Kemi is on the case!

[SleekMamma]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/32012712-d2ef-11ed-b1cd-5223fe349502?shareToken=f8d230bb699c280b7ebafca5e872e305

Go Kemi Go Kemi

I’m a lifelong Labour/Green voter, but now I refuse to vote for anyone who pisses on women’s rights the way those two parties have and continue to do. I am well aware of other important issues, but self-ID is a deal-breaker. Unless I have a Communist or SDP candidate, my only voting option will be Tory or spoiled ballot paper.

It is not 'target' anyone. It is meant to re-affirm and re-establish the legitimacy of single sex spaces; over which there has become much confusion. When everyone understands what 'sex' means then we can all move on. Transwomen can campaign for their own protected categories. What can no longer go on is ideological imposition in the name of 'safe spaces' for trans people - at the expense of women.

This is not instead of all of the other measures you talk about.

I think if Starmer wins the GE, Kemi becomes the Leader Of The Opposition. Likely to become PM in 2028.

I think of Sunak sneaks it, Kemi becomes his successor.

We're seeing the rising star in politics.

I think so too.

I think it is the only realistic and workable approach as well as solution to the intractable conflict we face. Denying there is a conflict is one of the reasons we are still here all of these years later still talking about it.

There is no other possible solution to recognising and understanding the difference betwen sex and gender and taking measures to make sure that understanding in recognised in law.

Yes, it is starting to sound as if the real reason that some transwomen might want to access female spaces is not just because they feel unsafe or uncomfortable in the men's, but more about wilfully ignoring and transgressing women's boundaries.

Gender is not the only target to nail.

She's absolutely consistent on the hyper-racialisation sweeping the West, more and more imported here from the US.

If anyone can spearhead a proper revolution in vanquishing DEI and free speech issues in universities, it's Kemi.

I remember that first speech she gave in the Commons some years back, contrasted it to Penny Mordaunt's "Stonewall R Us" one around that time.

No comparison.

Penny's and Liz's stars are on the wane (Penny just yesterdays news, Liz gone the way of all "super"novas).

Yes, she'll be awesome in opposition. She'll continue to hold their feet to the fire, and will question everything they do.

I love how matter of fact and unflappable she is on this. THIS is the approach I wanted from career politicians all along. Fact based, robust, won’t cave to bloody Twitter!

I also think she'd take the Tory Party to a more morally centered position. A proper dialog on migration, and a return to the party conserving.

Massive missed opportunity in Scotland with SNP members voting in snake Humza over principled Kate Forbes.

I'm an avowed atheist, but there's a lot to be said for leaders with a belief in something beyond party and power for it's own sake.

She would be her own woman, as different from Johnson and Cameron and Sunak and Major, as from May and Truss.

Well I think the Tories under Johnson/Sunak were willing to spend a lot more than Thatcher would have done to keep the social fabric in place during covid lockdown. We are paying the price now maybe but I think it is easy to be wise after the event and easy to forget how scary it felt in the early days of March 2020.

Firstly it should be reframed as ‘Gender Identity’ and not just ‘gender’ because so long as there’s a commonly used understanding of gender as being a polite or formal word for biological sex, we will still have room for some peoples obfuscation.

secondly I think there is a massive impact on GRA if I have understood what is being proposed by Badenoch in the Equality Act. These amendments do need to be looked at together and I am worried that is not in the EHRC brief. If EqA says biological sex and gender identity are not overlapping, that the former never changes but the latter can change at will- well, genuine question, then what is the residual purpose (after that amendment is made to EqA) of having a GRC. What does it actually give you if it doesn’t change legal sex any more? Why should a GRC still be granted for life if it can be just for Christmas?
Would we have to bring in a concept of legal gender identity for everyone or just those who apply for a GRC? I just don’t think it can work to amend EqA and leave the existing GRC as is. I don’t understand what the state would be certificating if GRA (quite rightly!) isn’t going to be seen as a legal sex change any more.

Re Gender
being a polite or formal word for biological sex,

It is an nasty, coy, euphemism from America. The formal, real word is sex. It is a shame it has come here.

We now have ‘bathrooms’ too thanks to U.S. gender ideology.

My apologies, that is just my view on gender as a word for sex. I realise there is no going back.

I’m just worried the trade-off that the Tories will make with the TRA lobby- because there has to be something- is that they won’t touch the GRA. And that means that we’ll have lost the chance for the next decade or so to sort out that complete pigs ear of a sexist poorly drafted mess. It’s not that times and social values have changed, it’s that it’s always been a crappy workaround to protect the church’s right not to marry gay people etc. GRA is specifically anachronistic now that pension age is equal and same sex marriage is here (at last).

There might be no going back.

But there's a better way forwards.

Tbh, if Starmer doesn't view this EHRC report/recommendations as his "out", he's even dumber and more captured than I give him credit for.

He has the ideal opportunity to pivot, and claim the experts have directed him to (aka given him cover to diverge from his TRA tormenters).

If he doesn't, then we can safely assume he's absolutely a prisoner of the trans lobby in his party, or he's TRA-adjacent at the very least.

Slothtoes · Today 16:06
GRA is specifically anachronistic now that pension age is equal and same sex marriage is here (at last).

You may be right. Maybe there would be just no need for it though in practice. Is there any chance it could just fall out of use?

I look at Kemi and definitely see a future PM. She's charismatic, strong and principled and takes no bullshit. Go Kemi!

Tbh, if Starmer doesn't view this EHRC report/recommendations as his "out", he's even dumber and more captured than I give him credit for.

He has the ideal opportunity to pivot, and claim the experts have directed him to (aka given him cover to diverge from his TRA tormenters).

If he doesn't, then we can safely assume he's absolutely a prisoner of the trans lobby in his party, or he's TRA-adjacent at the very least.

From what I've seen so far (i.e. today and it's changing all the time) I'm inclined to agree. This could turn out to be Starmer's golden ticket out of this mess but only, I think, if it all gets sorted before the general election. allowing him to evade any real responsibility for it.

But if the likes of J Maugham launch a challenge and get it delayed then I could see Starmer getting dragged into it, which I'm sure is the last thing he wants.

I’m obviously worried that I have given too generous a reading but I was hoping that Starmer’s recent 99.999 % of women don’t have peni comment was taking into account GRA holders- eg those who if male become legally women.
I will be really horrified if Labour who have had a commendable history in government of setting up specialist quangos which IMHO have done a lot of good- like NICE or the Human Tissue Authority- don’t back EHRC on this one.
Not just because of how resolving the injustice to women issues obviously demands that- but also because the EHRC has obviously thought carefully AND is working with informed stakeholders like Sex Matters. Exactly what they should be doing within their remit. Starmer as a lawyer will know that.

@Slothtoes sorry, but the consensus is Keir’s 99.9% means 0.1% are TWAW. GRC holders are a much smaller %. Even then GRC holders are TW not women = adult human female.

The GRA does need reviewing but focusing on the EA2010 and biological sex comes first. Legislatively it’s quick and it leads the way for other clarifications and a sensible debate. Then you go back and look at the GRA.

This could turn out to be Starmer's golden ticket out of this mess

Then he will definitely fuck it up. For one thing, how does he deal with that Penis News video?

Yes he might fuck it up. I'm prepared to wait and see. I don't see any more point in declaring I'll never vote Labour again than I do in promising to vote for them whatever they do cos Tories etc etc. I think they need an incentive to dig their way out of this and my vote is all I've got to hold over them

Imagine you're Starmer, and you don't get just one Golden Ticket, but a half dozen plus, one after the other, in quick succession.

Cass review.
Mermaids shutdown.
Sturgeon immolating.
Time To Tell book.
IOC ruling.
Posie Parker/Lesbian Project/Speakers Corner TRA violence on video.
EHRC recommendations.

And you still can't break the spell.

Ha ha yes, so many golden tickets and open goals - how can he possibly go wrong! I'm just refusing to declare my hand at this point. Every single party can still do a whole lot better.