I’ve seen how trans activists work, and Labour isn’t strong enough to stop them

[IwantToRetire]

This isn’t about a lack of guidance. It’s about a reluctance to act. And let’s be honest: an updated PDF download from the EHRC is unlikely to tell us anything we don’t already know.

Anyone who has got up close to trans activism will tell you it isn’t about numbers. It’s about volume. A small but committed group, willing to make enough noise or cause enough trouble, can shift institutions surprisingly far.

That is why Labour has yet to resolve its own internal divisions on sex and gender despite the ruling. This is not because the law is unclear but because parts of the party still don’t accept its implications.

Nadia Whittome recently suggested the judgment could lead to the “blanket exclusion” of trans people – which is not what the ruling says.

And this time next year, don’t be surprised if we’re still having the same arguments – with institutions finding new reasons not to apply a law that is already perfectly clear

Unless Keir Starmer is willing to make clear to his own party that biological sex is a matter of fact, not opinion, that resistance will continue – whatever guidance is eventually published.

Full article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/20/ive-seen-how-trans-activists-work-and-labour-isnt-strong-en/

And at https://archive.is/ia5Bh

All of that is spot on. Thanks for the archive link.

Much of it is due to fear, intimidation and bullying. And rather than being ethically wrong to give into it (because it encourages bullies to bully everyone) Labour has internalised that appeasement is being responsive to their constituents and is a virtue.

She's quite right. Although at this point it would be rational to wonder what IS Labour strong enough to do?

It’s bizarre anyone is carrying on as if Labour will be in charge for much longer. Do we really think the Reform/Restore/Tory coalition will go easy on things like implementing these policies? And rewriting them to go much further?

Labour are sunk.

Labour will be in charge for a while yet although Starmer may not be. The next general election could be as far away as summer 2029.
And there's no way a Labour PM is going to call an election early with the polls as they are.

I am willing to put £20 on Streeting calling an election in late 26 more likely before easter 27. He will need the support of the electorate

Being pro-trans is being responsive to their constituents, their constituents (broadly left wing Britons) are pro-trans (or trans-rights-activists as this board calls them). Being anti-trans is a right wing position.

See the latest yougov polling data for more details.

Well this is demonstrably false - let's conjure up the proof everyone...

You need to define pro trans as well - I support equal rights for everyone regardless of their thoughts on gender, I do not support mixed sex changing rooms, men in female sports, men on female quotas, being forced to use incorrect pronouns, the gender recognition act etc.

Nor does a large majority of the country.

But I absolutely support trans peoples rights to be whoever they think they are.

What is a right wing position?

Because it is a coherent political position, with a grouped set of policies and approaches, isn't it?

And not just the current name for 'sinner' in which to shove unwanted views because 'left wing' is associated with righteousness? Or a manifestation of the Trump belief that if you say it loudly and put it on social media at 3am then it actually happened?

And where in this group of policies and approaches can I find this powerful commitment to women's equality, access, and retention of existing legal rights to ensure these? And the enforcement of said women's existing legal rights and protections against men?

Because that's the 'anti trans' bit, isn't it?

I don't believe people are born in the wrong body.
I don't believe humans can change sex.
I believe how you choose to present yourself is indicative of what's going on in your head and I will respond to your behaviour rather than your appearance.
That would appear to be right wing, depending on how far away you are viewing from.

Believing in biological reality is right-wing?

This isn't about being 'pro' or 'anti' trans.

If that's the right wing view then how did the trans rights lobby get so powerful under the Conservatives? All those years of the Tavistock transitioning kids happened on their watch.

The problem for Labour is that they have to either drop TRA or change the law.

When in opposition, Labour were broadly for TRA, with the exception being women only safe spaces, without really defining what these safe spaces were.

Their new intake of MP were selected under these assumptions, many from institutions that supported trans rights.

So Labour MPs are skewed towards TRA. Not all obviously, but for many 'TWAW' is as fundamental as saying 'protect our NHS'.

Its not a left or right wing position, its not what their voters believe, but it is important to them individually, because its important to the group they have been selected from.

Starmer needs to explain to them that this belief isnt supported by the law, and its not going to be a vote winner to introduced such a law. It'll be time consuming and will ultimately fail. Its not worth it.

I think Labour are always going to have a women problem until this cohort of MP are gradually replaced.

Not to mention that Labour repeatedly soothed women voters into voting for them by repeating a commitment to protecting sex based rights. The receipts are here in many threads.

They were not loudly embracing the overturning of women's sex based rights as an important part of selling left-wing policy, oddly enough.

So believing in science is right wing now?

According to the latest surveys (SM, BSAS), about 20% of British people have what are commonly described as pro-trans views (eg TW must be allowed to conceal their sex, and use women's Schedule 3 single-sex services), whilst 80% are against or ambivalent.

This figure rises to 40% for Labour voters (even higher than for LD and Green voters) and I suspect it's higher still in the PLP.

In addition, TRAs have marched, Gramsci-like, through all the institutions – the public and third sectors, unions, academia, and the arts are all utterly infested.

So Labour probably feels it can't afford to look 'anti-trans'. And I don't see why we shouldn't worry about a Labour/LD/Green coalition arising either.

The same way groups always get powerful, eg finding fellow devotees, getting into positions where they can exert influence and relying on people who disagree with them not caring or noticing. As per the green party change of priorities and various unions.

...without really defining what these safe spaces were.

Or apparently being able to define what a woman is.

Oh shush, details, details...

'I hear you're a biological realist now, Father'

[For the puzzled: Fr Ted reference😄]

Being pro trans like many left wing views is more emotion based and simply kinder - "why wouldn't you want to make someone happy just by agreeing with them that they are a woman even if their sex is male"

The right wing approach then applies logic and consequences "it becomes unfair in women's sports" or "I don't want someone in a female only changing room with male genitalia " etc.

The same scenario can be applied to many other topics such as illegal immigration- "why would you object to people trying to get a better life in the UK" countered by "but how many people can the UK take". Or spending/ taxation- "why would you object to giving more money in benefits to less well off people " countered by "where's the money going to come from " etc etc.

In many ways it's a debate between the heart and the head. And because of that it is very unlikely to convince the other side of your view.

It's not about being pro trans or anti trans, it's about adhering to the law.

Companies are slowly shifting over and updating their policies now that the law has been clarified. The government is slow to comply but it's less important now that people are aware of the actual law. rather than Stonewall law, and don't want to tall foul of it. Even Stonewall have acknowledged that.

Keir has always looked confused and silly over this, saying that some women have penises, etc. I bet he cringes every time he thinks about it now.

"Being anti-trans is a right wing position."

Oh for goodness sake - we've been told (and screamed at, abused etc) womens rights are a right wing hate crime for over a decade now - no one is buying it apart from unthinking fools, blinded by their cult of gender.

Scream fascist/nazi/terf etc at us all you want - you lot look remarkably unhinged & increasingly ridiculous now.

You seem intent on beclowing "the left" out of existence - you're doing a pretty good job.