Starmer: “Gender recognition will not be one of the priorities of the incoming government.”

[Rainbowshit]

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-says-snp-lurched-29479637?utm_source=app

He also appeared to aim a dig at MSPs who passed the legislation: “What’s happened in Scotland is a reminder that if you want change, you have to carry the public with you.”
He also said: “Gender recognition will not be one of the priorities of the incoming government.”

Interesting. Are they finally beginning to read the room...?

[Floisme]

They've got a long way to go before they'll get my vote back but I don't quite understand being annoyed with them because they've finally realised women are pissed off. Apologies if I've misunderstood some posts but I'm delighted they seem to have noticed - it took bloody long enough.

If they think this is all it takes to win back my support they can go whistle, but at least it's a start.

[SmartHome]

I'm not annoyed I'm also delighted sanity is starting to prevail. I'm just holding a real grudge at how casually they dismissed us when they were chasing male votes and male opinions and woke points.

[MrsOvertonsWindow]

@teawamutu

Most people don't care, they said.

It's just a fringe issue, they said.

Only a few old bigots who'll die off soon anyway would disagree, they said...

This.
The press are not going to leave this alone - the outrages & lies so visible in sport, the NHS, the torrent of male sex offenders claiming to be women and the appalling situation in schools has finally been noticed - and people now feel they can speak.
I do wonder how labour will reverse ferret? They've started but Starmer's comments were so public & idiotic, he'll be reminded of them on a regular basis.

[LittleFingerStrength]

Angela Rayner said she didn't want my vote, as long as she is at the helm I shall make sure she does not get my vote and make her dream come true!

[SmartHome]

Apologies if this has already been posted, but this Aussie woman at recent event in Melbourne pretty much sums it up for me. It's not just here the left have thrown woman under the bus

twitter.com/salltweets/status/1636966573629149184?t=m0GdabmbJbZVsbCU-nO60w&s=19

[Floisme]

Oh yeah, I can't see me ever paying my subs to them or even sticking a poster up in my window. That's over. But I still have a vote going begging and, if they want to try and win it back I'm prepared to listen.

[dimorphism]

Starmer's comments were so public & idiotic, he'll be reminded of them on a regular basis especially with KJK standing against him. I am really looking forward to that.

[Panama2]

It is starting to feel that the same old parties have run their course. I would love there to be a Women’s Party.

[LittleFingerStrength]

After what happened with Jeffrey Marsh, Labour will also struggle to get others to vote for them.

[teawamutu]

@SmartHome

I'm not annoyed I'm also delighted sanity is starting to prevail. I'm just holding a real grudge at how casually they dismissed us when they were chasing male votes and male opinions and woke points.

This.

[SammyScrounge]

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow

Exactly. Keir doesn't seem to credit voters with much intelligence. Both the pro-Self ID lobby and the GC one will rightly understand this as him leaving himself free to do whatever he wants, once in power. So it will reassure no one.

He is a man of no conviction. I did not believe him when.he made silly statements about cervixes and I don't believe him.now when he says he won't push for gendering. This man cannot be trusted.

[RosaBonheur]

@SammyScrounge

He is a man of no conviction. I did not believe him when.he made silly statements about cervixes and I don't believe him.now when he says he won't push for gendering. This man cannot be trusted.

He's the Liz Truss of the left.

[anyolddinosaur]

I dont really believe believe many ex-Labour members read the Torygraph, sorry. And no I do not have to have vote for any political party if there is no party worth voting for. I refuse to vote for any party that would be a disaster, I wont give them the legitimacy.

Labour has to get back to the middle ground, it has to woo back former voters- I agree on that. If they want to be able to do anything they first have to be elected, too many of their members would rather maintain their purity and achieve nothing.

[FigRollsAlly]

@anyolddinosaur

I dont really believe believe many ex-Labour members read the Torygraph, sorry. And no I do not have to have vote for any political party if there is no party worth voting for. I refuse to vote for any party that would be a disaster, I wont give them the legitimacy.

Labour has to get back to the middle ground, it has to woo back former voters- I agree on that. If they want to be able to do anything they first have to be elected, too many of their members would rather maintain their purity and achieve nothing.

It does seem unlikely that many former loyal Labour voters would read it but maybe there are floating voters who do. Labour must think it’s an audience worth addressing otherwise why would Dodds bother to write this piece for them?

[teawamutu]

@anyolddinosaur

I dont really believe believe many ex-Labour members read the Torygraph, sorry. And no I do not have to have vote for any political party if there is no party worth voting for. I refuse to vote for any party that would be a disaster, I wont give them the legitimacy.

Labour has to get back to the middle ground, it has to woo back former voters- I agree on that. If they want to be able to do anything they first have to be elected, too many of their members would rather maintain their purity and achieve nothing.

I don't know how many there are - but we do exist. And there will be plenty of Telegraph readers that might be irritated enough to switch sides. Dodds was writing for them (I know she didn't actually write it, obvs) with some perceived benefit in mind.

[ScrollingLeaves]

LittleFingerStrength · Today 20:07
After what happened with Jeffrey Marsh, Labour will also struggle to get others to vote for them.

What has Labour to do with Jeffrey Marsh? ( This is not a rhetorical comment, I just don’t know.)

[ResisterRex]

@anyolddinosaur

I dont really believe believe many ex-Labour members read the Torygraph, sorry. And no I do not have to have vote for any political party if there is no party worth voting for. I refuse to vote for any party that would be a disaster, I wont give them the legitimacy.

Labour has to get back to the middle ground, it has to woo back former voters- I agree on that. If they want to be able to do anything they first have to be elected, too many of their members would rather maintain their purity and achieve nothing.

I'm an ex-Labour voter who now reads the Telegraph.

Labour must completely distance themselves from self-ID, and many of them should apologise (Lammy being the most obviously first up) to us.

These are the bare minimum we deserve before I'd even consider voting for them again.

[DworkinWasRight]

Angela Rayner wanted to expel women like me from the Labour Party. Now she’s discovered that lo and behold Labour are losing ground amongst middle aged women. Well, Angela, time to face the consequences of your own actions. It’s going to take a lot more than your patronising menopause policy, transparently concocted in sheer desperation, to win back the votes of middle aged women you were so willing to dismiss just three years ago.

[MissLucyEyelesbarrow]

Another ex-Labour member who reads the Telegraph. I do avoid all most of their news and opinion pieces though.

I read for their GC stuff, women’s sports coverage (amazing- far better than any other paper/magazine) and their coverage of women’s issues generally, which is surprising good.

[nilsmousehammer]

@SmartHome

Apologies if this has already been posted, but this Aussie woman at recent event in Melbourne pretty much sums it up for me. It's not just here the left have thrown woman under the bus

twitter.com/salltweets/status/1636966573629149184?t=m0GdabmbJbZVsbCU-nO60w&s=19

Thank you for sharing that. She is fantastic, I agree with every furious word.

And the quality of debate is shown in one of the early responses to that tweeted video 'this is the group the Nazis were part of, right'.

Yes darling, the Nazis absolutely stood for women's rights, that was absolutely what the genocide of millions was all about. The SS ran around stickering and misgendering, while the French resistance bravely smuggled sex offending males into women's prisons.

[SomeHorribleMamsnetter]

@SmartHome

Apologies if this has already been posted, but this Aussie woman at recent event in Melbourne pretty much sums it up for me. It's not just here the left have thrown woman under the bus

twitter.com/salltweets/status/1636966573629149184?t=m0GdabmbJbZVsbCU-nO60w&s=19

Fantastic, thanks for posting.

[SomeHorribleMamsnetter]

@DworkinWasRight

Angela Rayner wanted to expel women like me from the Labour Party. Now she’s discovered that lo and behold Labour are losing ground amongst middle aged women. Well, Angela, time to face the consequences of your own actions. It’s going to take a lot more than your patronising menopause policy, transparently concocted in sheer desperation, to win back the votes of middle aged women you were so willing to dismiss just three years ago.

Ah, they want our votes, but not our voices.

Fuck that.

[BreadInCaptivity]

It's as if they are finally starting to read the room...but far too late for me.

Even if Starmer says it's not a priority what does that actually mean?

Furthermore imho protecting women's rights should be a priority, saying it's not a priority to erode them further isn't something to celebrate.

The upshot is that the grass roots (and many MP's) are captured and even if Starmer has had a belated epiphany, I don't trust his ability to prevent further erosion of women's rights amongst a party that can't even protect one of their own female MP's from abuse.

This is a classic case of look at what people do and not what they say.

For far too long, the LP has not just sneered at women like me, they have been positively gleeful in their "righteous" escalation of animosity, arrogance and patronisation.

Sorry, but this doesn't cut it and the idea that trotting out Dodds and Rayner as women's rights show ponies just insults my intelligence.

A start would be giving Rosie Duffield a high profile shadow job, but that won't happen and that tells you everything you need to know - Starmer might have read the weather report forecast and put on his expensive Canada goose jacket but he's still banking on taking it off if things get too hot.

If they want my vote again then there is a lot of clearing house that needs to be done, in terms of people and not just policy.

[TheBiologyStupid]

@SomeHorribleMamsnetter

yes, they are bloody liars.

I want specific, definite actions spelled out in short words with a timetable.

'We will ensure that women are entitled to enjoy all the protections and rights afforded to them in the EA, that all spaces labelled as for women are single sex, and that 'woman' means a born woman and excludes a transwoman and any male bodied person.
We will ensure no males are placed in women's prisons, nor in single sex wards, nor allowed to take the place of a woman on a single sex shortlist or quota.
We will ensure all schools have toilets that are separated by sex. We will ensure all schools sex ed materials are govt approved and grounded in biological fact, and not beholden to any particular ideology.
We will protect the words 'woman', 'girl' and 'mother', and not use dehumanising language to refer to women and girls.
We will ensure males are not permitted to enter the women's category in sport.
We will ensure children with gender confusion are given good, quality support and counselling, and the highest quality evidence based healthcare.
We will ensure lesbians are respected and protected and able to enjoy the protections afforded to them in the EA, without interference from males.'

Maybe even:

'We commit to electing a female leader within the next 5 years.'

Now I'm getting carried away. I can't honestly see that ever happening.

That's a great list!

[xxyzz]

@southbiscay

I think it's as far as he can go right now strategically. I also think he has seen the writing on the wall very starkly in the wake of what happened in Scotland. Up until then, Labour likely thought that they had more to lose by pissing off the TRAs rather than pissing off women (and a few years ago that might have been true). They have observed the politically similar SNP haemorrhage members over gender and at the same time they know that their resurgence depends on lots of previously-Labour working class people who won't have any truck with this gender nonsense and have shown they are also prepared to vote for Tories.

The litmus test will be if more messaging comes out. Starmer knows he will not get through an election campaign without this being an issue that he has to respond to. He knows he can't fudge it any more.

I am cautiously hopeful especially as I expect the public awareness of this issue to continue to grow.

Agree with this absolutely.

Surprised more people haven't spotted the similarity to the way Starmer handled antisemitism in the Laboir party - another issue where he stayed pretty quiet and even made vague pro-Corbyn noises until he was sure he was in power and could afford to remove his enemies on the far left of the party who were most pro-antisemitism.

It's not his style to shout out his views. I've seen him speak to a small group and he is a politician through and through - he knows that keeping his cards close to his chest is essential to gain and maintain power. He will only take action to put his views in practice when he knows it is safe to do that. So I'm not sure we can assume from his fence-sitting to date what his views actually are. But nor can we assume that he doesn't have any.

He knows that Rayner, Lammy etc and the younger left of the party are strongly pro-TWAW - he's not in a position to act against them without considerable support outside of the parliamentary party.

It could be that he relishing what's happened to the SNP as an opportunity to walk back Labour's stance on this; my gut feeling is that his overall politics are anti-racist and anti-sexist ie what we used to see as classic left-wing values. I certainly hope so.

But either way, we won't get to see what he thinks on this genuinely until he's absolutely sure he controls the wheels of power and has widespread support outside as well as inside the party.

So given that - with or without our votes - it's looking increasingly likely that Labour will be the next party of government, in the not too distant future, our priority should be a) to continue making the strength of our feeling on this issue clear while b) avoiding anything that could be seen as linking women’s rights to the far right (as that will make it infinitely harder for Labour to walk back its previous daft comments on women, cervixes etc).

Tl;dr - I'm quietly hopeful Starmer might be for turning. And the more he sees the strength of support nationally for women’s rights, the more likely this is. BUT you will be disappointed if you expect him to give away any clues, before he knows he's in a strong enough position in the party as well as the country.