Labour Women's Declaration letter to Starmer

[fromorbit]

Interesting letter on Starmer's standard reply on sex and gender questions. LWD are moving forward and fighting to influence Labour from within. The debate over the next 18 months to next general election will be intense.

"Keir’s office has been sending out a template reply to constituents who have written to him about sex and gender. For a copy of Keir’s letter see below this post. We have replied as LWD in a private letter to Keir. But we’re happy to share here the main messages in that letter:"

labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/lwd-response-to-sir-keir-starmers-reply-to-constituents-about-sex-and-gender/

Good for Labour women for staying and fighting when so many of us have given up. That's an excellent letter from LWD and Starmer's response suggests that their previous RSOH TWAW and you're all fascist bigots is starting to shift.

Excellent clarifications being asked for - let's see where this goes.

We would also uphold the Equality Act that allows for certain spaces for biological women.

LWD great, but I really don't like the way they have worded 'allows for certain spaces' as though we are children who are only entitled to some, as granted (usually by men) if we behave, spaces for ourselves. LWD may be happier, but I certainly am not.

The vast majority of the time, trans women are rightly treated with respect and compassion as women.

Still TWAW in other words.

And it still seems as transwomen are being accorded more "respect and compassion" that actual women.

www.ipetitions.com/petition/labour-womens-declaration

if you want to sign the petition in support of the declaration

That wording is from Starmer's template letter. LWD say:
In the meantime, we urgently ask you and Labour colleagues to note that EA2010 provides for single-sex exceptions, not “safe spaces” nor “single-sex spaces”. The term “spaces” implies that this provision is only needed in extreme circumstances, for example in prisons or refuges. But the exceptions allow all women the dignity and privacy of single-sex provision in our daily lives, and are an important underpinning for discrimination legislation.

I've got great admiration for the way these women are holding Starmer to account for his inane TWAW, we mustn't say only women have a cervix drivel.
Sadly it speaks to the character of the man (at a time when we're desperate for some ethical politicians) that he was so easily captured by toxic science / fact deniers and so easily aligned himself with the wrong side of history in terms of women and children's safety and rights. Let alone his failure to speak out against the bullying of women in the party.
Still, if he and the party are creeping back to an ethical stance, it may eventually be possible to vote for them.
I'll wait.

I found this disappointing. Either lay it all out or don't. Which bits are they keeping from publication and why? Do they think the LP is going to look favourably on them for holding some of it back? Do they think we will trust them if they hold some of it back?

We feel that, since we met in July, you have taken the time to consider our arguments, for which we thank you.
They met with Starmer last July? That's good to hear but also a surprise. Is it public knowledge that they met or just me who didn't know?
And what they talk about - is there any kind of public record, even if only within the party?

Agreed. I can't see why they couldn't just have published their response as an open letter, which is the conventional way of doing these things.

Talking out of both sides of his mouth on all his different faces again, is zir?
As i remember, zir/labour party, still wouldn't allow the LWD to host a table at conference, so i'm not in the least convinced of his support for biological women, not in the slightest.
I still refuse, point blank, to support starmer/labour party, i will not be voting for him to lead the country, nor will i be encouraging anyone else to, i just don't trust him!

Signed, Thank you for sharing this. Fabulous to see how many founding signatories are Cardiff and Wales based given the worrying decisions and rhetoric coming out of the Senedd of late.

Polls, eg BBC and IPSOS show that two thirds of voters, including Labour voters, oppose Self-ID and support the single-sex exceptions. A clear steer from you, now, that “modernise” will not involve Self-ID, will put the party on a secure and stable footing as it enters into the GE campaign

*Robust policies cannot be developed with only one side of the arguments present. We welcomed the party’s listing of our conference fringe meeting last October. It was addressed and attended by many Labour politicians and was a great success. However the refusal of our 2022 conference stand application has not reflected well on the party and has contributed to many party members and staff remaining even further behind the curve in understanding the legal issues. Nancy Kelley, CEO of Stonewall, was invited by David Evans to address all party staff in a zoom only this week, further contributing to misapprehensions which many staff still hold.^

These phrases stood out to me here:

“It has contributed to many party members and staff remaining even further behind the curve in understanding the legal issues”

Prepared for people who do not understand the legal issues being voted in at the next election by signing this for change now if you haven’t yet,
www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4758082-petition-to-update-the-equality-act-thread-3

and,
”Nancy Kelly, CEO of Stonewall, was invited by David Evans to address all party staff”

How stone tone-deaf can you get?