Starmer insults women’s intelligence to blame Sunak for judicial failures when it was Starmer’s CPS that failed to prosecute rapists

[IwantToRetire]

I am so fed up with politicians and their seedy bully boy tactics.

So Starmer having failed to get personal approval from voters who rate Sunak higher than him, doesn't think maybe I should try harder to be more relevant to voters.

No he decides to roll in the gutter and use personal attacks. https://www.jackfm.co.uk/news/politics/labour-takes-inspiration-from-australia-with-sunak-attack-ads-but-they-need-more-to-pull-off-a-proper-ousting/

I'm not saying the Tories are blameless, but lets face it, it was/is the CPS who continued/s to fail to prosecute rapists even when the police present evidence, because the CPS only want to take on sure fire winning court cases to up their stats.

So not only has Labour tried to make out Sunak (who became as MP the same year as Starmer) personally doesn't want child abusers to go to prison, but now has plagerised women campaign's slogan about how rape has been decriminalised. https://rapecrisis.org.uk/get-informed/the-decriminalisation-of-rape/

And yet Labour still doesn't know what a woman is, nor have they re-admitted women expelled from Labour for saying women are biological females. But think our tiny emotional brains will be overwhelmed by their crass statements about women's issues.

Labour seem to think that because this sort of politcal sloganeering used by the vote leave party were sucessful during the Brexit campaign, that this is how they will win the next election.

Which is worse? That our politicians think voters are such dimwits. Or that they might be right. https://labourlist.org/2023/04/labour-attack-ad-rishi-sunak-crime-twitter-controversial-advert/

perhaps they changed their mind

They changed the policy!

You do know this is what we talk about here right? We’re all aware because we’ve all been campaigning about this and we know exactly what the Tories did. Don’t follow Starmer in insulting the intelligence of the women here who have been sounding the alarm for years. The difference is labour has watched this and refuses to listen to women and will take it further and make it law. They’ve done that in my home county of NZ and it is much worse there than here with no chance of self ID being revoked anytime soon.

The point is that you can look up exactly what the Conservative Government were prepared to put public money behind and the principles. That meant male sex offenders in women's prisons.

They recently rewrote the guidance and changed the operating provisions. But previously, it was apparently all fine.

Institutional capture. It's happening all over the world regardless of the political leanings of the party of government. It hasn't happened overnight either we've just been slow to realise how far it has gone. If the Labour Party had won the 2019 election then, Judicial Review R (FDJ) v Secretary of State for Justice, would never have made it to court because self ID would have been made law.

My concern for the next election is that we will end up with self ID. There is no doubt in my mind that Labour will introduce it and if the Conservatives don't win an outright majority then they will have to form a coalition with another party who will make self ID a condition of supporting the Conservatives on other issues. I'm not deluded enough to think the Tories won't throw women under the bus if it's the only way for them to be the main party of government.

To be honest, the point I was trying to make, is that this advertising campaign isn't 'policy'. It's some bloke doing it on his own, without telling anyone else.

And now everyone knows that. The perception is that it was a rogue person's decision, without telling anyone, and now they've all got egg on their faces.

Because, it's one thing trying to pick a hole in a Tory sentencing policy, it's quite another when the person ostensibly doing the picking is the one who's responsible for it.

And no, self ID was not implemented. Self ID would mean you could acquire a gender recognition certificate just by downloading a form and sending off a cheque.

What has happened, due to a relentless and widespread campaign by transactivists, like Stonewall, is that single sex exceptions have not been invoked. But they are there, and they can be.

And now, due to an equally relentless campaign by feminists, the government are starting to address the issue, by taking a look at the equality act.

Starmer needs to do the same. He needs to say that the term sex in the equality act means biological sex. All he has said is, that it does most of the time...

Complete bollocks.

Have only just had time to come back to this thread, and have read through quickly and was interested in responses.

Though get the impression existing loyalties (or none) remain unchanged re party poltics.

Not that happy that some on the thread think just insulting someone who says something they dont agree with is somehow a reasoned response, nor does it achieve anything.

Thanks to all who named various Australians, but as pointed out the Saatchi campaign, (well within my memory) was the first. Have no idea what outrageous flyers were posted during the victorian era - but suspect many where libelous, or would it be slander?!

Not feeling that I need to defend myself, but for various reasons had a nearly news free long weekend, and (for all those silly enough to think that was the reason for my post) it isn't because I am a Tory, but was genuinely shocked at the sheer tackiness of the ads - and that Labour thought it appropriate.

And maybe have been a bit pollyanna, but had thought that after all the Boris bombast, and Truss hyperbole, that UK politics was settling back into a more back to basics approach.

We all know the Tories do it because they have, so it does say more when Labour stoop to this. (Happy to be proved wrong by those claiming to be political wonks if they have evidence that Labour have done this before.)

I would have been only too happy if Labour had produced statements about the number of people living in poverty, without a home, etc., etc.. And acknowledging that Brexit, Covid and then Ukraine have caused huge economic problems. And that Labour would do X and Y to stop the increasing divide between rich and poor, create more housing, halt inflation.

So I am wondering now whether in fact part of the purpose of the statements they have chosen were in fact to appeal to the right wing red tops. ie they thought they would get the Mail etc., to be more supportive by going for these law and order, issues in, lets face it, a tabloid type way. Rather than Labour being its usual patronising approach to its voters who thinks these shouty "facts" will be a vote winner.

The problem is the right wing papers are presenting it as an own goal by Labour, so it has back fired.

And the stupid Labour interns or whoever dreampt this up are thrilled because they assume that something getting a lot of hits on social media this means a win - rather than people taking a look to have a laugh or sneer.

Like others on this thread I live in a Labour stronghold both MP and council (who are incomprehensibly incompetent and seem to think their role is to be a dutiful flunky to rich incomers). But if it was a knife edge area, I would wonder about giving my vote to Labour because of the self id issue, made worse by their grotesque pretence at caring about women's issues, but then insulting women and saying actually you dont exist because a man can be a woman.

They are so far up their own self righteousness, that they genuinely think anyone who disagrees with them is too dispicable to care about.

Not the case.

No, it was not.

Btw I do not see self ID as a party issue. I am totally disgusted at the practical elements (sex offenders in women's prisons) and the ideological elements (TWAW).

Both parties seem very free to barter and play about with the rights of women. Both are highly misogynistic since they would not dare to do this with any other group.

The Conservatives both created this monster and defended it practically and the Labour Party lost its head by engaging in a debate which alienated many of its own supporters and they now find they are stuck with.

However, on criminal Justice that is firmly on the Conservatives for cutting the budget year on year to deliver convictions. It's like the health service. You have to fund it, if you don't, crime isn't detected, the evidence gathering fails and prosecutions fall.

The problem is actually that the Labour party has never engaged in a debate - and it even suppresses its own MPs who dare to try.

The Conservatives both created this monster and defended it practically and the Labour Party lost its head by engaging in a debate which alienated many of its own supporters and they now find they are stuck with.

But this is what I don't get. Why they stuck with it? Are transactivists filling their coffers? Not as far as I know.

So they are 'stuck' with an ideology they disagree with? Why? What are they scared of?

Who else are they going to be scared of.

99.9% aren’t talking about it, or was it no one was talking about it

Sod that.

Spend a lot less time on here for precisely this reason.

No problem at all with people criticising Labour's position on the issue or seeking to improve it. But count me out of GC' s trying to use the issue as a way to help the Tories stay in power

How dismissive and patronising! And so cliched. Next you'll be telling us we rely on The Daily Mail to form a view.

Up to you if you want to stay away. Although posters always post this rather than just do that.

I guess it’s aligned to Labour’s view on it, just pretend everyone’s fine and read something else instead

Indeed. Except the feminist board of the biggest gathering of women in history.

And actually, if you stray away from the feminist board, most of the women here are in agreement.

But count me out of GC' s trying to use the issue as a way to help the Tories stay in power

That's probably a contradiction in terms to be honest. Gender critical feminists don't tend to be tory supporters.

We're just waiting for labour to step up and say that men aren't women.

Do you have any idea how many women would write their X in blood, if that was the case?

The truth is many of us now spoil our ballots. The vote has to mean something, and I certainly will not vote for a party that completely disregards women's dignity, rights and protections. And i used to be a Labour party member.

Some people's allegiance to the Labour party is clearly more addictive than their feeling for the integrity of their own sex.

@Datun - you could ask the same question of the Conservatives who could at the stroke of a pen change the law to remove this issue and alter the Equality Act to deal with "biological sex".

Instead, they will use that in the next election to barter women's rights for votes. Now, I'd say the Conservative Party are far nastier because they have the power. They know the issue. They don't act.

As for Labour, I imagine the reason they don't is quite simple. There's little to be gained by doing this publicly, but what I see is the slow movement away from TWAW and a working towards having a basis to say "no". Is that decisive? No. Is it politically wise, yes.

Well done both of you for showing you haven't actually read any of the responses and just repeat your tired old analysis which is that to criticise Labour means you are a Tory supported.

Most are saying how disappointed they are in labour. If you want the Tories out it would be more plausible to have ideas how to make Labour more vote worthy.

But it does reflect what has also been said about Laour that it is now run by intellectual snobs who are so convinced of their rightness they not only think but are happy to say that anyone who doesn't agree with them are stupid, not worth bothering about.

Way to go. How to win votes and influence people.

Just because one group is awful doesn't mean you will endorse the offered alternative.

So not just on FWR but in the media, the response is a big turn off.

It is democracy if lack of faith in party politics means no one votes.

Everyone knows that Labour (should) win the next election because the Tories have so much baggage. And they might still.

But its hardly a victory is it, to "win" not because you are in anyway inspiring or worth bothering about, but because the altrenative is worse.

@NotHavingIt - you are entitled to your view. But you can't deny that if the Conservatives had a sincere desire to address this issue, they could do it pretty much now.

My view is based on what Starmer has said. Is it enough for me? No. Do I see a shift, yea. Do I think he's likely to navigate the next election on TWAW. Absolutely not.

The Labour party in my city is thoroughly corrupt, incompetent and toxic and that adds to the problem if you are/or were a natural Labour voter. The best thing for my city is that the Labour council be voted out. Problem is people are so attached to voting that way as it forms a seemingly essential part of their personal and social identity.

I cannot read my view as someone appears to have reported it - for what reason, I'm unsure. Can you enligten me?

I didn't report it but I did read it. It was pretty rude!

enlighten

So much self righteousnes and inability to deal with straight talking is one of the reasons I've become disillusioned with the Left.