The Forde Report what should happen now?

Hmm...

Did Callaghan support the strikes when the municipal workers were on strike during the 'winter of discontent'?

You're reading an awful lot into the banning of shadow cabinet members from joining picket lines, Glorianny

Casdon

Glorianny

But if you don't support strike action isn't it logical that you would legislate to stop them?
You do wonder who Starmer will be left with

? read your last sentence again Glorianny.
I didn’t think you thought he’d be left at all!

Well of course he isn't! Whatever was I thinking of?
Left? Right? What a disgrace, for he may grow straight up and fall flat on his face

Glorianny

But if you don't support strike action isn't it logical that you would legislate to stop them?
You do wonder who Starmer will be left with

? read your last sentence again Glorianny.
I didn’t think you thought he’d be left at all!

But if you don't support strike action isn't it logical that you would legislate to stop them?
You do wonder who Starmer will be left with

Ilovecheese

Now Keir Starmer has sacked Sam Tarry from the front bench because he showed support for strikers.
I wonder, will he support Liz Truss when she tries to remove any right to strike at all?

Sam Tarry knew exactly what he was doing and what Starmer's instructions to his shadow cabinet were. Tarry even reiterated that if Labour were in government they'd be talking to the unions. That's the official party line.

I actually thought Tarry gave a good interview and looks like someone with a future in government if his current lapse is forgiven.

I think that suggesting that Starmer would support Liz Truss in removing the right to strike is taking the anti Starmer rhetoric a bit too far...

Now Keir Starmer has sacked Sam Tarry from the front bench because he showed support for strikers.
I wonder, will he support Liz Truss when she tries to remove any right to strike at all?

Glorianny, there's not much point in engaging someone on a rant in a reasonable discussion either as, in that mood, they are not open to other suggestions no matter how valid.
I don't see Keir as a 'shrinking violet'. In situations such as this, it is best to allow the officials to deal with it if they deem it appropriate, so that others can get a chance to speak. Still, it amused you and Grany so served some purpose.

MargotLedbetter

Glorianny

MargotLedbetter

Galaxy

Er anyone who has spent any time in the Labour Party at branch or CLP level knows that there is some real misogyny present. Crikey I could quote some corkers at local level from the last couple of weeks alone. It's quite tiring. It would be quite difficult for that not to influence policy in some ways, I suspect their failure to have a female leader compared to other parties is a symptom of that. Recognising those issues doesnt mean you are a Tory, you just keep wading through it.

Yes, you just keep soldiering on and grumbling and wondering why you bother, but hanging in there out of principle. So many women, particularly those of us chucked out for signing the Women's Declaration, carry on in state of despair.

When Labour states that it intends to support self-ID, that's misogynistic. It places the interests of 1% of the population above the interests of 51%. When Angela Rayner says TWAW and she and Starmer and Lammy and Creasy express support for Stonewall, they express support for a homophobic organisation that says that LGB relationships are same-gender relationships and not same-sex relationships. Nancy Kelley, head of Stonewall, has described lesbians who won't consider having relationships with self identifying lesbians with penises as being like racists refusing to consider a partner of a different culture. If you don't realise how homophobic that is I don't know what to say.

And as Galaxy says, that's before you get to the excruciating sexism expressed in practically every CLP and council meeting. Add to that the embarrassment of knowing that the Tories are going to choose either a woman or a person of colour to lead their party, while the progressive party has only ever been led by white men. It's nothing to be proud of, is it?

I would disagree with you on many of these points particularly the argument that it is wrong to say people should consider carefully if they are ruling out relationships with certain people. I always think turn that argument on its head. If you are heterosexual would you rule out ever having a relationship with a person of the same sex? And if you say "Yes" are you homophobic?
Self ID will happen. It is happening. Only the legal ramifications need sorting out.
As I said before for someone who claims to support labour policies you sure hate them.

Telling lesbians they should include self ID'd male transbians in their dating pool is homophobic. Lesbians are same-sex identified. I would say you're homophobic. All the people like you, are the reason why, unless things change, I will spoil my vote at the next GE.

What is the point of spoiling your vote?

Devorgilla

I don't think Keir looked shifty. I think he looked like any of us would if subjected to such a verbal rant. At least he didn't disappear into a fridge or behind a glass door. Perhaps if Audrey had sat down and discussed the issues with him she would understand his reasoning. I rather suspect he has met much more aggression during his law years.

Well he was sitting at a table trapped in by Audrey, the woman sitting next to him and security-nowhere to disappear to!
(I suppose he could have gone under the table!)
No point in discussing anything with someone who says one thing and does another.

I don't think Keir looked shifty. I think he looked like any of us would if subjected to such a verbal rant. At least he didn't disappear into a fridge or behind a glass door. Perhaps if Audrey had sat down and discussed the issues with him she would understand his reasoning. I rather suspect he has met much more aggression during his law years.

You didn't answer my question I note. If someone who is heterosexual is asked would they rule out ever having a relationship with a person of the same sex and they answer "Yes" are they homophobic?
I didn't tell lesbians anything. I wouldn't stop anyone voicing their views about dating, nor would I expect anyone to follow what they said.
I wonder why you feel you (or anyone else) has the right to police speech?
It's so easy to blame someone else for your decisions isn't it?
Incidentally please tell my gay and lesbian friends, my trans friends and all the lovely people I recently met at a Vogue Ball I'm homophobic, they'd collapse laughing.

Glorianny

MargotLedbetter

Galaxy

Er anyone who has spent any time in the Labour Party at branch or CLP level knows that there is some real misogyny present. Crikey I could quote some corkers at local level from the last couple of weeks alone. It's quite tiring. It would be quite difficult for that not to influence policy in some ways, I suspect their failure to have a female leader compared to other parties is a symptom of that. Recognising those issues doesnt mean you are a Tory, you just keep wading through it.

Yes, you just keep soldiering on and grumbling and wondering why you bother, but hanging in there out of principle. So many women, particularly those of us chucked out for signing the Women's Declaration, carry on in state of despair.

When Labour states that it intends to support self-ID, that's misogynistic. It places the interests of 1% of the population above the interests of 51%. When Angela Rayner says TWAW and she and Starmer and Lammy and Creasy express support for Stonewall, they express support for a homophobic organisation that says that LGB relationships are same-gender relationships and not same-sex relationships. Nancy Kelley, head of Stonewall, has described lesbians who won't consider having relationships with self identifying lesbians with penises as being like racists refusing to consider a partner of a different culture. If you don't realise how homophobic that is I don't know what to say.

And as Galaxy says, that's before you get to the excruciating sexism expressed in practically every CLP and council meeting. Add to that the embarrassment of knowing that the Tories are going to choose either a woman or a person of colour to lead their party, while the progressive party has only ever been led by white men. It's nothing to be proud of, is it?

I would disagree with you on many of these points particularly the argument that it is wrong to say people should consider carefully if they are ruling out relationships with certain people. I always think turn that argument on its head. If you are heterosexual would you rule out ever having a relationship with a person of the same sex? And if you say "Yes" are you homophobic?
Self ID will happen. It is happening. Only the legal ramifications need sorting out.
As I said before for someone who claims to support labour policies you sure hate them.

Telling lesbians they should include self ID'd male transbians in their dating pool is homophobic. Lesbians are same-sex identified. I would say you're homophobic. All the people like you, are the reason why, unless things change, I will spoil my vote at the next GE.

Grany

Have you seen tis video of Audrey giving Starmer a price of her mind, in Liverpool?

m.youtube.com/watch?v=FdP8ki9RMOk

OMG she's soo good!! And Starmer looks so shifty! Thanks Grany she's made my day. Bolshie women rule!!!!

I think I am right in saying that, as the Labour Party in Parliament has reached 50% each approximately of male/female MPs, it is no longer as necessary to allocate all-women selection to the same extent. If these constituencies became 100% women only for-political-ever, then you deny men the right to represent the community. It is a difficult one as it relies on people making a fair selection for the best candidate regardless of all else except their competence to do the job.

Have you seen tis video of Audrey giving Starmer a price of her mind, in Liverpool?

m.youtube.com/watch?v=FdP8ki9RMOk

MargotLedbetter

Galaxy

Er anyone who has spent any time in the Labour Party at branch or CLP level knows that there is some real misogyny present. Crikey I could quote some corkers at local level from the last couple of weeks alone. It's quite tiring. It would be quite difficult for that not to influence policy in some ways, I suspect their failure to have a female leader compared to other parties is a symptom of that. Recognising those issues doesnt mean you are a Tory, you just keep wading through it.

Yes, you just keep soldiering on and grumbling and wondering why you bother, but hanging in there out of principle. So many women, particularly those of us chucked out for signing the Women's Declaration, carry on in state of despair.

When Labour states that it intends to support self-ID, that's misogynistic. It places the interests of 1% of the population above the interests of 51%. When Angela Rayner says TWAW and she and Starmer and Lammy and Creasy express support for Stonewall, they express support for a homophobic organisation that says that LGB relationships are same-gender relationships and not same-sex relationships. Nancy Kelley, head of Stonewall, has described lesbians who won't consider having relationships with self identifying lesbians with penises as being like racists refusing to consider a partner of a different culture. If you don't realise how homophobic that is I don't know what to say.

And as Galaxy says, that's before you get to the excruciating sexism expressed in practically every CLP and council meeting. Add to that the embarrassment of knowing that the Tories are going to choose either a woman or a person of colour to lead their party, while the progressive party has only ever been led by white men. It's nothing to be proud of, is it?

I would disagree with you on many of these points particularly the argument that it is wrong to say people should consider carefully if they are ruling out relationships with certain people. I always think turn that argument on its head. If you are heterosexual would you rule out ever having a relationship with a person of the same sex? And if you say "Yes" are you homophobic?
Self ID will happen. It is happening. Only the legal ramifications need sorting out.
As I said before for someone who claims to support labour policies you sure hate them.

I find what has happened with the Tories leadership hopefuls very interesting as it was a diverse field. Sorry for my ignorance do the Tories do quotas? My gut feeling is that for the Tory party if you are a Tory then you are 'one of us' which might lead to the diversotyat high level. Although Labour has a more even balance of male/female MPs I think.

Galaxy

Er anyone who has spent any time in the Labour Party at branch or CLP level knows that there is some real misogyny present. Crikey I could quote some corkers at local level from the last couple of weeks alone. It's quite tiring. It would be quite difficult for that not to influence policy in some ways, I suspect their failure to have a female leader compared to other parties is a symptom of that. Recognising those issues doesnt mean you are a Tory, you just keep wading through it.

Yes, you just keep soldiering on and grumbling and wondering why you bother, but hanging in there out of principle. So many women, particularly those of us chucked out for signing the Women's Declaration, carry on in state of despair.

When Labour states that it intends to support self-ID, that's misogynistic. It places the interests of 1% of the population above the interests of 51%. When Angela Rayner says TWAW and she and Starmer and Lammy and Creasy express support for Stonewall, they express support for a homophobic organisation that says that LGB relationships are same-gender relationships and not same-sex relationships. Nancy Kelley, head of Stonewall, has described lesbians who won't consider having relationships with self identifying lesbians with penises as being like racists refusing to consider a partner of a different culture. If you don't realise how homophobic that is I don't know what to say.

And as Galaxy says, that's before you get to the excruciating sexism expressed in practically every CLP and council meeting. Add to that the embarrassment of knowing that the Tories are going to choose either a woman or a person of colour to lead their party, while the progressive party has only ever been led by white men. It's nothing to be proud of, is it?

Starmer is not on your side. He is not for nationalising the NHS (or rail mail or energy) keeping expensive private providers. Dr Bob Gill says he won the leadership fraudulently
Video

m.youtube.com/watch?v=LazWllDU-Yg

Well yes but we would disagree on whether they were misogyny or not so I am not sure we should rehash that.
Separately I suppose I think the quota system which is obsessed about endlessly at local level, helps to hide the actual sexism, I.e we cant be sexist because look we have these posts which must be filled by women.

Galaxy

Er anyone who has spent any time in the Labour Party at branch or CLP level knows that there is some real misogyny present. Crikey I could quote some corkers at local level from the last couple of weeks alone. It's quite tiring. It would be quite difficult for that not to influence policy in some ways, I suspect their failure to have a female leader compared to other parties is a symptom of that. Recognising those issues doesnt mean you are a Tory, you just keep wading through it.

GalaxyI am well aware that misogyny still exists. The question I asked was about policies which are misogynistic and homophobic. The presence of such people has as far as I know always been challenged by others. They are not policies!
Do you know of any misogynistic or homophobic policies?

Who suggested a leadership election, I didn't, but I also feel that with the factional wars going on, anything could happen.

Er anyone who has spent any time in the Labour Party at branch or CLP level knows that there is some real misogyny present. Crikey I could quote some corkers at local level from the last couple of weeks alone. It's quite tiring. It would be quite difficult for that not to influence policy in some ways, I suspect their failure to have a female leader compared to other parties is a symptom of that. Recognising those issues doesnt mean you are a Tory, you just keep wading through it.

MargotLedbetter

It doesn't really matter what he thinks, it's what his party's policy is — and there's no doubt it's misogynistic and homophobic. I have LGB friends who've voted Labour all their lives but will vote Tory to keep Labour out.

Golly for someone who claims to be labour through and through you really hate them don't you? Would you like to post a mysoginistic or homophobic policy? Or is it just the usual "Starmer doesn't know what a woman is". In my view any sensible politician is best adopting the Thomas Moore strategy on this just now and staying silent.

How long can Keir Starmer stay as leader though, if he doesn't do what he promised and bring the party together instead of driving it further apart.

And is the 21st century turning out to be all that great shakes for working people? Zero hours contracts, bogus self employment, fire and rehire etc.