JKR calls Labour's Bluff - Offering Meeting leadership only on her terms

[fromorbit]

JKR is playing at a different level. After Starmer and Reeves offered to meet with her she gave them her conditions.

I'll be happy to meet after NoXYinXXprisons, Lesbian Labour, Womens Rights Network, WomansPlaceUK and Alliance LGB have been given in person meetings with the Labour leadership. I'd also like to know whether Angela Rayner still considers the last two organisations hate groups.

They are trapped either they now have to meet with gay and women's groups and listen to them something they are desperate not to do. It is not impossible then that Reeves at least can be made to see some sense. Even talking with these groups and JKR will also make TRAs go ballistic and many will leave the party. Chances are that Labour will promise a bunch of stuff to JKR which If Labour still follow gender nonsense after that they can be fully held to account for. If they promise single sex spaces are safe then every time that is breached Labour's credibility will be on the line

Or if they refuse to meet with the groups they prove EVERYTHING JKR said in her essay was right.

The media are now hyping the meeting further locking Labour in

BRING IT ON
Keir Starmer insists he WILL meet with JK Rowling to thrash out trans and gender rights & ‘respects’ her views
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/28714134/keir-starmer-jk-rowling-trans/

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

There's a lot of varied attempts to convince that sex isn't real.

It seems very important to some people.

You know what one thing would have been more convincing than big academic words, clown fish, aubergines with feelings (thanks Alice Roberts), appropriation of intersex/ gay rights/ race / feminism and more effective than rape threats, doxxing, reporting, cancelling etc?

If the males who said they were women had all stopped acting like, well, particularly stereotypically male males.

Most women couldn't give a shit about tits or hair or lippy or heels or skirts. It's the entitlement to women's labour, validation, bodies and presence. The assumption that all the privileges of being a man remain. The tendency to speak over, use old boys networks, back door meetings, astroturfing. If males who said they identify as women had given all that up, we'd be in a different place.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-68550-w

Things have moved on in tooth enamel analysis since 2017.

'Sex estimation was possible in 100% of this burial sample using proteomics, in 91% using genomics, and in 51% using osteology. -

pressed 'post' too soon - this quote shows that it's generally easier to use proteins than DNA or bones to sex remains, mostly because teeth last longer.

It's a really fascinating paper.

It's always Pink News,always.

It sounds interesting.

But if teeth and enamel analysis is indeed a more accurate way of trying to determine sex than pelvic bones (as the claim F and M both always have set angles is misleading and debunked, as everyone is unique) why not take it to twitter to replace that misleading viral pelvic bone image that's been doing the rounds?

....

Yes, Arabella, you should get right on that

....

why not take it to twitter to replace that misleading viral pelvic bone image that's been doing the rounds? nobody on here is circulating pictures of pelvises @Christinapple !!

The debate is not around the process of identification of the sex of bones. It's simply being used as a pathetic attempt to suggest sex is not scientifically identifiable. We all know it is.

Sarcastic, obs.

What the fuck happened to reading various sources, from different journals/articles/newspapers to gain knowledge of something? Or is it just 'Pink News? Job done'

Or is it because I'm not a billionaire with 14M twitter followers?

Yes.

Also you have no argument.

Furthermore, she is asking him to meet a whole bunch of other women.

Of course, the correct question is why does it take a powerful billionaire with 14 million followers, to get Starmer to fucking listen to women?

Name changes don't really work when you post the same old rubbish sources and tell posters that you are reporting them.
Just a general observation.

Personally, this whole thread has made me realise that JK Rowlings pen is mightier than Kier Starmers pork sword. Sorry.

Nice one

"You can talk with me but only on my terms!"

Only someone who isn't familiar with feminism and not letting them divide and rule (ie solidarity which is now an over used word) would make a comment like that.

And even if she is JKR if she said of course I will meet with you and be able to represent everybody, she would rapidly loose credibility.

What she has done, unlike other celebrities, is not claim to be the owner of the issue.

She has used her platform to help those who aren't listened to, ignored, to have a voice in public.

Its that rare thing - sisterhood in practice.

Yes. Also women expecting things 'on their terms' seems to be some kind of horrific drama that people can't quite get their heads around.

You seem to be blaming JKR for getting a 'special meeting' which she did not ask for! She was offered the meeting by Keir Starmer, and she immediately drew his attention to the organisations (each of which represents far more than just one person) who, in the interests of democracy, he really ought to be meeting before he meets her!

And yes, she DOES get to dictate the terms of the meeting, because HE asked HER, not the other way around.

You seem to be blaming JKR for getting a 'special meeting' which she did not ask for! She was offered the meeting by Keir Starmer, and she immediately drew his attention to the organisations (each of which represents far more than just one person) who, in the interests of democracy, he really ought to be meeting before he meets her!

And yes, she DOES get to dictate the terms of the meeting, because HE asked HER, not the other way around.

Talk about back to front.

You will see from what I have posted on the thread I totally support her for acting in a sisterly and feminist fashion.

The whole point is she has shown up how shallow and unethical Labour is.

Wont even talk to one of their own MPs but gets all in a flutter about meeting with a celebrity.

@IwantToRetire, I wasn't replying to you, I was replying to @Christinapple... hence my quoting her post and not yours...

Watching the Leadership debate and waiting to see if a question on this comes up.

You're a better person than me, I don't think I could bear it! 😃

I'm watching the debate also. I can't hear much for the heckling going on from the rest of the family. Someone may need CPR soon.

Usual bluster from both really.
Sunak's an arse and Starmer is all smoke and mirrors.

Liking the older man who has asked are you two REALLY the best our country has got?

I have learned nothing new so far.

Hang on a WIMMIN question!!

Starmers listing Labour women who are REALLY GOOD and a TEAM. Yawn.

Liking the older man who has asked are you two REALLY the best our country has got?

They really are rather a damning indictment of the UK, aren't they?

Here we go!

Kier’s answer seems to be “I’ve got women on my team” - reading between the lines “I’ll let the girls deal with the wimmin stuff”

Vicky from Oxfordshires question re WIMMIN and biological sex.
Sunak on the ball here.

Hmmmm, in my opinion the wimmin are not that good or teamlike in that none of them gives the same answer twice re single-sex provisions and the Equality Act/GRA interaction🤷‍♀️

"I want to lead the country without having to deal with 50% of the population..."