Post Westminster Hall Debate - what are the next steps to ensure the sex based rights of biological women

[IwantToRetire]

The other thread is now full https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4800027-debate-relating-to-the-definition-of-sex-in-the-equality-act-2010-will-be-in-westminster-hall-on-12-june-2023-430pm

And what it will achieve we will have to wait and see.

But is clarifying the EA the most important campaign to ensure women's sex based rights.

Or ...

Oh, agree entirely.

I'm no cheerleader for Jess. But if she comes out reasonably unambiguous and sober on this, that can only be good news.

That will mean at very least there are dissenting voices to the TRA mantra at Starmer's table.

Since Labour are likely to win a landslide in 2024 (has anyone seen another queue as long as the near 8m waiting list on NHS?), and Starmer's ear will be caressed by sweet words of genderwoo by the likes of Rayner, Nandy, Kinnock, Lammy etc, it's essential that realistic opinions are given as counterarguments.

Right now that means ?Streeting?...and Phillips.

If Labour win Jess Philips won’t do much

It’ll be TWAW and good luck to those who didn’t vote for that, and the rest but I assume they’re for it

I don't want "reasonably unambiguous". We can't have shades of grey with this any longer. And Streeting? Have we forgotten the facebook group episode so quickly?

I think the understandable desire to have Labour in the helm means their behaviour is quickly glossed over and forgotten. I think those involved in aiding and abetting self-ID when they should have been making life hard for the government, should be humbly apologising before they ask for our votes and our trust again.

And Starmer needs to unequivocally disown his Pink News self-ID video.

I'm in your side.
It's not going to happen.
Labour will likely win a landslide.
No way is Starmer going to say anything like scrapping the GRA, or following the EHRC advice, ahead of the GE.
The very best we can hope for is a vague promise not to visit Self ID legislation.
I think he will hold to that.
But he'll absolutely bring in a trans conversion ban, and beef up online anti hate laws, laws against misgendering, deadnaming etc.
Ireland setting the pace here.
Now, if Starmer looks like getting a second term in 2028/9, that's when Self ID laws likely will become promised by him.
IMHO it's that period of a first Labour admin that GC women (and men if you want us) will have to absolutely step up to the plate.

Note how Starmer isn't opposing Tory anti-protest laws.
I can easily see Posie leading street demonstrations against impending Self ID, and Starmer stepping on her.
Quite the comparison to the Suffragettes.

Won’t you be voting Labour though? Or are you abstaining / other

I get the ‘landslide but it won’t be too bad’ from Labour supporters I can’t say I share that feeling

Jess Philips isn’t going to do much and Labour won’t be that different as they’ll not have more money. Apart from this issue where they can hope not to get attention then do it anyway

A hung parliament may be more likely if Reform UK stand aside for the Tories in marginal seats.

Tice says he absolutely won't step aside.

If he does, he's as much a coward and fraud as Farage was in 2019.

Reform are picking up votes over the boats issue but I’m not sure how likely this is

I'll vote for any Independent who is frank on GC opinions.

My days of facilitating Tory fraudulence is over, and no way am I lending my vote to a nobody like Starmer who would lock us down longer and harder given half the chance, won't reform new Tory anti-demonstration laws, won't be honest on Brexit, and is so beholden to elites received opinion on genderwoo, that he's effectively a fake person.

My brain wouldn't allow my hand to place an X in a box for Labour, lol.

re Jess Philips - I posted my appreciation of her standing up for women's single sex (biological) services.

And just to repeat, there is a danger on what was FWR being sidelined by mumsnet into some cul de sac of sex and gender, that what is being ignored are the other implications of the legal fiction that you can change sex.

And it is a shame that more are concerned about what is happening to women's single sex services, which were being decimated long before trans became an issue. Because died in the wool MRAs which are as likely to be trade unionist as Tory land owners, dont think or believe women need this. Because they dont acknowledge the problem of sexism.

And the MRAs are using TRA arguements to brand themselves as "progressives".

Quite honestly, who cares if you can trust a politician, they will do what is ever politically expedient and / or the news media bully them into.

So rather than carping on about JP now would be the time to capitalise on what she said to challenge the Labour Leadership.

But more importantly getting the oxygen of publicity to make sure the issue stays on the public agenda.

Nice as it is to have the DM on occassions publish articles that just means a whole group of people will reject it.

And once the Telegraph is sold, who knows what will happen. A former Telegraph writer is saying they are alienating people by covering the "woke war".

We know that the media is highly selective in what it reports. ie now that they have decided BJ really is a "bad boy" they are having a whale of a time writing up Tory splits.

But have you noticed how none of them are covering the reall full on culling that is going on in the Labour Party. I dont normally agree with this writer as she seems very much part of the liberal elite (and proud to be woke) but at least she has written this https://inews.co.uk/opinion/with-all-eyes-on-the-tories-keir-starmer-is-riding-roughshod-over-labours-values-2409502 (no mention of women pushed out of course)

But seriously, what a prospect the Tories public free for all, or Labour's behind the scenes extermination squads.

I've always thought, Keir Starmer wants to project himself as "just" more competent than the Tories, "just" less corrupt, "just" better manageriably, "just" more principled, "just" more trustworthy, "just" more human rights in outlook.

That's why he will expel Corbyn and mayors who talk to Ken Loach, he will wave thru Tory anti-protest and anti-free speech laws, he will have a raft of KeirBots ready to go in 2024, and he will brazen out the female/GC pushback against where we're going with the trans agenda.

If a leading and ambitious figure in a party that's widely expected to form the next government has decided it's politically expedient to speak up for women's single sex spaces then I am delighted. My personal opinion of that person, and indeed the party they represent, can wait for another day.

Rest assured, the Government is committed to maintain the safeguards that allow organisations to provide single-sex spaces, and I will monitor to monitor this issue closely.

I have been sent this from my MP via email.
I am hoping it means the small adjustment to biological sex is supported.

+1.

Could you say who your MP is?

Maybe not, no issue

On Jess Phillips I have no view on them as a person, I don’t follow their politics closely enough but I also don’t see that
much to get excited about. There were still more Labour MPs who were TWAW at the debate and generally.

Yes I meant to add that in earlier posts I might have implied that Tory MPs were well briefed because of certain well known campaigns, but shouldn't forget the work of (some!) Conservatice Women.

Maybe that's what we need as it would hit the headlines, all the Women's Declaration groups for the various parties hosting a public press briefing about how this cuts across party lines.

(Oh no, that would mean more women expelled from the Labour Party for sharing a platform with un Stramer approved people!!)

much to get excited about. There were still more Labour MPs who were TWAW at the debate and generally.

But she publicly stated that women are biological. We were all waiting to hear if she was going to be regulated.

Also would be could to know if she did get her ammendment through on the legislation voted on yesterday to say that single sex service should be funded.

Let's just start with Jess P and Rosie D.
Get a crate of wine in and get Jo C from North of the border in. Or maybe that's a step too far, like asking toddlers to cross the road, lol.

But she publicly stated that women are biological.

Many did but not from Labour. She won’t be able to swim against it if they’re in power. There’s too many of them

Or she’ll try but it won’t do much - maybe the Duffield treatment if she’s lucky.

I did not find her that unequivocal. Certainly compared with the majority of interventions which were impressively clear. I would not be sure that there are no caveats to come like Keir's 99.9%

I don't know if it irritated others but I really don't like this having a view solely because of lived experience. MPs represent a diverse community, they cannot be expected to have walked in all of our shoes. We expect intelligence, research and empathy. By all means throw in a bit of understand like the Hindu guy with daughters, but the Jess Phillips approach of knowing about women's issues because she worked in a refuge wears a bit thin after a while. (Angela Rayner is worse. She seems unable to say anything without reminding people she was a teen mother.) You can have the experience without learning from it. I almost prefer the Sir Peter Bottomley book club. He is of a very different demographic but brought in well thumbed books as a sign he had made an effort to research the issue in order to inform his views.

I don't think it's just about numbers. I suspect Jess Phillips keeps her ear closer to the ground and watches for signals more carefully than some of her colleagues. I very much doubt she would have said what she did if she hadn't believed it would be in her own interest to do so.

It doesn't mean she's gone up in my estimation and I'm certainly not about to send her a thank you card, but I'm still pleased, because this, I think, is how we win.

I wouldn’t assume that she knows much at all. Starmer isn’t going to talk about it.

Unless he really had to. Jess Phillips is no indication either way

As an aside over how many threads and knowing what Starmer thinks on this and the firm Labour position is still like reading sodding tea leaves

I take from debate Labour are woefully behind

That’s what struck me from reading this discussion. How little we know about Starmer’s views and his political purpose - not just on this but on any issue - other than to get elected. A picture is emerging that he is ruthless in getting rid of opponents and installing placemen/women as part of his preparations for the next election. Which is what BJ / CCHQ did at the 2019 election.

Well yes, he's ruthless, he's the party leader.

I keep coming back to why an ambitious politician like JP would have said anything at all? If she didn't know how the leadership would view it then surely the thing to do would have been to send her excuses and remain non- committal? She chose not to which I can only assume was either out of principle or self interest. I don't believe it was the former.