Janice Turner on Labour u-turn

[southbiscay]

Is it safe for women to trust Labour again?

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b5a6df40-2d70-11ee-aede-28bc53acbdb8?shareToken=463658bee75ab918efe6b0320e42aad3

We're going to be dependent on journalists to expose the "having their cake and eating it" aren't we? If labour have been pacifying the anti women brigade (Bradshaw, Russel whotsit, Cashman etc) with their " nothing to see here, all superficial, men will always be prioritised over child safeguarding and women's rights to safety", then it'll be journalists who expose the hypocrisy.

If they ever get to question them

Labour are pathetically absent on direct questions

Hope they get grilled.

Well, I guess it’s better than what we had before. But I am deeply suspicious that this is a way to get self ID whilst pretending there is not self Id. If someone can get a GRC by paying a gender ideologue GP then that is self ID. If female means someone with a GRC then makes can be adult human females. I am concerned KS really means this

And we already have self ID in most services. What we need is a move away from that.

I always though no to self ID in law was a symbolic victory as it made progress against ‘in practice’ self ID in services impossible. But we still need to make progress there.

We need to get rid of GRA to make sense of any of it.

To me this is the biggest sign of meaningful change. The policy statements are welcome and much clearer than before but actions speak louder than words.

Yes, that really is positive. If we can be heard, we will win.

This. Still, at opened a door for us to continue to press our case.

And this.

Yes, but still a fringe event.

Rebranding it as demedicalisation will come back to bite the TRAs and Labour on the arse. If it’s not a medical issue, it’s a lifestyle choice and that opens a whole can of worms about why, for example, we’re giving teen girls double mastectomies on the NHS for lifestyle reasons when women with breast cancer are having long waits for post surgery reconstruction and most women needing breast reduction for medical reasons have to go private. That, and reordering society, making single sex services needed by vulnerable or religious groups mixed sex and upending safeguarding to accommodate the lifestyle choice of a vanishingly small subset of the population. Most marginalised? Hardly. Public attitudes and acceptance will harden. This is not a smart move by Labour or the TRAs.

Rebranding it as demedicalisation will come back to bite the TRAs

I'm not sure that's true, since self-ID already entailed demedicalisation, and all the questions you raise should already have had purchase when selfID was the branding.

One frightening thing is that the retention of a 'medical model' without adequate robustness will just create a new cottage industry for clinicians, like the ADHD 'diagnoses' exposed byPanorama amonth or two ago. Quick Zoom call and a bank transfer and you're good to go..

If it’s not a medical issue, it’s a lifestyle choice
^^
why we’re giving teen girls double mastectomies on the NHS for lifestyle reasons when women with breast cancer are having long waits for post surgery reconstruction
^^
making single sex services needed by vulnerable or religious groups mixed sex and upending safeguarding to accommodate the lifestyle choice of a vanishingly small subset of the population

This.

I could believe Nandy's supposed change of heart if she had been ignorant of the issues at the time of Julia's questions. Many of us were pro trans ideology when we didn't know any better - it was just another letter on the LGB acronym so of course it was supported.

But she did know all about it. That was clear. I simply cannot buy her apparent conversion. And to blame a junior staffer is appalling if it's true (and a lie if it's not).

Sorry Lisa, you are going to have to do do much better than that.

Thirding everything in BettyFilous post.
Demedicalisation takes any seriousness or urgency for public assistance out of this whole thing. It kills off the vestigial ‘born in the wrong body’ beliefs on which the current non evidence based invasive ‘treatments’ are based. It removes any sense of gender identity as being an innate thing or anything but an irrational social construct or for some people an escape from other problems or simply for others a sexual fetish.

Sadly, gender related distress and anxiety and body dysmorphia, which are all awful to live with, will probably be deprioritised for professional NHS support as well in the demedicalisation, which does those suffering from those things no good at all.

All the American-inspired protests about ‘trans healthcare now’ will have to fall away, which is a nonsense that make it sound like in the UK people are being turned away from A&E or their GP for gender reasons, and gives an impression of terrible discrimination when actual special services are being argued for.

You can't be serious, this is window dressing.

They have told us clearly that the spousal exit clause will go on their watch.

Nothing has changed.

Just remember re Lisa nandy et Al that if you are shouting to crucify anyone who has apparently changed their mind then others will see that and think no point changing their stance! Hold their nose to the grindstone on this but easy on the past attitude. Whatever you think of them, it MUST be acceptable for people to change their minds.

What have they changed their minds about?

Not biological sex
Not the spousal exit clause
Not removing the panel for the GRA

They haven't mentioned children

What have they changed their minds about?

How much abuse they are going to ignore? A bit less abuse?

no one is crucifying anyone

and i lose patience with the whole ‘be nice or people will go back to thinking completely stupid things just to spite you’ schtick

Labour does not have a good record on women's rights IMO.
Probably only changing now because they realise how unpopular their policies are.
Just like ULEZ.
Don't trust them.

So you don't think Surestart was good for women? the maternity acts they bought in? Tax credits for PT workers? (almost always women)

& the Tories who have either removed them or destroying them - all these maternity death scandals we all see? happening under the Tories.

Boris Johnson bought in ULEZ and its been central Govt that has pushed it on councils, just as they have housing targets in areas with limited schools or GP services but then blame labour.

Its also children who are most affected by poor air quality.

So many Con voters on here who are not being genuine.

I‘m wondering too.

What actually is changing?

Other than a plea that women stop speaking up (or getting ‘grumpy’) dressed up Streeting style this time

I would be happier to cut Labour more slack if it wasn't so patently obvious that all that's happened is that they've seen the move as politically expedient.

Interesting piece in The Critic:

https://thecritic.co.uk/keir-starmer-should-apologise-to-women/

And that they either are quite intentionally trying to deceive and con the public into believing that they intend to protect women's rights, when actually they intend to protect men's ability to wreck those rights, with the plan that they'll be in power and it'll be too late when people realise they were cold-bloodedly conned for their vote -

or they honestly have so very little idea of what they're talking about that they haven't realised why what they're saying already does not and cannot ever work in reality.

I'm not sure which is worse.

Starmer is completely untrustworthy. He seems to change his ideas more often than he changes his underpants!