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 for raising the voting age - for when they're brains are fully mature at 25!

They don't experience the full range of empathy at 18. Most certainly wouldn't understand the needs of vulnerable or elderly people or parents.

I'm going to be accused of ageism now, because, you know - feelings - not science.

I think 18 is fair enough. There is the whole 'no taxation without representation' thing.

I was going to also say something about the cohort responsible for the most criminal behaviour... but you do have a fair point. Don't think we can afford to raising taxing age!

Im a therapist.
If Labour get in and go full throttle with the conversion therapy ban, ignoring all the important recommendations from Cass, I won't be working with this client group.
Which is a great shame because they'd get good, solid, exploratory support from me. I won't be trying to change their minds, but I would be looking at comorbidities such as autism and trauma. Asking questions,
the same way I do with clients who present with eating disorders and self
harm. It's poor practise not
to do this and goes against safe, ethical work.
I know a few gender affirming therapists and they adopt the nodding dog approach, just agreeing with everything said. Which goes against all safeguarding measures I've ever been taught. I won't do it. I'll have to refer these clients on.

The conservative media I read overall lands on the side of sex segregated services simply being a normal part of a civilised culture, rather than a "protection" issue. A privacy and dignity issue which is equally as important.

That's pretty much where I am. I see the safety argument deployed, and it is paramount and very important but I wonder why it even has to be deployed. Isn't privacy and dignity enough?

A single sex space shouldn't even need defending but much of the political and managerial class seem to have colluded in forcing women to justify single sex spaces.

I’m guessing I’m not the only person wondering where you’re based and whether you’re taking clients

That's the problem with a conversion therapy ban, unless it perfectly written, good therapist will just stay away, and not so good ones will fill the gap.

On paper, everything will look, fine, but patients wont be getting the best care.

Julie Bindel writes for me. Well, actually she write in the Telegraph but I pretty much agree with every word

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/06/14/keir-starmer-women-transgender-labour-manifesto/

https://archive.ph/JndmM Labour - putting the 'man' in manifesto (funny they always know what a man is)

Or, you know, maybe the oppression of women, being the size of a planet, is therefore, paradoxically, mostly invisible to the naked eye?
@theilltemperedclavecinist

I love this! Well, hate it- but you know what I mean.

Reeves was just on LBC - interview by Sheila Fogarty.

She said that Labour will deliver on the recommendations from the Cass review and is confident that they can ban conversion therapy in conjunction with this.

There is a phone in now (although Reeves isn't involved) to hear listener's views.

I think TRAs are likely to be more upset by this than GCs. They want the Cass review recommendations to be rejected.

I don't think the 'both sides' approach will keep the alphabet crew happy

They won't be able to square that circle. They'll try and all that will be achieved is another disastrous piece of legislation because it's ideologically driven rather than anything that makes sense.

That's what Sheila Fogarty is saying.

She is wondering why Labour thinks it will be so easy.

Sheila just beautifully dismissed a contributor who said the Cass review was biased. She said 'it wasn't. I'll leave that there'! That's the approach that is needed with that nonsense!

Their specific words need to be watched

x.com/anyabike/status/1801554035889029449?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

If they're not saying "in full" in the manifesto - and they aren't - and they're saying they'll ban all forms of conversion therapy, it's a trap.

Julie Bindel in the Telegraph: "voting Labour this time will not just be a massive compromise, it will potentially be an act of self-destruction".

Having read the manifesto I agree with her. I have signed the Labour Women's Declaration and hoped, as a long time Labour supporter, that the Labour leadership would take the Declaration as policy. It hasn't, so I am voting Conservative this time, as I am in a two-horse constituency where EVERY vote will count.

I feel this is making my vote count.

This. My conservative candidate is excellent on women's rights and the environment; the Labour man is a performative pronoun twat.

Our Labour candidate is an ardent feminist who I know personally. This is currently a Tory seat but she won the recent local election. I'm hoping to ask her about the issue of Cass and conversion therapy and how her stance sits with the Labour stance.

Also ask her what she would do if whipped to vote for e.g. a harmful "conversion therapy ban".

Would she defy the whips?

Janice Turner's comment in the Times today:

https://www.thetimes.com/article/e912811b-3640-4db3-8901-63d2b12ad1ed?shareToken=2199e4f3bb99a9c9e0413f3ce57a7214

Well. That's an unexpected party political promotion for the Conservative party. Simply by pointing out the contradictions in the Labour position.

Put that way, a decision to vote Conservative rather than my usual vote for Labour is not such a tough decision after all.

Thanks. Interesting that Dodds isn't lined up for cabinet.

A huge stretch to say Stetting is 'gc', though. I'd say he is whatever he thinks most expedient at the time.

To align with public opinion, a Starmer government may need to do nothing at all.

Might end up being true. That would be Starmer's hope, obviously. Say nothing, don't frighten the horses.

Jean Hatchet in the Critic

https://thecritic.co.uk/culture-war-what-is-it-good-for/

Edwin Starr earworm!

Y'all!

Huh!