Jess Phillips appointed a minister to focus on tackling violence against women and girls and domestic violence.

[IwantToRetire]

Jess Phillips has been appointed to the Labour government as a minister, focusing on tackling violence against women and girls and domestic violence.

The Labour MP has been a vocal campaigner on the subject, and has become known for reading out a list of all the women killed by men in the UK every year on International Women's Day in parliament.

Ms Phillips had the role of shadow domestic violence and safeguarding minister from 2020 to 2023 under Sir Keir Starmer but resigned over the party's stance on the Middle East conflict in November.

She was one of 56 Labour MPs - including eight frontbenchers - to vote in favour of an SNP motion calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Middle East.

This defied the Labour whip, and so Ms Phillips had to step aside.

More ... https://news.sky.com/story/jess-phillips-made-minister-following-frontbench-resignation-over-middle-east-13175726

Plus, as a poster said upthread, she either has no idea of what the Spousal Veto means, or she's pretty callous.

"So what about infertile women. What about women who have had a hysterectomy. Are they still women?"
Yes.

"What about trans women who look like they could also get pregnant?"
Men cannot get pregnant.

"Trans women who can be raped."
Men do indeed rape other men as well as raping women.

"What about very masculine presenting women?"
Masculine women are women.

"Its nuanced."
No. There are two sexes;
male/man/boy/small gametes/can produce sperm/XY or a variation with a Y

and female/woman/girl/large gametes/can produce eggs/XX (no Y). There is no third sex.

"Feminine" men are a type of man not a type of woman.
"Masculine" women are a type of woman not a type of man.

There IS no "narrow" definition of a woman.
There is only ONE definition.

Clue - it doesn't include biological males.

And comparing trans women to women with infertility or those who have had hysterectomy surgery? Pathetic and a total predictable fall-back argument from people desperate to convince themselves that men can somehow be included in the category of women.

Women of ANY kind, whether they have intact reproductive capabilities or not, have been pregnant or not, women who "don't look like women" (your words), women who don't want to BE women........they are ALL STILL WOMEN.
Men, however they identify, remain MEN.
A feeling inside someone's head does not change biological reality.

And to label people as "utterly insane" is incredulous coming from the side that has no concept of safeguarding, is happy to sterilise underage CHILDREN in the furtherance of an insidious and damaging ideology, is happy to ride roughshod over women's hard won rights, is happy to take away their safe spaces and right to dignity, privacy and safety, is happy to house dangerous men with vulnerable women and girls, is happy to allow men to compete against women who have trained their whole lives in a sporting discipline and now see their opportunities, medal and sponsorship chances being given away to mediocre male athletes with "ladyfeelz", is happy to bestow positions and awards to males in job opportunities that are exclusively female (woman of the year etc), is happy to force survivors of rape and abuse to seek shelter in places that can no longer be guaranteed to be free from males, and in fact can be RUN by a male..........

Yes.
WE'RE the lunatics.

Jess P's determination to force straight married women into state registered 'same sex' marriages without their consent (often after their husband has fathered their kids) is just wierd, a direct attack on women's human rights and freedom of belief/ marriage consent.

Very good news about Jess' appointment - a strong woman and voice.

She does it with Ruth Davidson (former leader of the Scottish Tories) and Beth Rigby from Sky News. I really enjoy it.

Sadly, she won't be able to do the podcast any more. And I don't think Ayesha Hazarika will either.😢 Collateral damage.

That list compiled by a gc woman expelled.from Labour.

So tired of hearing X is a "strong woman". Especially when I also hear "so and so is quietly GC".

Fucking hell. Stand up for what you believe in. It's literally your job as an MP.

At last - the first suggestion I've seen from a TRA on here that nerves about including transwomen in the women category are due to 'hatred of all men' and therefore not of trans people generally and not transmen.

Yes that's absolutely the case - the only reason women are nervous about being alone with a strange man ( however he identifies) or uncomfortable changing clothes in mixed sex changing room or showering with one in prison etc is due to hatred of all men. Just like the safeguarding we have in place for checking adults working with children is due to hatred of all adults.

Excellent appointment. I have to say he's really doing well with his appointments im very impressed so far

That's a shame but would rather have JP as a minister with this portfolio so I can live with it!

What's the deal with Ayesha Hazarika? Has she also been given a job?

*So tired of hearing X is a "strong woman". Especially when I also hear "so and so is quietly GC".

Fucking hell. Stand up for what you believe in. It's literally your job as an MP.*
Yes to this, it was the narrative for Thangham Debonnaire as well

Splitting the role up might be a way to neutralise any dissent. Jess ensures women may 'get' single sex rape support and refuges. (Good, but it's not enough).

Every other consideration will be thrown to the other group - Dodds and Philipson get to do the Rainbow brief, conversion therapy, Equality Act non amendment, all the contextual women in their miasmic vagueness. Press on with 'breaking new ground' for Genderism.

I hope she achieves something, but I have my doubts.

she stood by and watched Rosie Duffield receive appalling abuse.
she supports removing the misnamed “spousal veto”
she tried to appease aggressive men from wildly misogynistic (and anti semitic) cultures and nearly lost her seat anyway.
she added Brianna Ghey’s name to the “counting dead women” list

has she ever spoken out about grooming gangs?

I believe she has done some good work with refuges in her area, but seems to only get involved when there is zero political risk in doing so.

She knows exactly what the spousal veto is.

The concession to women is single sex refuges.

All the other concessions go to the Rainbow crew.

We get crumbs again, and those grudgingly.

Trans widows get shrugs.

That just about nails it. Thank you.

I don't want to derail but I get really confused about this issue.

Are some people (like Jess) literally arguing that a person should be able to unilaterally alter the terms of a contract (marriage)? And the other spouse be forced to stay if their spouse transistions and they do not want to be in a 'same sex' marriage (or opposite, whichever it's ended up being)?

Do they think transistion shouldn't be grounds for divorce either?

That the non transition partner should have to wait 2 years to divorce (and then receive a decree absolute with their ex spouses new name on it, ie not the name of the person they married)?

Because that seems utterly batshit.

But hey, utterly batshit seems to be the new normal.

Good but somewhat depressing points, I wasn’t aware she supports removing the spousal veto.

She knows exactly what the spousal veto is.
So she's callous

Are some people (like Jess) literally arguing that a person should be able to unilaterally alter the terms of a contract (marriage)?
Yes. This starts to rewrite all legal marriages.

And the other spouse be forced to stay if their spouse transistions and they do not want to be in a 'same sex' marriage (or opposite, whichever it's ended up being)?
Yes. It's forcing women to stay in abusive relationships. Forcing women to stay with porn-addled, AGP husbands, who often don't reveal this side of them until after the marriage.

Do they think transistion shouldn't be grounds for divorce either?
They do. But this - "spousal veto" - is a cover for removing annulment. This is very important for religious women as they cannot get divorced and remarried. It's also important to anyone who is married because if you allow this, then you start to interfere with marriage as a contract. Which it is. It's hard to overstate the importance of this.

That the non transition partner should have to wait 2 years to divorce (and then receive a decree absolute with their ex spouses new name on it, ie not the name of the person they married)?
Yes, I think so

Because that seems utterly batshit.
Yes

But hey, utterly batshit seems to be the new normal.
Yes. But we have a STRONG WOMAN doing all this to other women. Progressive!!!

I hope Jess Philips is able to apply some traction to her brief.

I also hope that this Government is able to apply a mirror internally and force much needed change inside the orgs of their more prominent backers, the Unions. Some of which have a sorry history of misogyny and using NDAs to hush up sexual misconduct amongst their male hierarchy.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves "What's the deal with Ayesha Hazarika? Has she also been given a job"
Actually, I was just assuming that being in the Lords would mean she couldn't do it. But maybe if she doesn't have a specific job she can?

I think Ruth Davidson is in the Lords as well, isn't she? Or maybe I've got that wrong....