Bell Ribeiro-Addy calls for Labour to legislate to protect trans-identifying males.

[ArabellaSaurus]

https://bsky.app/profile/bellribeiroaddy.bsky.social/post/3lyi6xnozie27

'I have been asked about leaked EHRC guidance on trans women. This ignores the human rights of a vulnerable group made collateral damage in the culture wars. Labour must not leave this to protracted litigation, but legislate to protect everyone’s right to safety & dignity.'

Not a mention of women's rights.

If she gets deputy, that's Labour getting a second term down the pan. A gift for Reform.

At least she's open about her priorities.

It doesn't look like she has a lot of support:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/58f5e597-2227-424d-9aa5-0f54c9aaad8e?shareToken=01e06a057ce067021cd845a93011a212

🙄

" This ignores the human rights of a vulnerable group made collateral damage in the culture wars. Labour must not leave this to blah de blah de blah fuck women centre men blah de blah de blah"

I saw her on newsnight last night. She’s not much of a threat, half of what she said was incoherent and she won’t get the numbers to go through but it’s incredible to make this a priority given the lay of the land.

Some Labour MPs just still not getting the memo apparently, despite the fact that it was written by THE SUPREME COURT 🙄 what an eejit. Thankfully she's got zero chance in the deputy leadership race

The TWAW crowd now have two other political parties to choose from.......Corbyn's new party and the Greens. Perhaps they should have the courage of their convictions and sign up, and then leave it up to the electorate to decide come the next election.

I'll tell you two things you hear in Labour circles about Bell Ribeiro-Addy.

Nobody dislikes her. She actually seems to be one of the few pleasant people in politics. This probably came in handy when she was Diane Abbott's office manager, because DA can be quite bruising.

But at the same time, nobody takes her at all seriously. She's the candidate for lefties who think Richard Burgon has too much gravitas.

Aye. That she is .

Well it's good that she has realised that she would need to change the law.

Now she just needs to explain the changes she wants to make and what that would look like in practice.

'Labour must not leave this to protracted litigation, but legislate to protect everyone’s right to safety & dignity.'
Maybe they could legislate to make gender reassignment a protected characteristic?
Oh.

I am very much looking forward to hearing about the details of what she is proposing.

Does she want all facilities to be mixed?
Does she want to clarify what 'trans' means, and whether anyone is excluded from the definition?

Obviously she has must have thought about all of this in detail and an announcement will be imminent.

The Darlington nurses tribunal is next month isn't it?

She is only concerned about trans women ie men. No mention of trans men. Does this mean the new guidelines mean that trans men are allowed to go coherent they like? Or does she only care about trans women?

Good point. She hasn't stated what this legislation would entail.

To be fair, Bell does not have a reputation as a deep thinker. When she says "we should legislate to do X", I wouldn't expect her to have a worked out plan any more than some rando commenting on a Daily Mail article would have a worked out plan.

Ok, she's an MP and legislating is literally their job, but we have the MPs we have and, not wanting to name any names like Alex Sobel, they aren't all that impressive.

Everyone’s, or every man’s?

There is a campaign to change the law, by the looks of it, on the grounds that the SC judgement overturned 15 years of legal understanding - i.e. 15 years of Stonewall telling everyone the law was as it wanted and not what it actually was. No understanding at all that the SC judgement stated what the law has always been, not changed it.

Well, if there’s a move to change the law, at least the discussions would need to be had in public. I’ve never heard an argument likely to stand up to the smallest amount of scrutiny. After all, transwomen already (rightly) have all the same rights as everyone else, plus some specific, extra protections.

So wants to "protect" transwomen - aka men. Nothing about transmen or other women. Typical.

Also no clarity on how she would legislate to protect everyone's privacy and dignity. Transwomen want to use women's facilities. Women don't want them to. There's no magic bullet that will make everyone happy.

What legal protection do they need that they haven't already got?