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/

And where on earth did I say I miss political talk? I don't at all. There is plenty of politics on MN. I miss feminism!

Any poll in 2022 would need to be redone

We've had Isla Bryson and Scarlett Blake since then

I’d like to see direct questions on males in females sports etc

Move to France.

You seem to be posting the same thing over and over. I'm not sure why - we all saw it the first time. But this is what you posted:

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”. Fewer than half as many (25%) take the opposing view, with 20% unsure.
However, when it comes to the matter of being allowed to legally change their gender status, the public is divided. Four in ten (40%) say the law should allow people to change their legal gender, while 37% say it should not. The remaining 23% are unsure

Let's start with this:
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”.

This is meaningless. Nobody has a gender recorded at birth. Sex is recorded at birth, and as Keir Starmer keeps telling us, everyone knows that gender and sex are different (although just to confuse the issue, the GRA says they're the same).

But, ignoring the sex/gender confusion, I'm with the 55%, because I believe that people should be able to to identify socially as anything they want - man, woman, nonbinary, sheep, goat, Napoleon, the Queen of Sheba. Who cares? It's just pretending to be something they're not, and there are no legal implications to this. Identify away. Have fun!

But then we get to the legal part:
However, when it comes to the matter of being allowed to legally change their gender status, the public is divided. Four in ten (40%) say the law should allow people to change their legal gender

Only a minority (40% is less than half for the arithmetically challenged) believe that the law should allow them to legally change gender (or sex, since the GRA views the two as the same). So fewer than half of people in the UK agree with the existence of the GRA. And as others have pointed out, this poll was 2 years ago before Isla Bryson brought the whole thing to many people's attention.

Where have I said that? You're trying to put words into my mouth.

My point stands that you can't say that you're annoyed at being told your source is dodgy, when you have done EXACTLY the same thing. It's hypocritical.

I’d be very surprised if the majority said yes to males in female sports for example, I’d welcome the chance to find out

Exactly. I believe most people don't care if a man wears a frock and calls himself Jill. They DO care, however if he thinks he should be allowed into ladies loos, changing rooms, sports, hospital wards, prisons, all women short lists etc. It's quite frankly boring to hear people try and spin one as the other and suggests a lack of actual coherent argument.

Especially when they wang on and on and on and on about it. Apparently the definition of madness! 🤷‍♀️

Yep be direct

None of this ‘identify as’ waffle

Do you want to give males access to the female changing room?

Oh come on helle. I've been completely open about my views on here across a range of threads so that's a total misrepresentation of my position. To be expected sadly.

I don't support males in female sport. I don't support males in spaces that need to be single sex for safety and dignity (hospitals, prisons, changing rooms). I don't support anything that makes it easy for predatory males and perverts to get access to women for voyeuristic purposes. This means I'm very anti Self ID.

Could not give less of a shit about a trans woman in public or work toilets. Meh. Could not really give a shit about AGP men in public. There are men indulging all kinds of fetishes in public every day. That's a man problem, not a trans problem.

If I was forced to choose between a law that says a person is the sex they identify with or a person is the sex they were born as, I'd choose the latter every time. But as that's not a threat at the moment, I can stick to what I personally prefer which is to treat trans people as the gender they identify with except for safety and dignity reasons. And guess what? I'm fine with that as a position, it's been my consistent position for years and I know all the various arguments and so am unlikely to be shamed into changing it.

Didn't flounce
Doesn't care about men in women's spaces
Downplays the transgression of social boundaries through public displays of fetish

How telling.

Could not give less of a shit about a trans woman in public or work toilets.

So you don't give a shit about the actual women that excludes from those places, due to religion, trauma etc? Those women's rights to same sex spaces are not yours to give away. Selfish.

What you're actually saying here when you say you couldn't give less of a shit about tw in women's loos is that you couldn't give less of a shit about the women assaulted because of that and the women who know feel unable to use public loos. I think that's a pretty shameful thing to admit to be honest. Personally I try and give a shit about everyone not just the elite and privileged.

Sorry, what? I don't care about people saying my source is dodgy, I do care about being asked questions, when I answer getting my answer dismissed and asked more questions and then getting sarcasm about how I'm "dominating the thread". It is pretty boring.

Not being agreed with is boring? That's a shame.

So when we had the Brexit vote, with a 52% vote share of a 72% turnout, was that a majority or a minority? Should we have Brexited or remained, given we "don't know" about 28% of voters views?

Gaslighty
I don't care about being disagreed with. I do care about being piled on and the "no debate" tone that's happening on here. It's not me that's brooking no disagreement.

I may be wrong but a search appeared to indicate that the only person talking about "dominating the thread" WRT this one is @AdamRyan. Who I thought had flounced. Apart from to tell us that public displays of fetish don't matter and that men are welcome in women's loos (they're not).

Males in female loos but not sports or changing rooms?

What’s the point?

Why do the safety and dignity arguments fall away in the toilets?

@IwantToRetire
I have no idea at all how to lobby Labour. When a party is wedded to an ideology, it's hard to find a way to make them understand that following that path is not going to make everything lovely for everyone except all the people who don't deserve it because they are bigots. And yes on some level they know it will be wildly unpopular but that's because so many people are stupid as well as bigots need to be shown the light. So they will be very sure to make it impossible or difficult to provide any evidence to contradict their view on this. It's a totally irrational position which they nevertheless see as their big idea, their way of making a mark, a great achievement which will put Britain at the forefront of progressive nations. Like the Race Relations Act, Sex Discrimination Act and the infamous GRA. I honestly think that this would have to play out with all the terrible harms that will result. I wish I could think of a way in, but I can't. They won't even listen to Labour women.
If this was the Tories, you could appeal to their sense of self-preservation - this will end up destroying the Labour Party along with women's rights. But Labour often exhibit a sort of death wish. Or you could point out the authoritarian social engineering aspect - emphasise the loss of freedoms, which Tories might see as anti-Conservative. But Labour are much more interested in rights than freedoms, so that would not carry so much weight. I am stumped.

Bollocks.

Nobody is saying no debate. However, sometimes there can be no agreement when people are coming from completely opposite points of view (you trust Labour and think KS is clear, we don't).

Lack of agreement doesn't mean no debate. It means we aren't going to agree.

Maybe stop taking it personally that we don't agree with you. We don't agree with anyone saying what you do about Labour. It's not a pile on, it's a chat forum where multiple people are replying to you. That's the format here.

Assuming this is a serious question...

52% is more than half, so of the people who voted, a majority voted for Brexit.

52% of 72% is about 37%, so only 37% of the electorate voted for Brexit. So a minority of the electorate voted for Brexit.

I have opinions about what I think should have happened, but this isn't a thread about Brexit so I'm not going to comment here.

It's enough of a derail asking me to do some simple maths for you.

First up I want to see clear arguments pre GE

If Labour are going to screw us over (again after the GRA) I want people to hear it, if they still vote for it there’s no excuse

Secondly Starmer is a bit chicken shit so keep the public pressure up and hope Scotland’s hate crime law goes down badly so Labour want to avoid it

Pressure from TRA lobbyists will be huge so it’ll be down to who makes Starmer fold

If it goes badly, my one thing is we get to speak up, if new laws are created it’ll be very bad. But not much to do but keep trying

I did not say you supported what. I said your assertion that the majority of the UK supported people being who they wanted to be or however you phrased it.

I was pretty clear that the reality when pressed as to the reality of that position was not quite what you want it to be. That the majority of the UK do not want males with penises in their toilets and no males in sports. Maybe you should read what I said. I was talking about the poll results that show clearly that the aspiration of the open lovely ‘support’ did not show the reality. Happy to post those poll results but surely you have seen them since we post them regularly. Considering other groups have also done polls and it comes up the same. And even AIBU polls, usually with over 2k polled have returned similar. But obviously AIBU is completely uncontrolled and undocumented. Still, since those are usually very clear (sports is usually over 90%) on AIBU, it is an easy indication that the reality doesn’t match what you say.

People say they want people to be able to identify, but that is way too simplistic because when it comes down to the ramifications of that identification, they actually don’t support it in real terms.

Stop being nasty to Adam. She has established her philosophical position as "GC lite". It fits perfectly with Keir, Angela et al and it provides a perfect lens to view previous and future posts through.