Labour Manifesto

[AstonUniRank]

FWR relevant bits:

'Tackling violence against women and girls

For too long, violence against women and girls has been ignored. Our landmark mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade will require a national effort. We will use every government tool available to target perpetrators and address the root causes of abuse and violence.
That starts with tougher enforcement and protection. With Labour, there will be specialist rape and sexual offences teams in every police force. The most prolific and harmful perpetrators will be relentlessly targeted, using tactics normally reserved for terrorists and organised crime.
Prosecution rates for rape are shamefully low with many victims dropping out of the justice system when faced with years of delays. Labour will fast-track rape cases, with specialist courts at every Crown Court location in England and Wales.
Victims deserve better support. Building on the success of the approach adopted by Labour Police and Crime Commissioners, we will introduce domestic abuse experts in 999 control rooms so that victims can talk directly to a specialist, and ensure there is a legal advocate in every police force area to advise victims from the moment of report to trial.
Violence and abuse against women and girls does not come from nowhere. Misogyny is one root cause, and therefore Labour will ensure schools address misogyny and teach young people about healthy relationships and consent. We will ensure police forces have the powers they need to track and tackle the problem.
Stalking has not been treated with the seriousness it deserves. Labour will strengthen the use of Stalking Protection Orders and give women the right to know the identity of online stalkers. Spiking is a devastating crime for victims, leaving many women feeling vulnerable when they go out. Labour will introduce a new criminal offence for spiking to help police better respond to this crime.
We will strengthen the rights and protections available to women in co-habiting couples, as well as for whistleblowers in the workplace, including on sexual harassment.'

I'm sure Labour think 16/17 yr olds will vote for them then continue to do so.

Careful what you wish for as Germany recently found out. In the 16 -24 year range 16% voted AfD which is up 11 points from 5 years ago when the youth vote favoured the Greens. This was the first election 16 and 17 yr olds could vote.

I've not seen anything yet about the Spousal Exit Clause - have I missed it?

I think what they mean here is women can continue to ask for them but they won't lift a finger to do anything for us.

They'll just watch from the sidelines as women exhaust time, money, resources and our mental health being forced to go through arduous tribunals and other legal processes to have access to single sex spaces that are supposedly ours in the first place.

When challenged about this they'll waffle something about respecting everyone's rights.

Exactly. It's back to relying on court cases and crowdfunders to secure rights.

GD is a challenging diagnosis to make. You cannot do a simple diagnostic definitive test. Its a matter of professional judgement.

Just as ASD is a challenging diagnosis to make for similar reasons. My Ex had to have a full day assessment with two specialist doctors who had to both agree for him to get a diagnosis. And that is for a diagnosis that affects no-one but him.

If Labour want to go down this path, then something similar is needed. Conditions that are hard to make a call on do need to have more than one specialist doctor involved and both to agree, especially when that diagnosis affects people other than the individual.

But really what is needed, is not a process looking just at GD yay or nay, but a proper holistic process to find out what the causes of the feelings of gender confusion are and how those can be addressed - much like the Cass report recommended.

It's says

We will also modernise, simplify,
and reform the intrusive and
outdated gender recognition
law to a new process. We will
remove indignities for trans people
who deserve recognition and
acceptance

It lacks any detail and is vague enough to still include ditching the spousal exit clause.

So I still have nobody to vote for then.

@Cityenergy That assumes the goal is to get an accurate diagnosis.

isn't there a massive conflict with the introducing a trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban and 'We will work to implement the expert recommendations of the Cass Review to ensure that young people presenting to the NHS with gender dysphoria are receiving appropriate and high-quality care.'
Surely the two a irreconcilable?

They are, but I don't think they grasp that yet.

Thank you. So much for 'Let me be clear' then.

I thought PB were out for under 18s, and if the trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban, bans talking therapies - then what appropriate healthcare is left for under 18s?

they will argue that they have not banned it, but in reality therapists will be too scared to go there - everyone knows how aggressive gender ideologists are in attempting to destroy the livelihood of anyone who disagrees with - so the only 'therapists' left will be the identity affirming ones. And Labour will absolve themselves of this outcome by arguing they never actually banned it, even though it was blatantly obvious that would be the effect.

If anything, we need laws protecting therapists exploring the causes of feeling of gender confusion, not laws that in reality will constrain them further.

"We will remove indignities for trans people who deserve recognition and
acceptance"

Indignities such as having it pointed out that this is a women's toilet or changing room.

Accept transwomen in your spaces, women. By order.

I wonder if the same diagnosis is made before surgery?

Do surgeons just take a single GD diagnosis from one professional as proof that a double mastectomy or removal of testicle surgeries can be performed on the NHS?

If that is the case, would that protect the NHS from misdiagnosis and treatment compensation?

If its a higher bar for surgery, i wonder what the rationale is, given the impact on women.

Well quite. But if that is what they are presenting, then I think in any consultation we need to make the case for getting an accurate diagnosis.

Despite dozens and dozens of people flagging this with anneliese dodds every time she tweets about a conversion ban.

x.com/AnnelieseDodds/status/1800833479523066301

There are no realistic 'indignities' at present. If the LP believes, or says it believes, that there are, it has a problem. I don't trust them. I certainly don't trust them to chuck the considerable sums of money it would require at the justice system, for a start, to achieve all they are promising. I'd like to see something about sex education in schools.

Don't grasp it, or are wilfully ignoring it?

I think they're ignoring the whole issue so much they don't understand the contradiction.

It's not lack of understanding, it's deliberate obfuscation. They're trying to say enough to make each side of a bitter conflict think they're on our side, and not so much as to actually pick a side.

Cowards. I don't trust them.

The conservatives have pledged to ban the teaching of gender ideology in schools in their manifesto. No such promises from Labour I see. But they have banned conversation therapy, which to me reads that affirmation will be the only accepted approach towards kids left confused by gender ideology teaching at school and on ticktoc etc.

Ah I see they've jumped on the latest DEI (menopause) thing that doesn't actually need to made into 'a thing' - must have run out of things to virtue signal about.

Have they mentioned anything about increasing investment in our armed forces giving the increasing threat of another world war? That’s far more important to me than all the other stuff they have mentioned.

I agree, it’s ridiculous. Workplaces pick this up and then start talking about the gender of employees in this context.

There is only a problem if treatment for comorbid conditions, and psychological and talking therapies are included in "conversion therapy".

I can see why people are concerned due to hysterical TRA statements, but I think its an overinflated concern. Conversion therapy seeks to "erase, repress or change" someone's gender. Its not about treating comorbid conditions or offering talking therapies to explore the implications. The Labour manifesto says exploration is expressly protected.

I think its right all "conversion therapy" is banned because some of it is barbaric and if the ban was too specific then practitioners of it would be more easily able to find legal "loopholes" to carry on with it.