If you’re going to make reforms
Starmer is perhaps reconsidering.
Sir Keir Starmer signalled a climbdown on Labour’s transgender stance on Thursday as he said lessons have to be learned from Scotland.
…
Sir Keir had previously vowed to reform the Gender Recognition Act to allow trans people to self-identify, but appeared to back away from the pledge during a press conference in Stoke-on-Trent.
Sir Keir told reporters: “I think that if we reflect on what’s happened in Scotland, the lesson I take from that is that if you’re going to make reforms, you have to carry the public with you.”
But who says they are reforms? Changes aren’t automatically reforms. If you’re going to make “reforms” that trash women’s rights, you don’t have to “carry the public with you,” you have to stop what you’re doing and listen to women.
It’s cheating to stack the deck in your favor by assuming your proposed changes are reforms.
In a message to the LGBT website Pink News for Pride in 2021, Sir Keir said his priority was “forming the next government so we can introduce legislation and change society so that, whoever you are, you can live a happy and fulfilled life”.
What about people who identify as Keir Starmer, or Charles Windsor, or Elon Musk, or Ivanka Trump? Should we change society so that they can live happy fulfilled lives as their assumed identities?
A sea change is happening – see World Athletics.
I guess technically they would be reforms, since it would be re-forming something to a different look or function. But the word has come to mean making better in common vernacular, so yeah, it’s definitely stacking the deck.. Not all changes are for the better; not all reforming is progress.
Not common vernacular. My Concise Oxford dictionary has as the first definition “make or become better by the removal of faults and errors.” 2 is “abolish or cure (an abuse or malpractice).” 3 is “correct (a legal document).”
I like Starmer in many ways (partly because he seems to be the best option in the present situation), but he is far too timid. He is always putting himself in the position of having to catch up with what appears to be ‘public opinion’, and never taking the lead himself.
So … No matter “who you are” (which really means “how you identify[ yourself]”) your self-conception must be respected and affirmed, and accommodations must be made by society such that you can live a happy and fulfilled life?
All right.
What if you identify as someone who believes that all this trans and gender woowoo is total bollocks?
Why does the self-conception of Genderists trump the self-conception of everyone else? Why does every other human have to reconfigure his or her understanding of self and relation to the universe in order to conform to and affirm Genderist doctrine?