To think there may be a few silent Tory voters amongst the GC contingent

[IrnBruLolly]

Having just skim read both manifestos I'm now wondering if there will be quite a few silent Tory voters from the GC contingent.

Tories are saying they will: 'introduce primary legislation to clarify that the protected characteristic of sex in the Equality Act means biological sex. This will guarantee that single sex services and single sex spaces can be provided, for example in healthcare and sports settings, to ensure women and girls are protected.'

^'We are clear that on fundamental matters of personal identity there should be one approach across the country, so we will also legislate so that an individual can only have one sex in the eyes of the law in the United Kingdom.'^

'Labour are saying they will: 'protect LGBT+ and disabled people by making all existing strands of hate crime an aggravated offence.'

'So-called conversion therapy is abuse – there is no other word for it – so Labour will finally deliver a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices, while protecting the freedom for people to explore their sexual orientation and gender identity.'

'We will also modernise, simplify, and reform the intrusive and outdated gender recognition law to a new process.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; whilst retaining the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a specialist doctor, enabling access to the healthcare pathway.'^

Tbf, they also say 'Labour is proud of our Equality Act and the rights and protections it affords women; we will continue to support the implementation of its single-sex exceptions.'

Thing is, I'm not sure they know what a woman actually is. 🤔

I'm confused. I thought GC women were all Reform voters?

I don't know about you but I'm a far right Xtian bot funded by Putin. Anyway, there's only six of us so I don't know why anyone cares.

Helen Joyce is interviewed on this podcast and explains the issues with 'conversion therapy'.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4FDln03P7SBzvGikykb8VS?si=4kS0pBArQKmO0pZRh3doHA

Essentially iirc, the law specifically applies to therapy only, so would do nothing to prevent religious institutions from 'praying the gay (or trans) away' which is the usual argument for why we need this law.

Conversely, any licensed therapist would have their license revoked if found to be implementing any kind of conversion therapy in the historic sense. We already have checks and balances to prevent this kind of abuse.

However, given stonewall's definition of conversion therapy including any exploration of trans identification, what a ban on conversion therapy would do is muddy the water and make therapists afraid to touch the issue with a barge pole, except for full on affirmation.

This means trans identified people would be prevented from having the kind of therapy that would be useful to them, to explore all possible reasons for their feelings (like therapy is supposed to do).

Like most policy proposals, the devil is in the detail and you need to look below the surface to see what is actually intended / likely to happen, not just take the party announcement at face value.

If a politician can't clearly articulate something as obvious and fundamental as what a woman is and why she might occasionally need single sex provision, I can't see why they'd be capable of dealing competently with more nuanced issues like the economy or foreign policy.

I've just noticed that the Reform party is gender critical yet they have no chance where I am (Scotland - likely to be Labour or SNP in my constituency)

Absolutely this. Gives the impression not only that Labour couldn’t deal competently with the other matters, but also that they use weasel words and act disingenuously in the debate so their words cannot be trusted on this or any other issues.

Exactly. It's the lying and the inability to talk plainly.

I don't know if it's the three letter acronyms, the lack of punctuation or the use of sentences that just don't make sense like, "More relevant as why so many women were ignorant of what was about to happen.", but none of that is really grabbing my attention or sounding rational.

This just isn't as important factor for many voters as it is to those with a specific focus on the single issue.

It might actually blow your brain if you follow Conservative for women…

I’ve said before, you only have left-leaning administrations to see how well the UK, and especially England has done on this issue. We are in a far better place than Canada, Australia, even the US. In Victoria, parents who don’t affirm & support medical intervention for children who think they are trans can have their children removed (and transitioned) by the state. Even Scotland and Wales have suffered far more than England. The Tories haven’t been great on this, but far far better than a labour administration would have been.

Personally, I don’t trust Starmer on this issue, and I’m willing to put up with a lot of shit in the economy, the nhs etc to try to keep my daughter safe

I’m fairly sure some of them will be - we aren’t all one homologous mass after all.

Personally I don’t think I could vote Tory but I also don’t want vote labour or green anymore either. But we don’t have an independent and our labour MP is in a safe seat (I don’t believe my constituency has ever been anything else since its inception) so it probably won’t make any difference which way I vote.

This, absolutely.
Even though I prefer what Conservatives are saying on this subject.

What did the conservatives do wrong while implementing the GRA and EqA? What are labour going to do differently?

I am pretty sure silent Tory voters are throughout the population. They just don't want to put up with hysterical idiots accusing them of believing selfishness is good. You can't argue with that stupid shit.

Reform is gender critical in the sense that it believes that your sex and gender are the same. However, it also believes that everyone should conform to their gender stereotype. Vote Reform if you want to be barefoot and pregnant.

This is quite important next to Anya's observation that the manifesto doesn't say they will implement Cass "in full".

I'll never vote for a party that doesn't have children's best interests at heart. Never.

x.com/anyabike/status/1801555518281904139?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Believing that everyone should conform to gender stereotypes is the opposite of gender critical.

There might well be a few.

However when polling is done on what people think are the most important issues "transgender rights/debate" normally comes in at around 2% - so the pool of potential voters is very small.

Spread those around the 650 constituencies and it's hard to see there'd be a visible impact.

Can you provide a source for the Victoria claim? I'm aware of a debunked pamphlet that was distributed at some point claiming this. However the Victorian government doesn't remove children on this basis, and doesn't transition said removed children either. There may be a confusion about the type of transition involved, too (social vs medical).

Nerfertiti, that’s a good question - I’ve seen it stated many times, but not investigated. I’ll link the state law which shows it is a criminal offence not to affirm anyone’s gender identity (which is pretty extreme in its own right!), there is no exclusion that I can see for this applying to children, but IANAL. I don’t know what the penalty would be for a (continuing) criminal offence wrt this act, but I’m not sure it makes sense to assume there’s none. Also, as it is an offence to not recognise someone’s gender identity, then presumably the state would recognise the child’s gender identity, leading to at least social transition?

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-02/21-3aa001%20authorised.pdf

Do you have any better information?

Further - if a parent is deemed to be committing a criminal act against a child, would the state not be obliged to do something to ‘protect’ the child?

I am well beyond my competence here, happy to be educated!

Historically, the Conservative Party are the most successful in British history. So an awful lot of ordinary British people have voted for them over the decades. We either have a centre leftish or centre rightish party in power; people forget that politics is actually very mild here.

I grew up in a completely apolitical household where it was considered rude to ask someone how they voted, and in RL never mention politics until someone else raises it.

Of course. Conversion therapy is banned, as is taking anyone out of the state for the therapy.

@Runor

And thank you for the link - much appreciated!

https://www.hrla.org.au/not-affirming-transgender-children-is-family-violence-in-victoria/
Here is one legal opinion.
I think the 2021 Victorian conversion therapy act is dreadful law, but I also think the legal opinion on that website may be hyperbolic.
I guess we don't know until a case comes to court.