Author Topic: Trans Rights and the Labour Party  (Read 201 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« on: February 14, 2020, 06:17:52 PM »
Couldn’t agree more with this article.  I was supporting Nandy in the leadership election but she’s gone done the wormhole like Wrong Daily now, so Keir it will have to be.   


Labour’s trans pledge says anyone who disagrees is a bigot
new
There is a bizarre race for ideological purity on the issue of trans rights and it is making many party members uneasy

Janice Turner
Friday February 14 2020, 5.00pm, The Times
Lisa Nandy brands herself as Labour’s truth-speaker. Rational, grounded, fearless of factions, the only leadership candidate prepared to tackle the self-delusion and disconnect which lost four elections, she’d won many prospective votes, including mine. Until Tuesday, when Nandy signed up to a witch-hunt of thousands of (mainly female) party members, including me.

The Labour trans pledge is an astonishingly totalitarian document. It not only demands signatories “accept there is no material conflict between trans rights and women’s rights” but says anyone who disagrees is a bigot. It names Woman’s Place UK and the LGB Alliance as “hate groups” whose supporters are transphobic and must therefore be expelled. Even though these were set up chiefly to defend women’s single-sex spaces enshrined in Labour’s own 2010 Equality Act and upheld in the party’s 2019 manifesto.

So calm, thoughtful, unite-the-party Lisa Nandy wants to expel supporters of the very platform on which she was just re-elected! Chuck on the pyre life-long trade unionists like NUT president Kiri Tunks and Ruth Serwotka, Corbyn policy chief Lachlan Stuart, ex-MP Laura Pidcock and Stonewall founder Simon Fanshawe. Sprinkle the bonfire with thousands of horrified women members who tweeted, Spartacus-style. #expelme. Shove on top John McDonnell and Andy Burnham, who have both met WPUK and, Lisa, who will be left?

I mention Nandy because although every leadership candidate except Sir Keir Starmer has now signed this pledge, she has doubled down. There are no spaces at all, she said on Radio 4’s Today programme, where male-bodied people should be excluded. She likened the debate over women’s refuges to fights between Eritrean and Ethiopian boys when she worked at a Centrepoint homeless shelter: ie a woman and any male who self-identifies as a woman are materially the same and must be treated as such. From changing rooms to sports to, presumably, female beauticians being compelled to wax — as Canadian trans activist Jessica Yaniv demanded — a trans woman’s testicles.

Nandy is not the first politician who, sucked into the gender vortex, loses all reason. This week Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle confounded biologists by saying that “sex is not binary”. During the election Lib Dem Dr Sarah Wollaston denied that a baby’s biological sex is observed at birth; potential Lib Dem leader Layla Moran believes women can differentiate male predators from self-identified trans women by looking into their souls.
Meanwhile in the US Democratic primaries. Elizabeth Warren, desperate to seduce Bernie Sanders’ supporters, posted her pronouns on her Twitter page, pledged that every trans woman prisoner (regardless of having committed sexual offences) should be relocated to the female estate, and then declared that as US president her education secretary would first be interviewed and approved by a designated “trans child”.

How have LGBT issues, in particular gender self-ID, become such a moral test of politicians in progressive parties? Sociologists speak of how organisations can be overwhelmed by “purity spirals”. This is when a group grades its members by a single value, which has no upper limit or agreed interpretation. Those who seek power must demonstrate their purity in ever more abstruse ways: those judged “impure” are denounced and destroyed.

Both Labour and the US Democrats have several concurrent purity spirals. Members fight to demonstrate their anti-racism by denouncing perceived white supremacy or by supporting no-border immigration policies. A US gay rights purity spiral means that although married to a man, Pete Buttigieg is accused of being “not gay enough” because as a chino-wearing, church-going ex-serviceman his lifestyle apes “heteronormative” society rather than “queer culture”. No matter that he’s bravely challenging prejudices of mainstream US voters for whom he’s too damn gay. Fighting a primary now, Barack Obama would be shredded as not black enough.

But the trans issue — specifically whether gender self-ID should be enshrined in law — is the purity spiral du jour. The Labour trans pledge transformed the leadership election from a civil, even dull contest, in which feminists felt they had a choice, into a grim, least-worst-option scenario. Every candidate has recited the catechism “trans women are women”, leaving members to assess whether they mean it literally, like Nandy, so single-sex exemptions are toast, or as an assertion of existing legal rights of trans women to be recognised as women, in most circumstances, which no one would dispute. This is the position it is hoped that sane lawyer Starmer holds.

So why are they submitting to this test? Because progressive politicians’ fear of being “on the wrong side of history” trumps all sense. Gender self-ID is constantly presented as the new gay rights. Yet gay men and lesbians only demanded to love freely. They did not materially encroach on any other group’s rights. Nor do most trans folk who simply wish to live without discrimination or violence and are horrified by activists who demand in their name that women surrender hard-won rights and safeguards.

Working on the 2019 Labour manifesto, Lachlan Stuart observed that LGBT activists were not “driven by a motivation to improve the quality of life for trans people” such as increased mental and physical health provision, only “to erode or erase the political rights of female people.” Their alarming central goal was to open up all female single-sex spaces to anyone who identified as a woman.

How will voters, who have hitherto been unaware of this arcane debate, feel about a Labour Party fully committed to ending historic safeguards? To a party which believes any male person should be allowed to legally change sex without qualification or checks, leaving women and girls vulnerable yet unable to object? Will Labour leaders pull out of the purity spiral and heed the fears of thousands of women members? Or will they, as that nice Lisa Nandy demands, simply chuck them out?
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Online Eleanor

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2020, 10:30:59 AM »

I have to admit that I don't understand most of what appears to be going on.  But Transgender Men sent to Women's Prisons are committing Sexual Assault.  And Teenaged Girls forced to share changing rooms with Transgender Boys are obviously at risk.  Perhaps we need a Gang Rape Scandal.

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2020, 11:21:44 AM »
Couldn’t agree more with this article.  I was supporting Nandy in the leadership election but she’s gone done the wormhole like Wrong Daily now, so Keir it will have to be.   


Labour’s trans pledge says anyone who disagrees is a bigot
new
There is a bizarre race for ideological purity on the issue of trans rights and it is making many party members uneasy

Janice Turner
Friday February 14 2020, 5.00pm, The Times
Lisa Nandy brands herself as Labour’s truth-speaker. Rational, grounded, fearless of factions, the only leadership candidate prepared to tackle the self-delusion and disconnect which lost four elections, she’d won many prospective votes, including mine. Until Tuesday, when Nandy signed up to a witch-hunt of thousands of (mainly female) party members, including me.

The Labour trans pledge is an astonishingly totalitarian document. It not only demands signatories “accept there is no material conflict between trans rights and women’s rights” but says anyone who disagrees is a bigot. It names Woman’s Place UK and the LGB Alliance as “hate groups” whose supporters are transphobic and must therefore be expelled. Even though these were set up chiefly to defend women’s single-sex spaces enshrined in Labour’s own 2010 Equality Act and upheld in the party’s 2019 manifesto.

So calm, thoughtful, unite-the-party Lisa Nandy wants to expel supporters of the very platform on which she was just re-elected! Chuck on the pyre life-long trade unionists like NUT president Kiri Tunks and Ruth Serwotka, Corbyn policy chief Lachlan Stuart, ex-MP Laura Pidcock and Stonewall founder Simon Fanshawe. Sprinkle the bonfire with thousands of horrified women members who tweeted, Spartacus-style. #expelme. Shove on top John McDonnell and Andy Burnham, who have both met WPUK and, Lisa, who will be left?

I mention Nandy because although every leadership candidate except Sir Keir Starmer has now signed this pledge, she has doubled down. There are no spaces at all, she said on Radio 4’s Today programme, where male-bodied people should be excluded. She likened the debate over women’s refuges to fights between Eritrean and Ethiopian boys when she worked at a Centrepoint homeless shelter: ie a woman and any male who self-identifies as a woman are materially the same and must be treated as such. From changing rooms to sports to, presumably, female beauticians being compelled to wax — as Canadian trans activist Jessica Yaniv demanded — a trans woman’s testicles.

Nandy is not the first politician who, sucked into the gender vortex, loses all reason. This week Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle confounded biologists by saying that “sex is not binary”. During the election Lib Dem Dr Sarah Wollaston denied that a baby’s biological sex is observed at birth; potential Lib Dem leader Layla Moran believes women can differentiate male predators from self-identified trans women by looking into their souls.
Meanwhile in the US Democratic primaries. Elizabeth Warren, desperate to seduce Bernie Sanders’ supporters, posted her pronouns on her Twitter page, pledged that every trans woman prisoner (regardless of having committed sexual offences) should be relocated to the female estate, and then declared that as US president her education secretary would first be interviewed and approved by a designated “trans child”.

How have LGBT issues, in particular gender self-ID, become such a moral test of politicians in progressive parties? Sociologists speak of how organisations can be overwhelmed by “purity spirals”. This is when a group grades its members by a single value, which has no upper limit or agreed interpretation. Those who seek power must demonstrate their purity in ever more abstruse ways: those judged “impure” are denounced and destroyed.

Both Labour and the US Democrats have several concurrent purity spirals. Members fight to demonstrate their anti-racism by denouncing perceived white supremacy or by supporting no-border immigration policies. A US gay rights purity spiral means that although married to a man, Pete Buttigieg is accused of being “not gay enough” because as a chino-wearing, church-going ex-serviceman his lifestyle apes “heteronormative” society rather than “queer culture”. No matter that he’s bravely challenging prejudices of mainstream US voters for whom he’s too damn gay. Fighting a primary now, Barack Obama would be shredded as not black enough.

But the trans issue — specifically whether gender self-ID should be enshrined in law — is the purity spiral du jour. The Labour trans pledge transformed the leadership election from a civil, even dull contest, in which feminists felt they had a choice, into a grim, least-worst-option scenario. Every candidate has recited the catechism “trans women are women”, leaving members to assess whether they mean it literally, like Nandy, so single-sex exemptions are toast, or as an assertion of existing legal rights of trans women to be recognised as women, in most circumstances, which no one would dispute. This is the position it is hoped that sane lawyer Starmer holds.

So why are they submitting to this test? Because progressive politicians’ fear of being “on the wrong side of history” trumps all sense. Gender self-ID is constantly presented as the new gay rights. Yet gay men and lesbians only demanded to love freely. They did not materially encroach on any other group’s rights. Nor do most trans folk who simply wish to live without discrimination or violence and are horrified by activists who demand in their name that women surrender hard-won rights and safeguards.

Working on the 2019 Labour manifesto, Lachlan Stuart observed that LGBT activists were not “driven by a motivation to improve the quality of life for trans people” such as increased mental and physical health provision, only “to erode or erase the political rights of female people.” Their alarming central goal was to open up all female single-sex spaces to anyone who identified as a woman.

How will voters, who have hitherto been unaware of this arcane debate, feel about a Labour Party fully committed to ending historic safeguards? To a party which believes any male person should be allowed to legally change sex without qualification or checks, leaving women and girls vulnerable yet unable to object? Will Labour leaders pull out of the purity spiral and heed the fears of thousands of women members? Or will they, as that nice Lisa Nandy demands, simply chuck them out?

The substance of this debate is not what rankles me, it’s that so much time, energy and newsprint is being taken up with it while one in four of our children live in poverty. Who will best address this during the reign of a government with such a huge majority and very little moral fibre is the real debate we should be having.
'She ( Kate) did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2020, 05:23:45 PM »
The substance of this debate is not what rankles me, it’s that so much time, energy and newsprint is being taken up with it while one in four of our children live in poverty. Who will best address this during the reign of a government with such a huge majority and very little moral fibre is the real debate we should be having.
I think the substance of this debate IS and should be troubling for women born women in this country.  Whilst it might be a distraction from other issues I don’t think the seriousness of what is being promulgated here should be downplayed.
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Online Eleanor

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2020, 06:37:29 PM »
The substance of this debate is not what rankles me, it’s that so much time, energy and newsprint is being taken up with it while one in four of our children live in poverty. Who will best address this during the reign of a government with such a huge majority and very little moral fibre is the real debate we should be having.

This a misrepresentation, Faith.  Any child living in poverty is doing so because of their parents.

What has Trans Rights got to do with The Labour Party?

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2020, 07:33:45 PM »
This a misrepresentation, Faith.  Any child living in poverty is doing so because of their parents.

What has Trans Rights got to do with The Labour Party?

And why when we are told that more people are in employment than ever before is there more poverty ?
'She ( Kate) did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2020, 08:02:58 AM »
I listened To Sir Keir wriggling himself out of a tight corner on this issue on yesterday’s R4 “This Morning” show.  He was very lucky to have had such a benign interviewer imo.  Someone a bit more aggressive in their questioning would really have exposed the cognitive dissonance that this issue brings out in “woke” politicians.
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2020, 06:14:05 PM »
I listened To Sir Keir wriggling himself out of a tight corner on this issue on yesterday’s R4 “This Morning” show.  He was very lucky to have had such a benign interviewer imo.  Someone a bit more aggressive in their questioning would really have exposed the cognitive dissonance that this issue brings out in “woke” politicians.

And people still wouldn’t care.
'She ( Kate) did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'.

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #8 on: March 02, 2020, 08:44:00 PM »
And people still wouldn’t care.

That is the bigger issue here Faith.  It seems like politicians are trying to deflect from the real issues of poverty, bad housing, lack of housing,appalling education from nursery to university. transport etc. Instead of being educated without bias and indoctrinated about policies enforced with vigor about things which should not be part of a school curriculum.

The actual scale of child anxiety/depression in Scotland alone is very worrying. How does it help a child who has had little to eat because of his/her parents are buying drink/drugs to be told that they are trans phobic because they don't really care about one boy in class who wants to be a girl or girl wants to be a boy.

It is a disgrace AND the money it costs to employ 'special people' who help children trans form into another gender is shocking. This, like global warming cr'#p, is becoming big business! Performing surgery on children is NOT progressive and there is no input from some parents- no discussion. The child wants the child gets- until they realize they are either gay/straight/or bi sexual!   As has happened! and this cannot be reversed.

People care about what is going on around them- the 'woke' agenda' is being ripped up by the masses- because they know who it is coming from!

The politicians should do the same and grow some.

'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #9 on: March 03, 2020, 11:18:25 AM »
That is the bigger issue here Faith.  It seems like politicians are trying to deflect from the real issues of poverty, bad housing, lack of housing,appalling education from nursery to university. transport etc. Instead of being educated without bias and indoctrinated about policies enforced with vigor about things which should not be part of a school curriculum.

The actual scale of child anxiety/depression in Scotland alone is very worrying. How does it help a child who has had little to eat because of his/her parents are buying drink/drugs to be told that they are trans phobic because they don't really care about one boy in class who wants to be a girl or girl wants to be a boy.

It is a disgrace AND the money it costs to employ 'special people' who help children trans form into another gender is shocking. This, like global warming cr'#p, is becoming big business! Performing surgery on children is NOT progressive and there is no input from some parents- no discussion. The child wants the child gets- until they realize they are either gay/straight/or bi sexual!   As has happened! and this cannot be reversed.

People care about what is going on around them- the 'woke' agenda' is being ripped up by the masses- because they know who it is coming from!

The politicians should do the same and grow some.

I can’t disagree with most of that.
'She ( Kate) did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'.

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #10 on: March 03, 2020, 10:50:27 PM »
This a misrepresentation, Faith.  Any child living in poverty is doing so because of their parents.

What has Trans Rights got to do with The Labour Party?

What has Trans Rights got to do with The Labour Party?

Don't know but I can share that the wonderful SNP have open arms to this and taken it to  our education system. 

read on:  https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1247405/drag-queen-primary-school-flowjob-twitter-glencoates-council-apology

The worst thing about this is; this school is in a very deprived area  poverty/food banks. and they get hit with this shit!  Give them real edible food not food for thoughts.
'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #11 on: March 03, 2020, 11:26:31 PM »
I think it’s fair to say that it’s only the far left who believe in no platforming, and insisting we all think the same politically correct way or be labelled Nazis.
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #12 on: March 05, 2020, 04:32:11 PM »
I think it’s fair to say that it’s only the far left who believe in no platforming, and insisting we all think the same politically correct way or be labelled Nazis.


That is why I use every opportunity to call the spade a spade.

 Stalin (similar tactics and ideology) as left wing-use the  scare the name 'Nazi'-at anyone who challenges the thought police (although Stalin just killed them for their 'thinking') throw Stalin at them and its  squirm, squirm, squirm.

I don't mind being called names, Islamophobic, xenophobic,antisemitic,racist- it means nothing to me and they are all made up names to create criminals and disharmony.  JUST like STALIN and HITLER!!

'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #13 on: March 10, 2020, 07:36:39 AM »
The reviled Melanie Philips making perfect sense on the ostracism suffered by Suzanne Moore for the views she dared express in the Guardian re the Trans issue:

“Obviously, the attempts to silence Moore and numerous others who offend against woke dogma are a blow against freedom of expression, the bulwark of a free society. More sinister and profound, labelling such dissidents as enemies of humanity is designed to terrorise others into disavowing both them and their ideas.

This enforcement of dogma, complete with metaphorically burning heretics at the professional stake or subjecting them to Orwellian smears and character assassination, smacks of the medieval inquisition, French Revolution or Soviet communism.

In response to the furore over Suzanne Moore, there have been references to The Guardian being a “great liberal newspaper”. This is about four decades out of date. It stopped being a liberal paper when liberalism became corrupted by ideologies which permit no opposition and are therefore inimical to truth, freedom and reason.

Suzanne Moore wrote: “I self-identify as a woman who won’t go down quietly.” We may not agree with everything she says, and she may not welcome all of us as supporters, but those who stand for freedom against such sinister attempts at social and cultural control will be cheering her on.”

I mean, who could seriously disagree with a word of that?
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Trans Rights and the Labour Party
« Reply #14 on: March 16, 2020, 03:25:52 PM »
The reviled Melanie Philips making perfect sense on the ostracism suffered by Suzanne Moore for the views she dared express in the Guardian re the Trans issue:

“Obviously, the attempts to silence Moore and numerous others who offend against woke dogma are a blow against freedom of expression, the bulwark of a free society. More sinister and profound, labelling such dissidents as enemies of humanity is designed to terrorise others into disavowing both them and their ideas.

This enforcement of dogma, complete with metaphorically burning heretics at the professional stake or subjecting them to Orwellian smears and character assassination, smacks of the medieval inquisition, French Revolution or Soviet communism.



In response to the furore over Suzanne Moore, there have been references to The Guardian being a “great liberal newspaper”. This is about four decades out of date. It stopped being a liberal paper when liberalism became corrupted by ideologies which permit no opposition and are therefore inimical to truth, freedom and reason.

Suzanne Moore wrote: “I self-identify as a woman who won’t go down quietly.” We may not agree with everything she says, and she may not welcome all of us as supporters, but those who stand for freedom against such sinister attempts at social and cultural control will be cheering her on.”

I mean, who could seriously disagree with a word of that?

This Link is from the states, seems some are not afraid to stand up to it or talk about it or print it...



        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7NFB9YribI


the best description of the 'trans' persons behavior is IMO  like this persons comments: "Neca Bibi 9 months ago

-Such hypocrisy. So he feels unsafe changing with other boys, and feels his concerns should be addressed. But girls that feel unsafe changing in front of a biological boy, should be ignored. Hmmm? 🤔 Seems a little hypocritical, self absorbed and selfish to me.

 "


And there are trans people who do not want the publicity or the support of others who seem to making  criminals out of people who have an opinion!
 Schools SHOULD NOT be the spring board to define gender issues. It has been highlighted- and  a study is trying to get information to confirm that children who are confused about sexuality are being 'diagnosed ' as trans people. Also some on the mental health spectrum are being 'groomed' for want of a better word to believe they are TRANS.  These children may be  homosexual/ bi sexual and not trans. Who decides?

If we are going down the road of  allowing trans people to compete in games and  share girls/boys only spaces then we need to have a third wheel.  Trans sports and toilets/changing rooms.
'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin