Labour Women Declaration responds to the UK Labour party’s “pivot” on sex and gender

[IwantToRetire]

We welcome –

• Rejection of self-ID as Labour’s policy: this is a major and significant shift.
• Labour’s new emphasis on distinguishing sex and gender.
• Indication of support for legal definition of sex in the Equality Act to make the operation of the single-sex exceptions (SSEs) more effective.
• Wes Streeting’s account of changing his mind when he realised that he needed to listen to women.
• Reference to the need to include consideration of sex offences in granting GRC.

Concerns/questions/flaws in Labour’s proposals –

• Spousal exit clause – not a veto, but a method of initiating a process to ensure basic rights for a spouse and needs to be retained not scrapped.
• NPF mention of need to look at international evidence: little comparable evidence is available, but there is emerging evidence of self-ID and puberty blockers being withdrawn in countries where previously available.
• Needs of detransitioners are not mentioned but must be understood and addressed.
• No mention of Section 22 of the GRA, which creates problems for SSEs, “effectively providing an ‘invisibility cloak’ for the characteristic of sex for one group of people”, see article.
• Keir Starmer’s reference to “safe spaces”, despite the correct term being single-sex spaces (needed by women for dignity, privacy and more).
• No rationale yet provided for one doctor rather than two; also concerns about lack of specification in qualification criteria for doctors to provide the diagnosis, given the prevalence of private doctors willing to supply report on request.
• Reduction to one doctor opens door to acceptance of more countries onto the approved UK list for apparent GRC equivalence.
• Inaccuracies in Guardian article, including claim that Panel involved in current process is made up of ‘anonymous doctors’ – it is a group of doctors and legal experts.
• Claim that “The process is intrusive, outdated and humiliating’ has never had evidence to support it – see, for example, this article by Fair Play for Women (particularly the latter sections).
• Using inaccurate language like “futile indignities” contributes to fear mongering.

Labour Women’s Declaration Working Group 2nd August 2023

The above is a summary. For full response go to https://labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/lwd-responds-to-the-uk-labour-partys-pivot-on-sex-and-gender/

I know there have now been lots of threads about the Labour Party but thought LWD deserve to be acknowledged given the struggle they have been directly involved in.

So started this as a new thread rather than tagging it onto the end of an existing.

I wish we could just say, "you can have self ID, but it's self ID of gender identity and no one will be changing their sex on official documents".

After all, trans people tell us that "there is a difference between biology and gender", and "we don't deny biology".

This is the rational answer.

Be any gender identity you want, change it as often as you want, have it on all your documents, everything can have a box for your gender identity, wonderful. But sex is a fixed fact from birth, sex is recorded as an unalterable and necessary fact, and sex based spaces are for those of that sex, The End. There can be additional mixed sex spaces and categories for those for whom this doesn't work, and that's it. That's all.

I do believe they'll be the One-Two of Trans Conversion Ban and draconian online anti hate speech legislation, and vague warm words on the GRA, EHRC advice to clarify sex >>> gender.

Every PM wants his or her name to be sanctified in perpetuity. For Blair it was scrapping Clause 4, the GRA, the Good Friday Agreement, for Brown it was mobilising the West to sort the 2008/9 banking meltdown, for Cameron it was Same Sex Marriage, for Clegg it was the 180 on student tuition fees (lol), for May it was the Domestic Slavery legislation (and very nearly gender Self ID, no lol), for Johnson it was getting Brexit over the line (and vaxx rollout/supporting Ukraine), for Truss it was (hmm, I forget), for Sunak it's (I forget again). Farage will always be remembered for changing Britain.

Starmer is no different. I think he'll pin his reputation on Green revolution. But if he doesn't bring in Self ID, he still "owes" the trans lobby in his party...the trans conversion ban and stringent anti hate speech laws on LGBT will be his sop.

Just one male person in a female-only space means ALL women have lost that single-sex space
They may well be distressed but the solution cannot include causing distress to another group of people, namely women
Sounds like telling women their needs will be met AFTER everyone else's
The way to stop the Tories turning this into a wedge issue is to have a solution then when it's brought up you just state the solution and move on

Brilliant answers.

As for there are bigger things to focus on, why is it so important to progressives then?

They are allowed to think it's ultra important for their side, but no one can respond without it being a "culture war distraction"?

The world could be ending tmrw, and wokies in the Labour Party would insist on an EGM to discuss Israel policy, Defund The Police and Self ID. Badges of honour.

Let them go.
I think its kinder in the long run. Maybe if they crash and burn they might actually learn to listen to women. Vague sort of hope I know.

And yet what they are ACTUALLY remembered for is often very different.

Blair - Iraq war.
Brown - selling the gold reserves, and fucking the economy
Cameron - I'm sorry but pig's head stands out to me, even if it's completely untrue
Clegg - selling out
May - fields of wheat
Johnson - lying philandering useless waffler
Truss - lettuce and crashing the economy in record time
Sunak ... maths so far.

Ah, Cameron - Brexit. Knew there was something else.

Yes. I wonder if we start flooding Labour MPs with this eminently fair and sensible suggestion it might catch on?

Haha, and there's probably even worse
Brown "who put that bigoted woman next to me?!"
Cameron "calm down, dear"
Clegg "I may be a failed deputy PM, but I'm off to make a mint at FB now"
May "Brexit means Brexit, and we're planning Self ID just as soon as we can sneak it past you all"
Johnson "there will be no border down the Irish Sea seperating NI from rest of UK"
Truss "I'm totally in lockstep with my chancellor which is why I'm sacking him today"
Sunak "here are my five pledges which I haven't a hope in hell of keeping"

The thing is, you cannot coherently hold a position that says 'we recognise individual self-ID of sex' AND 'single-sex spaces means single, biological, sex', because having single-sex spaces negates individuals' self-ID'd sex. These 2 positions are mutually exclusive.

Well this is exactly what the UK Equality Act says. But the real give away is that the minority group ie those with a GRC are treated as though the majority so that "for all purposes" they have changed sex, whereas the actual majority are treated as though a tiny minority that are catered for by the single sex exemptions.

More than anything this hierarchy in the EA illustrates just how little respect women have from the ruling class, ie MPs of all parties. They are they ones who made this law.

My area has an active grassroots women’s group and I think that their engagement with this MP might have helped the MP to look beyond their own experiences

I think this above everything else is something we all need to focus on in the run up to the GE.

Even if it turns out the local women's group is in fact you and your friend at the kitchen table.

MPs want votes from local people, not people on twitter or facebook. And if their constituency seems to have women actively challenging the trans status quo, whether because the local council has turned public toilets gender neutral, or Starmer has made yet another U Turn a letter in a local paper has an impact.

Added to which it means other women in the area will start hearing women saying things they may not have thought of, but agree with.

I dont underestimate the difficulties of women meeting up to work together, and for instance on Next Door covering my area a post asking if other GC women would like to meet up, after a lot of very hostile comments, was deleted.

I’m sorry about the deletion OP that is totally unjustified. You wouldn’t have had your post deleted if you’d wanted to form a local pro self-ID group. It’s what we’re up against in a nutshell.

Do you have a local Women’s Rights Network or Resistors’ group near you to join? Could you group together with someone and invite LAWS to your area? Any like minded friends to form a letter writing group to meet around your kitchen table?

This would do it

Still awaiting a reply from my Labour MP to my sensible letter asking him how/ if his views have changed lately. Doesn’t seem to think it is worth his while.

What stands out to me from the MP's reply is: There are bigger issues to focus on.

Yes. There are. So why is Labour wasting all this time and forcing women to also waste time defending our basic rights and legal existence when they acknowledge their are bigger issues? Why didn't Labour just drop it when they encountered the very first woman who said no to it? Because it's a very big issue for Labour, that's why. It's vital to the niche groups that comprise their advisors and student members. So why are they trying to gaslight us that it's not that important? If it isn't, make a public statement that everything to do with the GRA and self-ID is immediately dropped, there will be no changes, every MP who spoke out against women's rights in the debate will have the whip removed and membership revoked permanently with immediate effect, a guarantee that Labour fully supports the Tories reinforcing single-sex rights and protections and the issue will never be mentioned again. Then we can drop the unimportant issue. But not before, because we're not as trusting and silly as they hope we are.

100% agree that if it’s not important then women can have what they are campaigning for. When we think of the women-hours spent on trying to shore up the very basics for women it is so frustrating
I don’t think many actual MPs would really feel that it ‘wasn’t important’ though- they know the impact of gender identity politics and TRA authoritarian behaviour, plus institutional capture on women and children is a big issue for some women from their postbags. They also know this area is gaining attention far beyond those women, children and families directly affected. Think of Isla Bryson in Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, that whole mess. It’s really not a political non-issue.

It’ll only matter if it means not getting in

Otherwise it’s we know but we don’t want to talk about it, stop going on about something you care about

I'd love to let go of Labour and wash them right out of my hair. But equally I can't let go of this nagging feeling that, if they don't win a working majority, we'll get a hung parliament with lord knows what kind of deals cobbled together and maybe Ed Davey as Deputy Prime Minister?

Secondly I suspect that anything less than a clear win would mark the beginning of the end for Starmer. And much as he annoys me, I then start wondering what the odds might be on Angela Rayner becoming the first female Labour leader who doesn't know what a woman is.

Feel free to talk me out of this nightmare.

It's more likley to be Rachel Reeve than Angela Raynor in my view.

They've already said what they'll do, which is Self Id by any other name (with just one self chosen doctor to sign). They have also said they'll enshrine 'transpobic statement' into hate crime legislation, and will include gender identity into the ban on conversion practices.

I suspect the finer details will be ignored ( as with Scotland GRR) and will it take years of further publicised negative incident until reforms and adjustments are finally made.

'Transphobic' meaning not unconditionally playing along with someone's personal fiction despite reality. Regardless of impact on you. 'she raped me with her penis' etc etc etc.

You will be criminalised for stating reality. Just get the fucking red cloaks out now.

I'm a bit more optimistic than I was. The fact that the press are now on to this big time gives me hope that the the sheer number of indefensible outrages, assaults on women's rights and what is happening to children will be a major influence on what happens next.

The behaviour of numerous trans extremists is so anti democratic, anti child safeguarding and at times simply criminal that it can no longer be hidden by #nodebate.

"OperationLetThemSpeak" will make it impossible for a government to push through harmful measures - just remember Sturgeon's complete collapse in the face of those pink leggings. (fingers crossed).

I’m sorry about the deletion OP that is totally unjustified.

It wasn't my post and I had only recently joined Next Door and wasn't that familiar with it, and only worked out from a thread where someone was boasting about how they were going to set up a women's group now that they had sucessfully got the GC posting deleted,

I am part of a informal network, and would have wanted to contact those who had posted the originally message but never even saw their names.

I suppose what is bad is that I just sort of accepted wouldn't ever be able to post anything about women's sex based rigths.

Have to admit I dont use it much, it is such a strange mix.

On the other hand thinkg about this thread it might be time the informal network started thinking about lobbying with the GE coming up, so maybe a few letters to the local press.

Those actions sound brilliant IwanttoRetire and the GC argument has all the evidence and common sense and decent treatment of others so it’s not too hard a case to make. As a quick glance down ‘It will never happen’ resource thread will sadly show.

It’s just about showing MPs that it’s not OK to force women to jeopardise our families and ourselves to accommodate male wants. Because the social expectations is still that nice women should always be accommodating, it means we always need to justify it every single time we say no.

Anyway, for now I play the game in my letter writing, justifying everything I am asking for with facts and links to evidence, which works really effectively when the TRAs only have threats of physical violence or social ostracism and emotional manipulation. There’s literally nothing else they have in the bag but their male sexual entitlement.