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.

Would you agree that one woman harmed by a family member, partner or ex-partner is one too many?

Should we stop men and women ever mixing to eliminate the chance of any women harming men?

1. Yes, one woman harmed is one too many.
2. No.

Self-id is an unacceptable risk to women and children.

Irony alert "Should we stop men and women ever mixing to eliminate the chance of any women harming men?"

Single SEX spaces are safer for women & girls turning our single sex spaces into mixed sex spaces is dangerous for women & girls.

So should every space be single sex?
All the available evidence is that women and children are far more likely to be harmed by people they know than people they don't...

But stopping men ever mixing with women would eliminate a much bigger risk to women than trans women are.

You are being purposely obtuse obviously not all spaces should be single sex (but if they were women would be safer!)
The spaces where women are extra vulnerable to male violence etc due to undressing etc must be single sex.

Ah, got you, thank you for the explanation.
Homes should certainly be single sex then. I think I might start a campaign.

I know. I think they’ve been enjoying too many Christmas sherries.

You said "Most rape victims are raped by a partner, ex partner or other family member."

This is clearly not true, since a maximum of 49% are carried out by those people. 49% is not 'most'.

And what I quoted isn't a 'study', it's the most recent data from the ONS.

At least 51% of rapes are carrried out by a stranger or person known to, but not related to, the victim. More than half. Most of them in other words.

The fact that some rapes are carried out by partners and family members of the victim is irrelevant and isn't what we're discussing here. A larger proportion, more than half, are potentially affected by self-ID.

If you want to discuss the problem of rapes and assaults by partners and family members I suggest you start another thread.

If you want to discuss the problem of rapes and assaults by partners and family members I suggest you start another thread.

No, it is far more important to discuss the much smaller chance of harm to women from trans women, whilst supporting a government that has consistently introduced policies that harm women, and particularly the poorest in society.

Remind me what has happened to rape convictions and prosecutions in the past 12 years?

The fact that some rapes are carried out by partners and family members of the victim is irrelevant and isn't what we're discussing here. A larger proportion, more than half, are potentially affected by self-ID.

Are those people who have partners or families prohibited from self-ID?

Whether a woman knows a self-IDer is irrelevant. I'm sure we all know a few creepy blokes who we wouldn't want anywhere near a women's changing room. Knowing them doesn't make them safer in public places any more than in private ones.

How safe is a female prisoner if her abusive partner is also convicted and turns up at the same prison having self-ID'd?

What about the women in a refuge when the creepy bloke who everyone knows puts on a frock and turns up there?

Come on then jgw1. Tell all us women and mothers why a 45 yr old man self ID ing as a woman should share the swimming pool changing rooms with 13 year old girls? What's the rationale for that cos the only ones I can think of raise so many red flags?

The same woman and child are at far greater risk from the woman's partner and any other men in the family than they are of someone unknown who happens to have self ID as the statistics provided previously in the thread demonstrate. Your time might be more productively spent campaigning for fathers not to be allowed near their wives and children, they represent a greater risk.

I am starting to be seriously concerned that someone might think these are likely scenarios.

All the evidence is that women, children, girls, boys and men are much more likely to be harmed by someone they know than someone they don't.

What does this have to do with self-ID?

Women aren't safe from self-IDing abusers just because they know them. You should understand that since you keep going on about women who know their abusers. Knowing them doesn't make them safe. I don't understand what point you're trying to make.

I'm full of food and drink. I'll read all these new posts tomorrow and respond.

It has about as much to do with self ID as self ID does with swimming pool changing rooms.

Your 'statistics' were made up. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true. The actual statistics from the ONS show that less than half of rapes and sexual assaults are carried out by partners and family members. Do you understand that 'less than half' is not the same as 'most'? You're just showing yourself up as completely innumerate.

And what if the partner or family member is the one who self-IDs and can follow the abused woman to the women's refuge?

Can you answer this question jgw?

The ONS statistics showed that 45% of rapes were carried out by partners or ex-partners. 13% were carried out by people unknown to the victims. If you don't think about 4 times more risk from a women's partner and other men in a family is far more risk, then fair enough.

I am well aware that 45% is not most. The statistics that I was looking at early had just over 50% of rapes being carried out by partners, ex-partners and family members, rather than just under. Both sets of statistics show that the number of rapists known to their victims is much bigger than those who are unknown to their victims, which was the important part of the point I was making and you are refusing to engage with.

@OldCrone I suppose you probably missed the post where I replied to the one from Mrs Window.

Here was my reply.

The same woman and child are at far greater risk from the woman's partner and any other men in the family than they are of someone unknown who happens to have self ID as the statistics provided previously in the thread demonstrate. Your time might be more productively spent campaigning for fathers not to be allowed near their wives and children, they represent a greater risk.

What is your definition of a 'transwoman'? What is the difference between a 'transwoman' and a man?

We're discussing the fact that people like Keir Starmer think that any man should be able to self-ID as a 'transwoman' and be legally recognised as female. Are you suggesting that it's inconceivable that a predatory male would abuse such a law to gain access to women?

Are those people who have partners or families prohibited from self-ID?

I've already said that this is a problem. Some men could abuse the self-ID law to continue to abuse their partner or family member even if she has escaped to what should be a women-only refuge. We're not just concerned about 'strangers' who self-ID, but people we know as well.

Allowing rapists to self-ID is a problem regardless of whether or not they are known to their victims.

But stopping men ever mixing with women would eliminate a much bigger risk to women than trans women are.

Since transwomen are men, that's tautological.

What is your definition of a 'transwoman'? What is the difference between a 'transwoman' and a man?

At the time when the latest craze was to spout at least Boris knows what a woman is in the light of the latest scandal that he and the Tories had created for themselves I asked a few times what people meant by a woman.
They tied themselves up in knots giving contradictory answers to the question. Even though they had given the impression it was a simple question.

Do only some victims count as far as you are concerned? What about the women who are raped by strangers or acquaintances? Don't you care about them? (I know the answer.)

You just keep repeating the same irrelevant stuff and refuse to engage with the real issue: Self-ID endangers women.