Article on Labour and their silencing on women in the Times

[Igneococcus]

Looks interesting but I haven't read it yet, I'm about to leave the house, but thought I share this for anyone who would like to read it:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/64fe4fd2-9f0f-11ed-833f-9bc13ef7c75b?shareToken=526750d13a7abbf41f430cf2362fac29

This is a very worrying article:

"According to analysis by Labour Women’s Declaration, at least 12 of the 31 MPs on the shadow front bench are “broadly gender-critical” and on Duffield’s side, along with much the same number in junior ministerial positions."

A female member of the shadow cabinet is understood to have taken to Twitter to challenge a colleague’s opposition to the government vetoing the gender bill, but to have deleted the tweet after a request by the party."

One source familiar with the case described the behaviour as “disgraceful”, adding: “It seems a senior Labour man trumps a senior Labour woman.”"

Not even half are GC, and the party is silencing discussion. And the party has a higher tolerance for dissent when it's from men.

This one doesn't even understand the law:

"One member of the shadow cabinet, who is publicly opposed to the implementation of section 35, said the debate was being deliberately weaponised by the Tories and the Scottish Nationalist Party, precisely with the intention of creating a culture war and fuelling divisions within Labour. “They just want a bloody big fist fight and have lost sight of what this is all about,” they said. “A gender-recognition certificate is about allowing you to get married as a woman rather than as a man. It is not as radical as some have been led to believe.”"

This one might get it:

"However, another Labour MP said: “This is going to come up on every doorstep in Britain at the time of the next election and it’s not going to wash if MPs and even party leaders cannot answer the simple question: what is a woman?”"

There's also too much being hung on Yvette Cooper on Radio 4 this week, including in this article. The full interview shows she doesn't really get it because of how she handled the second question:

NR: you raised the issue of violence against women and girls. You'll know that there's a controversial case in Scotland - different legal system, different government, of course - in which a man called Adam Graham who raped two women is identifying as a woman and says he wants to serve his sentence in a women's prison. Now, that would not be possible as I understand it under English law, if Labour gets into government, do you agree that it should not be possible for a man who chooses to identify as a woman - someone who's still anatomically male - to serve their sentence in a woman's prison?

YC: this dangerous rapist should not be in a woman's prison. I think it should be really clear cut, if someone poses a danger to women, has committed crimes against women, they should not be being housed among women prisoners. I think that...that should just be straightforward and I think most people would agree with that.

NR: So, the fact that they identify as a woman, the fact that this person - Isla Bryson - is called in court, a woman, is referred to as "she" - all that should be ignored, and "she" - if she is she - should not serve in a woman's prison, in your view?

YC: There...there is...the Equality Act already provides for recognising that there is a difference between, between gender and whether...however that's legally recognised, and also for biological sex, and provides for there to be safe spaces for biological women, and prisons is one of the cases that's been highlighted as part of that. So, I think this has been something that's been long - you know, had those arrangements in place in the law, and it's right that there should be so. It is possible to, er, have a framework that both supports who are vulnerable who are trans, and also makes sure there are protections for women in these sorts of circumstances.

Thank you for the link op.

There was a time not so very long ago when this article would have had me jumping around and cheering. Now all I have to say to these reported dozen shadow front bench MPs is 'find your fucking spines before it's too late'.

And to Keir Starmer: Keeping a lid on does not take the heat out of the debate. It lets the heat build up until sooner or later it boils over.

That's a really good long read. I'm afraid they'll have to be much more vocal and contrite to win me back. They need to show some courage.

That's a good article, thank you for sharing. Labour have been frighteningly stupid and short sighted on this issue. It was always an open goal for the Tories, and will be ruthlessly exploited by them in the run up to the next election. But sadly, many women like me will no longer vote Labour because of their willingness to throw women's rights under the bus. It is very similar to the antisemitism that Corbyn allowed to flourish - the same hatred of anyone daring to challenge the extremism.

I'm going to read that when i make my next cuppa, many thanks for the share :-) however, i have to say my hackles have already risen due to early mention on the thread of yvette cooper! I can't stand her! I see her as being 40 faced with the ability to speak out of both sides of her mouth, on all mouths on all 40 faces!
My opinion and i'm entitled to it, her actions at the DWP showed me who she is and that was all i needed to know about her. I can't stand her husband either!

Also a good article in the Observer

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/28/forget-andrew-tate-what-about-the-host-of-misogynists-in-labours-ranks

"

I wrote on another thread that, imo, any change in opinion by the labour party/MP's, would be self serving and cynical. Already i feel justified in having that opinion...
Starmer says, tolerance and respect, yada yada, yada! Principals, yada, values, yada, yada!

Labour Womens Declaration working group says...
" His comments have been welcomed by the Labour Women’s Declaration working group, which said in a statement: “After years of looking the other way, the UK Labour front bench is finally starting to sound more convincing on sex and gender.”

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...
" Yet despite what the group sees as positive progress in its campaign, it has been dismayed to discover that it has been banned from having a stall at this weekend’s regional Labour conference in London. "

Again! That's 2 years running! Starmer/labour listening? I don't think so!

" . We have productive private conversations and have given detailed briefings to many Labour politicians, including Keir Starmer and Anneliese Dodds. But banning us from Labour events like this makes the party look ridiculous. "

Productive private meetings? With the biggest tool his dad made and a bobble head? Fat lot of good they did, huh?!
LWDwg did get one thing right though, the party does look ridiculous!
A far cry from the hard working men and women it used to represent, to the vapid ideologists of today! Ridiculous indeed!

It never ceases to amaze me how people who claim to understand that rape has effectively been decriminalised and how few sex crimes are even reported, still believe that the criteria for whether a bloke should be allowed to serve his time in a women's prison should be, "Has he got a rape conviction?"
Ffs. The vast majority of rapists will never be convicted. Same with the guys who sexually assault and flash and who generally just get off on acting creepy to intimidate girls and women. So why do Labour politicians suddenly have such faith in the justice system to identify the perverts when it comes to this issue?

I suppose Labour are getting it from both sides, because the TRAs are also not impressed, and sadly, this doesn’t only include nappy-wearing furries but respectable academics and persons of public life. But Labour is the party that sacrificed women’s rights with both the GRA and the EA. That’s a long, inglorious history.
My other thought is that they’re banking on young, childless women to support trans demands. Though even that demographic might balk at meeting Isla Bryson in the loos.

@Walrussy

Yes, men in women’s spaces - for a male sex offender that equals a 99% chance of not been convicted. That includes men in hospitals, care homes, prisons, special schools, home care.

1 in 585 transwomen is a sex offender.

Labour & SNP = sex offenders feast.

Came to post the observer one, both are good at exposing lefty misogyny.

I suspect more to come over the next year or so.

they’re banking on young, childless women to support trans demands. Though even that demographic might balk at meeting Isla Bryson in the loos

They would grit their teeth and pretend very hard that they couldn’t tell this person was a man. That’s what the very young women did when faced with him on their beauty course.

The ones who did object seem to have been told to pretend harder.

Another one in the times, comment.

I don't have share token though to read it, sorry.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/at-last-people-see-the-reality-of-gender-reform-and-dont-like-it-7l0qkwf0p

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e1e9955e-9f52-11ed-b4bb-1b45ac508ab9?shareToken=cee741126350990cbbb2afb0edc81e56

I would never vote Labour on this issue alone. Their treatment of Rosie Duffield has been pure evil.

We have to keep telling people that the reason there is a female prison in the first place, is because a risk assessment was done on males. Not that a risk assessment needs doing on every individual [to decide which jail they go into] because the FIRST and FOREMOST risk is being male.

Thanks Bing - v scathing article though managed to avoid any pronouns

Calum Steele is general secretary of the Scottish Police Federation 👀

I wonder if you would like to start a new thread with that one?

I found this bit revealing (quote from an anonymous Labour MP): “Sadly, misogyny runs deep in the Labour Party, and that has only got worse after members of Momentum morphed into trans activists but are still, in some cases, occupying key positions within the constituency party, which makes some MPs too frightened to speak out.”

Just like most people in Momentum aren't Palestinian, I assume, I'm guessing most of them aren't trans either. But it's another single issue people have latched onto. In both causes yes there have of course been terrible injustices and suffering (not necessarily on the same scale or with the same objective verifiability but I don't want to digress) . But in both causes, a specific injustice/misdeed then leads the Momentumified thought pattern to divide the entire world into our side/wrong side, a division to be fervently defined, enforced and defended.

There must be some kind of reward pathway in the brain that drives this collective performative righteousness. It becomes the campaigners' identity.

The Labour Party are very stupid if they can't tell genuine caring political activism from righteousness addiction, aren't they? They are going to fall into just the same sort of hole Momentum dug for them with Corbyn 🤦

There must be some kind of reward pathway in the brain that drives this collective performative righteousness. It becomes the campaigners' identity.

Binary non critical thinking.

They've swallowed the lie that T is the same as LGB and thus quote section 28 etc. (that's the key reward pathway)

They then erroneously use dsds as the science. And the suicide stats as the other side of the coin.

Chuck in advocates of "sex work" and you've a misogyny melt.

I've mentioned before and I wish I had the link but younger people (teens to 20s) are more tribal and unity driven, likely an evolutionary survival tactic and of course they wouldn't have lived beyond 40 in the distant past.

It's a lot if younger people driving this (as described by Emma Bateman on Glinner this week, the key issue in the greens) and they're more likely as a result to be into tribal 'identity.'

@DodoPatrol I hear you but the kind of woman who enrols on a beauty course is likely in a different class position than one who becomes a Labour Party activist (likely to be urban, middle class and ‘educated’). Elevated class position = more likely to speak up?

@WarriorN - so a kind of cognitive short-cut? - like when you see a rock out of the corner of your eye and think "puma"

Makes sense, and I suppose the knee-jerk brigade provide a valuable energy in many/most political movements. In fact if I look back on myself in my 20s... Its probably only got worse with the help of divisive-as-a-feature social media algorithms

But Labour (and the Greens) really need to face up to this, as a core activity. I don't think it wins elections or builds robust policy. Come on Starmer and <insert names of current Green co-leaders>. Set up some Nuance Units in your parties!

I think it's more that younger people and teens are more trusting of the status quo of their peers and also more idealistic.

Females particularly seems to love the underdog and become fiercely protective, in this instance of TW.

The flags etc don't help. Hetero flag is grey Ffs.