Labour's Ben Bradshaw on the attack

[CysticMeg]

twitter.com/BenPBradshaw/status/1607991584234115072?t=cBmrw2vp-ik9Q-5oSqyJow&s=19

So disappointed to read this tweet and the very clear direction of his follow up.

Interesting to read the overwhelmingly challenging replies though, with so many people feeling able to state their concerns. Another demonstration of the own goal nature of the Scottish ruling?

So mystifying to see see a gay man who is otherwise open to listening (or who has given that impression over his career) be so absolutely defiantly resistant to acknowledging the concerns of female constituents.

Depressing to think that surrounded by Tories in the SW, Labour are prepared to do nothing to listen in an effort to represent and engage with their electorate.

I'm not surprised, Ben has form, but I didn't think Teresa may was a kool aid nutter?

I'm a bit confused. Article behind a paywall:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/theresa-may-denies-supporting-holyroods-gender-reform-rpq3qrt22

Found an archive:

'Yesterday, however, a spokeswoman for the Maidenhead MP insisted that was not the case.
“As prime minister, Theresa launched a consultation looking at gender recognition laws with the aim of providing a more sensitive approach to transgender people, but she does not agree with Nicola Sturgeon’s legislation and is particularly concerned about the consequences it could have for children in Scotland and across the UK,” she said.'
...
'Speaking on Radio 4 May said: “We have different legal systems.
“Obviously, there’s a different system in Scotland, but I think it is important when any part of the UK is looking at legislation that only affects that part of the UK, that thought is given to what the impact would be on the Union.”
Her spokeswoman on Wednesday denied she had been suggesting that any efforts to overturn the legislation would only serve to fuel support for Scottish independence.
“She thought it important that all parts of the UK should consider how any legislation they pass affects other parts of the Union,” she said.'

Like..do you guys really believe that the majority of cisgender LGB ppl support you? Many of us were around the last time and got bought up thru sec 28..you sit with the people who are calling all LGBTQ ppl paedophiles - hell Glinner is proud that he uses the term 'groomer' to push hate.

Like people can see the same tropes and recycled homophobia appearing.

Convince us of the need to sterilise certain children EvilBee and you may well have it in the bag.

He's not standing again is he? Good.
I wish Standing for Women had the money to put up a candidate in all these seats where the MPs show their contempt for women so clearly. Maybe they will. I'd love to have someone I could campaign and vote for in my constituency.
I used to like Bradshaw, just another misogynist. Ten a penny. God this one issue has opened my eyes to how women's rights are perceived.

Here's a sharetoken:

May denies supporting Holyrood’s gender reform.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/84f00f58-86cb-11ed-bb21-8f4d97ec7b02?shareToken=4d31111b1d046c3d7a6584b33dd411011_

My concern is mainly driven by concerns for the L actually. Who are "you guys"? Female, decades- long Labour voting constituents of MPs who choose to make aggressive, accusatory statements and refuse to listen to concerns? That's me.

I believe being Lesbian/Gay/Bi relates to your sexual orientation. That's based on biology and not how someone dresses or behaves. I believe that LGB get to define their terms and have words to describe themselves. That they have the right to meet in safety and to self define and choose who to exclude.

Ben Bradshaw openly arguing against the Cotton Ceiling concerns, and openly supporting the Brighton students when they attacked Lesbian Dr Stock tells me he has no regard at all for the L.

It's so much fun..not so long ago (like a couple of years) you were suggesting that we should be sterilised so disgusting people like us don't reproduce...now you accuse us of wanting to sterilise trans kids.

I've never seen or heard a GC person suggest trans people should be sterilised. The Economist is a newspaper, not a GC person. Hth.

Perhaps you're confusing the UK with other jurisdictions, Evil. Here's an idea...since you have the internet at your fingertips, why not use it to do some
research? Educate yourself.

Our resident scolder is back. Will the poster recognise who they are and stand up again I wonder. The hyperbole is astounding.
Good for sunlight though. The visitors here start to see the truth when they see such posts. Keep going.

Well I'm one. Formerly known as a lesbian, now a female homosexual. Involved in action against section 28.

I have never in my adult life been on the receiving end of homophobia anything like as vile and hatefilled as I have encountered from trans activists. And yes, most gay friends feel similarly and would not now go anywhere near Pride. And most like me refuse to use the acronym 'LGBT+' as it is now a political statement of TQ+ extremist political afiliation and fuck all to do with sexuality. We have been told by Stonewall et al that they disagree with our right to be homosexual.

And that if as a female homosexual I won't provide sexual access to men who have said the special words I'm a sexual racist. 'Learn to cope' and 'gatekeeping your vagina' and 'cotton ceiling' (I mean seriously, what the fuck?) is all in there.

No idea what this 'cisgender' stuff is, but it sounds as much bollocks as the rest of it.

Evil, I have never seen that article, the headline is remarkable, and it is in stark contrast with my own views. Could you post more detail?

I don’t think that Economist feature is saying what you think it is. Are you very new to this issue?
It will be pointing out that demanding medical transition as a condition for legal transition as has been the case in many countries has the unintended consequence of forcing sterilization on them, with all the human rights problems such a consequence brings. Not saying ‘hey, we’ve got a great idea, let’s sterilise trans people so they can’t reproduce!’
Either you have brought this up in bad faith or are the victim of those who like to whip up paranoia among trans people.

Back to the OP, Bradshaw is reportedly standing down at the next election and was a Labour Cabinet Member during the making of the EQA (the one that restricted single sex spaces) so maybe he's making headlines for himself to line up other jobs.

Just Google The Economist headline, it relates to a ruling in Japan. Bit of a nonsense headline, which TE removed, but left the article exactly as was. Not the Gotcha moment that it might seem.

Of course it’s not a gotcha. That poster relies on bad-fact arguments, obfuscation, lies, and attempts to shame posters for views we don’t actually hold.

Depressing to think that surrounded by Tories in the SW, Labour are prepared to do nothing to listen in an effort to represent and engage with their electorate.

Ugh. Ben Bradshaw is retiring at the next election I think? I wonder if the SW Labour people think it’s inevitable that the Tories will win his seat and they just don’t care …

But this is depressing as I’d always thought Bradshaw was one of the good’uns.

To get back to the thread, following the predicable derailing from our US Scold . . .

May, as we saw throughout her stint as PM, is a very dogmatic and stubborn woman. I think she saw this issue as the Tories’ latest Section 28 and didn’t want to go down that road. While most people’s initial thinking on the issue (we all started off wanting to #bekind) has evolved now that they understand that trans demands involve a dismantling of women’s rights and of safeguarding, May is not able to move beyond an initial instinct.

Thank you countess. I found the tweet and associated article.

Evil, have you read the article referenced in the tweet you posted? If so.. how did you conclude a single badly worded tweet, the contents of the associated article and the views of women posting here, are all in agreement?

Granted, the wording of the tweet is alarming ...but tbh it is so outrageous it warrants scrutiny and pushback....which it appears it did.

Evil i wonder how helpful it is to attempt to scold women for 'wrong think' using poor evidence. Almost like you couldn't find something a bit more robust?

The Economist wrote a provocative tweet in 2019 to draw attention to their article reporting on the state of the law in Japan following a controversial decision of the Supreme Court there:

web.archive.org/web/20220315230404/www.economist.com/asia/2019/03/14/japan-says-transgender-people-must-be-sterilised

The tone of the article is that Japan is out of step with other countries and behind the times. So in effect, the article is saying the opposite to what EvilBee suggested. The Economist was certainly not "suggesting that [trans people] should be sterilised so disgusting people like [them] don't reproduce".

Yet again, it turns out that globally as people have turned away from thinking sterilising trans people is a good idea, you'll still find plenty of supporters for this practice among trans activists.

That's the problem with trans activists, they're are continually motivated to spreading disinformation to mislead and one of their favourite things is DARVO.

Apologies all for derailing. I didn't realise Evil has got form.

As for the May/Bradshaw business - of course its disappointing nonsense. Bradshaw making a half hearted attempt to locate a mythical middle ground by deigning to nod to cross party ally.

Erm if I read right Ben, May was not overkeen to be misrepresented in this way.

I posted this before reading the Times article, and now see that May has indeed changed her initial thinking on this issue (as indeed have many of us, who started out unthinkingly wanting to simply be kind) so kudos to her, she’s clearly less dogmatic than I’d given her credit for.