Health Secretary Victoria Atkins: ‘The Labour Party is writing women out of our vocabulary’

[IwantToRetire]

What gets her most impassioned is the topic of women – and what she sees as attempts to eradicate their place in society.

Most recently, an NHS trust provoked fury after saying that <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/Bm1bq/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/18/trans-womens-milk-as-good-as-breast-milk-says-nhs-trust/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">breast milk produced by trans women who were assigned male at birth is as good for babies as that produced by a mother who has given birth.

Before that, the health service was found to be using the term “chestfeeding” in place of breastfeeding.

“I’m a mum – I find it extraordinary that a trust thought this was an appropriate use of their time,” she says, suggesting that such services would do better to concentrate on tackling long gynaecology waits.

“I’m very comfortable and clear that I am a woman and I would like my rights as a woman to be protected. And they will be protected by the Conservatives.”

She is most scathing of all about Labour’s approach to women, suggesting that a “Left-wing mindset” is creeping into the NHS.

“That is why we need to be making this robust case to refuse to wipe women out of the conversation,” she says.

Sir Keir Starmer <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/Bm1bq/www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/26/keir-starmer-woman-is-adult-female-labour-hardens-stance/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">famously struggled to define a woman, settling on the statement that 99.9 per cent of women do not have a penis, as the party became embroiled in trans rows.

Last year, then-health secretary Steve Barclay promised the return of “sex-specific” language to the NHS after references to women were expunged from its advice on the menopause and diseases such as cervical and ovarian cancer.

But many trusts have resisted the shift, routinely referring to “people who give birth” while some have referred to “birthing parents”. Atkins can barely contain her outrage.

“When I see reports of mothers as ‘people who give birth’! No – they are mums. I find it deeply concerning that there are parts of the Labour Party and the Left who seem to think that women can just be written out of our vocabulary.”

“Half the population are women. Of course the NHS should use the word ‘woman’,” she adds.

These paragraphs are just a small part of quite a long article in the Telegraph but thought they would be of interest https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/02/23/health-sec-victoria-atkins-interview-mothers-nhs-trans/

She also talks about women and prisons and abortion being decriminalised. Full article can be read at https://archive.ph/Bm1bq

I almost cant be bothered to say this again, because it is clear that yet again people who only want to spout slogans dont wont to engage with the actual process of politics in the UK dominated by the 2 party system.

Not for long. The Tory Party is destroyed. What happens when one of the Big Two stops being big? I suppose we'll find out later this year.

As for those who are only here to spout slogans, not to engage in the reality of our politics? Don't make me laugh. For years the discourse on this forum was dominated by At least the Tories know what a woman is (a lie) and But Labour (a squirrel) whenever the government was criticised.

Again to repeat myself, picking on Jess Phillips for not being sufficiently gender critical is irrelevant as the person in charge is Starmer.

No, the person in charge is Tory PM Sunak. Before him the person in charge was Tory PM Truss. Before that it was Tory PM Johnson, Tory PM May and Tory PM Cameron. Every single one of them contributed to the erosion of women's rights and circumstances with the backing of their party.

Have you never watched Yes Minister?

I think the actual point here is that if a Government is motivated, really motivated and has a working majority, it is actually in a position to change law almost overnight. That has been true on emergency legislation many times, from COVID, to terrorism, to compensator schemes or finance.

The nasty truth on women and trans policy is one that's acknowledged thoroughout this thread. It's not a priority. It's not because of significant structural blockers. Those can be changed by powerful politician in a days if wanted.

It is lack of motivation and lack of power.

If the Prime Minister says he or she wants something done, it happens. It can be ludicrous. You can have a radical immigration bill that challenges the ECHR. You can legislate to borrow money in the City to fund tax cuts. You can leave Europe. All of these things happened in the last five years.

But not reform of the GRA or the EA or some basic guidance for schools which all would challenge the ECHR?

Okay. Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. No one cares at the top but it's worth an article in the Telegraph.

I think that, if you select someone with a record of serial dishonesty as your leader, then you can't complain if nobody believes a word you say again, and I share the scepticism that the Conservatives have either the intent or the ability to do anything further.

That said I appreciate that:

1. They consulted on self ID and decided not to pursue it. I think that was huge, and the decision also went against the general direction of travel elsewhere in the west. I have no doubt that, had Labour (and yes, I voted for them) been in power, they'd have gone ahead with it.
2. They seem better able to tolerate dissenters than any of the centre-left parties. I can't think of any Tory MP who gets abused within their own party in the way that Rosie Duffield is.
3. Their mocking of Keir Starmer's incoherent stance has, I think, been far more effective in causing Labour to pause and even backtrack than anything by the mainstream media.

I think you'd have to be pretty blindly tribal not to acknowledge that.

@Floisme - a very fair summary.

"people who only want to spout slogans dont wont to engage with the actual process of politics in the UK"
Sorry - are you referring to Boris Johnson there?

Great post 👏

Yes Minister is 40 years old and was set before Thatcher's CS reforms. A more modern portrayal in satire is Joanna Scanlon's character in The Thick of It which is a world away from Sir Humphrey.

For an even more modern and factual view of the CS, look at its politicisisation with staff being forced out and replaced with political appointments like Simon Case.

Apologies for quoting my own post but I forgot about another thing I appreciate: Successfully challenging Self ID legislation in Scotland was a very big deal, whatever our allegiances.

I agree that there have been some good moves from individual brave MPs and Peers of all Parliamentary parties speaking up against the TRA tide but FloisMe there are some over generous concessions you are giving to successive Tory governments.

We happily still live in a parliamentary democracy following legal procedure (unless you’re Boris johnson illegally suspending Parliament) so we can take as a basic right and we don’t need to ’appreciate’ that:

1. They consulted on self ID and decided not to pursue it

As a mandatory part of the process before changing the law any government of any party would have had to legally run a consultation with the public about changing the law, (on self ID) that wouldn’t have been a consultation they could avoid running.

The government’s element of choice in that was, just as Labour’s would have been if they were in government, to put forward self ID as a humane and reasonable option for the UK. They were either lying about that or so sexist and eager to support men’s sexual rights that it didn’t occur to them it was actually achieving quite the opposite from the perspective of women and girls and safeguarding.

And being Tories, always party before country etc, party self interest is in their DNA, so when the consultation exposed self ID to actual media debate outside the lobbyist bubble, a few dissenting journalistic voices cropped up.

And most importantly (thanks to many people including many of the women on here) MPs were then lobbied with objections. Plus the responses submitted to the consultation showed the government inarguably that self ID was at best a divisive contentious issue if not at worst a terrible vote loser for Tories.

Not quite the progressive signalling feel good no cost reform that the May government had presented self ID as consistently... so that episode doesn’t seem to me like a big moral win for the Tories at all even if the end result was a huge relief. It could be back on the table any time.

2 They seem better able to tolerate dissenters than any of the centre-left parties. I can't think of any Tory MP who gets abused within their own party in the way that Rosie Duffield is

Yes and this is a very important point and I agree with you 100%. I don’t want a political party of sheep too scared to disagree with each other on party lines- it’s not democratic to have groupthink. Big Tory win there.

3. Their mocking of Keir Starmer's incoherent stance has, I think, been far more effective in causing Labour to pause and even backtrack than anything by the mainstream media.

Yes, it all helps. However the Tories can’t push it that far because then it’s obvious that in 14 years of government the actual action achieved by them legally is the £5 GRC, and from the party that apparently ‘knows what a woman is’. And legally while we have the GRA women can have penises in the UK (and men vaginas) so no MP who says this is incorrect, just not lying and aware of the law. It needs to be repealed but no party will do that at the moment.

Opposing self ID in Scotland
Yes this was really important and helpful to the GC cause bringing further light to it and public airtime in the media. It shot the pink leggings photo of prisoner Isla Bryson to fame too which really helped.

And it was politically expedient to the Tories who at that point saw the political mileage in opposing self ID that they had a few years before (only 2017!) promoted and said themselves should be law of the UK.

But the government’s point wasn’t really on the topic at issue at all, it was to do with consistent laws across the UK and following the equality Act. So they would have had to oppose it anyway I believe. Hopefully posters with better legal memories can confirm this but it was discussed on threads at the time.

So the action of the government was very helpful yes but it was not actioned out of moral support of women. The government would have had to oppose it if it had been a GC action by the Scottish Government, just as much.

They consulted on self ID and decided not to pursue it. I think that was huge, and the decision also went against the general direction of travel elsewhere in the west. I have no doubt that, had Labour (and yes, I voted for them) been in power, they'd have gone ahead with it

Yet we have self ID of sorts, any man can get a GRC and legally be a woman, it just requires 2 years as living as a woman (or vice versa of course)
96% of applicants get a GRC and the 4% that don't fail on admin, Johnson bought the fee down to £5 and the NHS has opened up more Gender clinics.

The rhetoric doesn't match the actions.

There's also the loophole of getting one's sex marker changed on passports and title changed on driving license, without needing a GRC at all. They've not done anything about that either.

Miriam Cates and Kemi Badenoch have talked about it but there's been no action taken.

Happy to agree on some points and disagree on others.

I think the point about not doing it because they support women applies to all mainstream parties. But regardless, I think it's important to work together on issues where we do agree, whatever our other differences.

"2 They seem better able to tolerate dissenters than any of the centre-left parties. I can't think of any Tory MP who gets abused within their own party in the way that Rosie Duffield is

Yes and this is a very important point and I agree with you 100%. I don’t want a political party of sheep too scared to disagree with each other on party lines- it’s not democratic to have groupthink. Big Tory win there. "

David Davies, the MP for Monmouth, was severely criticised by many within his own party for allowing a Gender Critical meeting in the House of Commons.
I acknowledge he hasn't received the abuse that Rosie Duffield has, but he was certainly under intense pressure. He was about the only one in the Conservative party at the time who dared to stand up for women.

I'd also point out that Rosie Duffield is still in the Labour party. She hasn't resigned or moved across the floor.

This is a terrible way to convince anyone that you care about this issue beyond farming votes for your party.

Yes, I keep repeating we will have to keep fighting this battle no matter who gets in, and that's why trying to turn this into a single issue vote winner is always going to ring hollow. The election will come and go, and we will still need to keep working for women's rights because both parties have their factions and their lobbyists.

Very good point

Very true. Women's rights and child safeguarding is very low on the agenda for too many politicians.
As others have pointed out, this government have been compromised, not only by their lack of action but their culpability in funding and promoting these very dubious organisations to schools, the NHS etc.
Those of us who have been writing to tory MPs for many years will be familiar with the hand waving away responses as we pointed out the repeated safeguarding fails, the social grooming of children etc by transactivist organisations. This government will only tiptoe into criticising them as they've been funding them for years. So they can't suddenly acknowledge all the evidenced harm that's happened as they're totally culpable.
The toxic trans lobby have successfully embedded themselves in positions of power for years and removing them to ensure the safety of others will take years.