Starmer on what a woman is, and GRA reform

[ResisterRex]

In The Times:

Trans women are women, says Keir Starmer in call for legal reform

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/75ddf3d0-a176-11ec-b38e-10b333e9179b?shareToken=2a3aa1b4f35de5d5a23b0166178270f6

"Asked to define a woman, Starmer replied: “A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women, and that is not just my view — that is actually the law. It has been the law through the combined effects of the 2004 [Gender Recognition] Act and the 2010 [Equality] Act. So that’s my view. It also happens to be the law in the United Kingdom.”

The Labour leader called for reforms of the Gender Recognition Act, under which people diagnosed with gender dysphoria who have lived in their acquired gender for at least two years can apply to be legally recognised.

“The process that people have to go through does need to be looked at,” he told The Times. “If you talk to anybody who’s been through the process there’s a real issue about respect and dignity.”"

In addition:

He called for a “more considered, respectful, tolerant debate about these issues”. Starmer added: “I don’t think it furthers the interests of anybody to continue the debate in the way that it’s been going on now for some time.”

So I suppose Labour have no interest in winning a national election ever again?

@1dayatatime

So

"Asked to define a woman, Starmer replied: “A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women, and that is not just my view — that is actually the law."

Meanwhile the Oxford Dictionary defines a female as: "belonging to the sex that can lay eggs or give birth to babies".

So by Starmers definition a woman can be both male and female. One simple solution to avoid confusion would be to get rid entirely of the words "man / men and woman/ women" and replace them with "male / males and female/ females ".

That would not work, TRA are going after the word female as well now.

The arguments is that female is the identity not the sex.

And law would need to qualify that it's human & female because animal welfare laws recognise sex classifications too.

But it would almost be funny see the court case fought over doctors failing to provide single sex healthcare provisions for female cats and dogs.

He was so adamant that I seriously wondered if he meant transmen instead of transwomen.

What fucking law? You actual fanny. Point it out to me, Mr Starmer. Sir Lord Starmer, whatever your name is.

That'll be a trans fanny, not an actual fanny.

In the interests of respectful debate I do hope Sir Keir agrees to be interviewed on Woman's Hour by Emma Barnett. I really would like to see how he manages to defend this inaccurate, illogical and frankly insulting garbage. I'm another one who is absolutely seething with rage about this utter shambles of a Labour Party. This week has tipped me over to doing something I never thought I would do which is vote Tory.

Very quick thought. He says applying for a grc is dehumanizing and lacks respect and dignity I might be pharaphrasing a bit.
Hows about we all write/email him about making everything where you have to apply for anything ( I'm thinking benefits, charity grants, school allocations, etc) much easier, no reams of paper, no 4 months wait for action.

Pick your poison/favourite soap box issue and no mention of gc stuff. Maybe if he sees that if the gra is changed to make things easier, everything should also be made easier.

Email:[email protected]

Email:[email protected]

Email:[email protected]

@Olderbadger1

“Male supremacy is fused into the language, so that every sentence both heralds and affirms it. Thought, experienced primarily as language, is permeated by the linguistic and perceptual values developed expressly to subordinate women. Men have defined the parameters of every subject. All feminist arguments, however radical in intent or consequence, are with or against assertions or premises implicit in the male system, which is made credible or authentic by the power of men to name. No transcendence of the male system is possible as long as men have the power of naming... As Prometheus stole fire from the gods, so feminists will have to steal the power of naming from men, hopefully to better effect.” Andrea Dworkin

This isn't a petty side-issue. It's bloody central to everything - to our rights and our humanity. How fucking dare Starmer pronounce on this and then tell us to have a 'more considered' debate. He's already ended the debate by his patronising, patriarchal, misogynist, sexist, meaningless, one-eyed, pompous, anti-truth, bloody stupid redefinition of terms. I'm incandescent.

Thank you, yes.

a pretty underpowered response - I think this will be Starmer's lasting epitaph, tbh.

Jesus - he’s never applied for a disabled parking pass then has he? I’ve just done one for my MIL - 8 sections, with up to 3 pages of typewritten explanations basically begging for a pass. Then a phone call from someone asking allsorts of probing questions. She’s pushing 80, partially deaf, arthritis up and down, plus loads of other health issues. It took from just after new year until last week to get it approved.

And he wants to discuss inhumane and undignified process???

Game on sonny…

@Narutocrazyfox

Well mumsnetters, I think this will forever answer the question 'Why do people still vote Tory?'

😂😂😂

Yup

@MidCenturyClegs thanks for posting the trends map tweet.
Interesting.
I need to learn how to do that! Any tips?

Lib Dems are funded by pharmaceuticals that make puberty blockers.

I'm assuming that Labour have got a big direct debit from similar.

It's the only explanation.

I wonder how many pieces of silver they got when they threw my rights away?

I'll never forgive them. And their problem is that it makes me so angry that I am now politically active in an entirely new way. Stupid pricks, they're leaving us with a one party country. Fuckers.

In the interests of respectful debate I do hope Sir Keir agrees to be interviewed on Woman's Hour by Emma Barnett. I really would like to see how he manages to defend this inaccurate, illogical and frankly insulting garbage. I'm another one who is absolutely seething with rage about this utter shambles of a Labour Party.

This. I am politically homeless.

Apologies for going cross topics but,
I have been reflecting that whilst Russia is busy trying to rebuild the Soviet Union empire with hostile invasions and silencing opposition, China is going all out for world economic dominance and global influence through its belt and road initiatives, the West is .... well obsessing about gender neutral toilets and preferred pronouns.

We are totally screwed !

@SolasAnla

"And law would need to qualify that it's human & female because animal welfare laws recognise sex classifications too."

++++

Well to be fair my dog seems fairly indifferent about what "he?" Tries to hump - male dogs, female dogs, my leg, various bits of furniture etc. And "he ?" is definitely very fluid 🤮

@Spectre8

The David Lammy quote you provided, how disgusting his words are,
Reducing women and girls to absolutely nothing, like we are worthless,
Other than for whatever males have in mind when they have free access to us,
'Dinosaurs who want to hoard rights' .. how dare we try to spoil the fun of males by thinking we have the right of somewhere safe to go.
I wonder what his mother and other female members of his family feel about this,
Disgusting man.

We had Tory canvassers round. I told them I will never vote for any party that throws me or my female relatives and friends under the bus. They seemed in firm agreement with me and understood the issues.

I wonder where Labour now are with the "this never comes up on the doorstep" line? Because it will most definitely come up on this doorstep!

@DomesticatedZombie

Also: 'trans women are women, and that is not just my view — that is actually the law.'

What fucking law? You actual fanny. Point it out to me, Mr Starmer. Sir Lord Starmer, whatever your name is.

Well said

the law needs to clearly distinguish between sex and gender and what rights and lengths of legislation those two merit if any.

sex is very simple and clear you are male or female, its in your DNA.

gender is social construct based on expected behaviour and appearance of the sexes, its a cats cradle of cross overs, the tom boy, the trans woman, the butch lesbian etc etc.

you can not mix the two up in law one has two types and is very clear regardless of presentation, the other is as clear as mud and both sexes account for everyone within that secondary category of gender.

but then if you start screwing up the law to look at gender rather then simply sex, wouldnt that be in breach of the human rights act.

if you try to incorporate gender into the law over or alongside simple biology your opening a can of worms of offensive stereotyping.

its all just 1984.

@ResisterRex

We had Tory canvassers round. I told them I will never vote for any party that throws me or my female relatives and friends under the bus. They seemed in firm agreement with me and understood the issues.

I wonder where Labour now are with the "this never comes up on the doorstep" line? Because it will most definitely come up on this doorstep!

have you ever seen them on your doorstep? I haven't.

@Olderbadger1

“Male supremacy is fused into the language, so that every sentence both heralds and affirms it. Thought, experienced primarily as language, is permeated by the linguistic and perceptual values developed expressly to subordinate women. Men have defined the parameters of every subject. All feminist arguments, however radical in intent or consequence, are with or against assertions or premises implicit in the male system, which is made credible or authentic by the power of men to name. No transcendence of the male system is possible as long as men have the power of naming... As Prometheus stole fire from the gods, so feminists will have to steal the power of naming from men, hopefully to better effect.” Andrea Dworkin

This isn't a petty side-issue. It's bloody central to everything - to our rights and our humanity. How fucking dare Starmer pronounce on this and then tell us to have a 'more considered' debate. He's already ended the debate by his patronising, patriarchal, misogynist, sexist, meaningless, one-eyed, pompous, anti-truth, bloody stupid redefinition of terms. I'm incandescent.

Og god, thank you for expressing my anger today.

@Skyellaskerry

In the interests of respectful debate I do hope Sir Keir agrees to be interviewed on Woman's Hour by Emma Barnett. I really would like to see how he manages to defend this inaccurate, illogical and frankly insulting garbage. I'm another one who is absolutely seething with rage about this utter shambles of a Labour Party.

This. I am politically homeless.

It will be like the MN 'webchats'.

HQ have a problem in that politicians don't want to come here to talk because women here expect actual interaction, logic, response to evidence, and don't swallow soundbites.

Which is why now there are very tightly limited questions on subjects absolutely fundamental to women's engagement in politics, many deletions, questions are submitted in advance, only select ones are answered and are quite obviously cut and paste responsed from advisors using soundbites, slogans and no logic, and those answers are not up for discussion. Which makes the whole thing a waste of time, and makes those politicians look afraid of the electorate, afraid and unwilling to hear voters point out facts, evidence and issues that conflict with the Message, and unable to stand up for what they claim to believe in. Politicians come here thinking its an opportunity to download key messages onto the electorate hard drive; not to listen. Not to be challenged. Not to think. Not to have to face the screaming hypocrisy, factual inaccuracies and cognitive dissonance in what they're claiming. Voters are blank slates to them, to be Told What To Think. Engagement with them is to be avoided.

And they wonder why all respect for politicians is dribbling away.

The word 'oppressed' has been flung around with gay abandon in the past few years, largely to justify much of this political agenda. Just as Starmer's comprehension of 'dignity' is very selective and applies only to some but not others, many of them seem oblivious to the basic principles of what 'oppression' actually is as opposed to a Big Word that is On Message.

If you want to know who is actually oppressed, look at who is being demanded to provide service and labour, and who is doing the demanding. Look at who doesn't have a voice and isn't even allowed to come to the table to speak. Look at who gets arrested and who does the reporting and calling of the cops. Look at whose privacy is viewed with contempt and whose is a reason for passionate and emotive speeches. Look at who gets invited to select committees and has cups of tea in back rooms creating laws, and who has to be careful in case they get reported to the police for being difficult.

best comment on that daily fail article.

"I really have no problem with anyone identifying as whatever they want to be, but as a natural biological women my rights should be come before those who choose not to be male. That includes competitive sports, changing facilities and prisons."

Suzanne Moore: suzannemoore.substack.com/p/i-am-a-dinosaur-hear-me-roar