Do women in the U.K. know or care about the threat to women’s and girls rights now they’ve voted labour?

[Heylo]

i know the tories record on public services are abysmal and bar some genuine believers like Kemi Badenoch the tories would likely go the trans route if they thought it would buy them votes. But, currently it’s the tories who offered to protect women and girls from the trans madness. My question is - which women voted in trans loving, women - hating Labour?

we can look forward to -

1. continued gender ideology being pumped out in schools
2. conversion ban - you better hope your child doesn’t start questioning their gender out loud because TRA ridden schools will be referring them to gender clinics and socially transitioning them now they have a mandate
3. same sex attracted lesbians (myself included) it’s completely game over. Keep your head down and your mouth shut. Trans identified males and their female allies have already closed down every women only night. Same sex attracted women are now labelled bigots. We are no longer welcome in London’s LGBT soup community
4. prisons - what happens to vulnerable women? They are already disbelieved and dismissed. Now they have to endure the staring and various forms of sexual harrassment that goes with being incarcerated with men

i can only hope our political landscape mirrors America and in the same way Trump will be voted back in this year, we will have The Tories being led by Kemi back in in 4 years time.

omg I can’t believe we have to kiss goodbye to women’s rights - for the next four years

back to my original question. Apart from TRA idealouges, why have women voted these clowns in? Is it that they prioritise the Tories terrible record on public services over this? Do some women not see it as a huge issue? would love to hear from some posters who voted Labour.

Thanks & stay safe out there, as women we have woken up to a a dark chapter in history today

I have come across transwomen i.e. in lacy underwear - and a totally unsuitable swimsuit for their age. I complained there was a man in the women's changing room. The place is woke - they don't care.

How can I show my sources for my opinion that a statement is empty nonsense?

This is key actually.

It needs to be repeated over and over.

A male person who 'identifies' as a 'woman' is only ever either identifying with their personal expectation of what being a woman is, or is rejecting their identity of them as a male person and the only thing that is left to them in their mind is that they must be a woman. (Never the over 100 other gender identities, just as a 'woman').

When you analyse this, the misogyny of such a position cannot be denied. Those male people misogynistically have redefined being female to suit themselves. To include any male perceptions of being a female person is in the definition of 'woman' is inherently misogynistic.

It's subjective. Identifying is a personal experience....
Hence why
If you are referring to this as a concept, it exists. If you just don't know about it then google.

That's the reason @LilyBartsHatShop compared it to Butler, @Humtum you should probably take it as a compliment if you like that sort of thing.

I'm saying the same thing I said in my earlier posts - that a lot of you are so radicalised in your GC echo chamber that you don't realise there are less males invading your spaces and your sports than you think and you're more often offending and insulting biological women and reinforcing outdated gender stereotypes and perhaps you'd all retain some common sense about it if you delete and forget everytime you do it. You insist you should have the right to challenge anyone you suspect isn't female (regardless of your track record) and I'm asking you how you want someone to satisfy your curiosity?

I don’t need to Google ‘can men identify as women’ any more than I need to Google ‘do dogs have five legs’.

Mmmmm yes.
Btw I see you claim to have wonderful women friends who are mostly transwomen. Transwomen are men, so they cannot be wonderful women friends.

"Is Paris the capital of Spain"

I think anyone would struggle answering the question - how do you identify based on your gender.

As a concept - gender identity and expression both exist.

Exactly - if they implement the Cass review recommendations, then the gender-distressed kids who mainstream services are currently scared to treat for depression/anxiety/trauma etc just because they also carry the trans label will be seen by appropriate local NHS services and won't have to wait several years for a specialist gender service to simply ignore their underlying MH difficulties in the first place.

"I say I am a woman," argues the male, "therefore I am."

Why accept this opinion as if it's a fact? Makes no sense.

Men are statistically more of a risk to women. Biological women, no matter how ‘manly’ they present, aren't as much of a risk. If any female is pulled up for suspecting of being a male in a place where males shouldn’t be, it should be apparent within a nano second of speaking with said female.

Now, how does a man identify as a woman?

Keir Starmer just appointed a female chancellor and deputy how incredibly misogynistic of him!!!!!!!!

How can you tell which trans women are genuine and which ones aren’t?
Also, I‘m sure there are plenty of decent men who would be no danger to women, and yet I wouldn’t want to get rid of single sex spaces.
Wanting to maintain those spaces is not the same as wanting to exclude certain ethnic minorities or gay people.

I think its a pretty empathetic view.

As a concept - gender identity and expression both exist.

In what sense?

1. We re-establish the social and legal agreement that "woman" is a sex class not a gender identity.

2. We ask the person what sex they are.

Or are you suggesting trans women, those poor, marginalised flowers, would lie - LIE - to get what they want? That they might feel so entirely entitled to override women's own boundaries and identities that they do not consider any need to treat us with respect and honesty?

And if your opinion of trans women is so low that you think it's unavoidable they will trample over female people's stated wishes and boundaries, why on earth would you support allowing such people into women's spaces?

Note I am in no way whatsoever suggesting that trans women's inner gender feelings do not exist. Nor am I suggesting that some, maybe many, female people do not share those feelings. I am not saying this gender feeling they label "woman" does not exist. I am just saying it is a different thing to sex so it should not be called the same name as or treated as interchangeable with sex.

Gender identities need to have their own names, their own unique identities and their own social and political voices. Sex-based languages and rights cannot serve two purposes, as themselves and also as a handy metaphor for non-sex-based identities, because the latter utterly destroys the former.

We need to stop this ridiculous charade that the way a man thinks makes him "really" a woman and therefore entitled to resources that in reality never had anything to do with we as women "identify" and everything to do with the challenges we have because of our sex.

What are you talking about? What thread? Why do you have a screen shot of my post on a thread that I cannot find that you are posting here for whatever your purpose is?

Your continual reluctance to engage with the issue is very clear. But I will keep asking where the link is that you have taken this screenshot from. And I will just as often point out that sporting bodies who do not actively protect female sports categories have increased the risk to female athletes of being asked if they are participating in the event they should be in.

You have tried to use this as a 'gotcha' and all that it is doing is showing that sporting bodies have failed female athletes so devastatingly that we are currently in this position. By all means, please continue. But until I know the context of the thread you have posted a screenshot of, and where the fuck you have got the screen shot from, you are not posting any coherent argument at all.

Sporting bodies who have allowed this failure are responsible for not providing the protection that female athletes need. But please, keep on posting and I will keep on repeating this point.

I'm gonna take my view from the trailblazing trans folk in my life.

I think it's a pretty empathetic view.

I have empathy for lots of people, among them women and girls who need single sex spaces when they are vulnerable. You can be empathetic to people and still tell them no, in fact many times it's actually kinder.

I pointed out that you aren’t an intersectional feminist because you said people’s experiences don’t matter- all that matters is a ‘principle’ that you believe in, and think exists outside of all human context.

People should disregard their own experiences or priorities which are informed by other factors in their lives, and not try to introduce them into the conversation because they are irrelevant to your principle.

If you can’t see that disregarding the wide diversity of womenhood, and telling various ‘types’ of women that their experiences are irrelevant doesn’t make for intersectional feminism, then I can’t help you.

In that they are part of language....
They can be used in a conversation... and referred to.
Like 'pettifogger.'

I pointed out that you aren’t an intersectional feminist because you said people’s experiences don’t matter- all that matters is a ‘principle’ that you believe in, and think exists outside of all human context.

Feminism is about women's rights and liberation. Not "people" or "people's experiences".

@Whatever1964 - the only 'outdated gender stereotypes' are those perpetuated by the TWAW brigade.

The truly progressive stance would be to accept men wearing what they want, calling themselves what they want (and vice versa for women). It's utterly regressive to suggest that a man who wants to wear a skirt is not a man.

And if you think gender identity is anymore than that, then you're going to have to articulate it.