Women are being cast as intolerant bullies in this Starmer-drawn landscape of female-imposed weariness

[IwantToRetire]

Starmer (feels) weary of the incessant demands of feminist women that he commit to the annoying task of listening to them. He declared instead that “the people of the UK” are “exhausted” by the political battles over issues such as trans rights.

Keir (wants) to focus on “bringing people together rather than creating further division”. Who is Keir aiming to bring together? Women don’t want “bringing together” with men; that is rather the point and has been for more than a decade.

Sir Keir declared that he would “bring an end to those controversies [over trans rights] on day one.”

Is Keir assuming that all the women who have spent years campaigning, speaking, writing and lobbying in expectation that they would retain rights necessary for a safe and fair existence, simply forget what they were doing and wander off home in a daze?

It seems unlikely that immediately a woman from one of the large organisations advocating for women’s rights, like Sex Matters, said to another, “Come on Maya, you’ve had your fun, probably time to get a proper job now or sign on. People are fed up.”

Are we to assume the “vast majority” of these overly tired people are not women who want rights according to their sex? Women wanting single-sex prison accommodation, for example, are in Keir’s depiction of society, the unreasonable minority and it’s very tiring for the reasonable people to consider them. Although I imagine if you are the woman having to keep your eye on the male rapist in your cell, that could be a bit draining too.

Women are being cast as intolerant bullies in this Starmer-drawn landscape of female-imposed weariness. All the reasonable people want is peace. The “culture wars” have been long. Women have been putting culture guns to the tolerant people’s heads for too long and he will put an end to their irksome ways. The thing is, women are not a culture — the battle we fight is not for territory. Women are a sex, the female sex, and we fight for rights that we need when our bodies are the unfair focus of the opposite sex.

Moving ahead to day one of “The End of Pesky Women” I wonder what Keir imagines will happen. Perhaps at 4.30 pm exactly the miracle of women becoming silent women will occur; it seems a good time for women to wobble out of our various misguided, unreasonable groups, blinking in the sunlight, confused as to how we got it all so very wrong and made all the “other people” so exhausted. Perhaps there will be a party and women will clutch a plate of quiche and crisps, declaring to burn their rebellious t-shirts, ribbons, scarves and tea towels. Perhaps someone will be on the phone shouting over the music, “Scrap the ashtrays order, Kellie-Jay, it’s over love.”

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

(This is a much longer article raising many issues about Starmer’s Labour and women – I just pulled out the ones that struck home for me.)

Error

Good for you. But can you really not understand why some women don't want to? You can't think of any reason?

So women suffering from PTSD because they've been raped don't want a man in their refuge and start to shake at the sound of a male voice, but you think they'd be okay to have them in their changing rooms when they're taking off their clothes, or in the toilet next to them?

He doesn't want to make unpopular decisions and would rather please the TRA brigade than boring old moany women. We should be happy with our lot he thinks.

I'm a lefty but he shan't get my vote.

And likewise, you don't think that single sex changing rooms, where women might also take their little children, wouldn't be a magnet for a certain type of man?

There seems to be an influx of posters recently insisting women should share their spaces with males and by focussing on this you don't care about women, or something like that. The Nope to Labour thread a couple of TRA's are all over it. It's wild and their comprehension skills are through the floor.

I was fully aware that most people on this forum would not agree with me. That’s fine - I’m not seeking to change anyone’s opinion.
My point in posting was to show that there are women to don’t feel their rights are being eroded. This is relevant when looking at what politicians are saying.
You don’t need to convince me of your views any more than I need to convince you - just be mindful that not all women feel the same.

@BiggerBoat1
You do know that in some parts of the UK there are already no women only refuges or rape crisis services? This is what women are protesting about. Yet you want us to stop speaking?

Good for you, you're an adult & you have your set of (questionable) boundaries - but how about a 10 year old girl? Is it appropriate that she is getting changed or using the toilet next door to a cross dressing male stranger?

The thing is BiggerBoat1, you can envisage a situation where you're okay with mixed sex provision. Many women can't.

And not only that, most of the time this is billed as single sex provision. So it's largely women and children.

The saying is - good men stay out so that bad men stand out.

We don't need sex segregation for most things. Restaurants, shopping, football matches and iceskating.

But when women are particularly vulnerable, disrobing, traumatised, or dealing with their own personal biological issues in a loo, single sex provision makes sense.

Men constitute the predatory class, in that 98% of all sex crimes are committed by men and 90% of all violent crimes are committed by men.

So in situations where women and children are vulnerable, sex segregation is the biggest risk reduction you can make.

it's not a judgement on all men, of course. Many of the women here have men in their lives who they adore.

But you do feel the same! In rape refuges. So for you, it's just dependent on how vulnerable you think those women are.

As I said. You can choose what provision you use. As long as you allow other women to decide on their own boundaries due to their own vulnerabilities.

Strewth. There's a reason why they call trans ideology a luxury belief.

There are certain women who simply can't afford the luxury of believing in it.

But why are you so bothered that other women don't want to share their spaces with men, if provisions are being provided for those men separately? Why does it bother you that women want their own sex based provisions? You say it doesn't affect you - and all power to you - but it affects many women.

Why are you so insistent on giving it 'you don't speak for all women'. Has anyone said we do? We are well aware there's plenty of women out there happy to share their spaces with men, but you also don't get to speak for the ones who don't.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · Today 08:45

Dear Keir Starmer

Or more succuntily: Dear Sir Kier, don't be a twat. Love, Sane People.

Sex Matters have some info about this, including a Twitter hastag (by email):

https://sex-matters.org/posts/stand-up-for-single-sex-services/this-is-not-a-culture-war/?mc_cid=b1e7903fb2&mc_eid=1c486ed2e1

Look for the hashtag #NotACultureWar and share your own example of why single-sex provision matters.

Yes, we are tired of this shit. But how have we ended up in this position?

By apathy, by appeasment, by enabling.

All this 'neutral language' stuff has been anything but neutral. It has not come from the majority of the British public. Its been pushed by a tiny vocal minority who have bullied and intimidated into everything without anyone questioning or saying 'this is total bullshit which is actually a problem not a solution'.

This response just the same thing but saying 'be quite' rather than shouting 'bigot'. We did the whole 'no debate' thing already. Sorry, not doing that again.

This is a 'get your own house in order before telling everyone else what they should, and should not be doing' thing.

Its patronising in the extreme. Its not taking responsibility.

What we want is for a politician to a) admit there are problems - with all the bullshit cavets, b) state that abuse, bullying, harassment and intimidation of anyone is not ok and won't be tolerated c) identify and sort out the fucking problems which people have actual, pretty robust evidence for, at this point d) restore safeguarding and deal with chancers trying it on repeatedly.

None of this, is as hard as people want to make out - as pointed out the majority of the public are fed up about it and rational about it.

Name the issue - it is extremists who have sought to redefine language and material reality that are the problem here. Levels of tolerance have been completely burnt by a failure to acknowledge this.

I am now at the point where I think that Extremist TRAs need to be dealt with - as extremists. We need an acknowledgment that this has parallels with Incel issues and dealt with in the same way.

There needs to be accountability.

If on Day 1 Starmer wants to deal with it, how focusing on this angle of accountability. He won't.

RedToothBrush · Today 11:53

I am now at the point where I think that Extremist TRAs need to be dealt with - as extremists. We need an acknowledgment that this has parallels with Incel issues and dealt with in the same way.

I couldn't agree more, I'd like to see many of them have a visit from Prevent. When Starmer gets in, unfortunately, it's more likely to be women from LWS events.

It's just
so
fucking
maddening.

He's being wilfully stubborn and obtuse, with his "We're all weary of this, let's leave things as they are, it's fine," schtick.

Actually this is a load of nonsense.

If you want to have public trust and you want others to have access to public facilities, your opinion is actually irrelevant because you aren't the one that has lost trust and is self excluding out of fear.

It should concern the next PM that levels of public trust are that low - because it has an effect on everything from work place productivity (and therefore stuff like GDP, stress and sick pay) to representation and participation (important for stuff like community led activities, political participation and principles of inclusion more generally and actually it has an effect on poverty levels because of stuff like being forced out of jobs or not feeling able to get an education in certain areas or actually not getting a scholarship because some 'woman' has taken the place instead) to more visible and pressing concerns over backlash and how this manifests (crime, safeguarding, political opposition and the rise of the likes of Reform who capitalise on a failure to engage with public concerns).

Problems need to be solved. Public unrest and whistleblowing should always be addressed.

You are effectively saying the equivilent of 'well when I was in X Hospital, my care was absoluetely fine' why should we do anything more, when there a ruddy great independent review into services which documents a whole pile of issues that need fixing.

YOUR opinion is mute. Its irrelevant to this particular discussion.

Yet you come here to say 'Well what about me. My opinion counts too'. Hmm, well, no actually it doesn't really. Not in this context. Its meaningless virtue signalling to say 'look at me I'm a good person'. That shouldn't be relevant in political conversations like this - it should be about issues, policies and unintended consequence to virtue signaling - being recognised, talked about openly and without exception because it might upset a few people.

We need to get all this out in the open and deal with it.

We don't achieve anything by just saying 'lalala lets all hold hands and be nice' being completely oblivious as to how it IS have an impact on others. That attitude is so unbelievably narrow minded and blinkered its untrue.

Its 'I'm alright Jack' just as much as all the financial 'I'm alright Jacks' out there. And its just as ugly as a look.

But you think that services for rape survivors should be single sex. Everything else mixed sex is apparently fine.

It's just not consistent.

Absolutely.

'I don't care about sharing spaces with men' is an irrelevance to the issues at hand.

Some women do care. How to balance their rights with the rights of men who want access to women's spaces?

Gosh, it's a tricky one.

All this influx of 'i have a right to my opinion' and 'you don't speak for me' is is a bit flat earthy (apologies to flat earthers, insert your unevidence based belief of choice there).

You don't feel your rights are being eroded. That's OK, you can feel what you like.

But your rights evidentially are being eroded, whether you 'feel' it or not.

Black isn't white because someone feels it.

You can feel what you like, but it's not relevant to evidence-based policy making.

If you want to campaign for mixed sex spaces, rather than scold other women, why not go and do that rather than camping out here to tell us all off?

No one thinks a man speaks for all men. Why do some women like to shout down other women with 'you don't speak for all women!' ? Internalised misogyny and the need for male approval

@BiggerBoat1 thanks for sharing your opinion. I'm sorry you must have so many notifications right now and I'm just adding to them 😃

Would you be particularly bothered if men (trans or otherwise) were excluded once again from female toilets and changing rooms, ie. we returned to what was the status quo of just a few years ago?

IDK if the people who keep saying 'I don't care about public toilets and changing rooms' are telling us something about where the battle lines are being drawn for us behind the scenes.

Imagine coming to a forum full of women who have expressed how the issue has effected them greatly, in a direct way and they would like that to be recognised and efforts made to resolve those issues and having the arrogance to say 'well I don't see a problem'.

I mean its a change from 'None of you have even met a transperson'. Or 'You are all evil bigots', but really its still trying to shame women into silence or trying to make them double question themselves about whether they are being reasonable or not.

Yes we are reasonable, no we are not bigotted, no we are not uneducated and no we are not hysterical.

They are still out in full force. I've recently been called an extremist and a bigot over on another thread and I don't care about women's issues because I want single sex spaces so I must not care about all the other issues women face.

I'm also wrong to mention how my friend was a 'it's never affected me' person to 'fuck right off' when a male was doing performative woman-ing in a swimming pool female changing room in nearly see through trunks in front of her six year old. Whether the trunks were see through or not or was it just a cisgender man in a costume were the important factors here 🤨. Blows my mind the mindset of these people.

There are so many people who wouldn't tolerate someone say 'I'm financially fine, my kids private school is fine and I've got private health care, so I'm fine' as being ok but are quite happy to say that social issues that haven't effected them aren't important.

I was saying the other day on The Thread That Was Deleted, that politics had shifted from a left / right economic split to a more middle class verse working class social issue split where Labour support had traditionally been working class but has shifted to more educated middles classes whereas Tory support had been traditionally affluent middle class but had shifted to more blue collar workers.

Part of this, is about social values, but part of it is does still remain about socio economic experiences - largely connected to education and lived experiences due to that. Its labelled 'a culture war' but actually I do think large parts of it are about socioeconomic issues that are being ignored by many Labour representatives as a result of never having experienced x, y or z themselves.

There is something of a lack of empathy going on, which is expected in other areas, but somehow becomes unimportant when it comes to Virtue Subjects around identity.

Thats not how we should be doing politics. Mainly because it lets problems fester. It doesn't just make them magically disappear.

People who feel aggrieved and unlistened to, will merely go looking for someone who WILL listen to them.

Oh.

Yes.

'Culture war' has echoes of 'class war'.