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.

Such a good question. Contrast him with the (ex Stonewall) Wes Streeting who has recognised Labour are on the Wrong Side of History. He's publicly regretted saying TWAW, apologised to Rosie D and many women in Labour and is now able to move the discussion on to looking at the state of the NHS & other issues. He recognises the TWAW battle has been lost - especially in the light of Cass.

Starmer is stuck and it shows. Why is this?

I wonder this a lot. It looks like Labour will win the next GE anyway but surely they know they'd get even more of a landslide if they start straight-talking about this? It is pretty much the only issue that the Tories have an advantage on them with.

He did say that he agreed prisons, rape crisis centres and hospital wards could be single sex. He also used the word biology about 3 times, which I’ve never heard him use before. He’s still infuriating on this subject though. And when the election tv debates happen, he’s going to look so stupid!

Saying ‘safe spaces’ is so sneaky and dishonest. Meant to make us think he’s defending single-sex spaces, because you don’t always have time to analyse what you actually heard when you’re listening. So dishonest.

I was just counting down to the arrival of Adam! 😬🤣 This type of thread is political catnip for some posters!

To be fair to him, Suzanne pushed him on this and he clarified that he meant single sex spaces. (That’s how I remember it,anyway.

He mentioned her today?

My god shameless. He really is a big cowardly arse

A reminder!!

The interview will be on ITV plus one any minute now!

I was just reading through the thread before posting on this - that I wish interviewers would push him to clarify what he means when he says 'safe spaces' but it sounds like SR did just that, Good to hear.

I'm thinking it's a 'between them, they are covering both bases' approach.

Ah...this may be it then @PoppySeedBagelRedux

Has there been any known proof of this or is it just rumour? If it is true then it makes sense if he's on a journey that many of the parents on this FWR's board are also on. Terrified of upsetting the already fragile MH of their child. Perhaps he could come on here and talk to some of the other parents affected (if indeed this is true what you've said). You'd think that the Cass report would give him pause to reflect.

It is sneaky, I agree.

It implies that women should only feel entitled to single sex spaces when their safety is in question. Not merely their privacy, dignity, fairness or simply choice.

This opens the door to allowing "safe" TW in to "safe spaces". It also ignores things like sports and other sex-segregated competitions, scholarships and awards, as those are usually an issue of fairness rather than safety.

In the words of the weightlifter Sarah Robles, "no thank you".

That’s actually the only reason so far, that ‘makes sense’. I’ve got friends with ‘trans kids’ (I know).

They’re uncharacteristically vociferous about trans rights even though they know women’s rights are eroded by them.

We’d do anything to protect our children. And I can imagine he might be (thinking he is) doing that.

Fck all the women of course.

Because people aren't stupid, and they can see that 1. it's not relevant to most of the issues people want answers on and 2. it's hugely disrespectful, verging on poor taste, to refer to the tragic murder of a child as some kind of manipulative 'gotcha'. Kier should take a leaf out of Esther Gey's book and have some respect.

But to use their term 'cis' single sex? A poster above has already said that a person can legally change sex.

He is trying to sidle away from the issue and what he said in the past, leave the room in tiny unnoticeable steps so to speak.

Didn't work of course.

He would be better off saying my understanding of the issues have evolved over time…….bla bla

I am now hopeful that the proposed self ID bill wil be quietly dropped.

Am voting Labour BTW was touch and go for a while.

Great point. Some TRAs are mad. Some are bad and some are both. But they are not ashamed of their beliefs. I suppose you need courage when your convictions are manifestly bonkers.

The Interview is on ITV +1 now.

If it is the case, then I sympathise for him wishing to put his child first in all the decisions he makes, but then he should step down as labour leader and (probably) future pm!

As soon as he realises his personal life is affecting his policy, he should be stepping down if he has an ounce of integrity.

Agreed, nobody should let personal issues dictate policy, no matter what they are. Focus on family matters privately, especially ones that have a direct impact on a big majority of the voting population.

I know with the GRC, EqA and nhs not recording sex and gender as separated categories, it is a complex situation.

But Starmer is an expert in law and wants to be prime minister, but either cannot or doesnt want to acknowledge where the problems are and what the solution is, and be honest with the public.

Just watching it. He looks terrified.

I’ve only seen the interview where he stumbled on his dc’s info as it was linked on here

He looked like this then too.