Lisa Nandy says TWAW and belong in women's prisons

[pattihews]

And she totally supports self-ID. This is why if a general election was called tomorrow, I'd either not vote or I might even vote Conservative, though that would be painful for me.

Labour are still totally captured. I know there are good people within Labour fighting from within, but a Labour cabinet would include people like Nandy and Starmer who are staying true to Stonewall. They can't be trusted with women's rights.

I stole this from another thread: thought it deserved one of its own. Hope that's okay.

Gender ideology is like the 2008 financial crash: that came from the US sub-prime mortgage scandal and Labour got the blame because it was in power at the time it hit. Closer examination shows that actually Gordon Brown was one of the key people who managed to keep the UK and Europe afloat, but despite that many people blamed him and Labour for the disaster and voted Labour out.

The Conservatives were in power when Gender ideology hit across Europe and Australia and New Zealand. Ireland, New Zealand and Australia quickly buckled and compromised women's rights in the name of being progressive. France and Germany and Spain are all teetering. The UK is seen to be leading the way in the fightback against GI. Thank goodness GI hit when the Tories were in charge, otherwise self-ID would be legal and we'd all be in court for mispronouning and deadnaming people.

It's taking the Tories time but they're getting there faster than any other government that I'm aware of. Don't blame them for being momentarily submerged by the gender tsunami. I live in a part of the UK where our Labour first minister has refused to even speak to women's groups for the last three years, and who believes TWAW.

Always voted conservative or lib-dem but after watching SKS on TV this morning I actually thought I might fit the first time vote Labour!!

But now. Nope. They'll never learn.

Aren't they about to change policy on the prisons issue anyway. I'm assuming changes are imminent...

www.thejusticegap.com/transgender-prisoners-may-be-excluded-from-womens-prisons/

Labour have said they will clarify The Equality Act single sex exceptions, and I suspect what they mean by that is 'TWAW'.

Thanks for the link to that judgement. I'm part way through reading it and it's pretty shocking. Some of the terminology the judge uses is concerning.

He says he will use women and transgender women to differentiate between the two but later starts referring to women as non transgender women.

He acknowledges that sex and gender have been used interchangeably but are now accepted to be two different things but then refers to a TW as having a female gender.

So far it seems that the problem lies with the use of single sex exceptions in the EA being discretionary rather than mandatory.

So far it seems that the problem lies with the use of single sex exceptions in the EA being discretionary rather than mandatory.

Yes, that's my reading too. People who provide services can make them single-sex if they have a good reason (eg privacy, dignity) but they don't have to.

However, it's still a bit baffling because historically, for 100+ years, prisons have been single-sex, so that policy has apparently been changed without any kind of consultation.

So far it seems that the problem lies with the use of single sex exceptions in the EA being discretionary rather than mandatory.

And a judge has used their (his I assume) discretion to house a violent male pedophile in prison with some of the most vulnerable women in society and their babies.

It's fucking disgusting.

If the single sex exemption does not apply their then it won't apply anywhere.

What a time to be a woman.

And how does it work if using your discretion to favour males contravenes a UN Convention.

Why aren't the human rights lawyers all over this?

Women really don't matter at all. So long as the men get what they want.

there not their, in my anger my grammar has gone to pieces!

The Green Party are even worse than Labour over this issue, though!

I never understand how this works. The law is already made so isn't it then judges who interpret that law? The government can't just change the meaning of laws by saying what they want it to mean.

Look, it doesn’t matter. If you vote conservative, you’ll be a serf starving in a hovel in a few years worrying about how to get enough to eat and whether to burn the bed to stay warm*. If you vote labour, you might still have a house with running water, and the energy and luxury to be handwringing over which loo you use.

Don’t be distracted. I bet loads of other Labour people said loads of other things that are far more important. Yet this is the one being publicised? Who’s behind that, do you think?

• Hyperbole for semi-comic effect. I hope. No party is perfect, and if this is the only issue issue stopping you from voting labour, its a pitifully small issue compared the real problems this country is facing and a pants reason to put up with economic rape and pillage. Let’s just have one that’s better, and you can sort out the trans problems later.

How patronising, and so likely to win women over. If you really cared about winning people back to voting Labour you wouldn't go out of your way to alienate them.

If you vote labour, you might still have a house with running water, and the energy and luxury to be handwringing over which loo you use.

That's weird. I thought we were discussing the plight of vulnerable female prisoners being housed with violent sex offenders. Why have you interpreted that to mean "handwringing over which loo you use"? Are you deliberately misrepresenting the argument, or are you just not very good at reading?

If you vote labour, you might still have a house with running water

If they pull their heads out of their arses enough to stop their stupid obsession with toxic luxury beliefs like gender identity ideology, maybe. I won't hold my breath.

Nah - the current Home Secretary is Suella Braverman, who is as GC as they come. I have every faith in her to sort out this prisons issue.

I have spent some time in prisons, helping with education. Let me tell you that even woman's prisons which are considered ‘easier’ than mens, are scary places. Even getting into them as a visitor, through all the checks, handing over all your possessions, being searched.

Now imagine being there, a vulnerable woman, incarcerated with men. Something like 65% of women in prison show some level of brain damage, most of which will have come from male assault.

I think I am right in saying that they are now offering free birth control in some USA jails to ensure that female prisoners do not become pregnant. Seriously this is like state sponsored brothels for the use of male bodied prisoners.

I just didn’t understand how any MP can countenance this.

and if this is the only issue issue stopping you from voting labour, its a pitifully small issue compared the real problems this country is facing

This is desperately naive of you.

Let’s just have one that’s better, and you can sort out the trans problems later.

The further we go down the self ID, TWAW track, the more difficult it get to row back. We're already seeing that happen. I can't understand why you wouldn't grasp that, it's just such a basic point.

Also top marks for the 'women, we'll definitely make your issues a priority later, just not now' take. We've all heard that before, we'd be fools to fall for it again.

Agree.
I can’t believe I have the choice of this absolute shower or the hapless bunch in power.

He starts by saying that there is no statutory obligation to house men and women separately in prisons but the real issue lies in the interpretation of:

"..a proportionate means to a legitimate aim"

As I understand it the judges view was that if a prison has adequate safeguarding policies to achieve "a legitimate aim" ie keeping women safe then excluding TW from women's prisons would be a "disproportionate" means. He was satisfied that the prison service policies achieved the correct balance of rights.

The human rights lawyers seem to be part of the problem. Keir Starmer was a human rights lawyer before being an MP. The human rights campaigning organisation Liberty think TWAW.

None of them care about the human rights of women or children.

No party is perfect, and if this is the only issue issue stopping you from voting labour, its a pitifully small issue compared the real problems this country is facing and a pants reason to put up with economic rape and pillage.

If you think that denying sex and replacing biology with gender-feels is a pitifully small issue you don't understand what gender ideology means. It's the end of women's rights, because anyone can be a woman. It's the end of same-sex relationships and LGB rights, because sex is no longer a thing. It's the manifestation of a profoundly misogynistic, homophobic philosophy and world view. If you think that's nothing to get fussed about, I'm guessing you're either a straight man or you have no idea how far and deep this ideology goes.

I know , it is so depressing.

Goes to show that when it comes to 'human' rights women are the lesser humans.

T'was ever thus.

I liked what I heard of Starmer's speech and would love to have the option of voting Labour. Why can't they read the room on this? We need a proper opposition.

That's so depressing. But I suppose what he means by "correct balance" is that the men have all the rights, and the women have none.