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/

Interesting question. It would have to be made legal, as its a crime now, so not quite the same situation.

However rape is effectively decriminalised in this country because we don't have the resources to detect, prevent and enforce it properly. The legislation is written in such a way to give an easy out and therefore is not always a deterrent. And the police don't have enough resources to investigate properly and go through all the electronic records so many cases are dropped. Plus it's currently taking several years for cases to come to court due to lack of court resource and victims are withdrawing because they can't take the delays.

As a result 98.6% of rapes don't result in conviction. So although it's not the same, it is a good case study of how "the law" is not enough on its own to stop criminals.

Nothing is "going to land as intended" in an audience who are 1) intent on thinking the worst of "outsiders" and 2) convinced of the righteousness and ideological purity of their position.

That's why this debate is now a culture war. Posters are seeing "bad faith", "disingenous" "TRA" gremlins everywhere they look and it's clouding an ability for rational engagement.

Well no, you were always going to get chancers who thought the rules didn't apply to them. But that social contract gave women the ability to raise merry hell upon finding a man in the women's toilets.

Now a lot of women and girls are scared to ask any man in the women's what they are doing there in case they end up in trouble and not the man.

I'm sick of the all Men could always enter bollocks. Yes they could always enter But the good men stayed out so that the bad men stood out and until recently that worked the majority of the time and most women felt perfectly safe telling them to fuck off.

Women saying no should be enough.
But it isn't.
So we introduced the social contract.
It should be enough but it isn't.
So we introduced laws.
It should be enough but it isn't.

So women should just learn to "accept" the breaches?
Or women should keep on showing the breaches and men should police their own?

I know which way I'm leaning.

They might believe they are women (I’m pretty sure they don’t actually believe this) but they know they are not women.

Otherwise they wouldn’t know they were trans

And on a really simple level, can you say why, just because they want something (that overrides another group’s needs, safety, privacy, dignity, even religious belief) they ought to have it? Because it really sounds like you think the answer is that they are men and we are only women. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

What proportion of males who identify as trans actually believe they are female? It can't be many, surely? Most are aware of reality even though they say they wish they were the opposite sex. The few who truly believe they have changed sex (or always were the opposite sex) must be a tiny minority.

Bu even if you believe this is what these males believe, we don't allow people with other erroneous beliefs to do whatever they think they should be allowed to do if their beliefs were true. Why should it be any different for this group?

Some rapes lead to convictions so no it's not decriminalised. If it were, there would be a lot more rapes.

exactly. Tw know they're not female. Stalkers often believe the person they're stalking loves them, wants their attention, that isn't used as a reason to just let them do their harm.

I wish you'd stop telling me what "I'm in favour of"

Life is not that black and white and its starting to become reminiscent of the TRA "you want trans people to kill themselves!!!@" line.

Trans women in toilets are not the hill I would die on. That doesn't align with "What you are in favour of is women sacrificing their privacy, safety and dignity and you seem to think this is compassionate."

The place where I am happy to treat TW as women is in social situations. I will use pronouns and preferred names. I dont want to see trans women banned from womens knitting groups.

Toilets as I've said, I'm pretty meh, I don't really like sharing with anyone. I don't see that it's possible to "keep them out". I find the possibility I might encounter a TW in single sex toilets less excruciating than using gender neutral toilets with floor to ceiling cubicles with men personally. Because men don't always shut the door and leave piss on the seats. I've encountered pissing men with the door open in gender neutral toilets far more often than a TW in the ladies.

Other spaces for safety and dignity, no.

One swift glance at virtually any post on the transwidows threads show that none of these men actually believe they are women.

And if, as Adam says, they do, then yes of course it's a bloody delusion.

Something that Adam thought was incorrect only yesterday!

I mean that when people say that trans is a choice made by entitled men, that said men should never be treated as anything other than men, then to all intents and purposes you are saying trans = birth sex and therefore trans as an identity doesn't exist. It's a delusion that people believe in, not an actual thing.

It certainly is very much clouding an ability of any rationality from your side hence all the mis quoting and word salad answers, when there are are answers ar all, to simple questions. Define key terms. Do so with basic primary level logic and then proper debate can be had. Until then it's clearly those arguing to reduce women's protections who are stoking culture wars. Those seeking to protect women and children are doing safeguarding not culture wars.

Ha!
Sometimes "feminists" on this board say antifeminist things.

OK then. So let's say we make it a crime for TW to be in womens toilets. But they only get recorded if women report them and then 98.6% of the time the TW is not caught so nothing happens.

Do you think that's a law that's worth passing?

I am starting to see the same sort of logic creeping in as the "stop the boats!" logic. I'm assuming you think a 1.4% chance of detection would be a deterrent?

I’d say you have it wrong, men know exactly what they are challenging and why. They are not that far removed from reality.

But since you believe this why then do you think you can keep males out of changing rooms?

Are you planning on altercations at the door bouncer style?

I think your own posts over time show how little good faith posting you do. I also think that you mistake posters who post in a tone that immediately seeks to shame, denigrate and position others as hateful as being rejected for being ‘outsiders’ rather than for the content and the tone they post.

Considering just what you have posted here this weekend, I don’t consider you to be a judge of coherent rational thought at all. I think that you believe that you are but it is not evidenced. There is a lack of articulate detail in how you explain your position but you cannot see that.

The place where I am happy to treat TW as women is in social situations. I will use pronouns and preferred names. I dont want to see trans women banned from womens knitting groups.

yesterday you characterised transwomen as AGP and/or gender dysphoric.

Women joining a social knitting group aren't doing it to be props in an adult male's sexual fantasy.

Here, have some reading.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/14/we-are-facing-the-decriminalisation-of-warns-victims-commissioner

FWIW if the government wanted to spend scarce resources on safeguarding women and children, I think they'd get more bang for their buck in putting the resources into prosecuting rapists than stopping TW using the ladies. Genuinely quite shocked that others think toilets are the priority.

It’s such a poor argument.

One excuse after the other in order to ensure men override women’s safety and dignity

I really don't understand why we're even having to argue this. Women's toilets are for women. They are not for transwomen. That means they shouldn't go in there and that's the end of it. I'm certain transwomen are fully capable of understanding boundaries in other situations eg their boss's dinner is not for them, the car belongs to someone else so they can't drive it, the chocolate bars in the shop have to be paid for before they can eat them. They're grown adults after all, not toddlers. Women's toilets and other spaces are exactly the same.

Wow, that link of BoiledBeetle about what apparently is transphobic!

I see we are stuck in the ‘if we cannot prosecute it should we bother’.

But now we have what seems to be another false analogy just thrown in to make people disagreeing look akin to racists. And so the cycle continues.

Apparently, this is rational thought!!!

Genuinely quite shocked that you arr completely misrepresenting what anyone has said for some poor quality attempt at point scoring. Please post where anyone has said what's a priority to them? safeguarding has a multibpronged focus. We can do both so in absolutely no way are the issues with rape convictions arln argument for letting some males into the ladies loos and as a victim of sexual assault I find it disgusting tha you'd try and spin things like that.

"Here, have some reading"

How rude and patronising of you. You could also actually read what posters have been saying on this thread about why we don't want men in our spaces. About why we want our stuff back. About why you're refusing to hear women saying No:

4w.pub/a-message-to-those-recently-opining/

I know!!

https://transactual.org.uk/transphobia/#No1 it was@RebelliousCow who actually posted it! I was merely shocked by how bad it was!

It truly does seem that for some just about everything is transphobic if they can mangle what someone meant enough

Yes. At the heart of this is a person who does not respect women's rights to consent or not consent. My sister was raped by a male in the ladies loos. No idea what his identity was and this was more than 20 years ago when there was still some basic respect for the words women use to describe themselves but advocating to facilitate more of that harm is vile. Women say no. Get over it.

I think human lives are complicated so it's impossible to summarise as "correct"/"incorrect" thinking.

I was trying to get posters on here to be clear about what they actually mean rather than saying "I believe trans women exist and we should treat them with compassion". Because that statement is meaningless.

I actually think taking a position that "transwomen are deluded men and I pity their delusion, but am not going to accommodate it" is absolutely fine, it's logical and I see no issue with it. I don't think its "incorrect".

I'm debating the implications of that view, alongside my own opinions, which are somewhat different. But some people on here seem unable to engage with anything other than their own "correct" view.

It's very frustrating because it's so circular. So that's why the board has become an echo chamber. Because its now impossible to debate any position other than "transwomen are deluded men and I pity their delusion, but am not going to accommodate it".