Stella Creasy says women can have penises

[WhereAreWeNow]

Stella Creasy has doubled down on her TWAW position in today's Telegraph www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/stella-creasy-jk-rowling-wrong-woman-can-have-penis/

I don't think it's a penis that she can't tell from an elbow.

I think raising her profile may have backfired somewhat.

She'll be forever known as "that mad one who said women have penises".

Not True. As the Forstater Tribunal demonstrated:

Paragraph 94 in Forstater v CGD Europe & others “The GRA provides for certain exceptions where, as a matter of law, a person’s gender is not the acquired gender… there is nothing in the Act that requires a person acting in any private capacity to refer to a person’s acquired gender or to refrain from referring to a person’s gender before it became the acquired gender.”

Sections 12, 15, and 16 of the Gender Recognition Act highlight some of the exceptions where even as a matter of law, a person is recognised as their biological sex:

Where even the law contains exceptions, in recognition of the clear scientific fact that humans are a sexually dimorphic (literally “two form”) species who do not exhibit sequential hermaphroditism, then it's obvious a person can't change sex.

The GRA provides a qualified right for males with the PC of gender reassignment to be treated as women, in most but not all circumstances. Hence why Matilda Simon is in line for male primogeniture and inheritance.

I've been looking at this ancient figurine in a museum catalogue from an exhibition about 'The Phallus In Antiquity', and I do wonder how on earth the average PhD holder is supposed to know where the phallus actually is?

It's so difficult, isn't it, to distinguish it from the elbow.

I think raising her profile may have backfired somewhat.
She'll be forever known as "that mad one who said women have penises".

To the general public perhaps, but most of them aren't on Twitter.
Creasy was, if I remember correctly, openly critical of Corbyn and supported that challenge to his leadership. She clearly has ambitions as she's stood before but to have any chance in winning support from the left of the party in a (purely speculative at this stage!) leadership/deputy campaign she would have some serious PR to do.

Lisa Nandy must be worried Stella Creasy will take her crown. Though remembering that video of her, don’t think her “Bringing the Most Sunlight” title is in immediate danger.

People who’ve enjoyed the Stella Creasy Show this weekend should really join the Labour Party. There’s so much more to experience! For example, many on MN have asked what JKR did or said that was transphobic. Well, our local activists were happy to clear that up:

1. JKR “liked” transphobic mugs
2. JKR was quoted by a US Senator - this means she is responsible for all the transphobia in America
3. the goblins of Gingrotts are antisemitic. 🤔 Has to be well worth your monthly subscription!

Mugs? Elbows? Goblins?

Creasy was, if I remember correctly, openly critical of Corbyn and supported that challenge to his leadership. She clearly has ambitions as she's stood before but to have any chance in winning support from the left of the party in a (purely speculative at this stage!) leadership/deputy campaign she would have some serious PR to do.

Presumably that's why she's taken such a hard line on TWAW.

But she's made herself look ridiculous to the average voter.

I would not be against repeal of the Gender Recognition Act. i remember when it came into force in 2004. It is comparatively new. However it may be like our Abortion Act - had been so so very difficult to get into place or amend that trying to change it would be a can of worms so we may well be better off just leaving it alone.

I doubt she's worried about the general electorate at this stage. If she's aiming at a leadership campaign, her first task is to win over the left of the party membership, who have long and, in her case, not very fond memories. She's already won approval from Owen Jones - I laughed when I first saw his tweet supporting her but the guy has a lot of followers in the party.

I could of course be totally wrong but I'm trying to work out why an ambitious, extremely busy MP with a young family (You do know she's got a baby 😀) would spend so much of her precious free time arging on Twitter.

arguing.

I doubt she's worried about the general electorate at this stage. If she's aiming at a leadership campaign, her first task is to win over the left of the party membership, who have long and, in her case, not very fond memories. She's already won approval from Owen Jones - I laughed when I first saw his tweet supporting her but the guy has a lot of followers in the party.

This is classic Labour though, isn't it?

They're all about feeling important, fiddling while Rome burns, pearl clutching from the opposition benches.

Less keen on actually being in power.

@NecessaryScene it would explain why my mum didn't want them on the table.

This is classic Labour though, isn't it?

Oh yes, that's how I recognise the pattern 😀

I wouldn’t be against a repeal of the act either it causes so many issues as biologically you cannot change sex

It does show that once you push through a big change like that it’s very hard to reverse

It makes me more concerned re Labour and Self ID

I hadn't realised until I joined a political party how very cliquey and niche and partisan and riven with internal disputes/factions/alliances they were.

call me naive. I thought everyone within a party would be working for the overarching interests of said party.

@SpindleSheWrote ok so I may have engaged the photo, although to be fair it didn't really need more enlarging! At that point my tablet which has been being a dick all day froze and left me stranded with a humongous elbow staring at me.

5 minutes. 5 minutes it sat there all proud! And elbowy! I'm going to lie now I need to recover!

I bet

I reckon it’s a tussle of power plays

I also feel like I’m more aware of their dirty laundry in that regard than when I was younger - both parties

Yes, this is exactly the problem.

Once you've granted legal rights to a group of people it's very difficult to take them away.

The GRA was passed to resolve a problem that does not exist anymore - same sex marriage. It refers to male and female as genders but does not define male, female or gender. It is truly an awful piece of legislation.

But now people currently have the right to get a piece of paper saying they are the opposite sex to what they actually are in reality, I don't think you can take that right away from them without all hell breaking loose.

The drive to reform the GRA is aimed to make it easier for people to get that piece of paper, not to make it harder or impossible for them to do so.

If we repeal the GRA I can't see what is going to replace it except full self ID. So I think that, as bad as it is, our best option at this point is to stick with it and resist the proposed reforms.

Well she's still at it on Twitter. I have to admire her stamina.

The main reason the GRA was passed was because the ECHR judged that Christine Goodwin had the right to keep her sex private in all circumstances (including but not limited to marriage). The UK govt kept losing court cases on these rights and needed a piece of legislation that would prevent those losses. The Goodwin judgment is fascinating, if incredibly frustrating reading. I believe it was Press for Change who seized the opportunity to lobby for legislation allowing people who had not had any surgical intervention to access a GRC.

It is in my view a nonstarter to repeal the GRA unless we take one of the other routes that were potentially open to us to meet the need. The most obvious one in my view is to reduce to the minimum any reference to sex in public documents. This entire issue really should be a chance to ring-fence the areas of life where sex actually matters. I'd be completely amazed if any if the Tories who give interviews about this would be prepared to lift a finger to try and cut the Gordian knot and engage in hard realities.

We can however change the law though eg restrict the human rights legislation to true human rights not the myriad of extra things it has been extended to cover over time.

Kathleen Stock's response to Stella.
unherd.com/2022/05/stella-creasys-bourgeois-feminism/?=frlh

And Jon Pikes
thecritic.co.uk/language-truth-and-logic/

Both well worth a read.

And she's still behaving appallingly today, especially her responses to Jon Pike.