Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Actually the law.

“The process that people have to go through does need to be looked at,” he told The Times. “If you talk to anybody who’s been through the process there’s a real issue about respect and dignity.”

So I wonder if he’s read the Cass report? How long before the continuing scandal and disaster will force him (and others) to moderate and walk back their unqualified support for genderist demands?

He called for a “more considered, respectful, tolerant debate about these issues”. Starmer added: “I don’t think it furthers the interests of anybody to continue the debate in the way that it’s been going on now for some time.”

“Both siderism” strikes again. But only one side has been bullying, threatening, and desperately trying to silence their critics and questioners. Up to now, there has been no “debate” because one side has been demanding (and being given) so-called “rights” at the direct expense of women’s health, safety and dignity, with any resistance and critique being denounced as genocidal bigotry. Women have had to force the issue because so many institutions and authorities have been coopted by genderism. They have forced through trans activist demands behind the scenes, in backroom deals that bypassed the normal processes of discussion, examination and evaluation. What truly “powerless”, “oppressed” or “marginalized” group has ever managed that? What does that say about the actual amount of power and influence these poor, downtrodden snowflakes are capable of wielding? Since when have the powers of patriarchy been so willing to go along with something that wasn’t in their interest? Since when have any movements that threatened the established order of things been handed eveything they’ve asked for, with the protection and power of the police to boot? Please. They’re not a threat to patrirchy, they’re its realization.

Starmer, among others, has been on the side of those trying to force their way past women’s boundaries, and joined in with the vilification of women trying to defend their rights. In decrying the current state of things, he is blandly, and unironically standing with the one side which has dedicated itself to continued vitriol and intimidation against women standing up for women saying, in effect, “LOOK WHAT YOU MADE THEM DO!!”