Mollygo
What’s a non-male?
A clownfish, maybe.
Good Morning Friday 8th May 2026
I’m a Pear/Apple - Part 5. Still going!!
What do you think animals think about sharing the planet with humans
Gransnet forums
News & politics
Is the LP changing its stance on 'gender'?
(394 Posts)I've thought for a while that the worm was turning when it comes to 'trans' issues. It is finally getting through that support for self-id is misogynistic and that gender-criticism is not the same as transphobia. Slowly but surely, court cases and policy changes are moving towards (to my mind) a more sensible approach.
Ironically for many women I know who are broadly left-wing, it has been the Tories who have caught on to this first, and it's interesting that at least two of the leadership candidates have mentioned 'gender politics' or 'culture wars' in their campaigns. Meanwhile, the LP has been woefully behind the times, with idiotic comments about men having cervixes and how transpeople are the most marginalised group in society.
But now it appears that they realise that they are behind the curve, and that many feminists and female-supporting men will struggle to vote for them - or maybe it's that they realise that it's becoming more acceptable to speak against the tyranny, and they are now saying what they really think. Either way (and I speak as a member of the LP) it's not a good look, but it's a better look than the craven adherence to Stonewall's No Debate mantra that we've seen so far.
This is from James Kirkup in the Spectator and for those who don't like links the text is at the bottom of the post.
It's probably obvious that I would be delighted if the LP did a U -turn on this. I'm not delighted at the display of what I see as cowardice that has held sway for so long, but it will be such a relief to be able to vote for the party whose policies are closer to my heart than any of the others without fearing that by doing so I am betraying my daughter and future generations of women.
What do others think? Am I being naively optimistic? Will the Lib Dems, the Greens and SNP rethink their ideas ahead of the GE? Will any of it make a difference to how you vote, or do you think that it isn't important compared to other issues?
Here is the text of the Spectator article:
Amid the noise of the Tory leadership fight, some significant comments in the papers could be missed today. Here’s the quote, from a Sunday Times interview with an intelligent, ambitious female politician in her forties:
“Biology is important. A woman is somebody with a biology that is different from a man’s biology. We’re seeing in sport sensible decisions being made about who cannot compete in certain cases."
Could it reflect a new approach to trans issues from the Labour leadership?
She says she would ‘have a problem’ with someone with male genitals identifying as a woman and using a female changing space, and isn’t entirely sold on the use of gender pronouns. ‘You don’t have to say to someone, “Shall I call you he or she?” – it’s pretty obvious. But there are also difficult cases of somebody who is born as one sex and defines as another. I wouldn’t want to deny their right to define themselves in the way they want to be defined.’
Even by the standards of recent days, that’s pretty punchy. In particular that line on rejecting pronouns because ‘it’s pretty obvious’ strikes me as potentially controversial. I certainly know people and groups who would find that offensive. No candidate in the Tory race has thus been so outspoken on sex and gender. So are those quotes above yet another Conservative attempt to stoke a culture war?
That phrase has been used a lot recently, generally with disapproval and often by people keen to dismiss the concerns that some women raise about the impact of trans-rights policies on their rights and standing. And framing women’s concerns as the product of right-wing, social conservative politics makes them easier for lots of people in politics and the media to ignore and denigrate those concerns as marginal and ideological.
Of course, there’s nothing illegitimate about being either right-wing or socially conservative (I’m neither) but in much of our public discourse, those things are routinely denigrated, put beyond the pale of acceptability. So it’s significant that the author of those comments above cannot possibly be described as a right-winger or a social conservative. She is Rachel Reeves, Labour’s shadow chancellor.
The fact that Reeves, as smart and decent a politician as you’ll find in the Commons today, has said these things could have many implications. Could it strain Labour unity? It’s pretty hard to reconcile those comments with the position of some of her frontbench colleagues.
Could it reflect a new approach to trans issues from the Labour leadership? Reeves is today taking a much clearer line than Sir Keir Starmer, who has been more equivocal. I don’t know the answer to those questions, which can wait for another day.
My point here today is simpler. Rachel Reeves, the Labour shadow chancellor, has backed banning transwomen from women’s sport and excluding them from women’s spaces. And she’s rejected using gendered pronouns. By doing so, Reeves has provided yet more evidence to prove that concerns about trans rights policies and their impact on women’s rights are not right-wing or conservative. Nor are they marginal or ideological.
James Kirkup
Glorianny, Doodledog and Galaxy have put it very well.
Your comments seem to be unrelated to the article I posted.
The article, as you'll have read, is saying that young children are being thought to be trans because of their not conforming to current sex-role stereotypes, whereas it's possible they could be gay.
(Perhaps you've heard that Tavistock medics had an unpleasant 'joke' about how they 'trans the gay away'.)
As that article seemed to be what spurred you into the unrelated comments about gay white men, I hoped you might have a view on its actual content.
That the riots had already started when they arrived. And that it was a lesbian who was at the forefront, she often gets written out of the accounts although that seems to have been rectified lately.
Glorianny
Galaxy
Crikey. I dont know how to respond to that really.
Well you could just try to appreciate that the Stonewall riots long publicised as a gay protest had transgender individuals at the forefront. They then called themselves transvestites. And that some gay men even then tried to keep them separate. So there is nothing new about the split. The divide has existed for ages.
What is your point here?
Stonewall, the UK gay pressure group was named after riots in the US that happened 20 years before it (the pressure group) was formed.
Whether or not people in the US at the time (1969 - 53 years ago!) felt that trans and gay people had common interests is, surely, neither here nor there? It certainly has nothing to do with whether or not the LP is changing its stance on 'gender' issues.
You do know that Marsha Johnston was really clear that they were miles away at the time.
Galaxy
Crikey. I dont know how to respond to that really.
Well you could just try to appreciate that the Stonewall riots long publicised as a gay protest had transgender individuals at the forefront. They then called themselves transvestites. And that some gay men even then tried to keep them separate. So there is nothing new about the split. The divide has existed for ages.
What’s a non-male?
Crikey. I dont know how to respond to that really.
Glorianny
FarNorth
Do you have any comment about the content of the article Glorianny?
The one by gay man Dennis Kavanagh.
Here is the link again.
grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-death-of-stonewallI read it FarNorth and as I said some people seem to have little knowledge about the origins of the word and its links , and indeed reliance on trans individuals and queens, who were responsible for leading the Stonewall riots. It seems to me rather petty and insulting to then allege such people are taking over anything. It was their fight from the start and gay white men tried to keep them separate.
Did you read about Marsha Johnston and Sylvia Rivera?
FarNorth
Do you have any comment about the content of the article Glorianny?
The one by gay man Dennis Kavanagh.
Here is the link again.
grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-death-of-stonewall
I read it FarNorth and as I said some people seem to have little knowledge about the origins of the word and its links , and indeed reliance on trans individuals and queens, who were responsible for leading the Stonewall riots. It seems to me rather petty and insulting to then allege such people are taking over anything. It was their fight from the start and gay white men tried to keep them separate.
Do you have any comment about the content of the article Glorianny?
The one by gay man Dennis Kavanagh.
Here is the link again.
grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-death-of-stonewall
I think it's quite a complex debate in terms of bodily autonomy and I think we need much better information to make those decisions. The evidence with regard to transitioning is not really very detailed, jone of the many concerns raised about the tavistock for example, issues with little long term follow up etc.
I genuinely struggle to compare the issues around transition with abortion. The physical changes caused by transition are ever present. Many women wish they hadn’t been faced with the decision to have an abortion but the research I’ve seen, says most feel relieved they did.
I have absolutely no doubt that there will be people who regret transitioning just as there are people who regret all sorts of other things, including radical surgery to change the way they look. Perhaps as things develop there will be better ways of identifying such people but ultimately the decision to have treatment rests with the individual. I'd draw a parallel with abortion, which many women regret but still would take the same path. Does their regret mean they should have had more support? Or is it their body and their responsibility?
Have you any comment on the content of the article Glorianny?
I think it is likely to be the case for at least some people, although I am also not a psychologist.
Sinead Watson, @ImWatson91 on twitter, says similar things about her own experience of being a transman and then detransitioning.
She feels that there was very little interest in helping her decide if transitioning was really the right path for her. At the time, she was happy that things happened quite quickly and she went onto testosterone and also had a mastectomy.
FarNorth
Have you any comment on the content of the article Glorianny?
I think so few people now realise that the Stonewall riots in New York after which this charity is named were led by trans people and queens and were not the property of, or even led by, gay men.
There's a little about these people and the discrimination white gay men practised here.
www.si.edu/stories/marsha-johnson-sylvia-rivera-and-history-pride-month
FarNorth
Yes.
She had also realised that she still had mental health problems to deal with, caused by her difficult earlier years, and that transitioning hadn't made them vanish.
Well it wouldn't make them vanish, would it?
I hesitate to say this, as I am not a psychologist, but I wonder whether it is MH problems that make people feel the need to start again in a new persona in the first place, and also what contributes to feelings of being 'the most marginalised group in society'?
Before anyone pounces, I am not saying that this is the case - as I say, I am entirely unqualified to do so - but simply suggesting it as a possibility - what do others think?
Yes.
She had also realised that she still had mental health problems to deal with, caused by her difficult earlier years, and that transitioning hadn't made them vanish.
Just watched that link. The detransitioner regretted doing that even though she hadn’t started till late teens/early twenties and still didn’t realise the impact it might have further on in life but some are still advocating earlier treatment.
She was talking about it in terms of “if it just stops one”.
Transition-if that’s what you’re desperate for then go for it, but more awareness of how it might affect you and how permanent it is, could help to make a more informed decision.
This is a video of a detransitioned transman talking with T T Exulansic.
(27 mins)
odysee.com/@Exulansic:d/ravens-detransition-story-i-regret-my-top-surgery:7?r=CceWWJ3H1pQejCxqniuGfNHkUCpNTBCh
Have you any comment on the content of the article Glorianny?
And your point is Glorianny? That was a wonderful little rant you had there. Do you think gay men and trans are the same?
I think ‘condescending’ covers it pretty well 
. It’s also generalising wildly, and pretty offensive to gay men of any skin tone who did or do not discriminate. Plus ca change, though.
I think those are very broad statements about gay men to be honest, and I suspect there might be a word similar to mansplaining for white?
Women explaining gay mens experience.
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »