Rishi Sunak said…

Historically Labour has always been funded mainly by the Trade Unions. The Trade Unions also seem to be on board with 'gender identity ideology' (goodness knows why?) to the extent that they are now unable to protect the rights of their 'biology-understanding' women members in employment...a shoddy state of affairs.
I wondered if since the Tories have always had donations from many different types of business, this means they are not as vulnerable to single-issue lobbying.
They felt guilt about the Thatcher 'Section 28' years and Stonewall used this as their way in to the Civil Service across the board.
Fortunately not all Tory MPs were onboard and in the UK at least the fightback has begun.
There must be some malign influences at work though as part of the TQ+ (thinking PIE in the 1970s etc).

'I currently wont go for my overdue breast exam because they cannot guarantee no men. If I die of perfectly treatable cancer, that's on them.'
Are you sure, even in Scotland the mammogram leaflet makes it very clear only female staff will be on board the visiting x-ray van. You could just turn around and go home if that were not the case anyway?

To be fair to Bryne, it was something of a tradition for the outgoing chancellor to leave a note of this tone to the next when the government changed hands - it was an established joke and the expectation was that it was private.

I always thought that was a bit shit that it was used by Cameron like it was. As if they hadn't done the same in other years. As if they hadn't participated in this interchange and then manipulated the rules for their own benefit.

But still, I digress, I'm still voting Tory, still willing to vote labour if they pull their head out of their arse.

'On the other hand, in the Tories, most of the transactivists are women. Penny Mordaunt, Teresa May, Maria Millar, Caroline Noakes.'
I think the self-id stuff came originally from some cross party group in the House of Commons known as the Women's and Equalities Committee.
Crispin Blunt who is standing down at the next election was one prominent 'TWAW' male MP.

Yes, and I have no problem with them thinking that and using whatever pronouns the person wants and inviting those people into their own private spaces.

What I have a problem with is that the whole of society is being re-arranged to suit these people despite most people not agreeing, and it causing real harm to women and children e.g. Dolatowski's 10 year old victim. Karen White's victim in prison. All the girls on that course with Bryson, the disabled women forced to accept male carers. The woman in prison who had to have a coil fitted because the entire time she was in prison she was terrified of being raped due to criminal violent men walking around with their tackle out in the showers and making suggestive threatening comments.

All the SEND kids in schools being gaslighted into denying the evidence of their own eyes and their speech being compelled which for some SEND kids is not only difficult but will cause emotional harm. The kids who are being sterilised and turned into lifelong medical patients when with watchful waiting they may have ended up gay adults. The erosion of safeguarding in schools because kids are too scared to mention someone's sex.

I mean even if the majority agreed, it doesn't follow a policy is right. In Afghanistan the current policy is that women and girls do not have the right to education at all. That is a human right, it may be (I doubt it, but who knows) that the majority of people in that country agree with that policy. Out of fear or brainwashing or simply because they don't like women and girls. It doesn't make it right.

Personally I reserve the word 'moronic' for all those who, regardless of party allegiances, believed they could take away women's rights to single sex spaces without us noticing or objecting.

That's over. We've noticed and enough of us have objected for the Tories to have a major rethink. Labour can carry on loftily declaring it's a minor issue if they so wish, in which case they can look forward to Sunak exposing their craven idiocy at every opportunity.

If you're finding this annoying already, with possibly 18 months to go, then I suggest you buckle up. I also suggest you direct your anger at the Labour Party activists - some of them in senior positions - who enabled and encouraged this to happen, rather than at women on this board who have been warning about this for years.

I

Quite!

There are some very big expectations they are going to have to deliver on. Bringing fuel bills down; sorting out inflation; big public sector wage demands from every corner; the NHS; social care..........

I saw a report on this on CNN earlier. It was by a female reporter btw… the strategic thinking is once the initial outrage has passed, this will settle and actually cause a boomerang effect to strengthen sales indicating there will be no backing down. Don Lemon was also in the studio to give lots of nice grunts and moans about the ridiculousness current backlash. They also showed footage of a guy (probably famous but idk him) shooting cases of bud light for target practice to provoke viewer outrage, I presume. I really, really hope Budweiser have got this wrong and there will be no resurgence in sales.

We don't tell women in Afghanistan 'stop your activism' because some of the men agree women and girls have no right to education, do we?

I have no problem with people believing that TWAW. I think it's anti-science and deluded but they can do them. Have at it. Preferably not around me, and I can choose not to be their friends. It's the totally re-arranging society around this anti-scientific belief that is demonstrably harmful to women and girls that I have an issue with.

I think my daughters have less safety and fewer rights than I did growing up. I've seen what happened in Afghanistan, what's happening in Iraq. The silence (largely) of the mainstream media.

As KJK says if not now, when? At what point of evidence of the harm to women and girls, to child safeguarding should we fight back? Once it gets to the point of Labour being in power and it legitimately being the case that a woman can be sent to jail for saying a man is a man then it'll be far, far too late to fight back. We've already had Posie interviewed several times for ridiculous things, whilst rape is basically legal and Couzens got away with flashing on his escalation to murder.

Agreed. My mammogram was clear it would be women only.

Surely you cannot vote Labour because of the NHS?! Look at the whole package, they are destroying women's rights.

See, works both ways, doesn't it?

I don't criticise those who have their criteria for choosing where to cast their ballot and I don't expect others to criticise mine. Debate it, sure, but some of the posters here who've stooped to insults (such as @fuzzbearpenguin 's moron and "bet you voted Brexit" comments and @SerendipityJane 's charming posts above) are frankly an embarrassment to themselves and show that they have no contribution to make other than mud-slinging. It won't change my mind, it just makes me think that these posters don't have a coherent argument.

I completely agree with @NotHavingIt 's excellent post above. The tribalism, the "Every Tory is EVIL" (newsflash: they're not. Lots of people I know vote Tory and they're very nice people. I'm sure some Tory MPs are very nice people too. There is a beautiful sort of irony to anti-Tory posters commenting on how awful Tory voters are by being rude and intolerant...), the emotive language, the hyperbole that another Tory win means [insert doomsday scenario here] - it's just so many tired tropes and it doesn't achieve anything other than signalling the poster's virtue or demonstrating that they haven't considered any view other than their own.

To those saying 'vote Labour' despite the magical thinking (which we have no reason they wouldn't also apply to the economy, with predictable results) - at what point of harm to women and girls do you stop voting Labour?

When is the harm too great?

When they get to the point of Taliban lite or beforehand?

The Tories only gave any of this credence as a sop to the Lib Dem’s when they were in coalition.

The advancing transgender equality plan was published in 2011. I doubt most MPs in the Tory party were even aware of it or remotely interested - which left the field wide open for the handful who were TRA to push everything along ostensibly with government support.

The Tories massively took their eye off the ball & im not daft, if it wasn’t having traction with the electorate now they wouldn’t care either Advancing transgender equality plan

I agree Sideways, I think it's the likes of Owen Jones who've really made me resent people who think like this.

Calling people thick is not a vote winner, see Brexit as an example. I was a remainer but hate the implication that ANYONE who voted leave is either stupid or racist. It's too simplistic.

It's also the same school of thought that has led the Labour Party to dismiss women from the party who believe women can't have penises and to say that wanting women and girls to have sex based provisions is a bigoted position.

I'm not madly keen on the Tories, and have never voted for them, it will take me a LOT to get over the lies of Boris Johnson BUT they haven't the arrogance to call potential voters bigots or stupid.

The Labour Party has a lot to sort out to regain my vote. A great start would be to acknowledge the biological reality of 51 % of the population. But as someone said upthread, perhaps Sir Keir is a true believer, in the face of all of the evidence of the harm of self ID and the damage to children of 'trans healthcare', it is starting to seem the only likely explanation.

Well that's a thought.

He's really between a rock and a hard place with his fence sitting.

Women are pissed off and the TRAs are calling him a transphobe.

Not really the face of a strong opposition/ future prime minister if EVERYONE is annoyed about your position on this issue.

Not buying it.

Didn't their new VP of marketing say it was viewed as some kind of frat boy beer and they wanted to try a completely different tack?

Why would you try a completely different tack if the current track was filling the coffers?

Plus it's beer. It's not exactly a unique product.

It's so pisses me off. Even if they thought their sales might return, they've lost billions of dollars because people think they're misogynists!

You'd think they'd want to correct that opinion, wouldn't you?

Not say, ach, people will soon forget we hate women and made a repugnant ad to mock them.

Grrr.

It's this comment because your on the fwr board where we care about this issue mostly.

So Tories ignore promises but labour wont?

Am happy to flip to labour, just as soon as they admit women are ahf and worthy of single sex spaces, sports, prisons etc.
You go tell labour this. I've tried and given up.

Ahhh, interesting. It makes sense.

So Theresa May was got at whilst Minister for Women by the LibDems. I always wondered why she took the odd line that she did.

I agree. He's not in control of his party and, until he can win an election, he's going to be vulnerable. But if he wants my vote, he has to sort it out.

Maybe.

We've seen how violent the TRAs will be and he knows he won't get actual violence from GC women. Maybe he is scared.

However, being a massive coward isn't really a great leadership position.

I didn't mean his physical safety particularly - I mean I think his position as party leader is unsafe. He can't even get his own comms team under control.

If this is the case his behaviour towards Rosie Duffield is more cowardly than I'd thought.