Boris or bust?

[tabbycatstripy]

It’s not a decision I’ve come to lightly. I think Johnson is casual with the truth, lies when he believes it suits him, doesn’t particularly grace his office.

I’ve had to make my mind up whether I care more about him lying and eating too much cake than I care about children having healthy parts of their bodies removed, because of an excessively liberal worldview that doesn’t seem to be able to balance the rights of the child with the rights of adults to express themselves.

At the end of the day I - and I voted Labour for nearly thirty years - will vote for people who choose to do something about childhood transition. That’s my red line.

I was surprised that the LGB Alliance might have posted something that could be bi-phobic so scrolled down their Twitter postings for this year. In February they posted a reminder that their Facebook page is LGB Alliance UK as they sometimes receive complaints related to other Facebook pages “that are not in any way linked to our organisation”. So maybe similar sounding entities are responsible for the bi-phobia?

Bust. Still politically homeless. Can’t support him or the party that supports him.

@Alcoh

It’s a sad time OP but I am with you. I mean who thought they were following the ‘rules’ anyway? I had zero doubt they weren’t. And the rules were utterly ridiculous, far too damaging and I believe put in place due to the public opinion being shit if they HADN’T put them in place. Of course they didn’t believe in the rules which is why they broke them. If the public hadn’t been screaming for lockdowns and a police state then it wouldn’t have happened anyway. Boris always wanted a more liberal way of dealing with it and honestly given the damage those damn rules have caused I believe he was right. So I understand why they broke them basically.

Now when it comes to women and girls - I have to vote for the party who will protect them. And at the moment Boris is the only leader who has spoken any sense. I think he is starting to get it.

I agree with you. Everything you posted above is correct. We know boris didnt want a lockdown, he made it clear enough. And up to current year he is the only leader of a party that knows what a woman is. Oh maybe theres one other party? Cant remember which that also knows. But they are not represented in my area.

@GrammarTeacher
Pretty much agreeing with all your comments here.

I'm afraid I just think the Tories are better at avoiding the questions. They are the ones in whose watch the criminal courts and prison systems have converted to gender rather than sex.

Agree with this.

@UserNow I look for responsiveness to changing evidence in politicians, not ideological commitments that make them look stupid.

There are fundamental principle differences in ideology between individualistic Tories and statist Labour (v simplistically), I'm not sure where the definition of woman comes into it.

The women here do not appear to argue from an ideological point of view, but from an evidence perspective, but maybe I haven't seen what you mean, as I'm new?

The Conservative party have been the major party in power for the last 12 years .

I’ll take a view for the GE (I’m hoping Labour/Greens etc will have rowed back from the trans insanity to balance women’s and trans rights by then). For the locals I’ve spoilt my postal ballot with “Respect my sex if you want my “x” “ and I would encourage the politically homeless because of this issue to do the same.

@GrammarTeacher

If you think the right to protest changes aren't undemocratic and a real threat to society I don't really know what to say to you. To say that it is a feminist decision to vote in support of Boris Johnson is dreadful. It's not a vote in support of women. The policies of his government have proven time and again to hit women hardest. Look at how he talks about Muslim women. Look at how he treats the women in his life. Have you forgotten about the police being called to his flat due to a domestic incident? Look at the handling of women's pensions. Make whatever decision you want obviously. But don't pretend that this is a good one for women's rights.

Look to Scotland, where wee Jimmy krankee has banned protests outside Holyrood and afair quite some distance around it. Are you upset about this too? Writing to papers and MSPs?

The changes here I dont think ban protests or marches in large swathes outside parliament (although there were some changes a while back which maybe banned anything really close to parliament) more any protest that will prevent large numbers trying to get to work.

I think that should labour get in power all these womens issues you talk of now will melt away completely. Not by vast sums of money, not by any aid that could be provided, not a one will give any shits about any woman in their constituency. But by fudging numbers, not even fudging them actually.
Let's theoretically say.
All the women in Manchester in poverty and living in crime ridden areas = 20% of the female population of the whole of Manchester.
Labour get in and that figure reduces to 10% immediately because they use inclusive language. Its people not solely women.

Let's do this with a womens medical issue. Cervical cancer affects (I cannot remember so I'm making figures up) 10 % of women in the UK.
Labour comes along with its inclusive language bless them and suddenly its 5 % of people and now a massive chunk of the population are worried it could affect them too, because what the hell is a cervix, googling brings up your neck and spine? And money for the treatment/prevention, well sod it, in one swipe weve halved the cases of cervical cancer, let's put the money to better use in a different area.

Pick your woman only soap box issue, halve it now because inclusiveness, see what happens to the funding of that issue?