J K Rowling has nailed it - re Starmer and the trans issue

LizzieDrip

Why don't people feel "vindictive" towards Conservatives who failed to attempt to change that law.

To which people do you think Willow is referring, LizzieDrip?

Could you provide evidence that people were not enraged about the trans issues in the years before KS became prime minister?

Can you be certain that, had the Supreme Court ruling happened when BJ or RS were prime ministers, there wouldn’t have been the same vindictive outpourings addressed at them?

I know the answer.

Smileless2012

That is incorrect Allira. The Gender Recognition Act of 2004 allowed adults with gender dysphoria to change their legal gender (my emphasis); not their sex because ones sex cannot be changed.

That is why the act was called the Gender Recognition Act.

Apologies. I copied and pasted that from Wikipedia, Smileless which of course is not always factually correct. I wish now I'd added the link because, strangely, between then and now, it seems to have disappeared!

PMQs this afternoon have been lively.

Does the prime minister now accept that when he said that it was the law that trans women were women, he was wrong?"referencing the Labour leader's previous comments.

Starmer didn't directly answer the question, but said he welcomes the Supreme Court's ruling.

Still hedging his bets.

Wyllow Now he has made clear he will follow what has now come into law

It hasn't 'come into law'. As many KCs have stated the Supreme Court don't have the power to change or make laws they can only adjudicate and interpret the law. The Supreme Court has confirmed in the EA it has always been that sex means biological sex otherwise none of the protections made sense. Nothing has changed except we now all know this for a fact. Many organisations and businesses have been breaking the law because they, like too many politicians, let Stonewall indoctrinate them with Stonewall's preferred version. This goes across all parties.

That is incorrect Allira. The Gender Recognition Act of 2004 allowed adults with gender dysphoria to change their legal gender (my emphasis); not their sex because ones sex cannot be changed.

That is why the act was called the Gender Recognition Act.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

James O’Brien. 😂 an annoying twerp, full of himself.

Absolutely 100%

You are right Doodledog, some of my friends who voted labour criticise, labour especially KS & RR.

Maybe Starmer has become a scapegoat for the many. He is the leader of our country so will be the person who is targeted most.
Because I feel he needs to take a share of the blame for this doesn't mean I don't think he is a better PM than we've had for a while.l

Bridie22

I feel vindictive to all who allowed this carnage of biological womens rights, its been a disgrace, forcing people to accept lie after lie.

Agreed. I’m so angry with those in power, Conservative, Labour or Lib Dems who allowed this nonsense to go on for so long.
Thanks to Graham Linehan, JKR, Sex Matters, For Women Scotland and all the women and men who were cancelled, sacked, disciplined for telling the truth.

Why don't people feel "vindictive" towards Conservatives who failed to attempt to change that law

That’s a very good question Wyllow.

I think I know the answer.

Doodledog

Allira

"The Gender Recognition Act 2004[1] is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that allows adults in the United Kingdom who have gender dysphoria to change their legal sex. It came into effect on 4 April 2005."

"Among those who voted against the bill were Ann Widdecombe (who opposed it on religious grounds), Dominic Grieve, Peter Lilley and Andrew Robathan. Among Conservative MPs who supported the bill were Kenneth Clarke, Constitutional Affairs spokesman Tim Boswell, and future speaker John Bercow."

Interesting. I don't think it's about left and right, and never have.

I don't know, but suspect that in 2004 I would have voted for it to go through, as it did seem to be about tolerance and 'being kind' without the benefit of the hindsight we have now.

Who would have envisaged 'chestfeeders' and TRAs screaming death threats at 'TERF's back then? Or compulsory use of pronouns that suggest men are women because they say so?

Yes, it was about tolerance and kindness.

Who would have envisaged 'chestfeeders' and TRAs screaming death threats at 'TERF's back then? Or compulsory use of pronouns that suggest men are women because they say so?

Who'd have thought it would result in such intolerance and hatred coming from TRAs, and intolerance towards women from those in positions of authority such as those in charge of LHAs?

I feel vindictive to all who allowed this carnage of biological womens rights, its been a disgrace, forcing people to accept lie after lie.

But under previous law - ie the GRA - which may conservatives supported at the time - it was law that said transgender women could identify as women gender wise

Why should Starmer have to apologise for following that law before the Supreme Court ruling? he didnt even have to do anything with brining that law into being in 2004?

Now he has made clear he will follow what has now come into law.

Why don't people feel "vindictive" towards Conservatives who failed to attempt to change that law?

Doodledog, I do feel quite vindictive towards Starmer, as our prime minister and leader and also a legal person he should have stood up for the truth from the beginning, and I'm including his pre election time in that criticism.

AGAA4

I criticise Keir Starmer for his stance on this issue not for political reasons as I am not a conservative voter but because he was wrong along with many others.
A lot of damage has been done to women with the blessing of those who believed a man could change sex and become a woman.

He was wrong, but to me it is the fact that he was wrong along with so many others that makes his being singled out for criticism feel vindictive. I'm not saying that you are being vindictive, AGAA4, but making a general point.

P.S. Thanks to JK Rowling and all the brave women who helped this ruling to finally become law, you are all awesome.

I criticise Keir Starmer for his stance on this issue not for political reasons as I am not a conservative voter but because he was wrong along with many others.
A lot of damage has been done to women with the blessing of those who believed a man could change sex and become a woman.

Oh he knew. He just didn’t want to alienate any support.

Being a married man, one would assume he knew what a woman was, please can we have common sense back.

James O’Brien. 😂 an annoying twerp, full of himself.

Pantglas2

Everyone I know, family and friends, have always believed that women don’t have penises. Were we wrong (and Starmer and co right because the Law hadn’t told them otherwise) to have held those beliefs up until last week?

I don’t think so! And as for not seeing it as a win, imagine if it’d gone t’other way…darn right they’d be crowing!

Very, very far from the reality Pantglas as a Labour Party member with a knowledge of the breadth of opinion and the changes of same.

Continuing the present situation was getting intolerable and showing more and more situations into disarray and conflict.

As many have said the consequences of the GRA were completely unforeseen and the consequences have caused many people I know to change their minds.

Including politicians who also have changed their minds because of consequences.

It's the press as far as I can see that have made the stupid question on penis' the "key to it all". Its much more about who can use which spaces, protection of safe spaces, protecting vulnerability whomever experiences it.

It’s reassuring to know that our Prime Minister now believes that a woman does not have a penis even if he wasn’t sure before the Supreme Courts unanimous judgement that backed the biological definition of a woman. He said that it backs up his firm belief that a woman is a ‘adult human female’ and that he was pleased about the ruling, hmm.

nanna8

Didn’t you know that anyone who criticises Starmer is extreme right wing? That is what they want you to think. Must be a whole sh3tload of extreme right wingers there.

I've often wondered where you get your ideas about the UK, nanna8, but the idea that only extreme right wingers criticise Starmer is preposterous.

This whole left-wing right-wing thing is just not pertinent to most people who would probably categorise themselves as either left of centre or left-leaning or right of centre or right-leaning. None of which means they agree with every single policy or statement issued by their fellows on that side. That was the outlandish accusation made by James O'Brien, that if you supported the 'sex is biological and immutable' verdict you were somehow on Team Trump 🙄🙄 but then he is a sandwich short of a picnic on many issues.

Didn’t you know that anyone who criticises Starmer is extreme right wing? That is what they want you to think. Must be a whole sh3tload of extreme right wingers there.