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

Some women, for religious reasons, want an annulment instead of a divorce. The interim GRC allowed those women to apply for an annulment.

And the impact on children can be horrendous. Children of transitioners wrote to the government last time changes were planned, about how they are affected not just by domestic abuse and long term coercive control from some fathers, but also breaches of privacy as their dads insist they are now 'women' so want access to their daughters when they are undressed or attending their first bra fitting.
childrenoftransitioners.org/2021/02/27/gra-inquiry-submission/

There won't be a 2 year period, Labour have committed to ditching that.

There is also the issue of women (and men) who can't get divorced for religious or cultural reasons

Let’s!!! If enough of us do it and lobby hard enough we might have a functioning opposition in time to frighten Labour into softening on at least some of this. Even seeing a significant bump for Tory membership might help Sir Keir get his flip flops on.

Is it still needed? I ask that because divorces are now much easier to get and there's no fault required. I would imagine that you could get a divorce within the two year period quite easily.

But the marriage contract has changed. Why should two years of waiting and a standard divorce be necessary? Why not let the unwilling spouse exit the marriage by annulment as soon as possible?

Also, some transitioners actually want the marriage to continue as a same sex marriage, as it validates their transition, so they deliberately make divorce difficult.

No one should be forced into a facsimile of a sexual orientation they don’t actually have.

I agree the "evidence" is flimsy. Hence my asking. Surely if it was so, Tattle would have something.

I can't remember where I read the prediction that once in power Labour will actually have very little room for manoeuvre on economy/foreign policy/health/social care/net zero (ie all the big issues), and will risk alienating their support. They'll move rapidly to socially liberal policies and actions because a) things like self ID, or reversing schools guidance are things they can actually do, and b) it will make it seem that they are actually doing things. I find that an absolutely compelling prediction, and I see this morning's development as a signpost of where we are going.

@OvaHere
Re proposed 'conversion' ban. One issue often raised (I saw it even said by Victim support!) is that men who say they are women should be able to wear what they want. But what if they want to wear a short nightie showing their erect penis around the house? and watch sissy porn during the day when they have the kids overnight? or watch their daughter get changed because they are 'all girls together'?
Previously these kids could be protected by social workers (eg ending unsupervised access). But now Social workers are already scared to challenge men who say they are trans, Labour's proposal would criminalise them and leave kids even more vulnerable.
The level of ideological cruelty around this is astonishing. A while ago 6 Labour MPs signed a public letter stating children of transitioners should be forced to suck the nipples of men (a male sexual fetish) if the man was their dad. And they haven't been sacked.

I'd like to know what it means to 'live as the opposite sex', especially if you are a male changing your gender to female.
Though I guess this also applies the other way around, but as I'm a female, I wouldn't know what it means to live as a male.

If a marriage is annulled rather than divorce, after say, 20 years of marriage, does that affect the division of assets etc?

Short termism on Labour's part.

The European Parliament elections showed us what happens when left and centre left parties are not willing or able to improve voters' lives and concentrate on identity politics.

They start losing.

"At least they're not the Tories" can very quickly become "At least they're not Labour".

Surely if they were mutilating and sterilising kids, the government would say something?

Oh no, hang on, it took Keira Bell a single female taking the Tavistock through the courts for the government to even start a review. Which then took 4 years to produce a final report. And what was all this medical knowledge based on? Absolutely nothing. No evidence, no studies, no results. Just activists. Many of them also involved in Eunach Based Fetishes.

@Daffodilsugar

Sexual dimorphism.

In humans this means that males (small gamete producing sex) have an average of 90% more upper body and 60% lower body than the females (large-gamete producing sex)

There is currently no good quality evidence that demonstrates when a male takes female HRT that they lose as much strength that would make them
comparable to females. There is also no evidence that trans-men could match men with their HRT. This could change.

In addition to this societally males are responsible for most of the violence to women, and most of that happens behind closed doors. This is why the risk to women is higher when they attend to personal business and why they need a safe space to do so.

Having said that Transwomen are also at an increased risk. As they are less strong and more likely to be assaulted by men.

I think you spend most of your time shirtless and burp a lot.

I was referring to the post directly above mine @Kai125

No-one is born with both sets of reproductive organs.

It's a once in several years globally event that a baby will be born with partially-formed reproductive organs of one sex and partially- or fully-formed reproductive organs of the other sex, as a consequence of opposite sexed fraternal twins fusing in utero. But the conflicting hormones required for each type of gonad to work mean that only one sex's gonad can work, usually the male one.

The hermaphrodite of Greek legends, with complete sets of each, is a myth.

And if the new government will make it easier for people to find happiness then good for them.

Unfortunately, transitioning, in whatever form doesn't always lead to lasting happiness. One of the reasons for not rushing the process and having appropriate checks along is to make sure underlying issues are considered and treated where appropriate.

Easier, faster transition doesn't actually benefit transpeople.

My bet is that Labour will come up with a perfectly sensible policy that recognises trans rights but protects children, protects women's safe spaces, and also protects the position of women in sport etc. And all this fuss will thump to earth like a damp squib.

What a shame they didn't put it in their manifesto then.

They’ve had years to come up with such a policy while in opposition but haven’t. What makes you think they’ll suddenly magic one up once they’re in government?

Will they let us know this perfectly sensible approach before the GE?

If it they can why don’t they let us know about it

Can you think what it might be?

Helen Joyce will be on Times radio with Andrew Neil after 1. He did a stonking interview with Rosie Duffield last week. He’s doing good work in this area.

Really?

They're keeping awful quiet about it.

The Guardian calling it a 'reiteration'. It can't honestly be described in that way though, due to the stalling and obfuscation they've indulged in for years.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/24/labour-gender-transition-recognition-process-trans

HRTFT

Wes Streeting on NF on LBC this morning saying they will simplify it and what you wear is not an indication of your gender. He said his mother, nieces etc don't wear dresses and we shouldn't use dress as a way of confirming someone is trans.

So they are saying that it really is just feelings. So you can get a new birth certificate, driving licence, passport etc without changing anything about the way you look as that doesn't prove you are 'living as the opposite gender'. Frankly nothing proves you are living as the other gender because we all live how we want within our sexed bodies.

Can they not see what they are doing?

A transwoman called in and repeated about all the 'lower' surgery and how they had all been documents changed and how difficult it was. NF then asked if still had to have prostate checked - of course!

The only way this will work is if it's acknowledged that gender is completely different to sex and having a different gender does not give you access to the other sexed spaces/orisons/sports etc,