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.

My comment saying dawn butler and the lib dems have both received funding from TRA and a pharmaceutical company who manufacture PBs respectively has also been deleted despite it being a fact and recorded in both their parties funding list.

Can I ask a question? When you guys refer to women's right being eroded, which rights exactly are you talking about?

Just to clarify, he was NOT referring to RD's cervix comment when he said he didn't want to put people off their breakfast, but the overall, prurient, non-stop digging he gets about this issue, including the Nick Ferrari weird badgering about 'can a woman have a penis?'. You'll have guessed I'm a supporter, but I'm also baffled by why trans people attract so much venom.

According to census data,that concentration looks long odds 🤔

@Abeona

x.com/famedtrust/status/1744330831236051059?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

x.com/famedtrust/status/1744333973663228383?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

No. If you have to ask, I know where you’re going with it, and there’s no point engaging, tbh.

The right to single sex spaces and sports are two examples.
If men can identify as women (i.e. as transwomen), this means that they can identify in to these e.g. Isla Bryson in prison (until this was halted for Isla - there are many transwomen still in women's prisons across the world), Lia Thomas in swimming.

The Isla Bryson conversation kick-started debate about self-ID in the wider public arena. For both spaces and sports, on the one hand is the "case by case" approach, as suggested by the prison service in Scotland and by Peter Tatchell for sports, whereas on the other is the "let's segregate by sex because there is no viable way to manage this on a case by case basis, when it's a physical impossibility to change sex and there is no way to govern laws/rules that are based on a belief".

Sex is a biological fact, as confirmed by the NHS in headline news in the Telegraph today (!), whereas the idea that "we all have a gender identity" is a belief that not everyone holds.

It didn't come across as that at all. It seemed his apologising for how the conversation seemed to be going but then it didn't.

The rumour is about a thirteen year old, who Starmer has rightly kept out of the spotlight.
It feels very jarring, as my teenagers would say, to speculate about the child.
The pressure on Starmer is such that even a family connection would not make a difference one way or the other to his views.

Top work, BonfireLady!

rmc2001
if a woman in prison is forced to share a cell with a transwoman who then rapes her, do you think her rights have been eroded?

If I don’t think it’s safe to let my daughter go swimming to a place where she’ll be peeling off her wet swimming costume next to a 6ft bloke who claims to identify as a woman (who knows whether that’s true or not), have her rights been eroded?

If a woman misses out on a college sports scholarship because she was beaten by a transwoman who is taller and stronger than her by virtue of male puberty, have her rights been eroded?

If my mother refuses intimate care provided by a man who claims to be a transwoman (see above) and is then refused help because she is a ‘bigot’, have her rights been eroded?
If she doesn’t refuse, but feels violated because no male except her husband has ever seen her naked before, have her rights been eroded?

I could go on…

We mostly care about women’s sex based rights on FWR

Trans people are free to resolve their issues within their own sex class

It’s not up to women and girls to validate, support a d lose privacy and dignity plus safety and fairness

Really it’s about women, not men.

Look at the candidates rather than just the parties.

It's being talked about openly in Labour circles. The way in which attempts are being made to shut it down tend to lend it more credence than stopping the talk. If it wasn't accurate, who'd want to shut it down?

He’s terrified of militant members of his own party.

Bring back Boris. At least he understood shagging.

Oh so women’s rights abs safety are in irrelevance. How convenient.

And he is right to be-these people are straight up nutters. He is not stupid by any means and must see that the tide is turning. What remains to be seen is if he has the same bottle that Kinnock showed vis a vis Militant Tendency (one for the teenagers there). I would be delighted if Starmer told the TRA's, in terms, to fucking shove it and piss off. Not holding my breath though.

No that would be foolish. We can’t ignore any agenda a party has that will be rolled out once in office. We have to understand the manifesto, the values of any party and not just merely peer at the candidates and decide if we like the look of them.

Is Labour seriously expect to win a general election on the back of advice like this?!

A 13 year old boy has died. Basically because the Tories have decimated our mental health services.

Today I know which is more important.

I have lost ZERO rights as a woman. But people are dying daily due to seriously underfunded health services.

We each decide what is more important to us. This is massively more important to me.

Always the same.

Do you HAVE to bring up this again, we have MUCH MORE IMPORTANT things to talk about, silly women.

Stop drawing attention to things Labour aren’t doing well, because we need to GTTO more than women matter

Labour are clearly still signed up to Stonewall and take their advice from people such as Linda Riley ( Is she still their lead LGBTQ advisor?). Also don't forget Iain Anderson's recent defection across the chamber from the Tories - purely so he could influence Labour on this issue.

How many times will it take for Starmer to say he's committed to " modernising" the GRA for people to believe him?

This is a really good question and I’m trying to think about how I would answer that.

You can't possibly know why the events of today happened yet. But using the death of a 13 year old as a political football is pretty grim, especially so soon.

The Labour Party have not committed to sinking more money into the NHS

It's possible to be concerned about more than one thing at a time.

What the actual hell are you talking about? It’s very sad a boy has died clearly. It’s also sad that women have been violently raped by convicted criminals in prison as they claim to be ‘transgender’ and indeed female prison officers.

We are talking about the human rights and safety of 35 MILLION women in this country, yes it does absolutely matter!

And no you won’t change the topic or derail the thread.