Submitted 11 months ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crldey0z00ro
I’m constantly amazed that this is a hard subject for people. As the golden rule says:
“I’m not going to reach into your pants, without an invitation. And I prefer no one reach into my pants, because we barely know each-other. Whatever someone tells me is in their pants, I’ll take their word for it, as long as they haven’t flashed me in public. Also, shitting in practically transparent stalls is awful for everyone, and showering with strangers sucks. Let’s all just do less of both.”
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer does not believe transgender women are women, his official spokesman has said.
Oh damn, this is huge. He’s officially admitting to being a Transphobic Bigot. Literally.
What else in this ballpark would he like to admit to while he’s at it? Maybe he’s a Homophobe too? …What’s his stance on black people?
Also, are transgender men, men? And if so, why is it one rule for women and another for men? Is he sexist too?
On the basis of his admission of being a Bigot I would argue he is unfit to be leader of the Labour Party. I recall a Labour Prime Minister not too long ago getting angry at someone for being a Bigot… how times have changed…
This is not huge. He is literally saying what the law says. This isn’t transphobia. This isn’t bigotry. Literally.
You’re blowing this completely out of proportion, and also throwing in a load of other shit that he never said anything about.
This is not huge. He is literally saying what the law says, which is exactly what you expect a prime minister to do.
Damn, if only the PM had the power to get the law changed.
The PM declined to repeat his previous statement “transwomen are women,” instead asserting: “A woman is an adult female - the court has made that absolutely clear.”
This is transphobia, seriously listen to him weasel out of it. He was asked if trans woman were women in general, not specifically for the purposes of the Equalities Act.
“when looking at the Equality Act” is the key missing part off the quote. Would you expect an ex-barrister to contradict the ruling of the supreme court?
What’s actually needed is new clear primary legislation to address all these issues. Parliament still had primacy here but good luck getting MPs wading into such a toxic debate?
They could have announced they would look to introduce new legislation to address this. They could have said just about anything instead of what’s been said today.
But they didn’t, they are instead parroting the court ruling as if it’s a final settlement on the issue.
There is no weaselling around these words, the only debate is whether it exposes cowardice or bigotry.
They’re missing a word on the end of that sentence: “today”. Tomorrow, however …
I can't decide whether they're awful or just saying awful things to pander to the awful bits of the electorate. Both are terrible but they're different flavours of evil.
Labour chose to take this particular stance today. There are many other approaches they could have taken, they could have also tried to dodge the matter and kick they can down the road, but instead “trans women are not women” is what they have chosen to actively embrace.
(Further) pandering to the transphobic lobby is not necessary, and what’s been said today is far beyond pandering.
Pandering to the most awful bigots in the country is an awful thing to do. This is a spineless government with no principles other than “don’t offend the right wing”.
Feels like a cozying up to trump looking for a tariff exemption by doing this too, right?
It’s at times like these I turn to my man Alexei:
WickedZebra66@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Because they are in fact men. Biologically. Most of the time.
WickedZebra66@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Aww. Upset someone.