Tomorrow's Mail front page: Labour trying to reverse reverse ferret

[teawamutu]

Fuck sake is this ever going to be over?

Please tell me this is bollocks to hold Starmer's feet to the fire, somebody?

https://x.com/MailOnlineScot/status/1913702114129330408

Starmer must be rocking in a corner somewhere wondering if he can phone in sick next week.

At some point he has to get off that fence he's been clinging to for what seems like forever.

It's crunch time Keir. What you gonna do??

If an MP, or even several, disagrees with the verdict and expresses their opinion in private, that doesn’t mean Labour as an party are definitely going to try to pass a law on this does it? Given that they already defend the equalities act against the Tories. That’s just what this shit paper is trying to imply to get you to read it or react to it, which has worked a treat. Not that it’s difficult, MN has seriously lost its shit over this now. To quote my kids you need to touch grass.

Are they exempt from libel laws now? You’d think they’d be far more imaginative with their headlines if they could just accuse people of being involved in fake events without getting into trouble for it.

According to the article these quotes are from a LGBT Labour group chat. Clearly though someone on the chat is a person who is not on board with these positions hence the leak to the mail.

This is a manoeuvre from the prowoman faction inside Labour to undermine the TA side before they can do anything to undermine the judgement.

He’ll do what he always does, waffle about how he respects the legal profession and the rule of law.

So we believe the mail - a paper that's as tory as they come? They're never going to say anything good about labour are they?!

But having said that, there is clearly more to iron out here - I mean so legal definition is now clear. Thank you courts. Bt what everyday matters nos need thought to facilitate anyone who is trans - using gender specific toilets/changing rooms etc. Applying for jobs specified as male or female applicants only.

Just cos a court has clarified a legal definition doesn't mean that's job done does it?!

Hopefully you are right!

Come on Keir, shit or get off the pot.

MPs who behave like this are self-serving and anti-democratic. I have no respect for them.

Newspapers arent usually in the business of printing things the know to be untrue. A journalist friend of mine reckons the DM is usually solid on facts - it’s the opinions based on those facts that are often unpalatable. In this case the question is who leaked and why? Who has the most to gain? Keir or Wes?

I'm interested in the bit of the article in response to the Darlington nurses that Wes will make an announcement soon. Labour has to pick a side now or go down like the Democrats.

To quote my kids you need to touch grass.

I think you need to stop smoking it.

I thought it's already been decided that WhatsApp groups aren't private anymore. Isnt that how they brought those disgusting coppers to justice, or those parents upset at the school?

Not everyone can acess twitter, so it might help the discussion to have the link to the actual article.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14628401/Labour-Whatsapp-leaked-messages-transgender-court-ruling.html

Even before this article I was anticipating the Women and Equalities Committee (Labour dominated) to call some sort of emergency meeting and try and say that the Court had exceeded its powers, and it is politicians who make laws, not Judges.

Worse still that having refused to re-word the EA to make it clear the word woman means sex, they will in fact vote for Parliament to re-word the EA to say that the word sex includes not just gender re-assingment but gender identity.

For them it wont be just about saying they are in the right, but making sure (as they always do) that women know their place.

To be right fucking honest, respecting the rule of law is an excellent position to take on this.

I'd love to know who leaked it. Not all on board then. Wonder if Wes is a member? Trying to think who else is LGB and not mental.

As I said earlier it is obvious this is a hostile leak. You don't go to the Mail if you want a good news story. This is from someone who wants to undermine the TAs.

Given it is on the Labour LGBT group that means it is from someone who is gay, or BI but as we know there are plenty from those sexualities who want to see the TAs defeated. It maybe from someone who has recently peaked. The TA cause is more and more exposed people are seeing they were lied too.

It could be from someone supporting Streeting for sure.
Or someone who backs Labour Women's Declaration.
Even someone from Starmer's circle - remember Starmer has never been that keen on the TA line he always tried to play the middle. Ultimately I think Starmer will take the side of whoever is firstly popular and secondly has the law on their side - that means us right now we won 5 - 0 .
Also remember this story appeared in the Scottish Mail on Sunday and Scottish Labour are desperate to use gender to attack the SNP in next year's election. Sarwar's reverse ferret is embarrassing, but a real sign of how far the genderists have lost power inside Labour.

We always knew the TAs would fight back. However they can't win now in secret. They have to pass laws in public and in open debate. That is where they are weakest.

Check this thread for some more links to the internal Labour drama.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5316792-labour-mp-kate-osbourne-fights-back-in-labour-list

Another big question is Welsh Labour where the TAs are in strong control. What will they do?

Latest news from within Labour two NEC members come out against the ruling:

https://labourlist.org/2025/04/supreme-court-ruling-labour-women-nec/

Bear in mind there are 40 members though and at least two Vice Chair: Shabana Mahmood MP Lord Chancellor and Shadow Scottish Frontbench: Jackie Baillie MSP are pro women.

Guardian reader spotted! Voracity is a dead give away. In the last decade, legacy media has lied and obfuscated on this issue while the tabloids have been surprisingly better in their coverage. But for people who don't have the capacity to evaluate the news for themselves, "4 legs good, 2 legs bad" bleating seems to work.

If you really think the Mail is a reliable news source, you've got problems.

Snideness does not a convincing argument make, plus you've basically repeated the other ploppers so we'll be deducting points for lack of originality. Better luck next time!!

The article quotes a hanful of Labour MPs who I think are gay or lesbian, so they're quite likely to be in the Labour LGBT+ group.

No doubt they're searching for the LGB individual in the group who leaked to the Daily Mail. It's not the Labour front bench scheming to change the definition of women in law.

Labour knows it's an issue that could split their vote, women are a lot more aware of what's been happening in womens prisons, and sporting bodies have been increasingly excluding trans women from womens sports etc. They can't just slip an amendment to the Equality Act into parliament and hope no one notices.

And women, as in grown-up females, are more likely to actually go out and vote than young people. I think Keir Starmer probably has finally realised that most of the electorate know that women doesn't have a penises.

How simple minded and out of touch with the media landscape this comment is. We live in an age where public distrust of the media is unprecedented and justified and no media can be trusted on its own or naively, based on its reputation. Every story has to be double checked and chased down to source to verify - that is what any canny reader does and has to do. Tabloids like the DM and NY post have held up quite well and previously well-respected media like the WP, NYT and the Guardian have fallen drastically in my estimation. This DM story has screenshots of the whatsapp conversations and unless you are saying they are fake, that is quite a coup.

Using clichés like "does not a convincing argument make" isn't even an argument, let alone bringing out the convenient "ploppers" line. My post was in direct response to the one above. The simple fact, inconvenient as it may be to you, is that the Mail has a terrible track record for basic fact reporting, so getting this worked up about something they say without at least approaching their version of the facts with caution is potentially a total waste of basic emotion.

The simple fact, inconvenient as it may be to you, is that the Mail has a terrible track record for basic fact reporting, so getting this worked up about something they say without at least approaching their version of the facts with caution is potentially a total waste of basic emotion.

Ah, a believer in reputation. How naive. If this news had been leaked to the BBC or the Guardian, do you think they would have run it?