Starmer tw don't have the right to use women only toilets

[lcakethereforeIam]

It's a headline in the Telegraph. Unfortunately when I archive it it goes to an article about that twat Ashworth refusing to answer. So, I've screenshot the headline

Starmer about to be on Times Radio talking to Matt Chorley. It will be interesting to hear if this issue comes up.

This.

He's still trying to appease both camps.

Integrity: the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles.

He said some women have a penis and it's not right to say only women have a cervix.

I appreciate he is a barrister not a biologist but it's not credible to think he's that ignorant about biology so the only remaining option is that he is a liar.

I cannot see how someone can have integrity in light of their treatment towards Rosie Duffield and their deliberately obfuscating language. This seems like wishful thinking.

And like others have said. If a person states that a woman can have a penis, then the question has to be asked, how can you trust anything else that person says.

I've said before on here I don't trust the man as far as I can throw him and I still don't.

2 days before the election and he's finally come out with what women have been wanting to hear, nope not buying it. He's had all this time to be clear on the issue. Even Jane who didn't let him off the hook, couldn't get an answer without the "marginalised and traumatised community" line trotted out.

He's hoovering up votes from undecided women, telling them at the 11th hour what they want to hear. I don't know why, it's all but a done deal anyway, but he is. Once he's in power though I think it'll be a different story.

He'll betray those women, just like he's thrown Rosie Duffield to the wolves. Despite that he now seems to agree with her stance (especially when a man said it!) there's still no apology. He won't go that far of course. She's still hung out to dry while he tries to play defender of womens rights.

I find this a difficult topic to explain to people as there are so many strands to go through .. the convoluted legislation, the overlay of case law, the capture of every branch of government, health and education and professional regulators . The bias of the mainstream media. The average person in the street has not got a clue what is going on and it is so unbelievable that we have rapists in women's prisons that you sound like a tin foil hat conspiracy theorist.

Ain't that the truth!

When I have questioned why toilet door gaps have disappeared from the toilet designs, the Dapartment of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities passed it onto the Health and Safety Executive and they passed it on to the Building Safety Regulator. I said because of issues with medical emergencies, ventilation, hygiene, fire evacuation speeds, sexual assaults (all backed up by statistics and my research) it was really urgent and questioned why these new designs hadn’t been risk assessed for health and safety. The Health and Safety Executive told me it was ‘to give people the option of privacy and dignity…’

Personally, if we had a choice, I prefer the option of health and safety.

Maybe they should change their name? Why will no one actually admit the realities of what’s going on and discuss practical ways of solving it?!?

That was a pure puff piece wasn’t it? I heard a bit about five a side matey stuff and had to switch

I suspect he'll do whatever he is advised to do by his 'LGBTQ+ leads'. He's never been on top of his brief with this issue. He's handed it over to others.

Exactly

if the TRAs aren’t howling about this and denouncing him it’s because they’ve done a deal

I heard a bit about five a side matey stuff

Jumpers for goalposts! ⚽😀

Yep, footy talk and what dog his kids want

I haven't seen any howling. Particularly from Labour MP "allies".
They've cut a deal. Some sort of semantic legalese bullshit that justifies an AGP in a breast feeding class.

Willies. Willies. I love willies.

Blimey. Deals are being called in or something

Cup of tea and off you go Keir. What a swizz

Day late and a dollar short isn’t it.

It sounds great but:

1. has no teeth - ie no promise to enshrine it in law (eg clarifying EA)
2. no apology to or indication to hear Rosie Duffield
3. a front bench of MPs indicating the opposite. At best labour policy on this is incoherent, at worst anti-woman
4. deafening silence from stonewall/TRAs suggests it’s a pre-election sop

It stinks to high heaven. As PPs have said, I expect his view will have ‘moved on’ by July 5th.

No point in psychiatrists opinions then

What psychiatrists' opinions, exactly?

"This man has gender dysphoria"?

Right then, that makes him a man with gender dysphoria, not a woman.

I'm marvelling(?) at how stupid Labour HQ thinks women are. So obvious there's been a deal done. They haven't even bothered with confected outrage and bit of a skirmish. They've not even tried to burn the trail.

They think we're just women, just mums, we don't have any experience in politics.
They forgot they kicked us out of the party.

That's a left wing bubble perspective if ever I saw it. No-one could take them seriously and voted for an increased conservative majority as a result.

The fact that these losers have gone elsewhere is entirely due to no-one having any reason to listen to them anymore.

Remember the Taliban said they would protect women's rights...

whilst I am sorry to be a natural pessimist be realistic that starmer even if he has finally made his mind up will not be influenced by a supermajority including many ultra trans MPs. It's the potential backbenchers you have to think about plus's support from the Lib Dem's and SNP

if I am wrong we have a Labour government with an effective opposition so those of you who feel Labour is a better option on other issues will still have that government.

If I am right we have a soon to be ousted starmer and can kiss goodbye to women's rights probably for some of our lifetimes if he makes constitutional change like giving 16 year olds the vote.

I've said before, I'm genuinely not sure if he actually understands the nuances and intricacies of the situation.

Maybe someone has explained it now

There’s no way he does looking at his statements

Bizarre for someone who used to have previous career

Or is he just blatantly lying for effect

He seems clueless