Starmer: "trans-inclusive" conversion therapy ban, "modernise" the GRA, all hate crime to be aggravated offences as part of making every child "proud and confident"

[ResisterRex]

Exclusive in Diva, following a reception at a LGBT+ Labour event in Parliament on 29 Jan:

https://diva-magazine.com/2024/01/29/exclusive-keir-starmer-lgbtqia-rights/

"“We’ll strengthen the law, so every category of hate crime is treated as an aggravated offence,” Starmer said. “We’ll cut NHS waiting lists for LGBT+ people waiting for urgent physical and mental health care. We’ll modernise the Gender Recognition Act. We’ll implement a full, trans-inclusive, ban on all forms of conversion therapy. We fully support the view that conversion therapy is psychologically damaging abuse.”

“We are committed to a decade of national renewal and will work with all the organisations in this room tonight so every child can feel proud and confident in who they are, to stand up for LGBT+ rights at home and abroad and to get Britain’s future back.”

The mention of children is unclear but must have a background to the full speech? LGBT Labour hasn't tweeted about it but others have. Rayner and Dodds also in attendance.

https://x.com/djrm94/status/1752057964767101041?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

https://x.com/stevenatkins/status/1752256944843162016?s=46&t=WHoOZZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

x.com/anuox/status/1752094930074325420?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Exactly I am a woman that’s it, not dehumanising language around a body part

"People who've given birth", "people with vaginas". Good grief. Hugely, hugely offensive. Language DOES affect outcomes which is why the Census data with its mangled question is useless.

The TRAs will soon be objecting to the "people with vaginas" designation for WOMEN, since some of them have artificial neo-vaginas.

Rejoice that you don't feel despairing or politically homeless and unrepresented: I feel all three.

This. I've only ever voted Labour. I won't be voting for Labour or Conservative.

OK, well I take it if I wrote the same thing using the words "woman" and "man" you wouldn't jump me with "but what does that meeeeaaan if you can't define woman?"
😴
Bear in mind I was specifically responding to a poster claiming you have to have words for the policy to make sense. I think the policies will protect women regardless of what definition people use. Implementation of a policy to convict rapists will protect women regardless of if they are called snurgles, if the definition of woman includes males or anything else.

Honestly you lot make me laugh. Its like trying to talk to a 5 year old. "Why? Why? But what does it mean? Why? I don't agree because my friend Ella told me there definitely is one of those. Why?"

Read the context of the question I was answering and consider it like a grown up, rather than knee jerking "you think women should be cervix havers! Why? Why?"

I don’t really care why you say it.

I know I find it offensive though

Does anyone have any commentary to make as to what policies the Conservatives are planning to implement that will protect women?

Oh well, never mind. There is nothing offensive about biology in my opinion.

Who said biology was offensive?

Using body parts instead of the simple word woman is though

Implementation of a policy to convict rapists will protect women regardless of if they are called snurgles, if the definition of woman includes males or anything else.

Not if the rapist is housed in a women's prison.

Quite!! Plus the risk assessment carried out is only about the possible risk to the man rather than to the women.

you can’t write a policy about anything if you can’t first define very clearly who or what that policy is about

OK, well I take it if I wrote the same thing using the words "woman" and "man" you wouldn't jump me with "but what does that meeeeaaan if you can't define woman?"
😴

Well yes, that's what we are asking your beloved Labour Party to fix.

We don't want anyone to have to reduce women to body parts.

Go and read the post I was replying to, and my reply in that context. I was demonstrating that a definition of the word "woman" is not a necessary precondition for a policy to protect women as defined by biological sex.

I would not use the term "cervix havers" , "pregnant people" or "people with a penis" in real life. I would use man or woman. I was doing it to make a point. However instead it just set the 5 year old in you all off. "Don't call me a person with a vagina! It's offensive!"

1. I'm not calling anyone a person with a vagina
2. having a vagina is not in itself offensive, unless you hate women. Women have vaginas. We aren't barbies.

plus it’s not exactly the work of quantum physics to define ‘woman’ is it? it’s the definition it’s always been “adult human female”

I know.
My point is personally I take a party with policies that will protect women, more seriously than a party that state the obvious and then use biological reality to shaft us.

Exactly! So why is it people's number one voting issue? It genuinely baffles me!

Plus....Starmer says a woman is an adult female.
It's just so much hot air from the Tories to claim they are "the only party who knows what a woman is"

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/26/keir-starmer-woman-is-adult-female-labour-hardens-stance/#:~:text=A%20woman%20is%20%E2%80%9Can%20adult,Party's%20hardened%20stance%20on%20gender.

Thanks for letting us know

Do you read to understand or just post to campaign

Because there are a fair few posters saying why it matters to them on FWR

Right back at you. There's a fair few posters around saying why it matters to them that the Conservatives will damage women, doesn't stop you posting now does it?

No you wouldn’t stop me posting, but all the Labour links aren’t doing much either.

If you do want to understand why it matters to women read what they write on here. There’s enough there.

You don’t need to be ‘baffled’

and round we go, some males have female on their birth certificate and passports.

Has Starmer confirmed that these males are excluded from that definition?

Blimey.

Labour's finest at it again today.

@AdamRyan insulting the electorate always works.
just shows what you think of women standing up for their rights to name themselves.

Reducing us to body parts, saying we are like 5yos.

Way to win an argument