Time to dust off your Labour Party membership and support LWD

[Forwarder]

The only mainstream party that currently acknowledges biological reality took a bit of a pounding yesterday (results so far). Spoiled ballot papers ain't going to cut it. From these results we might get a Labour Libdem coalition next time, if not outright Labour majority.

Either way, that means full steam ahead for Self ID.

If you are still a member of the Labour Party, Labour Women's Declaration is trying to get GC candidates on the National Women's Committee and push back at the MRAs who run the party. The nominations go in this month and next. LWD running an advice session soon.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65475817

I am always intrigued by the motives of posters on FWR, who insist that no one cares about women’s rights, as they are impacted by trans issues.

It’s been happening for a decade, during which time we have had the Karen White scandal, Isla Bryson, Dylan Mulvaney, the Cass Report, Posie Parker etc. The issues have created a deep cultural fissure in the US, and there is at least one article daily in the British media. Murdoch and the Daily Mail don’t keep writing about topics that don’t generate traffic. They are covering them because people are interested. Ten years ago, hardly anyone knew what was happening; now it’s a topic you hear discussed everywhere.

The GRR Bill in Scotland made Scots side with a Tory government against Holyrood. That is huge, whatever you believe about Sturgeon.

Why is it so important to you to believe that no one cares?

At the moment voters preference is “neither of the above”.

The Tories because of 13 years in power. It would be the natural order for people to want change, even without some of the scandals. They had their chance, now give someone else a go. I personally think that voters, especially younger voters facing an uncertain future and their worried mothers and grandmothers, will also be looking for a party that offers compassion and understanding. Hence Rishi’s problem - too rich.

Labour, because people don’t trust them to govern. How much Corbyn influence remains? Does Keir control his party? Indeed what does Keir stand for?

This is where womens issues will hurt. Sex/gender is a societal issue. It should not be a political issue. Most people support safeguarding and protecting women’s spaces and oppose self ID instinctively. Quite why several parties to the left have adopted a pro self-ID stance to the extent they don’t allow dissent or debate is bizarre. Voters know what a woman is. Hence Kier’s problem - untruthful and untrustworthy.

At this point voters would normally look to a third option: LibDems, Greens, and at a local level, Independents, or simply not bother to vote. This happened in the local elections. Some of this was a protest vote by traditional Conservatives and possibly Labour voters, who want to give their own parties a shaking. Will voters return for a general election? Will additional scrutiny of the LibDems or Greens cause people to reject them as an alternative.

I think people are quoting part of my post on not caring

It is in press and is talked about

No ulterior motive here just despondent thinking about what’s next.

Starmer believes no one is discussing it, the local election results will have him riding high and I doubt will dissuade him of that view.

It’s not just discussion that counts but actual votes

I’d love to see it become a bigger issue at GE and see it reflected in votes.

I don’t think I could have felt any lower about all this. If pp feel more positive that it will impact votes - well I hope so.

I think it's time to join whichever party most aligns with your values in other respects and help the fight back from the inside.

Labour, Lib-Dems and Greens all have appalling policies when it comes to gender ideology but are better than the Tories in every other respect and have members who are fighting back. Every time a member (understandably) leaves, it puts TRAs in a stronger position and makes it harder for those of us who are still hanging on.

I'm in the Green Party. Absolute lunatics at the top and ridiculous motions passed at Conference. But local activists working hard in local areas, mostly unaware/not really interested in what's happened to the Party. I can imagine that it's similar in Labour & Lib Dems.

GCs in the Green Party have been heartened by the local election results. We gained a huge number of councillors - proportionally, we did far better than Labour. Many of our new councillors are older and are real environmentalists who are committed to working hard for local people.

BUT we were wiped out in Brighton. Partly because we're not ready for real power on a large scale and there were some poor decisions and local mismanagement.
But I am sure that Brighton Greens also lost a lot of women's votes because they had such appalling policies. One local councillors said in the council chamber that will women who were campaigning locally for a women only rape crisis centre were bigots.
The Brighton Green Party is TRA central and it didn't go down well with the voters.

SunnyEgg, I believe you.

I wonder if the problem is that political parties have become detached from the real world and have retreated to their own bubbles.

Starmer may be relying on the Guardian, the BBC and his own advisors for his take on the world, and genuinely think gender is a non issue. T is the new LGB and only opposed by a few hateful terfs and Tories, with Murdock and the Mail exploiting it for their own ends.

My own, rather short-lived, political career has given me a similar if opposite experience. I canvassed a lot of people, who generously shared their thinking. I am trying to feed back (see post above) within the local structure but no. Voters apparently want the Tories to shift to the right. Liz Truss (who Tory members voted for) had the right policies even if she mucked up the implementation. This is playing out in media analysis that suggests the local election results are Rishi’s failure. My experience was that people on the doorstep were saying they would not vote Tory to send a signal that they were unhappy with scandals, Boris and Liz. Ie with the party. People were still open to giving Rishi a chance, but he will need to deliver.

The Tories are starting at the back of the grid. After 13 years people will want change. Even Churchill lost when WW2 was over. In my view Rishi may have two advantages over Keir. First he was selected by his MPs not by the members. MPs want to keep their seats so can be expected to give more weight to constituent views, than to views within their constituency party. Second it is said that he does a lot of market research, and is guided by it. Keir may think people don’t discuss gender, Rishi probably has the research that says that people don’t discuss it because for most it is bleeding obvious. Women don’t have penises.

Can you actually get from the back of the grid to the front? He has 18 months and plenty of chicanes to come. And who knows. The driver in pole position may crash their car.

Thanks I think it was just frustration at results and where they may take us.

I have found it annoying to read re people not caring so I probably shouldn’t have said it. Just felt very low.

Interesting post, I actually met someone who works within the Labour party yesterday at drinks and found discussion fascinating. I didn’t get on to this topic but just hearing the answer to do you think you’ll win, maybe was the answer but Rishi is good although people are annoyed at past Tory actions (and a bit on Cummings and impact on past politics.)

Was great to get insight from inside a party.

Why is it so important to you to believe that no one cares?

Stating a fact doesn't mean we also believe it, but it really is unrealistic to think that women's rights are in the forefront of voters minds.

If you go on any other SM outlet where people are discussing politics, it is either very straight forwardly how to get the Tories out, not just from Labour left leaning people, but also Tories who are fed up with the party antics.

Otherwise people are focused on the cost of living crisis, housing, the NHS and education.

I'm afraid it is a bit like cycling (this isn't meant to say women's sex based rights are on the same level) where there is the same dynamic. Very committed cycling fundamentalists have captured the attention of more left leaning parties. And without taking into account to cost to those who cant, or it is in impractical to cycle, make huge changes to people lives through block off roads, sending buses half way round the world to get to a spot that used to be 2 or 3 stops away. Let alone, particularly for women, those who have to drive because they take kids to school, an elderly relative to a day care centre (all in different locations), have to get to work on time, to leave on time to do shopping, pick everyone up, and be home in time to do the cooking.

In the areas where this is happening, discussion is really fraught, and yes the cycling fundamentalists go round accusing any one who opposes them of being climate deniers, right wing reactionaries. For some people this has really messed up their lives.

But the parties who are pro cycling are only interested in getting the support of those they think want this, and implement without acknowledging the consequences for others.

And there are lots of articles in newspapers, high octane discussion, but as far as I know has never featured as a General Election issue.

Although if implemented nation wide would change how people can or cant lead their lives.

Most people see this as just two groups of extermists fighting it out.

And, as I said, obviously women sex based rights are far more fundamental than cycling, but most people view the issue as two groups of extremists fighting it out.

Even the police. Did you see the link I posted to an article in the Police Oricle commenting on policing LWS in Hyde Park? It is a real eye opener in terms of level of awareness.

Sorry, I can't follow your argument. Are you arguing that people are not interested in women's rights, as they are affected by trans issues? That just isn't true, as the examples that I gave above demonstrate. I have been involved in GC campaigning since 2012. The level of public awareness and concern is infinitely greater than it was then. Back then, most people looked at you as a mad conspiracy theorist, if you tried to convince them that men were in women's sports/refuges/prisons. Now, almost everyone is aware that this is happening, and many people have strong opinions about it.

If you are arguing that women's rights will not be the foremost concern in most voters' minds, then we are in agreement. I have never seen anyone on FWR argue otherwise. But you seem to be extending that premise, to argue that it follows from this that no one cares, so the views expressed here are irrelevant to politics. That simply isn't true.

Women's rights have never been the foremost issue in any election. Only a tiny minority of women have ever been active campaigners for women's rights. That has not stopped women achieving the vote, equal pay, the criminalisation of rape in marriage etc. Do you think that those issues were ever the foremost in voters' minds?

There are in fact only a tiny number of political issues that have enough salience to swing votes by themselves. Most voters are not single issue voters.

I don’t think it’s just covered on FWR. If you look at pretty much any DM article on Starmer it comes up. And yes DM is Pooh poohed on here too but many people read it and politicians would love their votes. Hence Starmer writing articles on there.

The issue is does it stick enough at voting booth and can it translate into votes.

I do think that GE issues can be quite random so it’s not out of chat yet. If you look at issues that became prominent just before GE in the past. Then SNP and Penny M

I know people feel strongly on here, I’d love it to convert to votes generally too

Maybe the flare up hasn’t occurred yet over it but still will. Starmer hopes not. I hope so

But you seem to be extending that premise, to argue that it follows from this that no one cares

I have never said that. It is purely your conjecture.

But I do think that despite headlines in some not all papers, most people do not think women's rights are under threat.

And I know from decades of being involved in women's liberation and feminism, that when it comes to the crunch, even if it is acknowledged that women will be disadvantaged, the majority of people will still assume women should take the hit, ie women are still second class citizens. Dont forget that many rape trails fail because of juries. And more often than not it is women on juries who dont want a man's life chances to be tarnished, and will give him the benefit of the doubt, over believing a woman.

I have never said that. It is purely your conjecture.

So what, exactly, is your argument?

Dont forget that many rape trails fail because of juries

Not true, in fact. Juries currently convict 75% of men put on trial for rape (data here) and, for the last 15 years, the conviction rate for rape has been higher than for other violent crimes - 58% on average, compared to 48% for GBH, for example. This is despite rape having one of the highest rates of defendants pleading not guilty.

The percentage of rapes that lead to conviction is disgracefully low, but this is due to a failure to investigate and charge. If a case actually gets to court, the chance of conviction is good.

As others have said the fight for women's rights in Labour is a long hall and can only be won inside all the parties. The UK is lucky we have voices standing up in all the parties Labour, SNP, Greens, Lib Dems, and the Tories. They are refusing to give up and it is the only way we can win long term.

It is true Starmer doesn't care about this issue and also most of the public don't but as the SNP has shown it has a unique power to derail things. As long as TRAs are determined to undermine women's safety it is going to come back against them. Trans criminals are going to keep carrying out crimes the Tories will use it as a wedge in the election to undermine Labour's claim to be serious on law and order. More and more medical issues will surface.

There will be a massive row inside Labour because the TRAs will demand Labour do more while Starmer will be desperate to avoid the issue. This is why GCs inside Labour have a huge advantage. The TRAs are dedicated but are so fanatical they are capable of wrecking their own cause. Their crusade against Rosie has utterly failed. So what GCs need is to organise and look like the real adults.

It's a long game, alright.

I wonder whether Shahrar Ali’s legal case against the Green Party is more important than we thought. If he wins it establishes that political parties shouldn’t discriminate within the party against people who believe there are two sexes and people can’t change sex. The trial date has been set for August this year.

And Shahrah's case is just the first to be heard. Dawn Furness and Emma Bateman are also sueing the Green Party. At least one other member is seriously considering it.

"Shahrar"

That will be really interesting. Are there any precedents for suing political parties over excluding certain beliefs, I wonder? Interesting balance to be struck between equity and freedom of association.

Thanks for the heads-up. I've donated to all three. 💸

Civil liberties aren't half expensive. I must have donated hundreds to gender critical legal crowdfunders since Jennifer James first failed to take Labour to court. Still, every victory makes it harder for my employer to fire me if someone outs me to them and makes them more likely to rethink some of their poorly-written EDI policies.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/05/09/never-trust-a-politician-who-cant-say-what-a-woman-is/

Labour is clearly under the impression that nobody cares about the "culture" wars (ie there isn't an issue just tories being anti-woke) and that the "real" issues that they are addressing will win them the election.

The local election results show Labour has banished the demons of Brexit and Jeremy Corbyn’s time as leader, while the Conservatives have badly misjudged the mood of voters by focusing on culture war issues, according to the party leader, Keir Starmer.

In a bullish assessment he is due to give the shadow cabinet, the Labour leader will accuse the Tories of ignoring voters’ real concerns. “The NHS trumps woke every day of the week,” he will say.

In a rare direct mention of culture war issues, increasingly seen by Sunak and his party as a means to attack Labour, Starmer will stress his belief that the Conservatives have miscalculated by appearing to focus more on such subjects than on core policies like health and the cost of living.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/08/voters-returning-to-labour-after-corbyn-and-brexit-keir-starmer-to-say

The term ‘culture wars’ is really annoying

The media are bad for that especially left wing media

If it could be labelled women’s rights then it would actually get close to what we’re defending and talking about.

But yeh I get that Starmer loves it if he can avoid the whole topic

Sorry posted too soon. Really didn't want a picture of Starmer or a Guardian front page on the thread (not to MNHQ didn't anyone ask you to imposed this on us - or was it the advertisers?).

But also, you could say, who would say that wouldn't he, especially in the guardian.

(On a slightly different note, but worth remembering that Labour, like the Tories, is actually made up of different factions. This looks like it will be an interessting read - Chris Mullin, who was a Labour MP for more than 20 years and a minister under Tony Blair, has won plaudits for the first three instalments of his political diaries, described as “wickedly indiscreet” and “a treat to be savoured”. Ex-Labour minister accuses Starmer of ‘moral cowardice’ over leadership (yahoo.com) )

Very irritating. However, when politicians say that the public don't care about something, what they usually mean is that, "We know we have a weakness on this issue, compared to the other parties, and we want to shift the narrative to issues on which we are stronger". So I would not read into this that this is Starmer's true opinion - it's likely the complete opposite. Unfortunately, though I don't have any confidence that he will do anything other than hand-wring a bit from the sidelines.

Juries currently convict 75% of men put on trial for rape

The "improved" conviction rates is because the CPS has consistently refused to allow cases to go to court unless it has a high chance of winning. And that is because prior to them taking this more stringent line, it was because of the number of rape cases that failed. Without context stats are meaningless.

Why do you think women have been campaigning and now the Scottish legal system is going to trial a period of Judge only rape cases. Becaue juries are less likely to convict particularly if it is her word against his.

So what, exactly, is your argument?

Again your conjecture that I am putting forward an "arguement". I am saying you are being niave and relying of the echo chamber of mumsnet to imagine that self id vs women's sex based rights is a number one issue..

Whether you or I like it or not, voters do not care or think this is a GE issue.

There would be a way of finding out, if in the run up to the next election you and some other women local to you, did some door stepping to tell local voters that you think this is a priority issue.

I think most people wouldn't even know what you are talking about, and even if they did would not think it a priority, and ask why cant people just be more "kind".