Labour MPs in denial about Supreme Court ruling

[Apollo441]

https://www.thetimes.com/article/c8efd6fd-3ecf-4436-ae60-7cff6393c493?shareToken=c585ace670fbb41d062acb8487e0d33d

More hogwash from some MPs.

Josh Newbury, the MP for Cannock Chase, said in a letter it was “clear in my view that trans women are women and that trans men are men”. He said the Supreme Court ruling did not contradict that but that “the misinterpretation of, and fallout from, the ruling has wrongly brought this into question”.

Can these idiots read?

it seems like obvious common courtesy to let people live in a way that makes them feel happy and safe.”

Unless you are a woman of course.

Archive

archive.ph/URKw7

Josh sounds as thick as mince. Single sex (the clues in the words) means the space is designated based on a person’s sex. It’s not designated based on gender, because if it were it would be called something different. Single sex means one sex, Josh. When both sexes use it, it’s not single sex is it - so utterly pointless referring to it as single sex.

I suspect many MPs surround themselves with activists who actively block any contrary messages from reaching the MP. The MPs are to blame as it should be clear to them their staff are activists.

She said: “Every government has backbench rebels. But when they make dismissive and factually incorrect statements that run directly counter to the government’s stated position, it’s a failure of leadership to let them stand.”

Go, Maya.

Of course you're going to get idiot MPs playing to the gallery or their trans children / mates / constituents / lingerie suppliers. So the person in charge needs to tell them to pipe down and obey the law.

Funny how he won't do it, though.

Loads of labour MPs ignoring the law, claiming it's bad for trans people, and Keir doing fuck all about it. And yet it's the far right who is 'sowing division'.

clear in my view that trans women are women and that trans men are men

I despair. Just when you think the standard of MPs can’t get any lower.

We've talked a lot about the Stonewalling of the public sector. Maybe someone should dig into the Stonewalling of political parties.

Maybe the Commons seating could be rearranged so that all the MPs who don't accept UK law can sit together and be easily identified.

It's not like he'd be sitting alone.

“I do not believe it is morally right for trans people to be excluded from single-sex spaces designated for their gender.”

I see he identifies as a right daft pillock

“It is, ultimately, not down to any court to decide how people feel living in their own skin, and it seems like obvious common courtesy to let people live in a way that makes them feel happy and safe.”

Now this goes beyond stupidity.

It may be common courtesy to let people live in a way that makes them feel happy and safe right up to the point where they may be making other people not feel happy and safe. This for the slow learners among our Members of Parliament is what the law actually does, settles disputes among the citizens of this country It does not do it by saying the feelings of happiness and safety of one self selected group are more important than others in society.

The court is not deciding how people feel living in their own skin, the judges do not give a shit about how people live in their own skin. The law is concerned about how peoples action affect other people.

it seems like obvious common courtesy to let people live in a way that makes them feel happy and safe

So if I felt safe carrying a loaded gun? Or a zombie knife? Or happy grooming and raping young children?

That’s unfair to daft pillocks.

Quite. Can they actually hear themselves?

Ask yourselves "who votes for these people?"

Or did they keep their bullshit quiet until they got elected or what?

'Trans women are women and trans men are men' sounds a little out of date.
We've noticed over the years that TRA claims and statements have shifted, perhaps in response to public opinion - 'born in the wrong body' was quietly shelved, possibly because it was so obviously clashed with 'body positivity'.

I've noticed recently trans people acknowledging that they haven't actually changed sex - possibly because they have become aware that even people without so much as an O level in biology weren't buying it - they have just changed their gender presentation, and demand to be accepted as such.

[Dr Upton is an obvious exception to this- he claims to have become an actual biological woman]

So it may be perceived as unhelpful that to have non-trans MPs proclaiming the absolutist 'trans women are women and trans men are men' line of yesteryear.

The problem for TRAs of acknowledging that only gender presentation, not biological sex, can be changed is that it sweeps away their claim to be allowed use the single-sex facilities of their choice, as these are designated by biological sex, not gender presentation.

And to add to my post - the other problem with TRAs saying they have only changed their 'gender presentation' and not their sex is that a show of hands on this thread would reveal an awful lot of us who don't even remotely 'present' in traditional female ways, so does that make us transgender too?😧

Apparently not. With these people, I'm always struck by the fact that, not only are they stupid, but they don't realise they're stupid. I always feel it would be better, somehow, if they admitted that they struggled with logic, reason and evidence.

I suppose if they realised they were stupid, they'd learn to keep their mouths shut.

I hadn't heard of Josh Newbury, so I looked him up. My working assumption was "bet he's a youngish gay man first elected in 2024". Bingo.

There are a bunch of Labour MPs like this - one might call them the Lord Alli intake - and they all seem to have precisely the same view on genderwoo.

Oddly enough my Labour MP, who's a gay man and a longtime stalwart of LGBT Labour, has been very very quiet on this issue. I haven't seen him signing open letters. His communications are heavily focused on constituency issues. But he's an older man and probably has a bit more political savvy.

There's a council by-election in Cannock Chase this Thursday. The council is Labour controlled, but Reform will fancy their chances of picking up the seat. Josh Newbury might care to pay attention.

You all sound surprised.

Keir Starmer says 99.9% of women 'haven't got a penis' as he faces questions over trans rights
https://news.sky.com/story/keir-starmer-says-99-9-of-women-havent-got-a-penis-as-he-faces-questions-over-trans-rights-12848438

Sunday 2 April 2023
Despite the date of that article, it was not an April fool.

When they show you what they think, believe them.

https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast

This map should terrify Labour.
It should bring them back on course for sanity and reason. Will it?

One thing I like about the Nowcast is how it shows projected margins for the constituencies.

There aren't many safe Labour seats, and a lot that are basically coin tosses. A Corbyn candidate getting 3% of the vote could kneecap Labour in lots of places.

Labour and their acolytes are a hateful bunch who show how much they dislike women at every step, unless they’re willing to read from the accepted script.

My Labour MP is quoted in that article and I’m disappointed. They are old enough and with enough life experience to know better. I’m a Labour Party member, I wrote to them about the data bill recently and they didn’t respond. I think I might start turning up to constituency meetings.

I would add said MP was not elected by the members and was imposed close to election so isn’t in a strong position locally.

It should terrify everyone!

However- my area is solidly reform. I know a lot of people of all kinds, I’m not particularly bubbled. I don’t know many- if any- racist people. So most Reform voters are not racist.
My friends roll their eyes at the very mention of them, but their friends and neighbours are voting that way. Why?
I’m seeing a really muddled situation. Conservative and Labour friends alike despising reform. Loads of self employed people that were broadly conservative voters are now reform. Loads of working men that were labour voting reform.
And professionals of both kinds rolling their eyes at them.

Well, yeah, but...

I think Starmer is entirely driven by pragmatism, not principle. He knows perfectly well that the trans stuff is nonsense but he went along with it while it was expedient to do so. Now that it's not expedient to do so, he has stopped, more or less.

It's harder to understand the workings of the tiny minds of Labour backbench MPs. However, I think a lot of us would have assumed that they, too, are driven by expediency, and that once the Supreme Court made a definitive ruling on the reality of biological sex, they would quietly perform a reverse ferret and hope that nobody noticed.

These latest pronouncements suggest, however, that their support for gender ideology is not driven by expediency at all. The more frightening truth seems to be that they actually believe it.