Sensible Discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls MK 2

I opened your link Suziewoozie - LN’s reply ‘giving some light not heat to the question’ beggared belief. Jeez.

Are you sure about the 1%, Ug? That's 660,000 people..

This article says 0.1%, which knocks it down to 66,000. Their definition is only people who have actually undergone a medical sex change. Which admittedly leaves a number of grey areas...

www.dailywire.com/news/exactly-how-many-transgenders-are-there-number-amanda-prestigiacomo

Following on from RLB saying she’d allow TW into women’s refuges and that the LP should stop having this debate Julie Bindel ( a hero of mine) tweeted ‘If RLB had any fewer brain cells, she’d need to be watered twice daily’ Spot on - she can join the insomniac LN.

Re numbers - since the GRA ( there is an exact figure available) about 5000 certificates have been issued. This group are not the issue , they are seriously committed to their gender change. The real issue are those ( number unknown) who just want to self id just as easily as you’d put on a new dress (and boy do they always wear a dress because dress = woman, the pinker and glittier the better) . These are the ones ( I believe all men) who have the power base and whom Stonewall support ( and now of course LN and RLB) . They have fully working genitalia and some even sport beards. I kid you not. I know that me and others on this thread were accused of ranting by Grandad but maybe those of you who are now waking up to this might think that that word should be replaced by ‘bringing a serious issue to our notice’. The ranting is being done by RLB, LN and their mindless supporters. Lemon btw has always nailed her colours to this particular mast and has never been afraid to say so or let our other political differences get in the way.

Oh god MaizieD maths was never my forte! I’m off to try and find the darned article now. I may be a while. Bear with me ....
?

If you’re not traumatised enough read this before bedtime

medium.com/@elsaegret/abusive-misogynist-activist-writes-nhs-policy-in-bristol-21dd02cc4c9c

Found it MaizieD it was in the Telegraph and as it’s behind a paywall I’ve had to copy and paste it as I couldn’t do a link.

The bold print is my enhancement....

“At a recent dinner party, a man in his sixties demanded of a bellicose woke vegan in her twenties how she could dispute that sex was a biological fact – that you are born either male or female. Within minutes, the “discussion” touched on gender as a social construct and those people who feel trapped in the wrong body… and promptly went nuclear. He threatened to walk out, nearly in tears. She remained calm but deadly.

There’s a moment, about halfway through any dinner gathering, that I begin to feel nervous. If transgender politics haven’t been raised, they very probably will before dessert has been cleared. For it has become increasingly difficult to avoid the subject, even if you really want to. The old are stunned that the concept of biological sex is being thrown on the slag heap, and therefore can’t leave the topic alone, and the young see this as the fight to the death of our times.

At first glance, it is mind-boggling that a question of gender concerning around 1 per cent of the UK population has proven so incendiary and so obsessive. But take another look and it’s not surprising at all: the relationship between sex and gender cuts to the psychosexual bone. The stakes really are existential: are you what you say you are? The answer to this will never be straightforward and has profound implications for how society is ordered.

Which is why I find it disheartening to see not just online militias bullying those they disagree with, but those at the top of the establishment doing so, too. I felt truly queasy last week, but not surprised, to see Labour top brass, including deputy leader hopefuls Dawn Butler and Angela Rayner, plus Rebecca Long-Bailey and Lisa Nandy, who are both running to be Labour leader, call on the party to “expel” any transphobic member.

The group to which Long-Bailey and co are pledging allegiance as they call for supposed transphobic heads to roll is Labour Campaign for Trans Rights, which has produced a 12-point pledge card, which the three candidates have endorsed. If they are elected, Labour members will be obliged to “organise and fight against transphobic organisations such as Woman’s Place UK, LGB Alliance and other trans-exclusionist hate groups”. This hard line has not gone down well with everyone: a social media hashtag, #expelme, went viral in response.

As for calling those who are mobilising to defend women-only spaces and sex-based rights as “hate groups”, neither Woman’s Place nor LGB Alliance preach either violence or death. Rather, they campaign on the basis that sex is biological. A Woman’s Place UK was set up in 2017 to put pressure on the Government to think harder about the impact on women of proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act.

The relationship between sex and gender cuts to the psychosexual bone

Changes currently being consulted on include allowing people to self-identify as a man or a woman without medical approval, which could mean trouble for women-only spaces such as changing rooms, refuges and prisons.

A Woman’s Place responded to the charge of “transphobia” and “hate” last week by reiterating the purpose of the campaign, which is “to ensure that women’s voices are heard and our sex-based rights upheld”.

How hateful. Just like its manifesto: “We are against all forms of discrimination. We believe in the right of everyone to live their lives free from discrimination and harassment.” Off with their heads!

Meanwhile, LGB Alliance – formed last year in protest at LGBT+ campaign group Stonewall’s increasing focus on trans rights – greets visitors to its website with the message: “Hello, let’s talk about the difference between sex and gender.”

Unbelievable!

It, too, presents a cogent position. “We believe that biological sex is observed at birth and not assigned,” and that gays, lesbians and bisexuals are “under threat from concerted attempts to introduce confusion between biological sex and the notion of gender”.

For instance, the alliance defends lesbians who don’t want to engage emotionally and sexually with trans women, notably those that have not had any surgical intervention downstairs. For this, they have been labelled transphobic.

Whether or not you think this position right or woefully wrong, it is still a legitimate position, lawfully and respectfully advanced, and invites serious rebuttal, not insult. Indeed, in response to the accusations last week, the LGB Alliance promised with perfect grace to “keep speaking the truth and remain open to reasonable discussion”.

To see what the Labour Campaign for Trans Rights says of them, you’d think they were swearing to cut up babies and eat them.

There is plenty of nasty thuggishness in the anti-trans camp, too, and they really have no excuse. But as last week showed with sinister clarity, it doesn’t matter who you are or how you argue. If you take a particular view on these matters, you risk being treated like toxic dirt, to be purged, rather than someone to argue with, in good faith, over one of the thorniest issues of our time.

The Labour Campaign for Trans Rights insists “bigotry has no place” in the party. Sadly, what they really seem to mean is that there is no space for a divergence of views in the party. But we knew that already, didn’t we?”

Do the leadership hopefuls not have advisors? Has somebody not taken a look at the responses to Lisa Nandys statement and said hold on this isn't going the way we thought it would go.

It’s too late now Galaxy Urm that figure is at the upper end of government figures which admit that they don’t have robust information. They say the best estimate is 200-500, 000 ( which is quite a wide margin) . As I said above, the number of GRC is very small. I’ve seem guesstimates that 85% of transwomen have fully functioning genitalia. Basically the figures are a mess - apart from GR certificates it’s all guesswork and i wouldn’t trust Stonewall to tell me the time. Either way, there are a lot more natal women.

Even 500,000 is less than 1% of the population.

Now we need to know how many are statistically likely to have a vote in the LP leadership elections... What %age of the population is a LP member or affiliate? What is 0.9% of that figure...

I realise that I'm probably down to the unknowable now. Just musing...

Maizie the last sentence in my last post is relevant isn’t it to your point? My guess would be that LN and RLB have lost far more votes to KS over this matter than trans votes they have gained. Well anyway I hope so.

After posting the below in the wrong thread I will try again hopefully getting it right this time ?:-

I believe that several forum members posting in this thread are forgetting that the Labour Party are not the party of government and in all probability will not be that for at least the next four years. Therefore such issues as transgender etc would be better addressed on a thread that referred to government policy on such minority group issues.

For myself, and I am sure many others which will be polling in this leadership election, the main issue is who of the three remaining candidates would be the leader to bring about the much required unity to the Parliamentary Labour Party and keep its key policies in close alignment to the ambitions of the grassroots membership of the broader Labour Movement in the country.

For myself, I feel that decision has now become much clearer over the last few days.

Anyway, I am off to the office and therefore I will leave you good ladies and gents (if there are any others contributing) to continue to debate the minor issues in this election.

Grandad Thank you so much for reminding me that the LP are not the party of Government. My little pink fluffy girlie brain had got quite muddled up as I was thinking about trans issues whilst ironing DH’s underpants, arranging a bouquet of daffodils and deciding which lipstick to wear in time for DHs return from a day out with the boys. I’ll now try and concentrate ( girlie giggle) and get back to you when I’ve digested this astonishing information.Thank you so much - you men are just so clever and well informed.,

I’m intrigued suziewoozie! What response are you hoping for with your last post?

MaizieD Mon 17-Feb-20 08:40:05

'Even 500,000 is less than 1% of the population.

Now we need to know how many are statistically likely to have a vote in the LP leadership elections... What %age of the population is a LP member or affiliate? What is 0.9% of that figure...'
--
I repeat my previous post :-

' If it is about percentages the votes 'possibly' lost would be higher for Long Bailey and Nandy who have signed the ' Labour Campaign for Trans Rights ' 12 point plan calling for 'Expulsions ' of Labour Members who they deem as being transphobic in my opinion.

Starmer by not signing up to the ' full ' 12 point plan may well have shifted a few undecided into his camp.'
---

Just concentrating on the % of trans population is not rely here nor there.

It is unknown how many trans people or those who agree with the Labour Campaign For Trans Rights are eligible to vote in the Labour Leadership Contest nor how many Labour Members are offended by the Campaign.

The point is which of the Candidates will loose or gain votes by signing or not signing up to the Labour Campaign for Trans Rights.

Just setting the scene and giving the context to a patronising, mansplaining post from a poster who is a fully paid up member of the patriarchy. And who at close of play last week felt he could accuse some of us as ‘ranting’ about this issue when he didn’t know the difference between gay and trans issues. Rather than his addressing that knowledge gap, he appears now to be saying it’s not relevant. Bloody hell. I’ll be back later ( got some more underpants to iron)

Thank you POGs I meant to say in an earlier post this morning that you had made the same point as me earlier and in more detail, This issue is now doing more and more damage to the LP - LN and RLB should hang their heads in shame.

The issue of self-identification does affect an extremely tiny minority but in fact has the potential of affecting the majority, not just natal women, their daughters, granddaughters but indirectly their OH, fathers, grandfathers too.

With so much on the agenda, with the interminable slowness of the LP leadership election, it's worrying that common sense seems to have disappeared from the process and meanwhile Boris forges ahead without a leader of the opposition of any substance to hold the Government to account.

suziewoozie I am with you on this issue.

Grandad

' I believe that several forum members posting in this thread are forgetting that the Labour Party are not the party of government and in all probability will not be that for at least the next four years. Therefore such issues as transgender etc would be better addressed on a thread that referred to government policy on such minority group issues.'
-

I do not agree with you.

The thread is discussing the Labour Leadership candidates and signing the Labour Campaign For Trans Rights is something they have been' proud ' to say they have done at hustings and interviews.

The excuse the Labour Party is not in Government is not the point, that could be used to try and avert away from scrutinising the candidates at every turn.

What is the point of hustings etc. if the candidates are not setting out to the Labour Members and wider electorate who are watching what values they hold, how they want to shape the Labour Party and hopefully enact what they get in to government.

Thanks Call for that and also to POGS again for her latest post. The trans issue transcends traditional party lines.

Labour didn’t win the last election ? No one told me

Grandad

This topic has been discussed now on both the threads and you have not been asked this question. -

Do you believe threatening to ' EXPEL. ' Labour Members for holding an opposing opinion is good for the party?

Now I appreciate this happens with Racist issues such as being an antisemite/islamophobic but they are palpable issues the Trans question is not that clear.

I don't think you're following my train of thought at all. POGS. I was just musing on probabilities in my last post as I am puzzled by the sight of candidates apparently being held in thrall by a very small minority.

The other interesting issue is that of anti-semitism, which, I think, might concern a far larger proportion of their electorate. Though I think that, with Corbyn gone it will sink into relative obscurity as not being needed any longer as a tool to demonise the LP leader with.

I found this a few days ago:

www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2020-02-12/antisemitism-threat-labour/

I'm posting this as something people might be interested in reading, not really as part of this discussion.

It's also in my opinion an indicator of intelligence and critical thinking, why on earth would I believe anything Lisa Nandy has to say on any topic if she believes child rapists should be placed in a womans prison. I would feel the same about a candidate who said the earth was flat or denied climate change.

suziewoozie

Please don't take this the wrong way but I am not ' backing you ' we simply on this subject hold a similar view so no need to thank me .

I initiated the point I believe on the other thread and so my posts are merely my own opinions and by posting I am merely continuing with my own thoughts on the matter, as other posters are doing.

Peace.