Reply from my Labour MP

[LadyBracknellsHandbagg]

I wrote to my newly elected Labour MP after the SC ruling asking him how his government were going to support WOMEN’S rights to access SSS, and I finally received this reply yesterday. As you will see, there’s not one mention of the word woman or women. At least he’s clarified that Labour don’t support women.

’Thank you for contacting me about this Supreme Court ruling and transgender rights in our country.

This ruling comes at a time when the discourse – and media commentary – around transgender rights can often be overly simplistic, toxic and politically charged, leading to debates in Parliament and the media that may not accurately reflect the lived experiences of trans people. As responsible politicians, we must understand that this concerns real people's lives, dignity, and fundamental rights. Indeed, Human Rights Watch has expressed concern that this ruling threatens the rights of trans people, and we must not ignore these very real implications.

Recent statistics continue to show concerning levels of hate crime against trans people, with 4,700 hate crimes committed against trans people in the year leading to March 2023, representing an 11% increase on the previous year. While some argue that rising numbers result from better recording of hate crime, I do not believe this accounts for the full scale of the increase. We must make the UK safer for trans people and ensure every victim of hate crime is treated equally.

Following this Supreme Court ruling, it is more important than ever that we focus on supporting trans people through these challenging times. While the decision may provide some legal clarity around single-sex services, campaigners rightly point out that it could lead to discrimination, especially over employment issues. We must ensure that this legal development does not become a license for discrimination or prejudice.

We must also continue supporting the implementation of the Equality Act 2010, ensuring that while legal definitions may be clarified, the fundamental principle of treating all people with respect and dignity remains paramount.

I will continue to advocate for policies that protect trans people from discrimination and ensure that they can access the healthcare, support services, and basic respect that every person deserves.

Alongside colleagues in Parliament, I am engaging with the EHRC to ensure that trans voices are not overlooked or side-lined following this Supreme Court ruling.’

Wow!
How can MPs ignore the rights of 51% of the population?

That is a shameful response

I’m so tired of politicians ignoring their electorate to progress niche ideas at the expense of the majority.

Hmm... it looks they prepared a reply for anyone concerned with the ruling and forgotten to read the actual email to recognise it isn't a good match.

All they ever do is send a copy and paste reply from an obviously pre-prepared statement. They have them for every topic.

Who is it OP?

This is outrageous but yes , it confirms that these Labour polititions will have to accept that most women will now not vote for them. They don’t care

Reply and let him know that his office sent the wrong C&P.

Ask him for a response that includes the word describing half his constituents, or his confirmation that he doesn't give a rat's ass about them so you and your acquaintanceship can make an informed decision at the next election.

I have replied with exactly that, but I’m not expecting a response, my thinking at the moment is that I will spoil my ballot paper at any upcoming elections, they are all counted as protest votes, because I cannot see me being able to vote for any of them.

I’d rather not say, but he was a new MP and overturned a large Tory majority which had been in place since 2010.

That’s actually a frightening response OP. It’s cult like in the way it studiously ignores the issue of women’s rights. I would forward this on to the offices of Wes Streeting and any other Labour MPs who have shown support for women and understanding of the issues at play, with a please explain.

The free AI detector Quillbot has flagged up that 65% of the letter is likely AI generated. When MPs can’t even be bothered to write human responses to a human rights issue, then I guess we’re screwed.

Trans Trans Trans
(fuck women)
What a fucking awful response.

It’s shocking that he’s sent some copy and paste AI shite without engaging with the actual point the constituent was asking about. Can you make an appointment to see him?

I like the suggestion of replying by saying oh dear, a bit of an admin mix-up in your office, you sent me an email about 0.2% of the population [or whatever the % trans is], but I had asked about 51% of the population - could you please let me have your answer regarding the part of the electorate I asked about: women.
I love a bit of passive-aggressive barely concealed sarcasm in these cases

I hope you get a 2nd reply OP but as you say, it's unlikely.

Queries to MPs could be framed in such a way as to 'head them off at the pass', something like
'While your commitment to rights for transgender people are already well known, and shared - trans people are of course entitled to the same human rights as any other portion of the population - I would appreciate a statement of how you intend to protect and promote the rights of women, focusing specifically on the group which forms 51% of the population.'

Get the ref to trans rights out of the way in the first line, and make them focus on women's rights - or not, but then at least their anti-women bias is clearly revealed.

I'd be in favour of sending it on to Labour HQ or something, as an example of how badly their MPs are responding to queries - irrelevant AI-generated stuff that is alienating voters.

He said this at the end of the email -

‘I feel you may like to discuss your concerns regarding these matters further?’

What is the point of discussing my concerns with him when he hasn’t even bothered to read my email properly and has completely ignored them with this reply?! It’s actually really helped to clarify things for me, because he’s told me the truth by mistake, so at least I won’t waste anymore time with Labour. They don’t value women’s votes.

What a disgustingly patronising reply. God, I hate politicians.
Also, what's the difference between that nonsense and anything written by ChatGPT?

The endless stupidity is very depressing. You could understand that maybe five or six years ago this stuff wasn't much reported on and therefore MPs could be excused for not having a full grasp of the issues. But now? After the Supreme Court ruling? Come on.

See? It's obvious!

On the other hand, maybe it is the AI that has learnt to write nonsensical babble that feels devoid of substance and humanity from precisely these kind of manchurian candidate individuals.
What a waste of space these people are.

This prob was ChatGPT; but I’ d say the difference is ChatGPT can generate a wide range of response types and this mp can only generate bullshit.

This is very good advice, thank you, I too love a bit of passive aggressive barely concealed sarcasm 😂 as is evidenced in my reply-

‘Given the nature of my enquiry I find it absolutely staggering that you have omitted to use the word ‘woman’ or women’ at all in your reply, and your whole focus was on the rights of trans people. As far as the law stands, and as a result of the FWS Supreme Court ruling, no rights have been removed from trans people, they have the same rights as anyone else, it merely clarified the law in this area, and established that instead of public institutions and businesses using the interpretation of the law as set out incorrectly by Stonewall, that they should be following the actual law.
My enquiry was actually about what your government intended to do to protect the rights of WOMEN to access single sex spaces, but I can see that that isn't something that concerns you. I hesitate to point out to you that 2/3 women per WEEK are murdered in this country, and the epidemic of VAWG is unending, yet all I hear from your government are empty words about what could be done, with very little action, when one of the simplest things you could do is protect our rights to SSS, which is already enshrined in law. It would appear like many of your colleagues; you either haven't read the FWS judgement or you haven't understood it.

You have confirmed what I have long suspected, that large parts of the Labour Party have no interest in upholding the rights of 51% of the electorate, so thank you for clarifying that. It will make my voting decision much easier at the next election, as myself and thousands of other women now find ourselves politically homeless. My only option will be to spoil my ballot paper.’

That’s really pissed me off on your behalf.
I would be sending @MarieDeGournay’s suggested response and that if wishes to get re-elected he may wish to engage with 51% of his constituents.

It really pissed me off when I read it, absolutely unbelievable.

Brilliant response 👏

Looks like the office clerk sent you the wrong standard reply

Yes I had a similar response years ago, no mention of women or women’s rights.