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.

There is part of me that thinks Starmer is deliberately trying to lose, no one can be this bad.

Starmer has started to realise how big this issue is and it’s not going away. It’s only getting bigger.

There’s a reason he had the view in the first place. That reason obviously hasn’t changed. Therefore he won’t - can’t ‘change his mind’. Clearly he doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying.

So here we are. What a pickle he’s in. It may be a relief to him, for him to lose - it’s feasible.

I'm sure that Starmer was a competent DPP. It's just worth remembering that the DPP isn't the badass trial lawyer prosecuting terrorists that Labour would have us believe. The DPP is effectively the Perm Sec of a small department and spends his time on the duties of a Perm Sec.

There are three people who will matter in a Labour government. That's Starmer, Reeves and Sue Gray. They're all Whitehall functionaries. I'm sure they will be quite competent at the bureaucratic stuff that makes up most of what government does.

Still and all, I'm not sure I approve of making Sir Humphrey the PM. That's not Sir Humphrey's function. And at least as much of this mess can be laid at Sir Humphrey's feet as the feet of the elected politicians.

So what’s he going to say when some bloke in a dress demands to be part of women only rape support groups. Is he willing to stand up and say to that man he should get out because he’s not a woman? Is he willing to tell men who tell everyone they are a woman they have no place in women’s refuges. Is he willing to keep women safe by saying men cannot become women and therefore have no place in women’s sports, toilets or changing rooms.

because until he does that he has no compassion or understanding, he has no understanding of women’s issues.

Labour’s cold indifference to women’s safety is truly chilling. It actually frightens me as a mother of two teenage girls. How has it come to this? I come from a long line of labour supporters, and my grandparents would never support this erasure of women in a million years and they were a misogynistic bunch!

Agreed. Completely inappropriate.

@ButterflyHatched

No sorry.

Starmer has been frighteningly pro trans, often resembling a TRA eg. in his treatment of people in his own party who have stated their actual understanding of biological reality. Etc.

He’s telling 51% of his electorate that some women have penises. And yes I understand why he feels safe legally saying this - because fck me men can actually legally call themselves a woman. What a terrible time.

And many potential Labour voters are utterly puzzled / dumbfounded / fcked off that he hasn’t supported women’s and children’s rights. Even the NHS is declaring that biological sex exists now 🙄).

And so if it turns out that his child is trans then yes we can say that that has influenced his actions and statements. As it would any parent.

However he’s not just any parent - he’s the soon to be PM and it would’ve directly influenced him at the expense of women and children in electorate.

Oh I'd not heard of this before. Excellent link - many thanks.

Swap trans with any other minority group and try saying that again.

@ButterflyHatched what other minority groups do you get to identify into?

I no more chose my gender identity than I chose my sexuality

@ButterflyHatched

That wouldn’t work would it?

You must understand that’s not a valid ‘swap’. If you don’t understand that, I can’t help you.

We don’t erase one vulnerable group in favour of another do we?

Statistically women are far more likely to be injured or killed than any other group. So why on earth would you want to take away their legal protection? Their right to safety?

That may be true for those who experience a gender identity (which isn't everyone) but any person (including people who don't actually believe in gender identities, including malevolent people who are looking for opportunities for personal advantage, for thrills or even in the worst cases to acruslly hurt or abuse, and you can't deny there's plenty such people) can claim any gender identity at any time. If that can't be challenged and can't be proven or disproven then there's no such thing as any space or anything reserved by gender because anyone can claim that gender. You may not be able to chose your gender identity but you can certainly choose what identity to claim and whether to speak the truth at all times and you cannot pretend that liars don't exist.

The problem isn't trans people as such biut the fact that the whole setup that would be established if gender is prioritised over sex can only possibly function if all people are good and honorable, unselfish and law-abiding. There's a lot of people who are all those things, and people who identify as trans are no less likely to be in that category than anyone else. But it's naive and ridiculous to establish rules of society that only function if 100% of people are good and honorable, unselfish and law-abiding.

Having spaces and opportunities reserved for women isn't an actual solution to centuries of discrimination and the continued misogyny deep-rooted in our culture, but it helps a bit. Making them accessible by gender not sex means they are open to anyone at all which means they no longer really exist at all as "reserved", unless humanity is changed to no longer include anyone dishonorable, selfish or abusive.

🙄

Men are not a minority group

That sex class could encompass all representation instead

It doesn’t have to impact women

Your identity could be as you wish, accepted by your sex class

As well as the Party for Women standing for election in every single Labour Party target seat, I want hulking 6 foot bearded males in full face makeup and Lycra minidresses to stand, and turn up to hustings to tell voters that Labour won’t clearly say that they are men and should be kept out of women’s spaces.

Do you doubt the imaginary ladyfeelz?

I’ve been female for 50 odd years now. Still no idea what it ‘feels’ like ffs.

Butterfly you have benefited from male privilege all of your life, from the minute you were born. You have no idea about the oppression many girls and women suffer from birth. None. It’s beyond your life experience to imagine just how ingrained this is in our culture so I take issue with your claim that they matter LESS than other groups!

There are cultures (I use the word ‘culture’ this loosely) where girls don’t make it out of the womb or are murdered soon after birth. This is still happening today.

you don’t get to ‘identify’ out of that ffs.

Oh I see. Makes sense.

Is there a way of finding out the donations each party receives and when?

Rebellious - I’m not sure.

What you did was frame your feelings in a certain way. That you have framed your feelings in such a way as to indicate that you a really a girl/a woman, doesn't detract from the fact you are not. Only if you believe that being a woman is a state of mind, rather than a state of biology would this be true.

I've been watching 'There's Something about Miriam' on Channel 4. A very sad story about a young Mexican boy( whose father could not accept such a feminine boy who was clearly gay - and so took him to a pastor to be exorcised). Hugo, as he was, was also secretly dressing up in girls clothing.

It ended up with Miriam ( Hugo) taking part in a British reality TV show in 2002 which became very controversial - for obvious reasons. Years later Miriam committed suicide/though some still believe s/he was murdered. Miriam 'passed' very well, and was indeed very beautiful - but still remained male. This essential fact is what caused so much distress and difficulty for Miriam( and for those who identify as trans but cannot accept they are still their birth sex)

We can all accept that some men feel this very strongly, and that some young women feel that they are boys/men and that they feel an irresistable urge to manifest this feeling through dress, mannerisms and behaviours - but we have single sex spaces and provisions on the basis of biological sex, not on inner feeling or outward dress.