Labour party plan to ensure women's posts are for women only.

[ArabellaScott]

And activists are not happy.

'The proposals to restrict trans members’ engagement in internal democratic procedures - including by blocking trans women from standing in All Women’s Shortlists, excluding them from National Women’s Conferences, and preventing them standing as Women’s Officers'

www.prideinlabour.org.uk/post/joint-statement-in-response-to-leaked-nec-paper

If violent TRAs kicked off outside conference, it would be an illuminating experience for lots of voters.

Labour members, maybe not so much. They've got quite a capacity for unseeing inconvenient things.

Why does the Supreme Court ruling mean a legal challenge?

Because if they comply with the Supreme Court judgment, violent men might kick off, so naturally they'd operate contrary to the judgment to avoid that.

So violence = legal challenge in that tweet?

Or are they pretending there’s another challenge to avoid violence

https://x.com/janeclarejones/status/1924740367401787856

One of the greatest ironies of the capture of civil society is that people have managed to simultaneously believe they are defending the most vulnerable people on earth while being too scared to stand up to them.

They simply don't want the TV and press cameras trained on a Conference Centre where weird cross dressing men are protesting outside. Especially as they are trying to look like a grown up Government.

They are pretending the Good Law.Project might sue them? I mean, they might.

So funny how lefty progressives demand "safe spaces" and spaces for "people of colour only" but don't think safe spaces for women are needed or relevant.

From what I saw of the LP Conference in 2019, it was just a weird cult of trans and Palestinian activists.

If only these idiots realised how much great work they are doing for Reform.

Because they are trying to pretend that the supreme court ruling might somehow make the conference against the law.....fuck knows how, or why? They don't either. It is just game play by those backbenchers who still cannot come to terms with the ruling.

If it’s not the case it’s just lying at this point isn’t it

Honestly, I don't know what the real reasons are behind this, but the optics are: If women won't include men in their meetings, we won't allow them to meet at all.

A couple of the rules of misogyny come to mind:

1. Women saying no to men is a hate crime.
2. Women speaking for themselves are exclusionary and selfish.
3. Women and Feminism must be useful to men or they are worthless.

I think they've just started to realise that this is deeply unpopular among working class voters and they need their votes.

Every time the likes of Nadia Whittome pipes up from the back benches, the LP loses votes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7v77rgp4peo

Absolutely pathetic. They know that complying with the law means telling men, no matter how they identify, that they can’t go to the conference. It’s that simple. What do they think will change between now and September?

I read this morning that the reason given was along the lines of they could be breaking the law would because if transwomen could attend but not other men they could be sued by the men not given access.

They have not read or understood the purpose or content of the ruling at all, have they?

You couldn't make it up!

This party wrote the fucking law.

It would be discriminatory against men who were barred when trans identifying men were not .

I had thought, though, they were worried that there would be challenge from trans identifying men when they had it women-only.

It’s really not difficult: no men at a women’s conference.

Trans identifying men can challenge all they want, and probably will again whenever the conference takes place. The law is clear and Labour have to deal with it. Or, they might just cancel the conference indefinitely to save the feelings of TIMs. This would not surprise me.

She is such a gift to Reform, why does Keir not shut her up? She’s embarrassing them more than they are already embarrassing themselves.

This is just awful, women just don’t get a conference because some TRAs might complain?! I don’t understand how they can say there might be a legal risk when the law is clear, they jus need to make the conference WOMEN only.
I’m not a Labour Party member but would definitely cancel my membership if I were

So we have a Supreme Court ruling but people are too afraid that GLP might sue them and will just cancel stuff instead.

It’s madness. Is there a point we can have our events back