Starmer furious that Sunak should mention his definition of ‘woman’

[HagoftheNorth]

PMQ’s today, Sunak highlighted Starmer’s famous comments that some women have a penis. Starmer was furious that Sunak should make that comment while Mrs Ghey was in the chamber. Surely Starmer should realise that it is possible to be respectful and compassionate about trans people without parroting the insane lie that transwomen are women (because ‘woman’ is sex not gender)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68229785

@Inisceal for the last time, it was about women. The real kind. Not men or trans. Women. Like your mother. Stop doing a Starmer.

Should we deny biology to avoid upsetting people?

IClaudine · Yesterday 20:26

++ In what way would stating a middle ground position be hostile to trans people ++

It isn't, but this thread is.

You said that you've given the subject a lot of thought, but have you read round it much? I mean from both sides.

You seem to have the opinion that GC women are awful, nasty, aggressive bullies.

Well, if years of online and in person rape and death threats, organised bullying campaigns to hound women out of their jobs, actual assaults for having the temerity to have differing opinions etc has resulted in women fighting back, but in much more moderate terms, are you truly surprised?

This is an open forum, you can say what you want, what you really think. That's what it's for, discussion and disagreement. Yes, people will disagree strongly, but unlike Trans Extremist Zealots, they won't threaten to come round with nail-studded baseball bats, or send you pictures of their pet knives and axes.

Now, where's that middle ground...

Penny Mordaunt also said Sunak should "reflect". Is she a leftie too

No but one her brother is transgender isn’t him? I guess she needs to say something if that is the case.

Does KS is aware this stupid game is going against him or is he celebrating his political point scoring ? 🤔

Good question

I’m glad Sunak didn’t apologise due to the media circus

It just occurred to me that everyone is assuming Mrs Ghey would be upset by the mention of biological reality. Yet we’ve had more than a few posters here who are GC, and their children are trans. It is perfectly possible to love your child beyond measure, and still disagree with their beliefs.

I don’t think that Starmer, or the press, or anyone should be assuming they know how Mrs Ghey feels

Women are the mothers of everyone, the good, the bad and the downright ugly. We are the mothers of those to be proud of, those to protect, those to be ashamed of and those who society should be protected from.

Don't use our pain when things don't go according to plan to hold society to ransom. This is our pain. We get to decide what to do with it. Don't white knight to shield us from suffering which you yourself don't seem to grasp. In most cases, the point of the suffering is for the child to see it and change its ways not for the world to see it and sedate the mother by appeasing the child.

It's the mothers who get to decide how to deal with their pain.

This is what happened. Starmer chose to - presumed to - know what was in a woman's mind (hmmm). Then used it to what he thought was his own advantage. To attempt to silence debate.

Here, you have a glimpse into the future under him if Labour win. What topics will next become no-go, one wonders?!

Even if any individual was mortally offended, there's no inherent right for anyone to steer a discussion one, preferred way.

I posted upthread but it's arguable Starmer breached the rules when he did what he did. If so, he ought to apologise:

erskinemay.parliament.uk/section/4880/reference-to-the-public

"Until recent times it was not in order to refer to persons in the galleries (except generally for the purpose of an order for their withdrawal), though it was a matter of judgement for the Chair as to whether to intervene. In 2017, the former strict rule was abrogated, the Speaker stating that such references could be permitted, but that references by Members in debate should be brief and directly related to proceedings, and should not be phrased so as to be in any way intimidating or to seek to influence debate"

And it’s clear that Starmer did do it to influence debate - or even to close down debate entirely on this subject

Yeah, cos Sunak bringing it up in a question about NHS waiting lists was oh so appropriate!

Well, he had a meeting with her later, so I expect he knows a lot more about what she's feeling than anyone here.

Well, he had a meeting with her later, so I expect he knows a lot more about what she's feeling than anyone here.

More assumptions. But did he know before he met her, what she thought? And even if he did, does any individual have the right to silence Parliament or steer the course of public policy, debate, law?

He didn't support her call for control of social media for under-16s. Yet another open goal that Labour has utterly failed on.

I wonder if Starmer is in breach of the rules and if this will be followed up on.

Political point scoring.

He should worry about the attacks from his own party today over the green u turn more than using parents in this way

@HagoftheNorth that’s a good point, plenty of parents of trans children accept biological reality and are GC.

HagoftheNorth · Today 07:15

And it’s clear that Starmer did do it to influence debate - or even to close down debate entirely on this subject.

Yes, it's quite unequivocal; I wonder if the Speaker will make him apologise?

Julie Bindel has an article on the story, in the Mail. I can't get it to link from my phone.

@Inisceal

I'm afraid that transgender women just aren't more likely to be attacked than women more generally (and a certain subset who have transitioned in adulthood are more likely to be the attackers). It's just not borne out by statistics, unless you include Brazilian sex workers.

I'm sorry that you feel upset on behalf of your child, but harm to feelings is not the only policy consideration that should be in play.

Sending you much compassion.

Also @Inisceal

Many scandi societies are rowing back on the idea that we should be affirming transgender youth, because many might detransition if left to their own devices. It's not a choice to be a trans youth, but it might not be permanent and is clearly subject to social contagion.

I do feel for you, but it is also unacceptable to compel people to ignore biology.

Bindel's piece is here and it's behind the new Mail paywall but it's been archived:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13062913/JULIE-BINDEL-Keir-Starmer-apologise-weaponising-case-Brianna-Ghey-score-points-Labour-supporter.html

Most people have the emotional intelligence not to bring up controversial topics relating to the death of someone's child up in front of them, unless they are sure as to that persons view.

Shame Sunak doesn't have that emotional intelligence, isn't it?

Emotional intelligence is a bit overrated in politicians IMHO. Because it favours those who are good at spin, not necessarily those who make good policy. Remember Gordon Brown and his comment on ‘that bigoted woman’? It was a stupid comment and it hurt him but he was a good policy maker.

Brianna's mother, Esther Ghey, said in a statement she did not want to comment on the remarks as her "focus is on creating a positive change and a lasting legacy for Brianna". She is supporting a campaign for mindfulness in schools.

It is not very appropriate to speculate on Esther Ghey's feelings. She has declined to comment for the above reason. I find her admirable.

Where was Starmer's emotional intelligence when he decided he knew what was in a woman's mind, and that it was ethical to use his imagined feelings of someone else to shut down debate, in order to deflect from his flip flopping? Where was his actual intelligence when he decided to dice with the rules? He could end up having to apologise for this. How will that be a win? erskinemay.parliament.uk/section/4880/reference-to-the-public

Starmer has the emotional intelligence of a brick when it comes to women’s sex based rights

‘No one is talking about it’

He’s clueless. Some like it because it’s for a minority of males but that’s because women lose out always with his version