@MyLittlePhonyPony
Yours is one pont of view I have considerable sympathy with.
I'm not sure I agree about the previous Labour government - despite its considerable failings, it was demonstrably and measurably less bad in numerous ways than the current Tory one. You mention tuition fees just for one example - I agree and opposed them. But those fees are now three times higher than when Labour left office. If (as we agree) they were bad, how is that not three times as bad? Similar comparisons could be made about other issues, although obviously I can't speak for your particular situation at the time.
But as for Starmer and the current leadership, yes. You're right to be skeptical about what they'll actually do better. He lied through his teeth to get the Labour leadership on the promise of unifying the party (ha ha), and since has been thoroughly tepid in standing up to the Tories' abuse. There's no evidence of any commitment to genuine leftwing values.
But when Labour did have a leader committed to those values, and a policy platform based on them, so many were adamant they couldn't vote for such a "loony left" and needed to wait for the Labour party to become moderate and trustworthy and professional again. Well here it is - great. We can't have it both ways. The electorate is either willing to take on radical change or they get the same sh** slightly watered down.
Labour can't win this way because the two demands being levelled at them are directly contrary so they can't possibly satisfy both. What's bizarre is that people don't seem to have any such demands of the Tories, even when they're even worse.
The system's completely f*ed in terms of delivering anything approaching genuine democracy, IMO. The only thing that could do that (and, to get back to the point, what would unquestionably be the best thing for a new party to represent women's sex-based rights) is proportional representation.