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

Just received this from my Labour candidate,

'As a woman, I am committed to defending the rights of women and safe spaces for women. I think we need to think carefully and thoughtfully about the knock on impacts of any proposals or legislation, as there are a very small minority who may seek to abuse those.

I am also conscious that life can be hard enough as it is, the added challenge of not feeling comfortable in your body must be hugely difficult. I know this often happens throughout puberty which is challenging enough as it is. This small percentage of the population is vulnerable and I think we should be supporting them.'

I'd asked about the transing of children, Cass, Rosie Duffield, single-sex spaces and got this back...

They think they can square the circle or at least sound like they are.

This is why journalists need to ask them about the detail.

What happens when a man tries to access a gym changing room (as an example)?

What if the man tells gym staff he has a gender certificate?

What then? Can the staff say no you can't go in?

If so great but what then is the purpose of these certificates?

What is the purpose of men being able to change their official documentation such as driving licence and birth certificate to say female?

Why are we officially recognising something called 'gender'?

What is 'gender'? What's the definition?

What is the purpose of all of this?

Right journalists, you've got 10 days to start doing your job and asking some questions of the party that is set to be our next government with a massive majority and no meaningful opposition.

Try and reconnect with your curiosity - I assume that's what first attracted you to the profession?

Because they haven't a clue what they are doing they don't understand the issues or the implications. And the reason for that is they have refused to listen to women. I worry that they view women as less important than men. That's why men get a voice and women don't.

They aren't getting my vote either.

the added challenge of not feeling comfortable in your body must be hugely difficult

Is it, aye? Gosh, imagine. Imagine feeling the challenge of not feeling safe or respected, of having your rights as a woman handed away, of being told you're in the wrong body and need to have it surgically altered to be the Real You, of not being allowed to name your sexuality for fear of being called a 'sexual racist', of being told your sexuality is a 'genital preference', of being told you are not a mother but a 'birthing body' or a 'uterus haver' or 'chest feeder'. Imagine not feeling comfortable in your body, or allowed to state your boundaries, or say 'no' to men. God knows women just have to live with it.

Men's rights elevated over women's rights.

Particularly for women whose faith or culture means divorce is impossible; the interim GRC is grounds for an annulment instead. Why have Labour decided their rights and beliefs are less important than the desire of the person who transitions? As you say the claim that trans people are prevented from getting a GRC by the 'veto' is nonsense.

KS is on course for a massive majority. So he can't be so desperate for the TRA voter base to need to pander to them. Therefore he must actually believe in this stuff.

The removal of spousal consent makes me so enraged.

My options are: spoil ballot or vote Communist Party who do have a candidate in my constituency.

When the Tory leadership contest starts I might also join them so I can vote for Badenoch. She's the only mainstream politician as far as I am aware who really, REALLY gets what's at stake here.

I think he's just a weak man who doesn't want to take on the TRAs, doesn't understand the issues and doesn't care about what many women think. He knows that this issue isn't what the election is going to be won on. He thinks it's largely an irrelevance.

Again, taking them on face value about single sex spaces remaining so, what message are they trying to give to people who want a GRC?

If they mean what they say then this certificate is the equivalent of one of those websites where you can buy a star or a pretend Lordship. You can hang the certificate on your wall but it doesn't mean anything in practice.

Personally I think this is the opposite of being supportive. They need to be honest, nobody can change sex so it shouldn't be a thing in law. Giving people a certificate that has no meaning isn't kind.

I assume there is going to be a public consultation on this?

What is the purpose of men being able to change their official documentation such as driving licence and birth certificate to say female?

Exactly. We know that the GRA was brought in to avoid the issue of same sex marriage, but that isn't an issue anymore. If a GRC doesn't get access to single sex spaces what's the point (we know men with a GRC, hell even ones without, will still demand access to women's spaces)

And the whole 'uncomfortable in my body' nonsense.
So what, as an old, overweight woman I feel uncomfortable in my body too.

Sorry, for picking up on your comments again.

No-one is born with both sets of reproductive organs. There is no genuine record of a Human Being, being able to produce both ova and sperm. There are either males with DSDs, or females with DSDs. If you know what DSD someone has, you know if they are male or female.

'Intersex' is outdated, inaccurate and confusing (and I highly suspect that the inaccurate and confusing aspects are why TRAs like the term so much).

My understanding is that yes, it does. Your marriage certificate will have his new name out on it and it will legally be a same sex marriage. I have read elsewhere that it will also make it more difficult for women to extricate themselves financially from marriages before their trans husbands-now-wives have spent significant sums on gender reassignment surgeries, treatments, and accessories such as women’s clothing.

Trying not to derail but...

No human is born with both sets of reproductive organs.

There is no such thing as "intersex" - there are people with DSDs, disorders of/differences in sexual development, who are all either male or female but whose sexual development differs from the usual path.

Anyway, back to Labour ...

Is the Times neutral? I thought they were a Tory paper. Do you think that before an election they might be trying to whip up fear?

Do you think Labour won't do any of this? It's in their manifesto.

The paper is quoting the Labour party's own words and drawing attention to them.

So no, not whipping up fear.

Blowing the whistle. Sounding a warning.

Errrr it was leaked from inside the Labour camp to The Times...

Well, point me to where the Guardian has dealt with this then

Just watched Sky News where the reporter is stating that today Starmer will be having to respond to questions re “trans and gender rights” . Do some proper research you idiots!!!!

Do you disbelieve Labour’s own words in quotes?

And where do you want to see this The Guardian?

Tootsweets23
They said they'd listen, they said they'd moderate their position. They roll out Wes Streeting and you have some hope they aren't totally ridiculous

I wouldn't bank on Wes Streeting. He was spouting some ridiculous nonsense on LBC ten minutes ago about women not having to wear dresses or being tied to the kitchen sink (with a reference to his mum and sister) - and yes, he was answering a question on Labour's gender recognition plans.

I would like just one of them to ask the questions - What is gender? What can a man who has a woman gender certificate under a Labour government do with it in practice?

They rolled Wes out because he is the one that lies best.

Changed his tune my arse. He was the one that had a list of women to oust from the party who thought the wrong thoughts. And it even included women who weren't even in the party.

Jess Phillips wrote the bloody manifesto to get rid of the Spousal Veto. They aren't going to drop any of this.