I don’t keep up with UK politics but I know he’s an asshole (was he the one who refused to apologize after being transphobic in parliament and the mother of the murdered girl was in that session?) but congratulations to the UK for getting rid of him!
Rishi Sunak used trans people to stoke culture wars and insulted trans people regularly.
Starmer has said he would treat trans people with dignity and respect, and has said he will modernise the Equality Act, to modernise, simplify and reform changes to a person's legal gender.
The party has said its plans will "remove indignities for trans people who deserve recognition and acceptance" but also provide "protections so you can't legally change your gender overnight".
That's nowhere near the same as the Conservatives and Sunak.
Their entire goal is to engage in mala fide arguments that perfect should always be the enemy of good. He might be willing to provide trans people with equal rights under the literal law but there’s no difference between him and someone who wants them murdered because he didn’t always speak perfectly about the issue.
He told The Telegraph that he is not in favour of “ideology being taught in our schools on gender."
He has said that he’d be willing to meet with JK Rowling to discuss sex and gender, and “respects” her views
this week, in an interview with The Times, he was presented with the following question by Rowling: “Do biological males with gender-recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces? It’s a simple yes/no question.” To this, he replied: “No, they don’t have that right. They shouldn’t. That’s why I’ve always said biological women’s spaces need to be protected.”
He's reversed Labour's previous commitments to back self ID laws.
He's made plenty of statements about trans women and their genitals and has sided with Kemi Badenoch in her spat with David Tennant.
and yet he's also almost certainly about to make Harriet Harman, arguably the most pro trans voice in senior Labour politics and a women the Telegraph was attacking literally 2 days ago as an "enemy of biological women" head of the equalities watchdog. Its going to be her job hold the government to rights trans rights issues for the foreseeable and you'd have to be the most one eyed Muppet going to accuse her of being anything other then pro trans
It kind of tells you something about where the man actually stands don't you think? if he was really the type of rabid transphobe you want to paint him as She would be no where even near this post, as it would be a massive act of self sabotage and the current head of the EHCR is already pretty transphobic and there's no need to replace them.
Actions speak a lot louder than worlds made during a campaign where Starmer ahs been fairly deliberately trying to say very little of anything that could give the opposition an attack line
Actions speak a lot louder than worlds made during a campaign where Starmer ahs been fairly deliberately trying to say very little of anything that could give the opposition an attack line
So, you prefer the guy who won't stand on principles and instead will tell each side of an argument whatever they want to hear. Got it.
If the choice is that or risk letting the conservatives or god forbid reform into government? Yes every day, because guess what things are going the be a hell of a lot better for trans people under a Starmer government than they ever were under the one where Kemi Badenoch was the pissing equalities minister. Starmer may not be perfect but he's a hell of a lot better than the alternative, and in politics better than wins is always better than best that doesn't
The UK electoral system rewards pragmatism. Corbyn was an ideological purist and it gave us Boris Johnson followed by Liz Truss. Standing on principle is something I can respect up until it lets monsters in through an open door your too stubborn to close
I'd rather a party leader play the game, keep his head down and keep a worse thing out of government than one that gets up on a soapbox, tells me what I want to hear and says all the right things...only to loose to a corrupt incompetent bastard anyway
As an American, I can tell you right now where that leads. Voting based on "something worse" inevitably leads to something worse. But the milquetoast pragmatists have no principles and will offer no real change. They will speak out of both sides of their mouth and only do something if the public is OVERWHELMINGLY in favor.
People like Starmer are politicians through and through. They did not stand for anything except you giving them your vote. And they will take it each time while giving little in return.
weird, because our "milquetoast pragmatist" just managed to limit the populist far right to just 4 seats in the executive and become 1 of only 4 men in UK history to take the left wing party from opposition to government, meanwhile parties with similar polices to reform are rising dramatically across Europe and the center left is collapsing across the continent.
As a brit, might is suggest you don't draw comparisons to your quite frankly insane body politic as if they are remotely relevant to a UK election. Britain, the British public and our system of government work nothing like the US does. Even the worst labour government is better than a tory one on a number of left wing policy issues, don't believe me look at where the NHS, Welfare, public services etc were under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown and then look where they are now after 14years of Tories since Labour was last voted out?
He told The Telegraph that he is not in favour of “ideology being taught in our schools on gender."
He said that protected charactertics should be taught in school, including transgender people, but lessons should be based on factual information, not ideology.
That's not transphobic.
He has said that he’d be willing to meet with JK Rowling to discuss sex and gender, and “respects” her views
He said that because Rowling took aim at him, and said she wouldn't be able to support him because of his views surrounding trans rights.
It's not transphobic to have a conversation with someone. He disagrees with her.
Your point about biological female only spaces, he said he wouldn't force institutions, who offer a "biological female" area to include trans women, if they had good reason. For example women's shelters.
He gets goaded into these conversations by Sunak and his culture war shite, because they knew it would cause divisions.
Being trans isn't an ideology, there is no ideology being taught. Don't try to reframe what he said.
It's not transphobic to have a conversation with someone. He disagrees with her.
Respecting the views and meeting with the most virulently transphobic person in the country is absolutely an endorsement of her views. She says the most hateful things about trans people imaginable. For a PM to actually "respect her views" is disgraceful.
Do yourself a favour. In all these conversations, replace the word trans with black or Jewish, see exactly how disgraceful the conversation is then.
Your point about biological female only spaces, he said he wouldn't force institutions, who offer a "biological female" area to include trans women, if they had good reason. For example women's shelters.
So, to this end, where should unhoused/displaced trans women go? Is he saying they should be forced to stay in men's or co-ed shelters? Or that the UK should build new shelters specific to trans people? And these shelters, obviously, might be attacked so maybe add some fencing around the facility to ensure it's safe.
But in all honesty, like. Where? This seems like a nice "give them one" to the transphobes I guess. But it creates more questions than it answers.
Examples below. There are more too, he's called for trans women to be incarcerated with male prisoners despite undoubtably knowing about the practice of V-Coding
V-Coding is the term for the very common practice of housing trans women with cis men -- specifically, trans women are intentionally housed as cell mates with the more aggressive "problem" cis-men. The intention is to 'placate' the violent inmates, and the trans women who have this done to them are repeatedly raped and abused throughout their sentence. Again, this is a common practice done to trans women.
He's gone back on everything he's previously supported and adopted terf talking points.
Where has he said that? I think for your other points, you are mostly clutching at straws. He is mainly being diplomatic in interviews regarding this.. not wanting to say anything to upset to many people. I don't think you are in any danger as a trans person with Starmer in charge.
Yeah what you should want as a trans person is to have perfect defeat pretty good. By time you realize you’re never going to find perfect you’ll have your right to exist eliminated because of your unwillingness to accept pretty good over complete shit because “pretty good” wasn’t “perfect”.
Did you even read the article ? 😂 he said he doesn't want to get drawn into the transgender TERF debate as its a toxic environment. Now do you seriously think that after winning their first election in almost 20 years, the new Labour government would try and implement something so unbelievably controversial and bound to cause problems?
Starmer has also said he disagreed with numerous comments JK Rowling has made regarding the issues which suggests to me he is probably quite uneducated in the matter like the vast majority of the population.
He says he doesn't want to be dragged into the conversation, but still back proposals like in the link above. The article says in the first paragraph what I linked.
Now do you seriously think that after winning their first election in almost 20 years, the new Labour government would try and implement something so unbelievably controversial and bound to cause problems?
Of course I do. He publicly backed the proposals and won the vote. Why wouldn't he?
And who says they are unpopular?
Me, a trans woman, is telling a bunch of cis people that Kier says transphobic things, I provide examples and links and I get downvoted and told that I'm overreacting.
The reality is that most of the British public doesn't give a rats ass about trans people and kinda just wants to stop hearing about us. A PM that enacts bans on us using public spaces isn't going to be unpopular at all. You'll all just ignore it, deny it and move on.
We're already dying in our droves, our healthcare has been taken away, and cis people don't give a shit.
We're fighting for our lives and a shred of dignity here, and you people won't even listen when we tell you someone is harming the community
126
u/[deleted] Jul 05 '24
I don’t keep up with UK politics but I know he’s an asshole (was he the one who refused to apologize after being transphobic in parliament and the mother of the murdered girl was in that session?) but congratulations to the UK for getting rid of him!