You can’t really do nothing simply because, generally speaking, people are a problem. Regional mayors have been popular for the Tories, because the Tories have disproportionately rewarded them and so they can do at least a few things for their impoverished populations in lieu of anything useful. Labour could spread those benefits fairly. But I actually don’t believe a huge amount of it. Government’s tend to create powers for themselves as quickly as they devolve them.
They did (as far as we know - we don't keep records of voting ages) but the vote was swung by our very unbalanced demographics - loads of wrinklies who had never voted turned up.
Braverman still driving the government to new lows.... https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...h-key-windrush-pledges?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other These Tories really are scum aren't they?
I jest a little, but 64% of young people voted in the Twatzit referendum against 90% of the 65s and over.
Maybe not every kid was in a priveledged position to care about such stuff . Maybe ,a kid from a one parent family on a sink estate disregarded by the middle class wokerati has different issues , food on the table , shoes on the feet etc Foreign sojourns ? the pipe dream of the few Goodbye Rishi...meet the new boss....same as ...
Well thanks to Tory Brexit that proportion of them too weighed down to participate will only increase.
Just how the ‘haves’ like it. Keep ensuring the most deprived continue to think there’s no point in voting.
Fair point . But please explain to me when the poor benefited from any Govt . Don't say Blair FFS . Too many dead Iraqi children .
I may have to withdraw my comments to @sydney_horn about the need for principles as Labour signals that it will not oppose the Government’s bid to overrule the Scottish Parliament’s Gender Recognition Bill. Not only is it disappointing for Trans people and takes Labour away from the position it supported Theresa May to take on Gender Recognition, but it’s also a big **** you to devolution, something once important to Labour. This all smacks of Labour with its eye on pleasing Murdoch before all others
My disappointment with Starmer's playing up to the rabid Brexshit mob doesn't mean I'd vote Tory. Just that I'm dismayed with the options im presented with
Yep. Murdoch and the Mail set the agenda. The politicians then squirm as to how they can play to the public mood against the EU, people in dinghies etc.
Not sure how he is doing that here, unless you count any setback for trans rights as women’s rights. The Scottish law actually allows for transgender women to be excluded from women’s spaces. The objections are based around highly unlikely scenarios, where a transgender person, over 16, but still at school, then moves to England or Wales and no one knows which class to put her in or that someone is so devious, they use the application process to masquerade as a woman to attack women. There are two deaths a day of women at the hands of men and none of them are putting a frock on to do it. Maybe Kier wants to start with that. Or the Met Police.
I don’t really understand why either party is opposing the Bill really. It seems like creating an argument for no reason.
So you think the women that are objecting to Scotland's gender bill are just being a bunch of soppy girls?
That's the thing - the vast majority of the opposition to this bill (in both Scothchlandland and Westminster) are a significant proportion of that part of the electorate who, ahem, don't have a y-chromosome.
Disappointing that you, usually so keen on an evidence base, come out with this line when, There is comprehensive research on attitudes within the YouGov article. Attitudes have certainly hardened against transgender rights since the conservatives launched their culture war. Are you happy about that? Really? https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society...-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights
It’s a poor form of argument to attack another poster by suggesting they have unpleasant views they haven’t ever expressed. Your post is just you enjoying the phrase ‘soppy girls’ and not reflecting well on you.
Well there you have it, a tiny issue compared to daily violence against women, even just in the Police force. Except the reason is votes. Everyone, including the SNP is rallying their base. But can Labour identify theirs?
I can see that the SNP is lapping this up. I imagine Sturgeon is delighted. But is this going to win the Tories any votes that they would not have had anyway?
I think the trans issue is vital to them. They (party and media) have taken every opportunity to highlight it well beyond its importance to the population. If you look at right wing Twitter accounts you’d think the Country is under threat of invasion by trans people. That much energy suggests it’s very important in rallying a decaying support, which cannot possibly back them for reasons of competency or good governance. They must therefore back them for what they stand for.
Not really - I'm not conflating LGBT+ rights with the self-identification 'issue'. And I fully know that anecdote isn't evidence, but I hear a lot of awful lot grumbling from y-chromosome carrying voters at the kids sports I'm involved with the self-identification 'issue'... Thankfully the sports groups I'm involved with haven't had to physically deal with this (yet). Also, I find your ad hominem extremely distasteful and, unfortunately, an extremely common feature of getting involved in the 'TG' 'debate' - voicing discomfort/disagreement with any aspect of the very vocal 'TG' lobby and that's immediately construed as being homophobic and wish all TG people dead (etc)...
None of that was ‘ad hominem’ and the contention it was is precisely that, as was Lloyd’s post you liked. I’m sure we can debate it with civility though.
Well. As long as they aren't killing anyone I guess its OK if we let them into changing rooms and toilets with other people's wives and daughters. Your figures are pathetically incorrect by the way. exagerating reality by around 400%. Doesn't excuse the murdering B'stards that are doing these things, but it does make a very important point. That your understanding of the situation is purely political and based on what you are told, rather than the facts. You also seem to be making the argument that, provided they are not killing anyone, no one should be concerned that a perverted, predatory man (I don't think anyone believes these potential crimes are being committed by genuine trans people) be able to use the bill to further his right to stand naked in front of women and young girls (possibly unaccompanied) in a female only changing room or toilet. The bill supports the laziest and most minimal expression of "womanhood" as being the standard under which a person can enter such places, and claim the lawful right to be there. But as long as they don't commit murder, are you suggesting that it is sacrifice women should be expected to make, in order to appease a few trans activists who aren't happy that the majority of people in a society should feel comfortable in spaces they feel should be safe? Few believe that trans people should not be able to self identify. But because we live in a society, where the feelings and the needs of the majority must count for something, it is fair that some standard of policing these matters does exist. Seriously. You do not need to enter a women's changing room just because you identify as a woman. There are alternatives available almost everywhere you might go. And if you are going to take offence because you have made no effprt to transition, other than growing your hair long, then understand why others may take offence when you call yourself a woman, whilst demonstrating the physical genitalia of a man. There are already laws in place that protect the most vulnerable. Just because the most political are not catered for is not a good reason for change. Starting a culture war to force society to change for 0.5% of the population, is your own business. But don't expect there to be no push back. What stats do you have on how many trans women have been thrown out of anywhere because they were genuinely trans, rather than a man in a wig? I guess you must have such stats, or there would be little reason for laws like this.
I still wonder if these discussions are all a bit binary. HH makes some good points but I don’t think enough credence is given to the possibility that there are more than 2 genders, particularly in an emotional, psychological manner.
He really doesn’t. It’s simply angrily expressed phobia against ‘lazy’ and entitled trans people. Ireland has had a similar system of recognition since 2015. Is anyone aware of this being a big deal or impacting upon women’s safety?
Actually, I dont think thats true in the slightest. It was the 2010 Equility act , not Scottish law, that set out that it was lawful to provide female only spaces, sports and services which excluded males, regardless of gender identity. The new Scottish law changes that, in part thanks to a ruling in a Scottish Court that the Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) needed to legally become the opposite gender, also changes sex for the purpose of the Equility act. Theres nothing in the SNP's reforms that allows to exclude trans women from female only spaces. The issue with the SNP's reforms is that it does away with any and all safeguarding measures needed for GRC and potentially puts vulnerable women and children at risk - which is why the Equality & Human rights commision and the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls where against this new legislation. By your own admission, its men that women are most at risk from and its part of the reason why the Equility act set out the need for female only spaces that excluded men irrespective of gender identity - well now any man can claim their female and have their sex legally changed with a GRC. And thats it. The criteria for applying for a GRC are virtually zero, just as are the grounds for denying one. No safeguarding at all. If you admit that men are the biggest risk to women then surely you can see the issues over suddenly allowing them lawful & unfettered access to women & children spaces via a system that is unbelievably easy to abuse? Except there is precedent for it happening. For example the case of Janiah Monroe, a convicted murderer who won an appeal to be moved from the male prison he was housed at to a women only correction centre in Illinois. Within two months of his arrival he had ceased HRT, become sexually active and ultimately sexually assaulted 4 inmates. Theres similar cases in the UK such as Jessica Winfield. There's a guy in Scotland who was sent to prison for sexually assaulting a 10 year old in Morrison toilets and who has since legally changed sex to female. And now under the SNP's new bill you dont even really need to masquerade as a woman.
It’s precisely that the Scottish Bill does not change the provision of the Equality Act that allows for less favourable treatment. There is no requirement in those extreme cases of a sexually violent person changing gender that they must be put in a women’s prison. (Quite why anyone, male or female should be put together with a violent rapist is another thing - prisons are way too unsafe). Equally, other single sex provision can exclude transgender people if it is proportionate to do so. If you accept the concept of a GRC at all, then making it easier (when the current system is so protracted and medicalised) is really not an issue. If people don’t and they prefer tolerated transvestism, then they can say so.
Funny. Thought I made it absolutely clear that I was referring to predatory men and not trans people. Perhaps you ought to ask yourself why you have to make rubbish up in order to argue with people, whilst anyone arguing with you only has to refer to the incorrect factual statements you make or the contents of your posts. Why did you lie about the number of women killed by men? There was literally nothing to gain from it. Any murder is horrendous. Why do you have to lie about me and what I said? If I was as petty as you, I'd get the mods to delete that lie. Thankfully, though, I am confident enough that people can read the posts for themselves, and understand that you are a person without an argument trying to give yourself validity.
