease with which European migrants could enter the UK, but also get work and access benefits.

For some, this stood in stark contrast to the situation of immigrants from the Commonwealth, not least when it came to the right to bring spouses or staff from non-EU countries. As such, the referendum revealed tensions between longer-settled BAME groups and newer Eastern European arrivals.

Europe was conceived of by some as a ‘white Fortress’, permitting white immigration while obstructing the entry of non-whites. Some respondents saw evidence of this in the EU’s response to the refugee crisis.

There was also criticism of specific EU policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy, which were seen as disadvantaging developing countries in Africa and Asia. Leaving the EU, it was felt, would increase trade and migration between the UK and the Commonwealth.

From ukandeu.ac.uk/minority-ethnic-attitudes-and-the-2016-eu-referendum/

Not trying to derail, just make the point that sweeping generalisations almost always miss the detail. Brown may have dismissed a single voice, but Labour are happy to make sweeping generalisations as we've seen. Bigots, Gammons, Rights-hoarding Dinosaurs, whatever.
The 33% of BAME people who voted Leave have been written out of the history books, the established narrative says it was all down to uneducated racist white people who didn't understand what they were voting for.
There was no nuance in understanding the Leave vote, and the Red Wall can read the Guardian too. Being told you are stupid, racist, uneducated and uninformed over and over again can't have been nice. Lammy wants to try the same trick with women? It'll be the same result.

Labour need to learn that you can't patronise people into voting for you.

So do the tories. Not all Tories wanted Brexit - I think we would all do well to remember that Brexit wasn’t a party political issue.

Agreed, and in a binary choice like that, there are a multitude of reasons why someone might choose A or B.

I just had a Labour canvasser on my doorstep and I told them I will never vote Labour again - regardless of the rest of their policies and regardless of the opposition - so long as the party does not know what woman is. The (young) canvasser sympathised, which was a surprise to me.

Has anyone had an answer from a Labour MP or candidate or official canvasser detailing what rights we should be yielding?