Gender/trans and the next government

[SmudgeHughes]

The Lib Dems and Greens are promising full gender self-ID, including non-binary identities. Labour is more vague, saying that it would “modernise, simplify, and reform” the Gender Recognition Act, while also promising to support the “implementation of the single sex exceptions in the Equality Act”.

The Conservatives say that, if they were re-elected, they would introduce primary legislation to clarify that the protected characteristic of sex in the Equality Act means biological sex.

Policy analysts Murray Blackburn MacKenzie say that the most straightforward way to make the Equality Act clear would be to disapply Section 9 of the Gender Recognition Act from the Equality Act, perhaps by an amendment to either one. Section 9 is the part that sets out that a gender-recognition certificate changes a person’s sex “for all [legal] purposes” other than the listed exceptions.

As gender analysts Sex Matters says, The next government will face ongoing questions about issues of sex and gender. It will become increasingly impossible to ignore that these concern women’s rights, freedom of speech and child safeguarding, and are not merely a matter of “trans rights” – that is, of interest only to a tiny minority with no impact on anyone else.

@SmudgeHughes : yes, I have actually noticed that!

Labour are ruined IMO. Starmer spouts weasel words and would say the sky is green if he thought it would win votes.
<pained expression> “Well it isn’t straightforward. Skies can be a variety of colours, no I haven’t personally seen a green one but….”
It’s very clear that as a party they are committed to self ID and the removal of women’s sex based rights, whatever words they’ve chosen to use in their manifesto and however vague Starmer is in interviews.

My Labour candidate hasn’t replied to me either and I didn’t just ask about women’s rights, I asked about education and justice too. If they can’t even be bothered to answer me I don’t owe them a vote.

I wouldn't worry about the polls. I saw it asked on social media about opinions of polls being banned due to them swaying votes. Anything could happen. I haven't read the reform manifesto yet (it's not out until 1pm) however conservative do align with my views to keep my daughter and myself safe as women. It may seem a small matter to some but as is shown on here it is a big issue.

The other worry is labour allowing the vote at 16. I personally don't feel it's old enough to make such a big decision. I don't know what others thoughts are on this?

I didn't know this. Surely he should be thinking of the country and not his personal circumstances. I guess easier said than done?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12945325/amp/Keir-Starmer-forgets-childrens-gender-accidentally.html

I found this but he said it was a slip of the tongue that he said he has two sons?

I agree, it feels like the equivalent of gerrymandering. The younger you are, the more you vote as an idealist not a realist.

Communism sounds like a social ideal till you see it in practice, as George Orwell observed.

Denmark seems to have had some success with socialism but they are very protective of their culture and societal cohesion. Not sure how they rate on the twaw issue.

I found this:

segm.org/Denmark-sharply-restricts-youth-gender-transitions

I would agree to allow under 16's that are still classed as children to vote does seem a way to manipulate the system.

I can't see any advantage other than this to allow it. Even my daughter agreed she wouldn't want the vote at 16.

I am totally against giving children the vote.

My 22year old DC says he’s still finding it a real responsibility deciding who to vote for and definitely wouldn’t have wanted it at 16 as he wasn’t mature enough or had enough life experience to make the decision. And yes he says it’s politicians gerrymandering

The voting age is one of the few things that is fine as it is. Leave it alone!

Oh yes, I completely agree, and I don't want to vote for any of those 6. I'm just saying that the votes are likely to be split this year by the number of major-party alternatives.

We also have an independent candidate, who I don't know anything about as yet.

I dont want to enter speculation about Starmer, but if you have a young relative that says they are trans, non binary, or whatever, that makes no difference on the issue of women's sex based rights.

You can support the right of those who want to be trans, but still recognise that sex is a biological fact.

So any one who claims it is because they know someone who is trans and this is what influences them, you need to ask what relevance that has to women having the right to single sex (biological services, etc.).

Anyone who tries to suggest that supporting the right to be trans somehow equates to denying women their sex based rights, have in fact been captured by TRA extremism - ie that the trans narrative is as much about punishing women.

And surely any one who has a relative who has been brainwashed by extremism should be more worried about that, that they believe to substantiate their belief they have to deny others their rights.

That's the problem. That TRA extremism is now somehow the norm.

(The same accusations have been said about Starmer and his wife. Which may or may not be true. You would like to think that politicians could act in a logical unbiased way, but then on the other hand it is often said that too many politicians dont have enough real life experience to be MPs!)

Incidentally, in Scotland you can vote at 16 for some elections, e.g. the Scottish Parliament. Maybe that's how we got where we are now...

DD sat her last GCSE exam last Thursday. Labour thinks that she would be capable of exercising her franchise just 3 weeks later. Really?

I'm torn. I usually vote conservative in general elections and stand with them in the gender issue but I really can't vote for them at the moment due to the hash they've made of things. I am politically homeless.

Labour would give 16 year olds the vote because polls show that this age group would overwhelmingly vote Labour. Simple as.

I think life experience at different stages does change opinion. All young adults will have had a different upbringing/life experience so it must seem like a big responsibility.

I do wish whoever comes into power would listen to women on this issue. It isn't the only reason I won't be voting for labour. I have read all the manifestos and although conservative have made mistakes in the past I do feel they are making positive steps. I do think the economy will be more stable with them. I completely agree in historic mistakes happening but I can only look towards the future and what I feel will be of benefit now.

As for my daughter and myself/women I want them to feel safe and secure. I think things have changed so much in the last ten years and as a society we need a clear direction.

I don't have issue with support for transgender people. I just don't understand why some politicians feel women should be redefined.

I know. So if they are voted into power they will stay in power due to this. It's a clever strategy really. I guess it does depend on how many 16 year olds actually go and vote. It's hard to know if they would want to queue and vote for something they are unsure about?

There's far bigger issues, be sensible - the Tory's need to go!

I can't get worked up about it. I don't think it should be lowered, but, tbf, the younger me would have been all in favour. I don't think it would make a massive difference, considering the number of young people voting. Of all the things Labour could bring in, this hardly seems to the one to get excited about.

As I said it's not the only reason I won't be voting labour...

Also I have been sensible. I have read all the manifestos and made an informed decision. I waited until today to read reforms. Anyway we will all have different varied opinions which is why we have the voting system :)

I remember them bringing that in, for much the same reasons. It was an SNP led campaign wasn't it.