Sir Kier Starmer on GMB now being asked what his stance on trans gender is

[SpringLobelia]

He said he apologises to people eating their breakfast'.

He is being questioned about his treatment of Rosie Duffield but he's not answered really and moved the convo swiftly to Brianna Ghey

Susannah said you told the MP Rosie Duffield that she is wrong to say only women have a cervix and he is again deflecting.

Says he believes in safe spaces for women.

Women's prisons? - deflects again to the NHS today. no answer to any direct questions.

Says again about safe spaces being important- but again deflecting and whittering about the constituion

SR asking for clarity- is it right or wrong for RD to say only women have a cervix - KS- she is biologically right. SR- should you apologise to her?
KS- deflects. Wants discussion. Not answering the question.

I'm giving up now. He can't even string a coherent sentence together. Keeps deflecting.

IMO of course.

Sorry, I don't spend my day on Mumsnet - I actually have other things in life that take up time.

And with that. Kids home from school. Coffee break over. I'll be back later I expect, but just wanted to make sure you weren't all offended at me not giving you my FULL attention 24/7.

I don't always get their name right though. 😬🤣

Men are the risk, usually. Yes.

Often to other men, particularly the gender-non-conforming of their number.

This is not women's problem to solve by letting some men use our single sex spaces.

The 'talk to TW' trope is just aimed at appealing to female socialisation to beee kiiiind, and doesn't work any more.

I don't have a birth gender. I don't actually particularly align with having a gender, which I believe is a purely societal construct that we would all be better without. I have a sex, observed at birth.

What's so difficult about biological facts?

I think cases like Brianna Ghey have everyone tiptoeing around, but it is important to remember that you cannot actually change sex. You can live your version of the opposite sex as many do. But biologically it's in your dna, your cells.

Young people at school might find it easier to look like the opposite sex but after puberty makes changes to the body in line with your dna. So girls at school saying they are boys and boys saying they are girls naturally garner sympathy but they still cannot change sex.

Anything with ‘cis’ is already male focussed

It’s an offensive term

How did you take "Oh, okay, sports don't matter. Women can just push over and make space for men " from my post??
By not reading thoroughly and jumping to 'sport isn't a right'.

What I pushed for, and what has happened, is, regardless of age or level of sport, you can choose to complete in the category of your birth gender, or an open category.
That's good, and thank you. But the women who initially raised this issue were reviled as bigots.

So trans women who pass as women can use the female toilets OK?
Well, if they pass, we're not going to know, are we? But the fact remains that they will be on average larger and stronger than the average woman, and will retain male patterns of offending, so it's not a situation that I'm entirely comfortable with. Which is unfair on the many harmless transwomen, but the situation is unfair on women, too.
And it's fine for butch women to be attacked / abused because it's caused by "by the insane situation we have now".
And I don't know how you got that from my post... No, it's not okay. But surely you can see how it's happened?

You realise that men don't have to claim to be women to enter womens spaces?
Of course I realise. But once it becomes normalised, it becomes easier. We used to be terribly concerned, as a society, about safeguarding, about closing loopholes. Now, it seems, not so much.

It’s simply because he doesn’t actually believe what he is saying.

Exactly

😂😂

Susannah said you told the MP Rosie Duffield that she is wrong to say only women have a cervix and he is again deflecting.

He ought to say 'have had or have a cervix.'

Women who've had a hysterectomy are still women but they sometimes lose their cervix during surgery.

It isn’t dragging the child into politics 🙄

It’s trying to explain why his stance is so inexplicable. This has circumstantial evidence to support it. And is frankly, a realistic theory.

If it’s true - he cannot be elected with this intransigent view about trans rights, which erodes women’s and children’s right - obviously driven by the fact his child is trans (as all parents would be but all parents aren’t PM)

If it’s true and if it came out after Labour were elected, Kier would have to resign and there would be a big shit show. The fuss would be horrendous for his child and for him. It’s a sorry situation and extremely sticky. If it’s true.

To be fair, do we have any evidence that he wouldn't be equally unsure about talking about penises and testicles on Breakfast TV?

The fact you think this, is what’s worrying.

😂🙈 what? I’ve never forgotten I have daughters not sons.

No evidence, but maybe it depends on whether it's a male or female penis and testicles 😂

Not sure if already posted?

https://unherd.com/newsroom/keir-starmer-owes-rosie-duffield-an-apology/

Usually. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34290981

Back from work and just caught up. I was surprised that a number of posters seem to believe that, if it transpired that Starmer has a trans child then he would have to resign as PM, because he would be compromised by his personal life.

Beggars belief.

All public figures have personal lives, and political positions personal to them but not necessarily their party, or Government policy.

I men its just such a fantasy to suggest it.

I can't decide whether to have a BINGO gif or this one...

Children with DSDs have absolutely nothing to do with gender ideology. I don't know why DSDs keep getting dragged into this. Apart from anything else, DSDs are always sex specific.

You realise that men don't have to claim to be women to enter womens spaces? There is no law preventing it happening. They can just walk in. They can say they're a cleaner, or a plumber (both have happened in recent years). or can just walk in. There is no law preventing this. There is no "right" for only women in womens toilets

This seems to contradict what you said earlier:

Women are at risk from a small subset of men. Awful, hideous men. A transwoman is at much MUCH greater risk from men. Forcing a transwoman to use mens toilets would put them at very high risk of violence.

You seem to think "transwomen" would be safer from other men if they used the women's toilets. But if any man can just walk into the women's toilets then they wouldn't be any safer than if they used the men's.

You seem to be using two different arguments which contradict each other. If women are concerned about "transwomen" in their spaces, you say that it's not important because the women's toilets are full of men anyway. But then you say that "transwomen" are safer in women's toilets because there are no men in them (apart from "transwomen"). Both can't be true.

I generally think politicians' families should be left out of it, unless they choose to make their family an issue. And I don't have any knowledge of KS's family.

I just note here that we don't know how many shadow cabinet members have trans-identified children. Depending on who you believe, it's at least three and may be up to six. (And they say social contagion isn't a thing!) It's openly talked about in Labour circles.

We don't need to speculate on KS's personal circumstances. We just need to know how the 'trans kid' chills discussion, and that's a very real factor in his inner circle.

But these boys aren't changing sex, they have a rare genetic condition which means their penis/testes don't developed properly until puberty when they have huge surge in testosterone. They are still male at birth with xy chromosomes

It would just be good for Keir Starmer to acknowledge the evidence of the Cass report, put out a statement similar to Wes Streeting and to answer questions directly. That would give floating voters and previous Labour voters a real flavour on what his policies will be (if or when he gets in) as PM.

I believe reasonable discussion can be had and the era of "no debate" must stop.