Article on Starmer indicates the public are @getting@ it

[PostingForTheFirstTime]

This is an article on Starmer's chances of becoming PM. The article itself does not mention women, gender or trans issues. But below the line, many people are mentioning these issues, and stating they will not vote for a party that so disrespects women.

I'm beginning to hope that the tide is turning.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-best-starmer-can-hope-for-is-a-coalition-b586ttdkk

Does anyone have a share token?

I wonder if the latest round of pronouncements is because there's talk of a coalition going on behind the scenes, and capitulation on this agenda is a condition?

In which case, its not even a case of 'after the revolution' for women's rights, is it?

Try again; article with share token here;
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/8c4938f2-206e-11ec-8cb7-e60ba8dbca61?shareToken=2bd9ec676afbe9db6a1cc480dd98ea81

OK that worked. Its been archived so if you search the Archive Is site it will be available.

@Thelnebriati

I wonder if the latest round of pronouncements is because there's talk of a coalition going on behind the scenes, and capitulation on this agenda is a condition?

In which case, its not even a case of 'after the revolution' for women's rights, is it?

Honestly, you've lived without rights for so long, acknowledging them would be disruptive to the greater good. You're not included as part of the greater good, obvs., and the much-vaunted Social Contract didn't ever anticipate that you would benefit.

We're helping you realise that embracing the tenets of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy is your only option. We're promoting this by removing the language with which you can identify your oppression as it's known that language hampers thinking and it's thinking that gets you people into trouble.

We don't thank you for your service because that would imply you had some humanity and didn't, in fact, exist merely as service and support bodies.

So, empty those minds, stay silent, stay oppressed.

Ooh goody. We could have the option of voting for a woman-hating, woman-erasing, woman-subordinating party actually in coalition with another even more woman-hating party.

Yippee.

No.

I wonder at what point it will dawn on these idiots that not looking at or acknowledging reality never makes it go away.

@Artichokeleaves

Ooh goody. We could have the option of voting for a woman-hating, woman-erasing, woman-subordinating party actually in coalition with another even more woman-hating party.

Yippee.

No.

Your choices are:

–1 the face-eating leopard party
–2 the face-eating cheetah party
–3 the face-eating necrotising fasciitis party
–4 a coalition of 1 and 3 or 2 and 3

Oh, god.

SNP/Labour coalition. with SNP/Greens up here.

Can you blimmin imagine? Women would be thrown on bonfires!

Sorry, I mean: 'Women's rights would be thrown on bonfires!'

Oh well. It makes the election campaign very easy doesn't it?

Women: Ffs don't vote for any of the following list!

Sadly, I don't have this confidence. The Times comments are good, but on the Guardian there's hardly a mention of women's rights in the comments:
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/29/the-verdict-on-keir-starmers-labour-conference-speech

Really? This week, of all weeks, when we have seen politician after politician throw women under the bus - and you think the tide is turning?

The Times BTL comments have been GC for years. That means nothing.

The guardian would delete comments that the times let stand

The guardian would delete comments that the times let stand

I've posted something. I'll let you know how long it lasts!

InvisibleDragon The Guardian blocks comments which don't support their views on trans issues. I used to be able to comment on political articles but now they no longer show up.

on the Guardian there's hardly a mention of women's rights in the comments
My comment has been removed from The Guardian story. When comments are open and uncensored even the Guardian readership is broadly pro-women/pro- reality.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow

Really? This week, of all weeks, when we have seen politician after politician throw women under the bus - and you think the tide is turning?

The Times BTL comments have been GC for years. That means nothing.

I agree - I don't think the tide is turning this week - or any time soon.

BUT, there has been a sea change in the nature of the contributions from men below the line in the Times. There are countless male posters who have been speaking about women's rights in recent weeks. It's not enough, but it gives me a little hope.

I posted this under the Guardian article referred to above:

Given the well publicised and debated comments by David Lammy, Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner et al regarding the rights of transwomen over natal women, the party have offended a significant proportion of 51% of the electorate. Regardless of his speech, if the Conservatives make a manifest commitment not to remove access to women (sorry, bodies with vaginas from the Lancet which should know better) only spaces by anyone who wants it, they are on the way to winning the next election hands down.

Shortages will go away, this issue won't.

It has been removed: 'This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.'

My comment stayed up for now, but they've closed commenting very quickly.

It's extremely depressing how blatant the censorship is. I think it's genuinely contributing to a huge lack of awareness on this.

Mine was removed within five minutes. Just wait until the Guardian does an article defending freedom of speech!

The Guardian are in a real mess.

They regularly do well researched investigative pieces on women’s health, which somehow slip past with the word ‘woman’, but can’t acknowledge in the rest of the paper that ‘woman’ can be used to refer to sex not gender.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow

Really? This week, of all weeks, when we have seen politician after politician throw women under the bus - and you think the tide is turning?

The Times BTL comments have been GC for years. That means nothing.

I'm fairly new here, and took out a subscription to The Times just last week.

I guess I'm not used to seeing so much mention of (let alone enthusiasm for) gender-critical views. I got all excited.

Other peoples' comments on The Guardian (which used to be my go-to source of news) and its moderation of GC views explain why I never realised so many people actually shared my own concerns.

But I do think the MSM are beginning to drag the issue out into the sunlight at last.

I think how the guardian works is they will delete anything GC if it can be considered 'off topic' as that's one of the rules under 'community standards' , and they try their best not to have comments open on any article where gender is mentioned, therefore GC comments will almost always be off topic. However this week their daily politics blog has covered all the gender goings on at the labour conference, so GC comments are now on-topic and have been able to stand. I'd say the GC comments are getting a lot of pushback but also a fair few upvotes. Not sure if this will continue tomorrow or not, but if so it would be a good time for a FWR takeover :)

Would be interesting to see the Times subscription figures but my impression is a lot of previously Guardian-reading middle aged women have started paying for the Times over the last few years because of their good sense on this issue and willingness to publish about it.