Starmer says a woman is a female adult

[WanderingWitches]

I can't see a post about this quote in The Observer today
There are a lot of pissed off people on X about this.

"Sunak received his loudest applause from the Tory crowd in Manchester when he lunged into the arguments about identity issues by baldly declaring: “A man is a man and a woman is a woman.” Does Starmer, whose own party has its divisions on the subject, agree? “Yes, of course,” he responds crisply and without qualification. “You know, a woman is a female adult.”

www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/oct/07/keir-starmer-we-need-to-show-the-country-that-we-are-the-change

Toilets for Everybody.

How very Roman.

There's the Fudge.

THAT is the bit they're not saying.

That and the bloody 'safe spaces' rubbish.

Faced with a difficult problem, they've bent the language instead of facing the problem.

I just told my OH there is a woman in the garden.

It's actually an adult female cat that comes by for food but according to Starmer, that's a woman.

flo

I think the very fact that they are voting on simplifying the process today of GRCs after Starmer said he was not in favour of removing the medical process is rather an indication that either he has little influence or he speaks weasel words.

This is him back in July this year

“But Sir Keir stressed he now wanted to 'keep it a medical process' and did not think 'self-identification is the right way forward'.”

Has Starmer been used to regain lost support yet is ineffectual as a labour leader in reality, just a figurehead so that supporters vote thinking he is influencing the policies? Because from listening to women who tried to get motions tabled for clarity at this conference there is little support for gaining clarity within the party local leaders.

And this vote about self ID has been allowed where as not a vote to see how many support clarity around women’s rights. It seems that there is a disconnect here and that is very concerning.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12339573/amp/Keir-Starmer-admits-SNPs-meltdown-gender-recognition-laws-led-U-turn-past-support-self-identification-trans-people-says-Labour-wants-medical-process.html

I've seen murmurings about Angela Raynor being a more popular figure. I wonder if they may bump Keir and put her in place for the election.

Then again, she's a woman, and I can't see Labour having a female head.

'that is actually the law' is the problem, not the solution.

Giving men female id, and having ambiguously written laws, or allowing laws to be misinterpreted, isnt going to solve conflicting rights.

We need clear language to differentiate between men and women. Otherwise women wont have their need met, and we are going to see yet more women disadvantaged.

Whats starmer going to do in the next parliament when he will have to act when this happens. Say thats the law and remove all single sex spaces?

Yes. The shadow education minister also said they would scrap any schools guidance the Tories made and start all over again.

As I remember, pretty much every Labour leader struggles to get a grip on their party, and the only thing that gives them security and stability is winning an election.
But from what I've heard, the friction between Starmer and Rayner is particularly bad, even by party standards. If Starmer doesn't get a good majority then I think he's toast.

Basically Labour will be trotting down the same road the SNP have been galloping along for the past five years.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the first female leader of the Labour Party turned out to be Eddie Izzard.

What a thought.

I'm not sure if even if Labour might like 'a lady leader! Without any if the annoying female bits!' that Eddie is cohesive enough to get very far.

I don't think they're quite barking enough to move against Starmer so close to an election and with all the polls in their favour. But afterwards, if he doesn't win as comfortably as the polls are predicting, then yes I'm sure they will.

Before you vote for Labour/Starmer you have to understand that they do not believe this to be true -

I'm reminded of an interview Decca Aitkenhead did with Angela Rayner in the Times or Sunday Times about a year ago(?). Sorry I can't find or link it as it would be paywalled. It was a pretty sympathetic write-up until Aitkenhead asked her about Labour's 'women problem' and what struck me at the time was that the issue was being pretty widely reported but that Rayner seemed completely blindsided by the question, as if she had no idea it might come up.

What I took from that was a) Rayner's political instincts must be very poor (otherwise she'd have seen it coming) and b) that she had been very ill-briefed by her advisers and c) that her own faction and Starmer's must be miles apart as I don't think anyone in Starmer's camp would have been caught out so easily - they'd have blustered and come out with some bland piece of nonsense but I'm sure they'd have expected the question.

I repeat the story now as it kind of gave me an indication of what Starmer must be up against from within in his own party.

Don't you remember that press release of AR with her arm round Lily Madigan, saying that she couldn't wait to work with LM in parliament?

Trouble is, according to Labour, woman is a female adult but female includes anyone who identifies that way: it's a pointless statement from him. Snake.

Yes but that was several years ago. I would not expect such a senior member of the party to be so blindsided by a straightforward question. I found it fascinating and I imagine Starmer was tearing his hair out when he read it.

I do agree

Are these toilets in addition to single sex ones or all the toilets at the conference like this does anyone know? Because I think this tells me more about what's going on than any lawyer approved statement from Starmer.

From the article I understood that it was throughout the convention hall. ie it was a local initiative by some rainbow group and the convention centre, but Labour in making the booking clearly thought it wasn't an issue.

Thanks and yes, it's sounds like that's what's happened, and while I don't believe for a second that Starmer personally approved the arrangement, whoever did approve it either believed it wouldn't be an issue or went ahead and did it anyway.

It really doesn't bode well, and I say that as someone who's still trying to give Starmer the benefit of the doubt.

Starmer says a woman is a female adult

Well, great. But who is a woman, Keir, can you tell us that?

I don’t trust Starmer at all. He’s a non-entity saying whatever he thinks will get him elected. He’s also chosen an ambiguous thing to say and left leeway to explain to TRAs that yes, he meant TW too.

Angela Rayner isn’t trustworthy either. Most of them are in thrall to the TWAW brigade.

I know people don't like politicians to have gone to Eton but I'm also not sure I want someone with I believe nvq lev 2 quals as leader. Now I'm sure she is at least masters equivalent from her experiences but I just can't see someone as leader in that position.

I can't get past Rayner's 'scum' comment and never will. Nobody who can dehumanise a whole section of society over their voting choice should be in politics, imo.