Keir starmers biolgrapher doing an AMA

[Theeyeballsinthesky]

Asked “does keir know what a woman is?”

reply

I don't think he's got any problem on the biological definition of a woman or on protecting safe spaces. His language on this, which I know has sometimes caused pain and anger, is more about trying to ensure people who are trans are treated with dignity rather than be kicked around as political footballs. That's not a bad motive.

women’s right to be treated with dignity is clearly of no importance plus again with fucking “safe spaces”

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/AMA/5107465-ama-with-tom-baldwin-author-of-keir-starmer-the-sunday-times-bestselling-biography-of-the-labour-leader

here

I have a significant problem with Mr Starmer's high anxiety about men being subjected to 'indignity' such as paperwork, and feeling that the solution to this is to remove all women's privacy, equality, safety and dignity and hand them to these men as some kind of consolation prize or ritual sacrifice.

You can't help but be very significantly concerned indeed about a man who cares so deeply about any man having to suffer feeling indignity over a paperwork procedure but has no problems at all with requiring non consenting women to be forced to suffer the indignity of removing their clothes and doing the most intimate of things with any man present who wishes to be, and to be considering legal processes to punish women who voice being unhappy with this.

I just, like Women’s rights. Why do they leapt in the ‘oh the poor trans’

just stick to women’s rights. Make then men move up or create third spaces

why do we have to fix it? Some women are ok with trans women in women’s spaces but some women are not. Why can’t the ones who are not ok be listened to ?

he might as well have described women as support humans

they really don’t see women as people in their own right do they

When you ask "About women,"

And the reply is, "But poor sad men,"

It is time to worry. No, Mr Starmer does not believe women are real people. He emphatically demonstrates a belief that male humans are intrinsically more valuable and real, and that female humans (who have not taken the step of identifying as being a man to gain a bit more power, or at least to identify out of being female) are resources that belong to men to be used for and by men.

And that women's consent to this is not relevant or necessary.

He, as a man, feels entitled to tell women what he will do with them for the benefit of other men, and what they may have and not have, with this predicated on ensuring women's rights primarily serve the needs and feelings and wishes of men. And he knows best.

Now trot off and vote for him, there's a good girl.

@UpThePankhurst exactly. Labour wrote the GRA. If it is so bloody undignified, why did they pass it into law? They clearly thought it needed to be robust back then. Has VAWG decreased so much in 20 years that the safeguards can be dropped?

plus again with fucking “safe spaces”

Every time I read this, I am reminded of when they changed the hard shoulder for refuges on so-called "Smart Motorways".

That thread is a big old sell

They don't.

The safeguards are intended to check Is this person serious?', not 'Is this person safe?' VAWG was never a consideration.

They're just phoning it in, aren't they. Got to go, my takeaway has arrived!

Go him though, fitting the wimmen in between the footie and the takeaway. Tell us where women come in the priorities without actually telling us....

It was so patronising, virtual head pats of the women asking questions just calm down, dears and listen to your betters.

I'm not really sure what the point of it was.

I suppose it was a substitue for Keir because he's not inclined to come on here himself and talk over and patronise listen to women.

Me neither Eresh. A look how wonderful KS is advertorial I'm guessing.

I'm finding the Tee, hee, hee, he was late due to the football and then had to leave on time for his takeaway because he didn't have time to cook anything, men what are they like? really fucking infantilising and annoying.

Me too.

Quite. 'Tell me you're insanely sexist without telling me you're insanely sexist' is something that Labour is performing with gusto all over the place. The lack of self awareness is staggering, but I support they fondly imagine it won't bother anyone who matters.

Thinking back to a very sweet friend years ago who was a passionate labour supporter in her teens, and very clever, headed for politics, and managed to get a work experience placement in a Labour office. Mid eighties. She went bright eyed and keen to learn, all that intelligence and knowledge, and came back shattered to tell me the office lead was introduced to her, surveyed her breasts, then turned away saying 'make me a cup of tea love'.

Nothing has changed, has it?

Well there it is sisters , it's all about the dignity of the Ladz innit? Make it all nice and easy for them! Never mind the women and children(cos where women go they might have there children with them). I gave 30 bloody years to that Party and overlooked the bloody sexism and classism. I left when they called WPUK a Hate group. I'm a nobody btw, just a middle aged mum on an estate but it fucking hurts as we need a decent government but I can't vote for any of these parties who would prioritise these men. I remember when that Corbyn sooked up to Madigan. I honestly thought Madigan was a joke ! And I was "warned " by my local MP when I raised a concern about Madigan'.
They haven't learned a thing.

@Ereshkigalangcleg same it was like "have a word with the little ladies Tom"

The Madigan thing was jaw-droppingly unbelievable. It was an early intro for me into this subject, and we weren't really allowed to mention the whole shitshow on here except in very general terms.

Fuck off now women, a man's gotta eat.
Jeez.

He's devoted his Sunday evening to you women and you can't even be grateful.

This is not hyperbole. He demonstrated this in one of the leaders' debates:

there was a question about what policies the candidates had that would benefit women. Starmer talked about the wonderful women in his team - it was all about the women supporting him. Sunak actually replied with a couple of policies (I think he said something about childcare). Starmer had absolutely no policy in his reply. He could have said something banal about the NHS or whatever, but he actually replied about the women in his team!