Labour’s policy on the Trans issue

It does but as always the devil is in the detail. I’d like to see those “biological women only” spaces specified before I believe they have a real grasp of the issues and will “defend” those spaces. it rather meaningless.

“Reasonable “ is a subjective concept.

They've realied there's an election next year.

Callistemon21

They've realied there's an election next year.

Yes as have all the parties.

Just seen my typo!!

But whilst this is rather sketchy in the detail, it does seem indicate they have realised that many electors were questioning some of the recent statements made by Starmer and others on Trans issues which could have been vote losers.

That is what I think.

I will give Ms. Dodds the benefit of the doubt, but I I imagine she has realised that half the population are born as women and alienating them is not a good political strategy.

What is the agreed Tory stance on this?

My default stance tends to be ‘cautiously optimistic’, and that’s how I feel about this. I have never fully believed that senior Labour figures don’t know what a woman is, or think that men can have cervixes - they have been worried about alienating the vocal minority, but now the election is getting closer they realise that they can’t carry on as they are. It’s not a good look really, but I can understand why they have taken a pragmatic approach.

Well. They seem to be dropping the self-identify idea.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66299705

Doodledog

My default stance tends to be ‘cautiously optimistic’, and that’s how I feel about this. I have never fully believed that senior Labour figures don’t know what a woman is, or think that men can have cervixes - they have been worried about alienating the vocal minority, but now the election is getting closer they realise that they can’t carry on as they are. It’s not a good look really, but I can understand why they have taken a pragmatic approach.

Transmen can have cervixes.

Indeed. Transmen can have cervixes (cerviii?)

Transwomen can have penises.

Because that is who they are transmen and *transwomen”.

Annaliese Dodds' article seemed sensible to me. She seemed to have a proper grasp of what a lot of other women are thinking (not surprising, as she is one...).

Labour will defend those spaces, providing legal clarity for the providers of single-sex services.
My concern is that their “defence” will be expressed in the same way as has been expressed elsewhere, i.e. it would be up to females to complain when males are in those female single sex places.

I think they talk with forked tongue. 😡

Lathyrus

Indeed. Transmen can have cervixes (cerviii?)

Transwomen can have penises.

Because that is who they are transmen and *transwomen”.

Exactly. As I’m sure you know, Glorianny.

They can promise all they want, but, wait until they get into power and certain factions threaten not to support them unless they do as they dictate.

Mollygo

^Labour will defend those spaces, providing legal clarity for the providers of single-sex services.^
My concern is that their “defence” will be expressed in the same way as has been expressed elsewhere, i.e. it would be up to females to complain when males are in those female single sex places.

Yes, the devil is always in the detail. I think they are treading a fine line between sounding sensible to feminists and accommodating to the trans lobby. It’s tricky.

I also note that they want to ‘simplify’ getting a GRC by changing from needing a panel to having one doctor sign it off. Again - it seems sensible, but will these doctors be specially trained and neutral, or will there be some sort of register of sympathetic doctors who will sign off anyone who wants one? Time will tell, but it seems that the tide is turning.

MerylStreep

I think they talk with forked tongue. 😡

Do you think they will change tack if they get in?

Let me think 🤔
Ok, I’ve thought. Yes yes yes.

That’s the big question Callistemon. They have tried to appease the trans lobby for so long that it’s hard to know what they actually think. Now the focus groups will have shown how many women feel disenfranchised by the antifeminism they have shifted a bit.

I am sticking with cautious optimism as the alternative is the Tories, who aren’t feminist either, but are also detrimental to the poor, the sick and to the country as a whole.

MerylStreep

Let me think 🤔
Ok, I’ve thought. Yes yes yes.

😂

MerylStreep

They can promise all they want, but, wait until they get into power and certain factions threaten not to support them unless they do as they dictate.

That is what concerns me, and will do many I would think. Any faction, ie that threatens not to support any Government should be ignored. Minority threats cannot be allowed, nor should they, to hold sway over any elected Government.

I agree, freya. But the trans lobby is everywhere - or was, and could have made it difficult for Labour to get elected. Many people believed that JKR was transphobic, for example, but couldn’t explain why. Councils and universities were worried about losing Diversity Champion status.

More people are waking up to it now though, and cutting ties.

It is a shocking thing that a politician of whatever party is nervous about expressing beliefs on the issues of sex and gender, because of the backlash that will follow.

Having seen the idiotic behaviour of Alison Rose with regard to gender identification in NatWest Banks, anything is possible.