Ed Davey is just every inexplicably over-promoted, middle-aged bloke mansplaining a in meeting.

[JohnnyMcGrathSaysFuckOff]

I know there's other threads on this and I don't know why this 'got' me so much.

I am just so tired of it.

I sit in meetings listening to nice, reasonable men saying things like 'of course we oppose violence against girls and women'. With their pronouns in their email signatures, of course.

I was listening to the radio this morning about the string of errors that led to Couzens being free to do what he did to Sarah Everard.

Then this, with Ed patiently explaining it all to Mary.

Don't they ever listen to themselves? Don't they ever think, hang on, an actual woman is telling me there's a problem here, maybe I should listen?

It makes me feel like crying, sometimes.

Has anyone seen that Annaliese Dodds has now come out and said that women can't have penises? That's a big change from Labour. Of course, she said it with the air of one stating something completely obvious, as if she had never previously floundered when asked the question.

The trouble is once someone has prevaricated on this subject, it's going to be hard for people to trust them again.

@RoyalCorgi has she really? Where did you see that?

Yeah, I have given birth to three babies and with my DTs, I found out the sexes via a blood test (NIPT) when they were in utero, 10w gestation. So yeah, that 'MWs decide' nonsense.... it sounds like the kind of thing a teenage boy would believe.

Have none of these men ever accompanied their wife to a 20w scan ffs?

Dodds' comment was a while back, no?

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/v0ju5x/anneliese_dodds_mp_says_she_disagrees_with_stella/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10865467/Labour-chair-says-fellow-MP-WRONG-argue-women-born-penises.html

Creasy: "She said: 'Do I think some women were born with penises? Yes. But they are now women and I respect that.'
Ms Creasy added: 'JK Rowling doesn't support self-identification whereas I do. Of course biological sex is real - it's just not the end of the conversation.
'I am somebody who would say that a trans woman is an adult human female.'"

So biological sex is real but when men born with a penis transition they become an adult human female. Suggesting biological sex isn't real. Or can change. 🤷‍♀️🙄

Here it is - it's from yesterday, in an interview with Kay Burley:

https://twitter.com/cathydevine56/status/1661499084480323592

Here's her previous pronouncement.

Untrustworthy

Its a move forward for dobbs, but she still makes a distinction between sex and gender that needs clarification. There's no situation where my gender would be the same as a man who wants to perform woman/female gender. Certainly nothing that has to be written into law.

I dont think Davey has the intelligence to look think more than a few steps ahead. He cant envisage the implications of allowing men to 'be' women.

He arrogant, too. Sturgeon and starmer are both more effective communicators and they couldnt justify why a man can become a woman. Why he thinks he can is astonishing.

Part of the problem with this discussion is that interviewers are stuck on the 'what is a women' question, rather than asking how they think a man becomes a woman. And they need politicians to justify examples - when exactly did eddie izzard have the right to use womans facilities, do 'woman with penis' get to provide intimated care for teenage girls? Make them justify why thats the case, and if not, how are the ensuring it can't happen.

Ah, thanks. That is an improvement.

But I still don't trust them.

Apologies for lowering the tone but I’ve just seen this by Deborah Ross on what she plans to do when she gets her own penis - and couldn’t resist sharing :D
https://archive.ph/PKUfp

Absolutely that the questioning needs to develop into this. Let them stutter and stumble their way through explaining the mechanism by which this ‘happens’.

Just an update on Annaliese Dodds. Rosie Duffield has tweeted: "Every single thing a Shadow Minister says is written for them and approved before they get to say it - so she's really not going to go all rogue with her own opinions all of a sudden! This will be the reaction to some latest polling - or doorknocking with real people..."

So this isn't Annaliese coming up with her own thing, it's an agreed party line.

If only we could believe they mean it.

Stuff them

They were all TWAW a minute ago

What we need is unequivocal commitments to protecting single aex spaces on the basis of biological sex.

In old money, women need women's spaces that men can't colonise or invade.

Unfortunately there are plenty of women that say what Ed says.

What do people think about the argument that this whole debate about women having penises etc ..is to distract us from the economic mess we are in and other major political storms e.g. war, climate change. Part of me understands that point but then I think actually this trans debate is much bigger than you might think.

Anyway, grateful for some counter arguments I can use next time I get that challenge.

That's argument says that objections to men entering womens sports are unimportant in itself, that the unfairness doesn't matter, when it's just women and not everyone.

And that rapists should be going into women's prisons as complaining is only a distraction from money, women in prison don't matter, only the prices in shops.

Getting a payrise is important, not stopping rapid onset gender dysphoria harming children.

It's rather capitalist of them.

What do people think about the argument that this whole debate about women having penises etc ..is to distract us from the economic mess we are in and other major political storms e.g. war, climate change. Part of me understands that point but then I think actually this trans debate is much bigger than you might think.

I don't understand it. It should not be a political issue and I don't think the Tories have made it one. They did not whip their Scottish MPs and a couple voted to support Sturgeons self-ID bill. Two of their most important appointments in rolling back the madness: Dr Hilary Cass and Baroness Kishwer Falkner, were strong, well qualified and seemingly apolitical. Indeed Lady Falkner was associated with the LibDems for a long time. The Tories have MPs like Caroline Noakes and Maria Miller (and a number more) whose views are different to those of the PM, without the sort of problems that say Rosie Duffield has experienced within Labour. And dialing back a few years, David TC Davies MP was able to put his head above the parapet and question self-ID when no one else dared to do so.

If you look at Rishi's five key priorities for 2023 they address the sort of things Governments should be addressing.

It is those parties who are trying to enforce views that are making the debate political. Yes you, LibDems, Greens and Labour. They too should focus on "its the economy, stupid" policies. Yes the Government should play a role when safeguarding and equalities issues arise, but this is best done by an evidenced rather than ideological approach.

@WagnersFourthSymphony that article was hilarious, thank you.

What do people think about the argument that this whole debate about women having penises etc ..is to distract us from the economic mess we are in

Generally I seem to hear this from people who are trying to control what women care about, think about, and talk about.

It's perfectly possible to have several concerns about various issues all at the same time.

So it's a minimising and a deflection.

The two issues that are involved in the question 'do women have penises' are

1. Women's rights - does this politician think they are worth discussing and
2. Honesty/integrity/conviction

To me both of those issues are very important. If a politician doesn't care about women's rights they are not getting my vote, and likewise for the latter point.

It's definitely a distraction, but I think it's an important one to sort out. If the bar is set so low that overriding women's rights with nonsense like "some women have penises" is accepted what's the hope that these people can run a country?

So did Rishi Sunak and the Conservative party, and people seem to fine to trust them. Some are still prevaricating (as they are in other parties).

If we're going to hold everyone to statements they made months ago and refuse to accept a change of mind, we might as well pack up and go home now!
What are we campaigning for??

^^

All of that.

Sanity, a basic grip on reality, and not suckered in by extremist quasi religious ideologies are three fundamental things I require of anyone who wants to run the country. It's a pretty low bar.

If they can't manage those three things then nothing else they have to say is relevant really.