Keir Starmer unable to define a woman AGAIN

[IwantToRetire]

Suspect that the Sun doesn't care that much about women's rights, and are only trying to score points against Starmer. But his reply (if accurately reported is so avoiding in any way accepting women as biological females. And this will be our next PM.

Reading out questions of Sun readers, Political Editor Harry Cole asked the Labour chief if he still believed men can have cervixes and women can have testicles.

Asked again about his position on trans women and whether they can be defined as women, Sir Keir said: "We set out our position very clearly..."

He added: "Everybody knows there is a difference between sex and gender. I absolutely understand that and respect that. We will not be going down the road of self identification."

He went on:"As you well know the overwhelming majority of women, it's a biological issue...

"There's a small number of people in this country who are born into a gender they don't identify with and they often go through pretty hellish abuse.

"I think most people would say if we can find a way to be respectful to all the women we must properly respect and we have defended their rights and advanced their rights as a party, as a movement for many, many years and we will continue to do so, then fine.

"But we won't and I don't think we should simply abuse ignore, make fun or mock..."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/26845883/keir-starmer-transgender-women-define-is/

@AdamRyan

For a significant proportion of my life, a majority of the general public would have agreed that women aren't as good at maths as men, or that homosexual couples are not as valid as heterosexual ones.

The popular idea that some men are somehow "really" women so "need" to live as women is based on exactly the same sexist and heteronormative beliefs as the idea of male and female minds being suited to different things and homosexuality being a misfiring of natural sexuality.

The majority view can be wrong. I don't base my opinions on the majority view, I base them on first principles, logic and compassion.

Anyway. I'm off. This is about to get tedious and "where's your evidence/that's too old/wheres your evidence/that's the guardian/whetes your evidence/why are you dominating the thread" script. So I'm going to leave it there.

That's a lot of words to admit you can't provide a winning argument.

40% identifies a majority, surely.

Evidence is a good idea. Especially for an issue which is clearly changing quickly with the public.

But yes if none can be supplied.. then stay / go it doesn’t matter.

OK then. 🙄

Oh noes! When public opinion shifts. The horror.

I was quite prolific on the board then

The break it down for me thread is current. The most recent post was 2 days ago.

the difference in the tone of debates is marked. Very little about politicians and "capture"

At the start of that thread, in 2018, many of us didn't realise what had been going on behind the scenes. The Denton's report hadn't been published then.

https://gendercriticalwoman.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/iglyo_v3-1.pdf

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-document-that-reveals-the-remarkable-tactics-of-trans-lobbyists/

Oh come on, you can't throw 'it's the Guardian' into the mix when you yourself have often said you won't read articles etc from sources you don't rate (Tufton St being undesirable, for instance!). Pot / kettle!

I totally understand there is a large minority on this board that think it is unacceptable for a man to be recognised in the identity of a woman (e.g. as a trans woman).

You can identify as anything you like, but you can't change sex and men - however they identify - shouldn't have access to women's single sex spaces etc.

You say you miss political talk. Have you noticed that this thread is about Labour?!

If starmer was confident that the majority of the public are happy for men to be treated as women legally, his language would be different wouldnt it?

Why talk about culture wars and being kind and the need for sex segregated space? Why wouldnt he laugh in the presenters face and say "what are you talking about, we all agree that a woman can have a penis?"

The majority of people in society are only just waking up to what 'being trans' actually means. Debbie Hayton's interviews and activism, for example, are making people aware that most male transitioners are AGPs - and he also makes it clear that he's male; he has not changed sex. He knows he's not a woman.When people understand what the implications are of men " identifying as women" they don't approve, or like it at all.

People can still understand that for some people there can be some comfort, or release, in presenting in ways typical of the opposite sex - but that doesn't translate into them thinking that men should be in women's spaces; in women's sports; in changing rooms with their daughter. They don't like the idea that their children might be expected to refer to a male teacher as 'she'.

As more and more men who identify as trans are found guilty of committing crimes, including crimes of a sexual nature - the scales rapidly fall from the eyes.

Oh dear… so really some people don’t like their reality tested just like when people are asked a direct question about penises in single sex spaces suddenly realising that maybe there IS a constraint on their supposed support. And when they are asked to stump up support for female sports having males in it … they realise… actually their support really isn’t what they said it was…

Gosh.. reality is shit! It shows that people aren’t really what as ‘live and let live’ as they want to be. And that is fucking inconvenient to the narrative that some people want to present.

Who’dathunkit!!! People say shit that doesn’t stand up to reality.

Saying 'the majority of people' support an extremist view which disenfranchised women and enables their assault, when there is no good evidence to support that statement suggests you are living in an echoe chamber.

That's not evidence that people want males to be allowed into female spaces. You have to ask good questions to get good answers. Nice try but no goal.

But the public don’t understand

in the old days i agree that a lot of people thought that males who thought they were women needed a bit of help and were harmless

none of them thought that womens sports were under threat and that a male could take things intended for females and that intact males would be able to strip in front of girls and that we would have to call rapists she

and that males that have beards and no surgery and don’t take hormones would have to be called she as well

etc etc etc

Nearly everyone Ive ever spoken to about this feels the same way as me, and the rest of them speak in very derogatory terms…they have no idea that this could get them into all sorts of problems

All sorts of trouble…..

Late last night it looked promising that we could actually have an informed discussion about how to lobby Labour as they are assumed to be the next Government.

Surely by now it must be obvious that replying to posts that are just the same old (as if we are too stupid to have worked it out for outselves) dont talk about Labour Tories are worse, just encourages it.

So there have now been 6 pages of posts that are just repeats of posts on other threads an as on other threads responses are ignored ad infinitum.

Far better to just stop posting on a thread as it makes it far clearer that we aren't going to rise to the bait.

Does anyone have any thoughts on how to prepare for Labour being the next Government?

It is a rather ridiculous assertion to be honest because quite a lot of us have posted the poll results about what the UK population think in reality vs the aspirational question of ‘supporting trans people to be themselves’. In fact, a couple of those polls are even posted in the break it down for me thread so that they are there for anyone to reference if they want to.

But still, I have come to expect such disconnects to come up regularly. It keeps being repeated as if it is this magic fantasy that positions women who disagree as being somehow the hateful minority. No… sadly… the majority of the UK (and other countries where these questions are asked) have an aspirational answer that changes rather quickly when it is probed as to what that means. Then it kinda falls apart.

And it is growing a firmer ‘no thank you’ each year.

I'm not interested in "winning". That's not how the world works. Just bored of the same thing again and again. Definition of madness and all that

A majority of Britons believe that people should be able to change the gender they socially identify as, with 55% saying “people should be able to identify as being of a different gender to the one they had recorded at birth”

the majority in society don't agree with you and think that some men with gender dysphoria should be able to identify as women

That's very self aware of you! 🤔

I went to check the break it down thread thanks to your post. I had a some of the basics before I discovered fwr, or so I thought. Turns out I didn't know the half of it, and what I've learnt here has been eye watering opening.
I was "be kind" until the first time someone said "no debate" which was the opposite of my belief in respectful debate being essential to reaching consensus which can work for everyone. I'm still hoping that might happen eventually.

Tufton Street contains non-transparent think tanks, like policy exchange that take millions from US donors for who knows what purpose, and appear to be the ultimate source of a lot of the more far fetched ideas around gender identity.

If you want to listen to them, that's up to you. It's a bit pot, kettle to then go on about "stonewall capture" though. At least stonewall are clear about their agenda and funding.