Telegraph - Keir Starmer: Pro-trans laws are needed across UK

[ResisterRex]

At first glance, just (just!!) a rehash of his video from last year. Which said what it said. But there's this:

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/23/keir-starmer-pro-trans-laws-needed-across-uk/

"Asked by The Telegraph about the leader’s comments to Pink News, Labour confirmed that he stood by plans to reform the GRA.

A party spokesman said: “All political parties agree that the process needs modernising. A future Labour government will consult on what that looks like, while upholding the Equality Act and maintaining single-sex spaces.
“Labour has a strong and proud record of standing up for women’s rights. Our commitment to them is unrelenting.”
Trans rights have become a key electoral battleground in the USS_ and are expected to be similarly important in the UK at the next general election."

Do all political parties agree the GRA needs updating? The Tories just made it easier to get a GRC, and they've not said they plan to do more.

Once again the "maintaining single sex spaces" rhetoric. But next to the Haldane judgement? Come on.

I think they're frightened both of their own party members, many of whom are very pro trans rights, and of the younger, more metropolitan section of their voter base, who also fall into that category. And when I say "very pro trans rights", I mean there are constituency parties who will hound and harass gender-critical feminists in the party in an attempt to drive them out.

To a large extent, Labour relies on young, urban professionals to vote for them - and these people tend to have a consistent set of beliefs: pro-EU, anti-racist, pro-trans rights, probably not that interested in traditional class politics.

But in the red wall seats it's a different matter. Labour desperately needs its traditional working-class voters to return to them after switching to the Tories in 2019. And those voters are, by and large, going to be unimpressed by the idea of having a six foot, 15 stone hairy-bollocked bloke sharing a changing room with their 16-year old daughter.

How can Labour appeal to both constituencies? So far the best strategy it's been able to come up with is to dodge the question, but if Sunak puts the pressure on, it's going to be forced to provide an answer that upsets one side or the other.

Did Rishi say what his view was or did he as the headline suggest simply kick the question down the road, by not saying much, which of course is a terrible thing if Keir does that?

Fucking hell I'm not about to do a fucking transcript for you, and place it in the context of legislative due process. Stop being so lazy FFS

I think some posters are in the semi wind up. It’s too tiring to engage with all the deflection , have a nice Boxing Day sarny instead ;

We're in an economic mess, the NHS is on the verge of collapse, Tories have nothing to offer anyone under 50, and Labour are beginning to put together a reasonably attractive offer.

But people will vote instead based on an issue that a whoppping 8% of people have paid "a lot of attention" to and 66% say they pay little or no attention to?

yougov.co.uk/topics/society/articles-reports/2022/07/20/where-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

How can we effectively fight on this issue and do forward planning if we insist on delusional thinking? We're just walking into a situation where Labour gets a comfortable majority and sees absolutely no electoral benefit in taking note of GC opinion because "they're all Tories anyway."

How can we effectively fight on this issue and do forward planning if we insist on delusional thinking? We're just walking into a situation where Labour gets a comfortable majority and sees absolutely no electoral benefit in taking note of GC opinion because "they're all Tories anyway."

The fact that they weren't thinking about it six months ago doesn't mean that they won't be thinking about it in a year or two years' time. Before 2016 no one, as far as I could tell, had any strong views either way about staying in or leaving the EU. It just wasn't a subject that ever came up. Yet by June 2016 families were torn apart by the issue. It's all about bringing how you persuade the public to care about something they didn't think they cared about.

And of course, it will come to public attention if the government decides to block the Scottish legislation.

I'm not saying we shouldn't find other ways of fighting on this issue - but in fairness, lots of us are already doing that.

How can Labour appeal to both constituencies? So far the best strategy it's been able to come up with is to dodge the question,
Thanks for your thoughts RoyalCorgi. I guess it puzzles me because, from where I'm sitting, the priority would be to win back the red wall supporters before they get settled into a new voting (or not voting) pattern. I'd have expected to see some kind of 'Come back home to Labour' campaign by now. Instead there seems to be an assumption that, now Brexit has happened, those voters will automatically return, which I find pretty arrogant and also indicative that the party has lost touch with how their traditional voters think.

Before 2016 no one, as far as I could tell, had any strong views either way about staying in or leaving the EU. It just wasn't a subject that ever came up
I think that's mistaken. From what I saw and heard, there were plenty of people with strong views about it - you might think those views were mistaken but they were definitely around. But Labour wasn't interested in listening - I thought the Mrs Duffy debacle made that very clear to a lot of their traditional supporters.

I don't think it's necessarily a vote-winner, but I do think this issue makes Labour look downright stupid. They either stumble over an answer (Keir) or look like loony evangelists. I absolutely think it will make people wonder what's going on when the election draws closer.

If Labour will blatantly lie that TWAW, what else will they lie about? All the Tories need to say is we are dealing with the issue, whereas Labour will be full steam ahead to letting Dave Davina change with your daughter.

Obviously, the Tories can still mess it up in other ways, but Labour are leaving the goal wide open.

I find the comparison with Brexit interesting. The EU was not many of the things that Brexiteers said it was but Brexiteers who stood to make lots of money (eg JRM) from it harnessed people's dislike (sometimes hatred) of those who are different from them - in this case foreigners. I suppose perhaps the aim is for something similar to happen by othering those who are trans.

Whereas the Tory party as the clip provided up thread of the Prime Minister shows, say absolutely nothing at all about it, but aren't challenged by the media in the same way, presumably because much of the media and its owners benefit from the lax taxation of the rich in this country.

I'd have expected to see some kind of 'Come back home to Labour' campaign by now. Instead there seems to be an assumption that, now Brexit has happened, those voters will automatically return, which I find pretty arrogant and also indicative that the party has lost touch with how their traditional voters think.

I think that's true, though of course they might be right - I can imagine that a lot of working-class voters who voted Tory in 2019 might be so fed up that they will return to Labour by default unless Labour does something horrendously stupid. Like pretending men can be women...

Re your other post, I think it's an interesting observation about the EU already being on some people's radar. I wonder, though, if it was the EU specifically, or just general anger at immigration, which then found a focus in the Brexit campaign (of course, a lot of additional immigration was the result of free movement in the EU). Also possible that I simply hadn't picked up on that anger because I was only reading the Guardian and listening to the BBC.

It’s difficult to know how it will go. Inflation is a biggie if that goes down it leaves more room for Tories, although they have a long way to go in the polls. Sunak does pretty well but the party is lagging.

It doesn’t take much these days to sway opinion over an issue, sometimes not that related. But Penny M rightly thought it was damaging politically after dropping down race.

Add in billboards and KJK running against Starmer who will stir media up.

We’ll see. Starmer isn’t great, lacks in many areas, but Tories obviously have been hit hard

I agree, the Tories have a mountain to climb and I won't be at all surprised if they lose.

This issue is going to keep coming up though and I'm looking forward to KJK making sure everyone knows what Labour will be supporting.

It's going to be interesting.

It's not a vote winner though either.

If us wimms can manage to get this out in the open, where everyone can see the issues then I reckon we have a fair chance at labour losing the next election.

This issue currently cant be top of "most important issues" because to even mention it gets you called a bigot at best and ignored as if you never said a word. Or as it used to be #nodebate

You think cheap childcare will win over women who will cease to have a name for themselves soon? I reckon women are smarter than that.

If people want to go to the other side (bit juvenile) then they are welcome, it's not a hive mind thing.
I personally will vote with self id in mind, others can vote however they choose because I'm not their mummy and women will cope with the aftermath if the wrong party gets in.
Do you think all this mundane shite is never thought about? That plans are drawn up for many scenarios? That we have no brain between us and cant figure out what to do for the best with what we are left?
You have no faith in women.

Re your other post, I think it's an interesting observation about the EU already being on some people's radar. I wonder, though, if it was the EU specifically, or just general anger at immigration, which then found a focus in the Brexit campaign (of course, a lot of additional immigration was the result of free movement in the EU). Also possible that I simply hadn't picked up on that anger because I was only reading the Guardian and listening to the BBC.
I'd say it was a bit of both - not you personally but I heard and witnessed quite a lot of discontent expressed in private that either wasn't taken seriously or was misrepresented by the likes of the Graun or BBC. I agree the discontent might not have originally been specifically about the EU but that was where it crystallised. I have tried to learn from what happened next, and my take-away lesson is that trying to close down uncomfortable discussions will come back and bite you on the arse.

Best rated comments = hard (but necessary, IMO) read for Labour HQ

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11570689/Labour-war-Scotlands-new-law-changing-gender.html

Those comments are glorious.

We can split hairs on the “risk of harm”, but why should women and girls have to change next to men in the first place of they don’t want to?

I don’t want to get changed etc. next to a man. My 10 year old doesn’t either. So why do we have to be uncomfortable just in order to validate some man’s subjective feelings and desires?

My DD is at the age when she is horrendously embarrassed even at the thought of changing near the boys at school. But her feelings matter less than some adult man who’s decided, against all material reality, that he “feels like” a woman?

And my DD, who’s small for her age, is clearly physically and emotionally smaller and more vulnerable than an adult man, isn’t she? Yet he gets to decree that he’s the vulnerable one and gets his feelings and “rights” prioritised, no matter how upset or uncomfortable a woman or s small girl might be.

That’s the nub of what’s wrong here. It’s the prioritising of someone who is patently not more vulnerable, over someone who patently is. It’s the privileging of the feelings of someone who already gets what they want over those of someone who has much less agency. It’s the fact that the whole business is an out and out lie and pretence and we all know it. THAT’S what’s so fucking wrong about it all. The reduction of real women and little girls to the mere content of some man’s psychological fantasies about identity, kink and validation.

It makes me so fucking angry that women go along with this, because they should fucking know better than to reduce the comfort and safety of real little girls to mere collateral in virtue signalling about the importance privileging of men’s power fantasies and sex kinks.

If you Google "rishi sunak equality act sex", you'll see a bunch of results from last month reporting that Rishi Sunak raised the prospect of amending the Equality Act to clarify that sex means biological sex.

You'll also note that the results are heavily skewed by the trans activist side.

For example, the Gay Times reports that, "The UK's latest Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is reportedly planning to review where transgender rights stand in the Equality Act 2010."

Prick Pink News goes further, reporting that, "Rishi Sunak 'wants to gut trans rights from Equality Act'."

All because he said that the protected characteristic of sex should refer to someone's actual, biological sex, i.e. the innate characteristic they can do nothing about and the basis on which 50% of us are routinely discriminated against, and not someone's "legal sex", a mechanism by which male people can choose to be called female but do not lose any male privilege, and female people can choose to be called male but do not gain any male privilege.

Confirming that sex should mean your actual, real, biological sex isn't taking anything away from trans people, who already have all the same rights as everyone else, plus a few more rights that no one else has, and who already benefit from their own, separate, protected characteristic.

All it would do is ensure that members of the female sex are entitled to sex based protection.

Why would trans activists object to that if, as they claim, trans rights are not in conflict with women's rights?

We aren't.

If we were fans of the Tories, we would be delighted that all the other parties are determined to throw women under the bus over this issue, rather than furious about it.

postcardpuffin

And my DD, who’s small for her age, is clearly physically and emotionally smaller and more vulnerable than an adult man, isn’t she? Yet he gets to decree that he’s the vulnerable one and gets his feelings and “rights” prioritised, no matter how upset or uncomfortable a woman or s small girl might be.

I just find it mind boggling that these extremists and their enablers simply refuse to see that this sort of thing is hugely problematic and distressing for women and girls. All I can think is that they're selfish control freaks, as they insist in imposing themselves.

I wish we could redefine pro trans. I consider myself to be both gender critical and pro-trans. Or at least pro- the rights of people with gender dysphoria or any other condition not to be misled or lied to.

I'd like the JKR manifesto

Dress however you please.
Call yourself whatever you like.
Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
Live your best life in peace and security.

But be honest. Be trans and own it - Use the facilities for your birth sex and don't colonise those belonging to others.

So many of them seem to be narcissistic control freaks who hate women.

Jane Fae announced Fae's intention to transition the night before Fae's daughter had an important exam.

Jan Morris treated Morris's wife and daughter appallingly.
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4695399-sunday-times-article-by-jan-morriss-daughter

It's all 'me, me, me' and using women and girls as props in their fantasy lives.

So many of them seem to be narcissistic control freaks who hate women.

Specifically, they hate their mothers. Often very very much. I wish this were more acknowledged.