Boris has nailed colours to mast

[Ridcully82]

On gender transition at PMQs:" biology overwhelmingly important", preceded by urging respect for those feeling they need to transition. Sounded calm, respectful,and kinda where we were on course before the TRA actions.

'Don't you think TWAW is denial of biological sex? Women are adult human females. Transwomen are adult human males.'

No, this is what I'm saying. It's actually not. It's an assertion that being a woman is to do with something other than biological sex. I don't know what - I don't understand what people mean by 'gender identity' that is separable from thought/feeling. But KS is not denying the existence of sex.

He might be saying sex matters less than gender identity (and naturally I think that's nonsense).

@Blossomtoes

You can say this

I know it seems useful but trying to shame people won't work and is exactly the problem with modern politics

And then follow it with this? Seriously?

How about I ask why you're on the side of history that gives children puberty blockers and mastectomies and agrees that the right place for rapists is in female prisons? Does that make you rethink anything?

Well yes, because that was my point? The shaming doesn't work. That poster was trying to shame people by making a list of reasons why people that will vote Tory are bad, so I did the same back. Doesn't work though, does it?

Those of you who think you can change labour should be already involved locally to discover just what a waste of time it will be.
Either join now and try and change or vote against them at the local elections.

It's an assertion that being a woman is to do with something other than biological sex.

So denying biology in favour of feels?

@FOJN

It's an assertion that being a woman is to do with something other than biological sex.

So denying biology in favour of feels?

Not strictly denying it. Decoupling it from the concepts 'woman' and 'man'. So he believes there are physically male people who are women, and that they can be declared 'female' to make their legal situation clearer, without changing their biology at all.

Starmer is far too clever not to know and understand that this is what is is doing.

It’s okay. I’m not expecting anything other than straw man arguments and hyperbole in response. Just maybe hoping to plant a seed.

How very magnanimous of you to offer us some rare insight and patiently wait for us to come to the same understanding as you.

Stating you anticipate only strawmen and hyperbole in response to your post establishes a "no win" dynamic for anyone wanting to engage. It's transparent and not very sophisticated but perhaps you thought it was clever.

@ResisterRex

Actually I see it completely the other way around. I see this gender ideology as an exercise in class privilege. The people promoting this don't give shit about the women from disadvantaged communities who are most likely to be most harmed by this - those that end up in prisons, homeless shelters, refuges and recovery centres. The privileged with degrees care not one crap about those women, who are far distanced from their lives. The privileged never imagine themselves ending up in one of those places so care not about what happens to those who do.

This is so important to keep saying. If you're flush, chances are you can buy your way out of places where this is a problem. Go to a different gym, have no need of a shelter or refuge, or you're not banged up.

The less money you have, the worse gender ideology is for you.

It's a luxury belief system, peddled by people who never bothered to think how it would look and feel in the real world. In the real lives of real people.

Exactly, and what about women of faith? Women Asylum seekers from regions where they have been raped and enslaved as part of the war in their countries?

Labour and all those supporters of this ideology are usually hand wringing and weeping about the plight of these women, so what happens to them when they can't access the spaces and services they need because there are men in them? Where is the compassion and understanding for them? Ah no, it's all saved for those most oppressed men.

tabbycatstripy

Not strictly denying it. Decoupling it from the concepts 'woman' and 'man'. So he believes there are physically male people who are women, and that they can be declared 'female' to make their legal situation clearer, without changing their biology at all.

I fully understand this but to repurpose "woman" or "man" is denying they relate fundamentally to biology, which they do. I think we agree so I'm not sure why you are challenging the idea that gender ideology and those who support it are denying biological reality.

@tabbycatstripy thanks, I kind of hope that woman I dismissed over so many things reads here and maybe realises I know I was approaching things wrong. I suspect she might be as she knew about rapid onset gender before any of us be kind colleagues did.

Of course I may just be becoming more right wing as I hemorrhage my eggs.

Who knows!

I like this idea, our own party. I've often thought most of the people on here would make a better job at running the country than any of the current options. I think I could join a party that looks after those in society unable to look after themselves and isn't bloody bat shit crazy!!

@FOJN

tabbycatstripy

Not strictly denying it. Decoupling it from the concepts 'woman' and 'man'. So he believes there are physically male people who are women, and that they can be declared 'female' to make their legal situation clearer, without changing their biology at all.

I fully understand this but to repurpose "woman" or "man" is denying they relate fundamentally to biology, which they do. I think we agree so I'm not sure why you are challenging the idea that gender ideology and those who support it are denying biological reality.

Because to me, that's not the case. They are not denying the existence of biological sex (and you understand this as you say).

My reason for pointing it out is to show that Starmer isn't lying, or stupid. It doesn't help to suggest he might one day change his mind and tell the truth. He is fully bought in to a new way of looking at the world. It's a way I regard as dangerous to women, so I want to describe his take on it with accuracy.

In Scotland now we have to go to court so the meaning of the word woman is not redefining

The Scottish Government has lost a court battle over legislation which expanded the legal definition of a woman.

Ministers were taken to court by campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS) over the Gender Representation on Public Boards Act, which creates a target for public boards to have 50 per cent of non-executive members who are women.

The legislation, which was passed by MSPs in 2018, states that the definition of woman should include “a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment...if, and only if, the person is living as a woman and is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of becoming female".

That means a trans woman who has not yet changed their legal sex from male to female using a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), but who is “living as a woman” would be covered.

FWS argued that by passing the law Holyrood had exceeded its authority by redefining the 2010 Equality Act, which is reserved to Westminster, and defines a woman as a female of any age.

Full piece here , it’s a shite show in Scotland for women 🤦‍♀️

www.holyrood.com/news/view,scottish-government-lose-court-battle-over-redefinition-of-women

@ohfook

I think Labour are beginning to listen. I received this reply from my local Labour mp who said Labour will be upholding single-sex exemptions.

Did you hear the mess the Labour MP made on Julia Hartley-Brewer's show made of this today?

You cannot uphold single sex spaces if you accept TWAW then add in self-id where people change their biological sex on their Birth Certificate, how the hell can you? It's totally contradictory and JHB made that clear but still the Labour MP obfuscated and blustered.

We are having enough trouble upholding single sex spaces without self id being made law due to the lobbying and misrepresentation of the current safeguards by Stonewall et al, there will be no chance if that gets through.

@Rosit

Ok, so many of you have vehemently refused to vote for Tory for years and have stated that every other stance they have taken has been completely in opposition to your own principles and beliefs - you believe that their views/actions have been amoral (at best), cruel, unethical, corrupt etc. Pretty much everything else they have done has been repugnant to you and your sensibilities and you will never ever vote for them.

This one issue though, you agree with them. You are aligned in viewpoints with the party whose views and actions you otherwise find abhorrent…that doesn’t give you any pause for thought?

It’s okay. I’m not expecting anything other than straw man arguments and hyperbole in response. Just maybe hoping to plant a seed.

Would you expect black people to vote Labour if Keir Starmer didn't know what a black person was?

Would you expect a gay man to vote for Labour, if Keir Starmer didn't know what a homosexual was?

Thought not.

So why aren't women allowed to put their sex-based rights first?

[quote littlbrowndog]Full piece here , it’s a shite show in Scotland for women 🤦‍♀️

www.holyrood.com/news/view,scottish-government-lose-court-battle-over-redefinition-of-women[/quote]
It's great that Scottish SNP Government lost though. I love it when my donations go to the legal cases which win.
How sad that we women have to donate to these legal challenges/cases, when the existing law was already clear. They just chose to wilfully misinterpret it for whatever is driving this 'trans identity ideology' insanity in western countries right now.
Why aren't MSPs representing the sex-based rights of 50% of their constituents i.e. women?

Labour and all those supporters of this ideology are usually hand wringing and weeping about the plight of these women

I think this is the part that sickens me the most.

You'll get passionate speeches about fervency of care and tolerance for those of minority cultures and religions, for the value of inclusion, for the disabled, for homosexuality, for VAWG, for child safeguarding, for women's services and health and refuges, for breast cancer, for the importance of accessible cervical screening -

and then point out that these things clash with the absolute freedoms and primacy of interest of male people, and watch the speaker turn on a dime. You'll get whiplash.

They cannot balance their views or interests in any way. You'll immediately start hearing how homosexuality is transphobic, that women need to reframe their trauma, that it's unacceptable to participate in a faith or culture that is incompatible with mixed sex spaces, that safeguarding is transphobic and NAMALT -

they only ever care about these vulnerable populations they can wax so very sentimentally and passionately on so long as those people are obediently serving the speaker's own political agenda. They will decry and rubbish them and come out with intolerance that can make your jaw drop the minute these people and their needs become inconvenient.

Don't take my word for it, go and look for yourself. Go and talk to a few. But just because someone shouts the word 'equality' and 'inclusion' a lot really does not mean they have any real belief or value for it, has the faintest idea or commitment of what it means, or that they are not doing it purely as good marketing.

@mudgetastic

Why is it more likely that we can persuade labour to understand biology than we can persuade the tories to have a greater awareness of poverty ?

I've never fit politically into the modern divisions, neoliberal right or liberal left. So that's where I'm coming from. I used to, on balance, mostly vote on the left. For a while I was a member of the Greens.

But in general, at the moment, I think the Conservatives are more open to change and influence, and there is a lot more interesting stuff going on among the conservative public intellectuals as well. Conservatives have not always been neoliberal or unconcerned by poverty, and in a lot of ways that kind of conservative governance seems to be on the wane. (And the left has not in the past been perfect on this issue either, tending to put too much weight on social programs and globalism as an answer without considering the role of good jobs and the role of agency of individuals in the culture.)

The real problem on the left at the moment is a completely closed down orthodoxy of identity politics, which seems unbreakable and inescapable. There is just no sign of any way to make a dent in it, and no self-awareness. In terms of public intellectuals on the left, while there are still some they are thinker on the ground - probably because a lot have myteriously been moved to the "alt-right".

So, yeah, I do think that on balance, persuading the Tories might be the better bet. I can't see any way to get through to Labour.

In the English census did you get asked what your sexuality was or if you were trans gender

In the Scottish census advisors said you can choose the sex of your kids 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️☹️

This Bill passed by a vote of 88 for and 28 against, 0 abstentions. It became law on 8 March 2018.

The rights and existence of half the population is the most fundamental red line imaginable. I'm not actually going to vote Tory, I live in one of Labour's safest seats so no point, but nothing would possess me to vote Labour.

I also think we need to examine the rhetoric that Labour will look after people more. If you look at the 2019 Labour manifesto there was not a single penny more for welfare etc than the Tories had. Current shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has a long history of hardline and inflammatory statements concerning people on low incomes. Labour would have cut vat on fuel to help mitigate rocketing costs, total circa £80 pa, but complained the Tory packages of £200 plus another £150 for most wasn't enough, no doubt terrified in case they didn't make enough noise to bury their own much smaller offer. There are many other things like projected minimum wage which also fall short of Tory plans. Easy wins like the £20 UC reversal are ignored and Labour had nothing to do with Marcus Rashgord's FSM campaign apart from trying to claim the credit when it was sorted. Please don't insult me by telling me Labour care more when they don't actually give a toss, I'm not stupid.

For me this is the biggest fight ever for women and girls.

Scotland falling with self id.

We will be like Canada or some parts of USA where it’s a hate crime to misgender a man

@littlbrowndog

For me this is the biggest fight ever for women and girls.

Scotland falling with self id.

We will be like Canada or some parts of USA where it’s a hate crime to misgender a man

I'm hoping it will get rolled back as I think it is also outside the remit of Holyrood.

Also petition that police Scotland accuratly describe the sex of rapists

As now if a rapist in Scotland says they are a woman it’s recorded as a woman’s crime

murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2022/03/23/update-petition-on-accurately-recording-the-sex-of-people-charged-or-convicted-of-rape-or-attempted-rape/

So in May how should I vote?

I believe in biology. Personally this is my no1 interest/issue politically because I think we are such a crucial generation regarding women's rights.

My local MP (at present) is Duffield, I usually vote Labour or Lib Dem.
The area has always been blue until Duffield.