Trans women have a cervix according to David Lammy.

Freya5

If I am interpreting your comment correctly, then innuendo aimed at your grandson regardless of what it is implying, is obviously going to be unpleasant because it's nearly always disparaging. And meant to be.

So your response is quite normal and doesn't mean you are 'phobic' about anything. Who doesn't want to protect their grandchildren from sly insinuations!

Unfortunately Lammy and Starmer are not alone in their belief in the current 'new speak'. But I think the latter has learned a lesson, so to speak.

I'm hoping that eventually a 'discussion' can be had in a more temperate climate. People have every right to identify as they wish and live their lives accordingly and we, as a society, should be mature enough to live-and-let-live. But if one demographic wants to impose on another and demands that other gives up its rights to accommodate theirs, then there will be problems. And that's where we're at, it seems, at the moment.

But those activists making those demands are a small minority, albeit a very shouty and vocal one.

I wonder how this will all pan out in the next decade or so.

I hope you're right Dickens that Lammy has learned a lesson but I do find it extremely worrying that Starmer who is more than likely to become our next PM, flip flops around such an important issue.

Smileless2012
It’s a pity I can’t find the link to KS not managing to explain to a questioner how he will keep women (AHF) safe.
If the matter wasn’t so serious it was funny.

Smileless2012

I hope you're right Dickens that Lammy has learned a lesson but I do find it extremely worrying that Starmer who is more than likely to become our next PM, flip flops around such an important issue.

... me, too.

Starmer flips and flops I think because he's trying to appease both women and the trans community.

And not impressing either.

As Tony Blair said, "I don’t know how politics got itself into this muddle..."

He doesn't seem to realise that he isn't appeasing women, he's alienating them which for an intelligent person is rather disconcerting to say the least.

It seems impossible to watch any political debate without the issue of trans people being raised and debated. Open any newspaper and the trans lobby are in full flow.
The proportion of people who identify as trans is evidently female (0.52%) and male (0.56%) It is baffling that such a tiny proportion of the population appears to be relentlessly at the forefront, able to create such pressure on politicians, the media, and have such an effect on the way we live.

It's baffling and frightening LovesBach which is why IMO politicians need to leave the electorate in no doubt as to where they stand on the issue.

Thanks for the info, Merion

I've glanced at this thread but not followed it all.
I'm really fed up of seeing news reports about male criminals which report them as 'she'.
And sports events for girls & women being won by boys & men, and hailed as if it's something wonderful.

Yes, I've heard Starmer say he'll protect single-sex places, then ramble on about a tiny minority of unhappy people & making it easier to get a gender recognition certificate.
That suggests he wants to include the unhappy men in 'single-sex'.

I wonder how he'll protect single-sex spaces if he intends to make it easier to get a gender recognition certificate .

Perhaps a two-tier system where there is a certificate that allows transgender people to change their sex on their birth certificate / get married as their preferred sex, but doesn't allow access to single sex spaces like women's prisons & refuges unless they've had gender realignment surgery? & I wonder if transpeople living as their preferred sex but not choosing / still waiting for surgery could use disabled person toilets? As they are usually single cubicle & safely unisex.

Starmer won’t protect females. If males have a GRC, they can turn up even if you request a female attendant, and women who are upset by that will face accusations of homophobia.

This is what you will get as a consequence of a Labour government.

i was in a hosp recently, the nurse told me to use the men's loo as the women's was unavailable.
there was only one of each, in it's own room.
inside the men's loo was a receptacle labelled,
'san products only'.
before reading/hearing about all this, i would have assumed a cleaner had put it back in the wrong loo. . .

Welbeck the loo what ever it says would be for use by all patients on that particular ward if needs be, I mean it’s not as though there would be a urinal stall in there is it?
And the “receptacle” could be for incontinence products as well so not in the wrong place.

Mollygo

Starmer won’t protect females. If males have a GRC, they can turn up even if you request a female attendant, and women who are upset by that will face accusations of homophobia.

What has Sunak done to water down the TRA hold on politics?

I'm bored with party sniping politics on here, but that really can't go unchallenged. I am the first to agree that the LP's stance on gender politics leaves a lot to be desired, but things have got worse and worse over the past 14 years during which time many seem to forget that the Tories have been in charge. They have done the square root of bugger all to turn back the tide, but at the last minute have realised that many feminists are letting our pretty little heads be turned by it all and have started asking awkward questions of senior LP people. I'm not fooled by this at all.

valdali

Perhaps a two-tier system where there is a certificate that allows transgender people to change their sex on their birth certificate / get married as their preferred sex, but doesn't allow access to single sex spaces like women's prisons & refuges unless they've had gender realignment surgery? & I wonder if transpeople living as their preferred sex but not choosing / still waiting for surgery could use disabled person toilets? As they are usually single cubicle & safely unisex.

No-one can change sex.

They can choose to change gender, but cannot change sex.

I don’t see it as sniping, when you look at what parties say about themselves.
KS wants to make it easier to get a GRC, without considering the impact on females.
Other parties, which believe you can change sex and produce long speeches about protecting trans rights without being able or willing to produce the same reassurance to females is worrying.
Do I think Conservatives have got everything in this area right? No.

That is worry with Labour - at times, some of them think that you can change sex - you can’t.

People can identify as what they like, but they don’t change sex, any more than someone identifying as a horse can change species.

Hopefully, when in power, Labour will take a sensible and pragmatic approach to all this. It’s been hard to know what Starmer really wants/thinks.

It's hard to know if Starmer knows what he really wants/thinks.

Emily Pankhurst and another lady died for women’s right and their fellow females went through it.

David lammy and his crew need help
Sorry but this world is getting messed right up ( there is another word for messed ) and it feels like a train running and not stopping into disaster
Trans gender people yes absolutely deserve respect and we deserve safe space as biologically born women. End of .. non negotiable

Mollygo

I don’t see it as sniping, when you look at what parties say about themselves.
KS wants to make it easier to get a GRC, without considering the impact on females.
Other parties, which believe you can change sex and produce long speeches about protecting trans rights without being able or willing to produce the same reassurance to females is worrying.
Do I think Conservatives have got everything in this area right? No.

I'm not disagreeing with women needing safe (ie single sex) spaces. I have said more than once that I am unhappy with the LP's handling of the issue, but I don't see the Conservatives as having handled it well either, and they have been the ones in power for 14 years, during which time the issue has gone from a minority one to impinging on so many areas for women. They could have put the brakes on, but they chose not to, and are only now starting to roll back on policies when they sniff an election opportunity.

Dragging up something (moronic as it was) that David Lammy said years ago, and doing it just before a GE snacks of propaganda and desperation, yet I've seen threads about it all over social media in the last few days. Why do it, and why keep pointing to the LP if not to snipe?