I am unsure which is worse - bullshitting the populace via his excruciating TV and radio drivel or lying to his own individual constituents on their ow doorsteps?
Dear moley. I am not on Twitter, but I look at it IYSWIM. Your series with Marr asking physics/other questions of Starmer, and him answering 'the trans community is amongst the most marginalised and abused Communities. We need to make progress on the gender recognition act" is one of the funniest things I've seen for a while. Thank you for bringing levity. I need more levity and less 'fucked offedness'
Hello! Well, thanks for saying that, I do appreciate it!
I have to admit that I enjoyed that one. It started off with, "“I’m taking my wife’s car to the garage tomorrow for a service.’’ - Which was a play on 'cervix'. of course! It was the most mundane and disconnected question I could think of at that time.
For some reason then I started to think of Monty Python and their wonderful Philosophy Question, “Which great opponent of Cartesian dualism resists the reduction of psychological phenomena to a physical state and insists there is no point of contact between the extended and the unextended?’’ - Which is a correct question, but unintelligible and unanswerable to most people!
Of course, once Python was in my head that led to the question about where the coconuts came from that King Arthur and his band used instead of horses! 'They were flown here from Africa, etc'
Which led inevitably to the MP and the Holy Grail 'Bridge of Death' scene and those famous 'Questions Three'.
So, yes amusing and VERY absurd!
But no more absurd that Starmer trotting out that ludicrous and seemingly new party line about trans folk being an endangered species....
I would have also become emotional if anyone from Labour had bothered to visit me in my safe Labour seat. The stress of dealing with gaslighting, and the effect it had on my job (I left it), the lack of response from my MP, and the incredulity at what people like Nandy (paedophiles in women's prisons!) and Rayner ('saving a seaa for Lily Madigan!) and the rest who signed that LGBT pledge calling us a hate group. The bullying of Labour women in CLPs. The venom against Rosie Duffield and not a dicky-bird from Starmer. That takes a toll.
And Lammy? He's partly responsible for this shitshow, via the Gender Recognition Act. Has no guts to ever let a chink of doubt that pretending men could ever be women was not a good idea; has unintended (but if you read Hansard, predicted consequences). So he lies. Arrogant man.
I really feel for women who have been emotionally abused and coercively controlled. If it feels like this for me, what must it be like for them?
I will probably never vote Labour again. They should be challenging Govt. policies on prisons, NHS wards and schools, yet they collude, and they say they'd go even further. Bastards.
I only just saw the Hansard stuff - it was posted on twitter by @hairyleggedharpy in 2018 but she RT'd it recently. Here's the Hansard extract referring to prisons and Lammy's response. The whole thread is worth a read - the GRA was basically them trying to avoid gay marriage.
Interesting that he can cry at the drop of a hat, gets to anger quickly, but it’s always for himself. In my experience those who tend to get to the top (workplace, organisations etc) are narcissists and everything they do is for themselves. It’s rare to find someone who’s principled and actually works for the greater good.
I'm all for men not being pressured to suppress emotions but I find it very uncomfortable in a professional setting. I also feel that suppressing emotions in certain circumstances is a good thing.
So, I don't particularly like the idea of someone who is Quick to Anger or can Cry at the drop of a Hat....it smacks of no self discipline. (and the Quick to Anger is a bit of a red flag for me).
I was thinking in terms donations to the party (with the intention of influencing policy development sympathetic to the ambitions of the donors), and public shaming for MP's and party members who do not comply with the subsequent policy position.
I can't think of any other explanation for MPs to start spouting what they clearly know to be untrue, the spluttering and obfuscation and linguistic knots they tie themselves in, shows they are not speaking their own truth. If the market in trans healthcare is predicted to grow £1.5bn p.a. by 2026 then it's not hard to see who might be funding it.
The LibDems have Ferring Pharmaceuticals as a major donor. Jean Hatchet's research showed that this company produces puberty blockers. During the run up to the 2019 election, while Butler and Labour were threatening the Equalities Act, then LibDem leader Jo Swinson was having one car crash interview after another, and going full batshit on the matter of so called "trans rights"
I would have ranked Lammy as one of my favourite politicians until last week. I'm watching in horror as men (and some women) I admired fall to the genderwoo - Talcum X, Jolyon Maugham, Peter Jukes, Billy Bragg, Keir Starmer, David Lammy, Nick Thomas Symonds - then there's all the men that keep schtum. It's hard not to conclude that the left hates women.
Yep. Apart from a few things that have annoyed me in the past (attacking Stacey Dooley for being a white knight by helping children in African countries) I quite liked Lammy. He's articulate and good at taking on the government. But after this cervix fiasco, and the 'don't lecture me on rights cos I'm black' shit, I've lost all respect. He's entitled.
Maugham: I liked him for his challenges against the corrupt government. Felt sorry for him constantly getting attacked by right-wingers. Then he went full gender loon misoynist and he's been involved in corruption himself. Hate him on a visceral level now.
Jukes too. I want to support Byline times, but he's thrown himself in with the trans stormtroopers because it's easier. That one hurts, because so many people tried to talk science with him, but he kept running with pseudoscience. It's always easier to go against women for these men.
Keir...I had high hopes for him when he wasn't stupid enough to sign that pledge...then he went on that Pink News hostage video and sent me into despair.
Or men in all parties hate women? They find us a nuisance, particularly when we argue our case well. They really resent women putting their feet to the fire.
True - but I am a lifelong leftie so feel totally betrayed. I didn't expect much from the tories and yet they look the least insane on this issue. However, a lot of this happened on their watch so they don't get a free pass. They may not have introduced self ID but it's still policy in MoJ NHS, Education and more. I will probably spoil my ballot next time because I won't vote to be erased, and any party you do vote for will claim you voted for self ID.
Glinner, you need to make it clear that the Dawn Butler statements that allegedly upset the constituent were not the ones about "people being born with no sex". That particular episode of madness came after the Dec 2019 election. In the run up to the election, Butler attacked single sex spaces enshrined under the Equalities Act and said that there was “no way [that] spaces will be permitted to discriminate against trans people”. This caused confusion, as the Labour Party manifesto had promised to retain single sex based exemptions. Labour subsequently stated that “Our commitment to reforming the Gender Recognition Act, to introduce self-declaration for transgender people, is undimmed. Labour will amend the Equality Act 2010 to ensure it protects trans people by changing the protected characteristic of ‘gender assignment’ to ‘gender identity’ and removing other outdated language such as ‘transsexual’. The Equality Act will continue to allow for separate and single-sex services, providing that such treatment by a provider is justified, but no spaces will be permitted to discriminate against trans people.” The fear your interviewee encountered was real, just for other reasons, and actually far more serious ones than the batshit "born without sex" comment Butler came out with post election. Had Labour been elected, we would have been facing some real attacks on the integrity of the Equality Act, and the enshrined in law right to single sex spaces.
Thank you. That's really useful. I have written to Lammy, with no hope of response, to point out what 'self-id' and "Stonewall Law" means in practice: a man with a history of abusing his wife allowed access to a a homeless hostel for women. That organisation, St Mungo's, out of one side of its mouth claims to work for women, but on the other waives its right to exclude males (GRC, or not, but in this case, they allow self-declaring transwomen to use the services as a matter of Policy - they are a Stonewall Champions and as they wrote - irrelevantly to me 'a top LGBT employer'). Google Marc/Melissa Addis.
Yes. Sorry I deleted as I thought it was off topic. If you google rubber fetish man and NSPCC it'll get you there. Was discussed at length on Mumsnet. Also he was the guy whose great idea it was to book Munroe Bergdorf as a Trans Ambassador for the NSPCC, despite Bergdorf have ing form for not understanding basic Safeguarding principles. The NSPCC, likeSt Mungo's keen to point out its great credentials as a 'top Stonewall LGBT employer' rather than showing responsibility to its client group.
I know who you are on about, he'd wear his fetish gear under his work gear, and allegedly take photos in the loos at the NSPCC of his penis; and at the time, he was defended by the likes of Talcum X. In the light of the dreadful murder of Sarah Everard, and her murderer's prior pattern of behaviour of indecent exposure, I wonder if the same crowd would be as quick to condone that type of behaviour in a work setting, especially a job in an organisation that claims to protect children.
You know at this point I think they'd (in public anyway) condone anything. We've all been groomed to think 'kink shaming' is such a terrible terrible thing.
In a world unrecognisable from the mid-80s our politicians stay resolutely the same. Back in 1986, with the campaign to decriminalise gays in Ireland gathering pace, Dublin's Lord Mayor Bertie Ahern told the voters "I have never met a homosexual", though everyone in political circles knew his top advisor and best friend was gay. Ahern went on to be the most successful Prime Minister in Irish history.
The only thing i find unbelievable is that Lammy is in anyway shape or form 'a good politician'. He like many many others is in it for what his ego needs and often gets - he ticks the box of being black but as for being Trevor Phillips he aint nowhere near.
Tottenham CLP has a really strong GC contingent - great that you have caught up with the Labour Womens' Declaration. Knowing this, I was particularly surprised by DL's recent comments.
It is bad enough that Labour down south is taking the position that it has, but SNP MPs are taking a similar position as NS has thrown women under the bus re the Scottish Act. I emailed my MP asking that she ask questions on behalf of women in the area, naming 12 women who have approached me (as a Community Councillor). He response was she is following the party line and that means only asking questions for transwomen and transmen. I asked how many transwomen/men had contacted her l and her response was none.
So this MP is prepared to ask questions on behalf of people who have not approached her, but not on behalf of constituents who have. Thus is not the first time we have had this response from her. If only I could find enough people to put in a vote of no confidence. Unfortunately there are few women in the area who are members of the SNP...
So we have seen both faces of Lammy.
I am unsure which is worse - bullshitting the populace via his excruciating TV and radio drivel or lying to his own individual constituents on their ow doorsteps?
Dear moley. I am not on Twitter, but I look at it IYSWIM. Your series with Marr asking physics/other questions of Starmer, and him answering 'the trans community is amongst the most marginalised and abused Communities. We need to make progress on the gender recognition act" is one of the funniest things I've seen for a while. Thank you for bringing levity. I need more levity and less 'fucked offedness'
Hello! Well, thanks for saying that, I do appreciate it!
I have to admit that I enjoyed that one. It started off with, "“I’m taking my wife’s car to the garage tomorrow for a service.’’ - Which was a play on 'cervix'. of course! It was the most mundane and disconnected question I could think of at that time.
For some reason then I started to think of Monty Python and their wonderful Philosophy Question, “Which great opponent of Cartesian dualism resists the reduction of psychological phenomena to a physical state and insists there is no point of contact between the extended and the unextended?’’ - Which is a correct question, but unintelligible and unanswerable to most people!
Of course, once Python was in my head that led to the question about where the coconuts came from that King Arthur and his band used instead of horses! 'They were flown here from Africa, etc'
Which led inevitably to the MP and the Holy Grail 'Bridge of Death' scene and those famous 'Questions Three'.
So, yes amusing and VERY absurd!
But no more absurd that Starmer trotting out that ludicrous and seemingly new party line about trans folk being an endangered species....
Thanks for taking the time, friend!
The TA3 min ago
I would have also become emotional if anyone from Labour had bothered to visit me in my safe Labour seat. The stress of dealing with gaslighting, and the effect it had on my job (I left it), the lack of response from my MP, and the incredulity at what people like Nandy (paedophiles in women's prisons!) and Rayner ('saving a seaa for Lily Madigan!) and the rest who signed that LGBT pledge calling us a hate group. The bullying of Labour women in CLPs. The venom against Rosie Duffield and not a dicky-bird from Starmer. That takes a toll.
And Lammy? He's partly responsible for this shitshow, via the Gender Recognition Act. Has no guts to ever let a chink of doubt that pretending men could ever be women was not a good idea; has unintended (but if you read Hansard, predicted consequences). So he lies. Arrogant man.
I really feel for women who have been emotionally abused and coercively controlled. If it feels like this for me, what must it be like for them?
I will probably never vote Labour again. They should be challenging Govt. policies on prisons, NHS wards and schools, yet they collude, and they say they'd go even further. Bastards.
I only just saw the Hansard stuff - it was posted on twitter by @hairyleggedharpy in 2018 but she RT'd it recently. Here's the Hansard extract referring to prisons and Lammy's response. The whole thread is worth a read - the GRA was basically them trying to avoid gay marriage.
https://twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1049299981981470720?s=20
It seems pretty conclusive that they did know the ramifications of self ID for women.
Such great "LGBT allies", eh? Because they didn't have the guts for the Equal Marriage fight, they threw women and girls under the bus.
Yup - that seems to be the sum of it. Lord Moynihan comes out the debate well - some people predicted exactly where this would end.
I was going to be generous and say maybe he forgot because… he doesn’t care? But after reading that thread 😡
Interesting that he can cry at the drop of a hat, gets to anger quickly, but it’s always for himself. In my experience those who tend to get to the top (workplace, organisations etc) are narcissists and everything they do is for themselves. It’s rare to find someone who’s principled and actually works for the greater good.
I'm all for men not being pressured to suppress emotions but I find it very uncomfortable in a professional setting. I also feel that suppressing emotions in certain circumstances is a good thing.
So, I don't particularly like the idea of someone who is Quick to Anger or can Cry at the drop of a Hat....it smacks of no self discipline. (and the Quick to Anger is a bit of a red flag for me).
(uncomfortable in a professional setting for ANYONE not just men).
Sounds quite histrionic as well.
Yes, I thought it was very performative too. I mean, even Oscar winners use eye drops sometimes.
Politicians - one after another - are saying such ridiculous things that it makes me wonder - How much money is a stake, and from whom?
I wonder too. In a way, it would feel less crazy-making if it were as banal as money.
I was thinking in terms donations to the party (with the intention of influencing policy development sympathetic to the ambitions of the donors), and public shaming for MP's and party members who do not comply with the subsequent policy position.
I can't think of any other explanation for MPs to start spouting what they clearly know to be untrue, the spluttering and obfuscation and linguistic knots they tie themselves in, shows they are not speaking their own truth. If the market in trans healthcare is predicted to grow £1.5bn p.a. by 2026 then it's not hard to see who might be funding it.
The LibDems have Ferring Pharmaceuticals as a major donor. Jean Hatchet's research showed that this company produces puberty blockers. During the run up to the 2019 election, while Butler and Labour were threatening the Equalities Act, then LibDem leader Jo Swinson was having one car crash interview after another, and going full batshit on the matter of so called "trans rights"
Off topic, but an Interesting typo in this article in the Guardian today:
"The sports guidance concludes that female-only sport is bothl awful and necessary to guarantee the fair and safe inclusion of women. "
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/oct/05/who-is-included-views-report-on-transgender-participation-in-sport
Little Owen’s been sneaking into the subeditor’s office again
It's fixed now :o)
I would have ranked Lammy as one of my favourite politicians until last week. I'm watching in horror as men (and some women) I admired fall to the genderwoo - Talcum X, Jolyon Maugham, Peter Jukes, Billy Bragg, Keir Starmer, David Lammy, Nick Thomas Symonds - then there's all the men that keep schtum. It's hard not to conclude that the left hates women.
Yep. Apart from a few things that have annoyed me in the past (attacking Stacey Dooley for being a white knight by helping children in African countries) I quite liked Lammy. He's articulate and good at taking on the government. But after this cervix fiasco, and the 'don't lecture me on rights cos I'm black' shit, I've lost all respect. He's entitled.
Maugham: I liked him for his challenges against the corrupt government. Felt sorry for him constantly getting attacked by right-wingers. Then he went full gender loon misoynist and he's been involved in corruption himself. Hate him on a visceral level now.
Jukes too. I want to support Byline times, but he's thrown himself in with the trans stormtroopers because it's easier. That one hurts, because so many people tried to talk science with him, but he kept running with pseudoscience. It's always easier to go against women for these men.
Keir...I had high hopes for him when he wasn't stupid enough to sign that pledge...then he went on that Pink News hostage video and sent me into despair.
These are intelligent men.
They're educated men for sure - little signs of intelligence lately.
Or men in all parties hate women? They find us a nuisance, particularly when we argue our case well. They really resent women putting their feet to the fire.
True - but I am a lifelong leftie so feel totally betrayed. I didn't expect much from the tories and yet they look the least insane on this issue. However, a lot of this happened on their watch so they don't get a free pass. They may not have introduced self ID but it's still policy in MoJ NHS, Education and more. I will probably spoil my ballot next time because I won't vote to be erased, and any party you do vote for will claim you voted for self ID.
Glinner, you need to make it clear that the Dawn Butler statements that allegedly upset the constituent were not the ones about "people being born with no sex". That particular episode of madness came after the Dec 2019 election. In the run up to the election, Butler attacked single sex spaces enshrined under the Equalities Act and said that there was “no way [that] spaces will be permitted to discriminate against trans people”. This caused confusion, as the Labour Party manifesto had promised to retain single sex based exemptions. Labour subsequently stated that “Our commitment to reforming the Gender Recognition Act, to introduce self-declaration for transgender people, is undimmed. Labour will amend the Equality Act 2010 to ensure it protects trans people by changing the protected characteristic of ‘gender assignment’ to ‘gender identity’ and removing other outdated language such as ‘transsexual’. The Equality Act will continue to allow for separate and single-sex services, providing that such treatment by a provider is justified, but no spaces will be permitted to discriminate against trans people.” The fear your interviewee encountered was real, just for other reasons, and actually far more serious ones than the batshit "born without sex" comment Butler came out with post election. Had Labour been elected, we would have been facing some real attacks on the integrity of the Equality Act, and the enshrined in law right to single sex spaces.
Thank you. That's really useful. I have written to Lammy, with no hope of response, to point out what 'self-id' and "Stonewall Law" means in practice: a man with a history of abusing his wife allowed access to a a homeless hostel for women. That organisation, St Mungo's, out of one side of its mouth claims to work for women, but on the other waives its right to exclude males (GRC, or not, but in this case, they allow self-declaring transwomen to use the services as a matter of Policy - they are a Stonewall Champions and as they wrote - irrelevantly to me 'a top LGBT employer'). Google Marc/Melissa Addis.
At work! He did that at work?!
Yes. Sorry I deleted as I thought it was off topic. If you google rubber fetish man and NSPCC it'll get you there. Was discussed at length on Mumsnet. Also he was the guy whose great idea it was to book Munroe Bergdorf as a Trans Ambassador for the NSPCC, despite Bergdorf have ing form for not understanding basic Safeguarding principles. The NSPCC, likeSt Mungo's keen to point out its great credentials as a 'top Stonewall LGBT employer' rather than showing responsibility to its client group.
I know who you are on about, he'd wear his fetish gear under his work gear, and allegedly take photos in the loos at the NSPCC of his penis; and at the time, he was defended by the likes of Talcum X. In the light of the dreadful murder of Sarah Everard, and her murderer's prior pattern of behaviour of indecent exposure, I wonder if the same crowd would be as quick to condone that type of behaviour in a work setting, especially a job in an organisation that claims to protect children.
You know at this point I think they'd (in public anyway) condone anything. We've all been groomed to think 'kink shaming' is such a terrible terrible thing.
Women’s rights are a wind sock issue. If the prevailing wind is TWAW that’s who the politicians will back.
In a world unrecognisable from the mid-80s our politicians stay resolutely the same. Back in 1986, with the campaign to decriminalise gays in Ireland gathering pace, Dublin's Lord Mayor Bertie Ahern told the voters "I have never met a homosexual", though everyone in political circles knew his top advisor and best friend was gay. Ahern went on to be the most successful Prime Minister in Irish history.
I realise I forgot to thank these women for speaking out so openly about this. Thank you.
The only thing i find unbelievable is that Lammy is in anyway shape or form 'a good politician'. He like many many others is in it for what his ego needs and often gets - he ticks the box of being black but as for being Trevor Phillips he aint nowhere near.
Tottenham CLP has a really strong GC contingent - great that you have caught up with the Labour Womens' Declaration. Knowing this, I was particularly surprised by DL's recent comments.
It is bad enough that Labour down south is taking the position that it has, but SNP MPs are taking a similar position as NS has thrown women under the bus re the Scottish Act. I emailed my MP asking that she ask questions on behalf of women in the area, naming 12 women who have approached me (as a Community Councillor). He response was she is following the party line and that means only asking questions for transwomen and transmen. I asked how many transwomen/men had contacted her l and her response was none.
So this MP is prepared to ask questions on behalf of people who have not approached her, but not on behalf of constituents who have. Thus is not the first time we have had this response from her. If only I could find enough people to put in a vote of no confidence. Unfortunately there are few women in the area who are members of the SNP...
Lammy is the author of the Gender Recognition Act 2004. He's the man at the root of all the problems today.
Labour women: Do you think he saw us?
David Lammy: Dinosaurs!
Graham Linehan For The Win!