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/

Sorry mate, it is whataboutery. If you had pointed out the donations by GI opponents to the Tories on the other hand....

It’s got nothing to do with whether he can define you. It’s about whether he can define who can access that safe space you mentioned. If you can’t define who can access it then it’s already been abolished.

Starmer previously said that some women have penises because a man who says he's a woman is no different from an actual woman. So those men who say they're women should be allowed in women-only spaces.

Asking him to define what he means by women is just asking him if he still stands by this definition of woman (a woman may be an adult female human or a man who says he's a woman).

So, do it to Julia, then?

If the abolition of safe places for people with genital like mine and who has reason to be frightened of people with different genitial, was proposed, I'd object to it. But that doesn't seem to me that is was he said. Not even close.

I think this is a pretty accurate representation of much of the public understanding and is why it remains a side issue.

Yep

He can’t be bloody clear. It’s infuriating to hear the word salad every time.

You're right he’s trying to say both things at once but can’t get to what he actually means

I don't think we are "mates"?

I think Sir Paul Marshall (evangelical Christian, anti-LGBT as shown above) paying a grand an hour for Conservative MPs to spout twaddle on GB News is more concerning.

EDITED: A journalist has done the maths. Here you go. £660,000 to Conservative MPs, Rees-Mogg got paid £325,000
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/media/2024/feb/28/payments-tory-mps-by-gb-news-since-its-launch

Poor old Rosie Duffield, shafted as usual, only earnt £6k

That's not what he said. It might be your understanding of it.

He says woman = adult human female.

He also recognises there are people who are male, but legally recognised as women. Therefore "women with a penis".

His position just reflects the facts, you can't penalise someone for stating reality.

I don't think Labour will have a out right victory in an upcoming general election no.
At the moment polls are being taken on the back of pretty much no campaigning. The 'man in the street ' hasn't given the election any headspace yet. Policies get dumbed down as the elections get closer. Nuance goes. Policies are turned into sound bites by MSM. 'Ban the boats ' 'Save the NHS' 'No lads in ladies lavs'
Surely you know no journalist will let this go? Especially as KJK plans to stand against him. It's her sole raison d'etre

He's so ... Moist...

Grow a F*ing spine FFS.

He also recognises there are people who are male, but legally recognised as women. Therefore "women with a penis".

Did he say that?

He said a woman is an "adult female", and 99.9% of women don't have a penis. I don't think he said anything about men who are legally recognised as women, but happy to be corrected if you can post a link.

Like I say, all very reprehensible, but where does it say he’s pro taking women’s rights away? From what I read (skimmed, admittedly), it doesn’t seem like he’s someone pushing the trans agenda at the expense of women and children. Is he?

”He said no to self-ID”

He did, but that does not mean GRC will not be nearly as easy to get as though they were obtained through self-ID.

From The Guardian
Sun 26 Nov 2023
Labour grassroots back Starmer’s new stance on gender, allies claim after poll
Members back ending of support for self-identification and broadly share views of public on gender recognition, says Labour Together group
Michael Savage Policy editor

The party shifted its stance in the summer, abandoning its support for self-identification – which would allow people to legally change gender without a medical diagnosis. It announced the move alongside support for making the process of obtaining a gender recognition certificate far simpler and less invasive, as well as continuing to ensure some single-sex services and places could only be accessed by biological women……….

Note the process for obtaining one will be ‘far simpler’

Two-thirds (67%) approved of Labour’s new policy to streamline the securing of a gender recognition certificate by removing a panel of doctors and lawyers from the process, allowing a single doctor to diagnose “gender dysphoria”. The party has said that continuing to require a diagnosis “upholds legitimacy of applications and confidence in the system”.

A single doctor signing an applicant off will be easy to find.

I think there would also be another element, not mentioned here, of removing a protection for spouses of transitioners obtaining GRCs.

Absolutely, his strategy is to keep it a side issue. Because he knows fine well that if the public at large gets wind of the entirety of what’s been going on and what they want to do, there’ll be outrage.

A small proportion of people in universities, Stoke Newington and Brighton might be in favour, but everyone else who actually understands what’s been happening thinks it’s ludicrous and dangerous. If there were to be an effective campaign to get the word out more to the public, you’d see him u-turn like greased lightning.

I think it would tell a hell of a lot (and there has already been quite a lot) to turn this into an major, election-deciding issue. Especially with the state of most of our media.

‘No lads in ladies’ lavs’ is Sun-level genius. The simplicity with the alliteration really sticks in the mind. If they and other right-wing media start running with stuff like that, suddenly it’s a major issue and Starmer and the MRAs will be up shit creek.

Another thread hijacked by the usual suspects who re-use the same posts over and over again.

We dont need to talk about the Tories or to be told we need to talk about the Tories when trying to discuss what, if anything, Labour stands for.

Anyone would think they are frightened to have Labour policy or lack of it discussed.

I would suggest there is no need to respond.

After all it is more than possible to start a thread headed "Everything the Tories Have Done Wrong" if it really was that important, and no doubts hundreds would make it a long and thrilling thread.

On the plus side, Kiern is, for once, sticking to his principles. On the downside, however his principle is that women count for Jack shit. He continues to show stunning levels of arrogance in thinking he can pull the wool over people's eyes and patronise them with 'we've been clear' bullshit. He's a completely vile man.

So within the year Starmer, who cant make a straightforward statement about anything, will be PM, and Anneliese Dodds who wants to make getting a GRC easy, will be minister for women.

Anyone have any ideas of some sort of strategy.

At the moment our best hope is that Starmer having been such a uncommitted socialist, means that many long standing party members will not vote Labour and will support independents like Corbyn and maybe even Abbot.

Added to which, and this will not just be Muslim voters, all those feel he is in the grip of the Zionist wing of the Labour party (making Cameron look like a more impartial politician) who on principle will probably not vote Labour.

But even if this does weaken the Labour vote, the Tories will lose a lot of their usual voters to Reform.

Although it may well be that it will be easier for the Tories and Reform to form a coalition than Labour and a ragtag of diverse independents.

More and more I am in favour of the two main parties dividing into their natural smaller groupings, because at least if Governments are made of a coalition of parties we will get to see how deals are struck, rather than what we have at the moment when behind closed doors Sunak is making deals with the ERG, and Starmer making deals with whoever he thinks middle of the road voters will prefer.

Don't forget that Labour is disadvantaged by the boundary changes. Lost votes (or votes they could have won but didn't) + boundary changes may well = fewer seats won than hoped for / anticipated.

But unfortunately Labour could be picking up seats in Scotland because even Labour now seems better to some than the SNP

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/keir-starmer-says-99-9-of-women-havent-got-a-penis-as-he-faces-questions-over-trans-rights-12848438

Sir Keir also said 99.9% of women "of course haven't got a penis" as he was asked about his stance on whether a person with a penis can be a woman.
He added that there is a "very small number" of people who identify as a different gender to the one they were born with as he called for an end to a "toxic divide" over trans issues.
"They need legal support and a framework. Most people don't disagree with that, and that's the framework within which we ought to look at these issues," he said

Oh OK, I assumed when someone asked about funding the right wing over GI issues, they meant funding the anti-Trans side of the culture war. He appears quite anti LGBTQ, his GB news channel is quite anti trans, so I'd say that's the equivalent of a pro-trans person donating to Labour.

Marshall is also putting money directly in the pockets of specific conservative MPs rather than donating to a party. £325,000 to Rees Mogg! Shocking

Self-ID means anyone can claim to be a woman on the basis of a feeling. Even the Karen Whites and Katy Dolatowskis of the world.

GRC provides gate keeping so they can't do that.

It's not the same at all.

GRC provides gate keeping so they can't do that.

How do GRCs ‘provide gatekeeping’ if no one can check who has one?

Does Eddie Izzard have one or does he just ‘claim to be a woman on the basis of a feeling’?