The Times Lead Story - Labour Set To Annihilate Women's Rights

[Arealnumber]

Labour to simplify ‘undignified’ gender transition process

www.thetimes.com/article/29648ec1-5b29-4b35-97df-2a443c71d7e0?shareToken=fd3bf0c5a080ae78044dd82770d8e1a7

The if is doing some heavy lifting there.

I know I said I wouldn't engage with Cassie but here I am.

"If" is not doing any heavy lifting. Ova said if none of the other reasons for annulment apply. Annulments are rare. It is highly unlikely any of the other reasons for annulment would apply.

Yes it would be better for trans widows to retain the law as it is i.e. the "status quo".

Fuck off Cassie, talking about things you don't understand and breezily dismissing trans widows as being less important than getting rid of the Tories.

Take a leaf out of Labour Women's Declaration's book and try and get Labour to change their policy on this rather than shrugging and assuming Labour somehow know best.

Is there a need to speak to me like that? Random.

I (as usual) can't really see the difference between the Labour and Conservative position on this, except Labour are getting rid of the total farce of "living as a woman".

2 years is long enough to end a marriage.
And the "annulment" - well I would be more sympathetic about it if people weren't such total arses to me on here. But as it is, lots of us have found our husbands weren't who we thought they were. Lots of us have been lied to, cheated on and abused emotionally and sexually. Lots of us feel the man we married lied throughout. Lots of us have then had a shitty divorce. So why is the "trans" scenario different? I don't think it is. It is if someone can change legal status while married. But not if there is a 2 year pause during which time you can get divorced/annulled.

Yes. Getting a GRC is a piece of piss. Hence why I'm so confused ppl are backing the Tories on it or acting like Labour's plan is a huge change

It is a huge change by the fact they are making it easier and removing a panel to assess the application and relying on the say so of one person and, I know you don't give a toss about them, but it is a huge change for Trans Widows as it removes protection from them.

You asked us to listen and see what Labour was proposing before making any decisions we have.

I don't I'm purely saying if there is a two year window to dissolve the marriage (however that happens) that seems long enough so I would think a specific exit clause is unnecessary.

Again, it looks like catastrophising about Labour and seeing the absolute worse in a way I don't fully understand. I think they've proposed quite a good compromise. A long period of time to put off chancers and allow marriages to be sorted. No fiddling around "living as a woman" which is an impossible and pointless criterion.

What protection is it removing exactly? Especially when you don't even know the process yet.

And stop telling me I "don't give a toss about trans widows". You know fuck all about me and are basing that on the fact I'm a labour voter. It's ridiculous.

So why is the "trans" scenario different? I don't think it is. It is if someone can change legal status while married. But not if there is a 2 year pause during which time you can get divorced/annulled.

You just don't get it and that is because you don't want to get it. You think Labour and KS are the answer to all our prayers and will brook no opposition to that view. Your dismissal and denigration of Trans Widows is appalling.

I'm basing it on
A- your not giving a fuck attitude
and
B- you saying on a thread recently that you no longer supported trans widows because I don't think women should be shunned for attending legal marches

If you do give a fuck, maybe show it by listening to women who know more than you instead of blithely assuming you and Kier know best.

Well you clearly don't give a toss about them or you would know, understand and believe them when they say they need to retain the Spousal Exit Clause.

Labour have told us what the process will be and removal of the Spousal Exit Clause is part and parcel of their revision of the GRA.

It is not because you are a Labour voter I don't care who you support or vote for it is because you will never hear any criticism of Labour or KS and dismiss and denigrate all evidence or posters that does that.

Its worth pointing out here I think, that Labour have said they have no intention of pulling back on the recent policies put forth by the Tories to make these processes even harder for the disabled. And have even suggested that these policies "don't go far enough"
Their compassion for the poor and marginalised apparently stops with trans people and doesn't extend to anyone in actual distress.

Utter bastards!

Didn't you previously say that you're not bothered by transwomen using toilets or joining women's groups (knitting if I remember correctly)?

How do you think the ex wives of these men would feel if they encountered them in any of these places?

Its worth pointing out here I think, that Labour have said they have no intention of pulling back on the recent policies put forth by the Tories to make these processes even harder for the disabled. And have even suggested that these policies "don't go far enough"

Their compassion for the poor and marginalised apparently stops with trans people and doesn't extend to anyone in actual distress.

No one person, easy panel, removal of indignity or dehumanisation for disabled people.

Tragic but doesn't surprise me.

Its worth pointing out here I think, that Labour have said they have no intention of pulling back on the recent policies put forth by the Tories to make these processes even harder for the disabled. And have even suggested that these policies "don't go far enough"

Yes, I find this really depressing. No reassurances for carers or claimants, just another fudge. There's a lot of discussion on the Benefits and Work website about it.
https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/would-labour-be-better-than-the-conservatives-for-disabled-claimants

And the "annulment" - well I would be more sympathetic about it if people weren't such total arses to me on here.

An argument from petulance is rarely a sound argument.

But as it is, lots of us have found our husbands weren't who we thought they were. Lots of us have been lied to, cheated on and abused emotionally and sexually. Lots of us feel the man we married lied throughout. Lots of us have then had a shitty divorce. So why is the "trans" scenario different?

When you marry someone, it may be hard to tell whether that person is a liar, a cheater or an abuser. Often it takes a while to find out. However, it is very easy to tell what sex they are. That’s how it’s different.

I'm sure you said on another thread you weren't a Labour voter, member or supporter.

Or was that another poster?

Cassie said that she wasn’t an activist, though she does deliver leaflets.

But delivers to ONLY three streets ( poster's emphasis) so that makes the poster a volunteer NOT an activist. Seemingly.
Despite spending most days on here berating the mean women of FWR for being mean to Keir and said poster.

Cassie until very recently was a Lib Dem voter. During the time the rest of us were voting Labour.

OOOH Gerraway!
Hilarious.

Given her conversion is so recent I wondering she's actually had chance to vote Labour yet.

Thank you borntobequiet

@daffodilsugar

Where is your evidence that trans people have been with us since time immemorial? Give me some evidence from say the 1500s or the time of the Norman conquest in 1066 or caveman days.

Shame that yet another thread is being side tracked by someone who has an opinion but not a lived experience.

We get rid of one saying how sad we all are because we are frightened of men, and then lo and behold we get another one who has an opinion and feels able to tell someone that their lived experience isn't as important as their opinion.

If ever we needed a "lived" experience of Labour thinking they can tell us how to think even if it contradicts our lived experience, and we should toe the line, just start a thread on FWR and someone will ignore why the thread was started to take the opportunity to say how we think isn't right.

Starmer ‘not in favour’ of gender ideology being taught in schools
Not sure this deserves a new thread so adding on here
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/labour-bridget-phillipson-kettering-northamptonshire-britain-b2567771.html

I shouldn't allow myself to be goaded.