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.

@jgw1 - I have a wife?

I thought I was just a man for today?

You could be a woman and have a wife. Don't be so cisheteronormative.

I could, but wouldn't my husband have to have announced that at breakfast?

It’s more likely if Labour win

Although worst case imo is a deal with SNP etc

I believe that any creature that slithers and hisses is more likely to be a snake than an elephant.

Ohh, shall I be a snake or an elephant tomorrow?

Snake, elephant, pub bore, whatever. We shan't be surprised.

There's a reliable risk assessment to determine the risk of male sex offenders reoffending. Some idiot decided to use the female one instead. Because TWAW apparently.

Some have a backbone.
twitter.com/RosieDuffield1/status/1608164085194948608

One can either throw light on the issue to provide illumination or create a veil of obfuscation to cast it into darkness. We can see you.

Jgw1 I know you usually just use sarcasm to make your points on the political threads but I'm not sure you get this one. It's not a funny joke haha won't happen, it is happening in England and Wales and on steroids in Scotland. A victim was made to call her rapist she in court. Sex offender risk assessments are based on sex but services are using female risk tools on men who identify as women. Please do look this up as I think you don't believe it has happened and have bought into the ideology.

Being a TRA doesn't make someone a man, lots of them are women, I suspect maybe a small majority.

I think I am struggling with the wild leaps to conclusions that seem to occur.

Indeed. There's always been a succession of posters claiming to be women / "GC as they come but..." for years on this board. They always out themselves with their sneering dismissal of women's rights and safeguarding children. Best not feed the trolls I reckon.

In a functioning system, men would go to a men's prison and women would go to a women's prison.

What's actually happening is that some men who declare that they have womanly feelings (the ones that the Scottish Government wants to hand out GRCs to) are being sent to women's prisons. Self-declaration of a feeling of womanliness shouldn't give male criminals, including rapists, access to women's prisons. But this is what Nicola Sturgeon has decreed should happen in Scotland.

Here's Lisa Nandy saying that she wants the same to happen in the whole of the UK.

New take on Theresa May's view:

Theresa May denies supporting Holyrood’s gender reform

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/84f00f58-86cb-11ed-bb21-8f4d97ec7b02?shareToken=b5ac5c5eb74abe4c97e44b62f2d12516

If men are already being sent to women's prisons, then it has nothing to do with the bill in Scotland which has not become law.

Interesting - TM made those comments in a radio interview didn't she, so little scope for misquotation?

Insider criticism of Theresa May, even before she became MP, was that she was incapable of making a decision. Perhaps this issue is another she flip-flops on.

Moving on from the poster who is determined to make the thread all about them. My private theory is they are a Rishi plant aiming to get us all to repeatedly question then justify why we would ever consider voting Labour. When trying to understand someone else’s argument, most of us will try to add some context. For example a woman who has been abused might see this issue as the one which will determine how she votes in the next election. A man might respond by saying he believes the gender cult is bonkers but not something that will carry electoral weight. Different experiences, different perspectives. jgw tells us that we should not prioritise this issue but does not reveal why they take this line, leaving us with no reason to give his opinions weight.

(I think Keir risks people thinking he is untrustworthy because first he can’t standup and confirm he thinks it is all bollocks, and dangerous. Boris took a bit of persuading because initially he did not take the issue seriously, but got therein the end. Rishi will also try to hide, but has appointed Kemi as the Minister he can hide behind. Then second, men do care about free speech and will dislike the idea that Keir sets a lead in forcing people, including journalists, academics and his fellow MPs to tip toe around an issue.)

I really hope that the constitutional issue is the one that wakes people up. Last week I was with a group including a professional couple with a background similar to Rishi’s parents. One man in the group started talking about his concerns about raising girls and how he was much more aware of misogyny. Another (really nice but a serious anti vaxer) talked about information cover up, allowing me to cover about men in women’s prisons and sport. And how women’s voices were not allowed to be heard. The couple were astonished. This was awful. They read the Guardian and listened to the BBC. How could they not know.

The Guardian will need to cover the constitutional issue. I very much hope that like Keir they are forced into acknowledging that women have legitimate concerns, one which Labour need to address. It is not just a case of evil phobic Tory bigots trying to interfere with Scottish devolution. I wonder how their readers will react if/when they realise that the Guardian has not been supportive of women and women’s issues, indeed has gone out of their way not to cover them.

I wondered if the apparent rowing back and blaming the BBC might signal two things:

1. a reason to have a pop at the Beeb plus handy place to lay the blame
2. a sign that Tory HQ will take this on and that the main (actual or perceived) architect / driver of the previous consultation has recanted.

Thus we should glean that the Tories are largely changed on this issue (not totally, there are still some saying they like the rapists in prisons and transing gay kids idea). To perhaps lend weight to this, nothing seemed to have been said on the Scotland Bill by the other driver - Nokes. Nor was any comment obvious from Miller or Mordaunt.

No, but it shows that the priority of the Labour party is to give a choice to males, like the child rapist mentioned in the clip in my last post, about whether they go to a men's or women's prison.

The labour party thinks that allowing violent males who rape children to choose where they are incarcerated is more important than protecting female prisoners from these violent males.

This is not directly to do with the Scottish bill, but until Keir Starmer condemns what Lisa Nandy said in this clip, and starts prioritising the women and children who are harmed by these men, I will continue to see him as someone who views those women and children as acceptable collateral damage.

Different experiences, different perspectives. jgw tells us that we should not prioritise this issue but does not reveal why they take this line, leaving us with no reason to give his opinions weight.

You missed the part where I pointed out earlier in the thread that the vast majority of sexual assaults are carried out by someone known to the perpetrator.
Where I pointed out some of the many failings of the current government when it comes to the criminal justice system. But you keep going on and on about an issue that will effect very few of us.

Just don't mention the clampdown on protests because the current government doesn't like consent. Arrested for holding up a blank piece of paper...

But you keep going on and on about an issue that will effect very few of us.

An issue that does affect women, particularly the most vulnerable who need the protection of single sex spaces. These are risks we do not need to take. The whataboutery is irrelevant.

You talk about issues that don’t affect “us”.

Who knows who you see as “us” as you are reluctant to give us context to your views. I know, from the direct experience of people I know, that it is an issue that people need to be concerned about.

"An issue that does affect women, particularly the most vulnerable who need the protection of single sex spaces. These are risks we do not need to take. The whataboutery is irrelevant".

There are a few posters Needmoresleep who like to claim that the majority of sexual assaults are carried out by people known to the perpetrator. One normally finds them on rape threads gleefully pushing this point and sometimes on threads about child abuse. Their dismissal of VAWG & the need for rigorous safeguarding measures is very telling.

People with learning disabilities are extremely vulnerable and discriminated against. Where is Starmer's pledge to introduce pro-disability laws? Labour are bizarrely obsessed with a niche middle-class issue and hoping no one cares. They are pathetic.

Just quoting nepeta's post from earlier in the thread, as you seem to have missed it, or not understood it, @jgw1.