Starmer’s pets
Joan Smith on Keir Starmer’s buddy relationship with the People of Gender:
[G]ender-critical women’s organisations and even some of his own MPs struggle to get a meeting with Sir Keir Starmer.
Not so trans activists, for whom Starmer apparently has all the time in the world. This week he welcomed members of the lobby group LGBT+ Labour to a reception at Westminster and offered them everything the most dedicated trans activist could want, short of self-ID. Starmer was accompanied by a raft of frontbenchers including his deputy, Angela Rayner, and the Shadow Women and Equalities Minister, Anneliese Dodds.
“Together we’ll ban conversion therapy, strengthen hate crime laws and tackle health inequalities,” Dodds posted excitedly on X.
But the “conversion therapy” she means isn’t conversion therapy, and by “health inequalities” she probably means the tragic unfairness of not being able to swap sex as easily as you can swap hats. Meanwhile, what about women? The people who are subject to rape which goes uninvestigated, unprosecuted, unconvicted, unpunished? Any inequalities there?
It must be galling for Labour MPs such as Rosie Duffield, who has been relentlessly targeted by LGBT+ Labour, to see the party’s leading figures palling up to its members. Starmer has not spoken to Duffield for more than two years, leaving her to cope unsupported with endless smears and demands that she should lose the Labour whip. He is evidently more comfortable with the widely-ridiculed MP for Jarrow, Kate Osborne, who was at the reception despite having boasted on X about her delusion that some women have a penis.
It’s galling for Rosie and for all of us – galling, infuriating, frustrating. It feels as if 50 years of progress have been torched.
It seems more like Starmer is their pet…
The accelerationist in me wonders if it might be better in the long run if a newly minted Labour brings in Sex Self ID and bans “conversion therapy” just so that more normal people get exposed to the entirely predictable outcomes of those absurd polices.
Most of my extended family are quite conservative and religious and several years ago they were all over the topic of gay marriage (because Northern Ireland didn’t get it until 2020), and they weren’t for it I can tell you that much! However transgenderism isn’t on their radar, they don’t talk about it or seem to have any opinion on it at all. In fact the only out and out “Terf” in my family is the black sheep who supported gay rights, to the point where she got into arguments with her own pastor about it.
At the end of the day I think most people aren’t going to care about this until it effects them or someone they know personally. When everyone has a first or second hand experience of girls loosing to boys in sports, or of women getting banned from the local leisure centre for complaining about the flasher in the showers, or a “trans” kid who got all the treatments and still ended up a basket case, or who detransitioned and now has to live with missing body parts it’ll be impossible to ignore the negative effects of this ideology on most peoples lives. That might be better than trying to stymie it in the hopes that it’ll break before it gets to do even more damage.
While theoretically I can see the point of this approach, it comes at too high a price. Not only will more people be “exposed to the entirely predictable outcomes of those absurd policies,” more people, particularly women and girls, will be subjected to them. In fact that harm is happening right now. It is not theoretical. It’s also not something I want to see extended or expanded, needlessly engulfing even more innocents in the nightmare morass of genderist demands. I don’t want to see more women and girls used as political cannon-fodder just so the follies Team Trans can be made more obvious to those as yet ignorant of, and untouched by, its bullying madness. Of course given all the captured institutions who’ve bought into, promote, and enforce this bullshit, that’s probably going to be what it takes, but I’m opposed to choosing it as a deliberate strategy.
Also, trying to undo all the shitty laws will suck up even more time, effort, and energy that could be put towards
other vitally important issues. Why winkle and weed, when you can halt and prevent?