Read on Twitter
This is more bullshit rhetoric and deflection.
1. We are members of your political party and you are refusing to engage in a matter of public policy that is currently splitting the left. You can call us right wing all you like, that will not change the fact that you are https://twitter.com/NadiaWhittomeMP/status/1286605512696573953
1. We are members of your political party and you are refusing to engage in a matter of public policy that is currently splitting the left. You can call us right wing all you like, that will not change the fact that you are https://twitter.com/NadiaWhittomeMP/status/1286605512696573953
still trying to demonise and silence women within the left that are going to carry on having this conversation, because it affects our rights, this is a democracy, and you cannot propose changes to the law that affect us and then try and constantly handwave and deflect by calling
us bigots, right wing etc.
Actually defend the policy, and deal with the objections, and stop this propagandist nonsense. Because we're not going anywhere, and we are the people who vote for you. Do you actually want to win an election???
Actually defend the policy, and deal with the objections, and stop this propagandist nonsense. Because we're not going anywhere, and we are the people who vote for you. Do you actually want to win an election???
2. The rights that are being debated are not trans people's fundamental rights. Trans people are protected under the law against discrimination. They have employment protections. They have state supported healthcare. No one is suggesting taking that away. In fact, many of us
would like to see more resources for trans people, to allow proper evaluation which isn't rushed, for mental health support because there are a lot of co-morbidities and vulnerabilities, and for dedicated services to meet their needs.
The 'rights' being discussed are whether
The 'rights' being discussed are whether
male born people have the right to self-identify into the class of women without any gatekeeping, and have access to all women's services as a result.
What we are discussing, in fact, is the meaning of the class of 'woman' in law. Women have a legitimate political interest in
What we are discussing, in fact, is the meaning of the class of 'woman' in law. Women have a legitimate political interest in
the meaning of their own political class and the rights that follow from it. What we are discussing, that is, is women's rights. And you are maintaining, that in a 21st century liberal democracy, women have no right to have an opinion on their own rights.
3. We did have a debate on the inclusion of gay people in the military. And that debate was won, by public debate. And thought that, in changing public attitudes. You do not create durable social changes and shifts in attitude by making laws by fiat, and demonising anyone that
so much as asks a question. If you want to persuade people, then persuade them. To us this all looks like you cannot answer our objections at all and are relying on demonising and trying to cancel us. Because your claims don't actually stack up.
4. The comparison with gay rights fails. Gay rights didn't involve the demand to access another class of person in law, and to fundamentally change the meaning of that class. In fact no civil rights movement in human history has made this kind of claim. It is unprecedented, and
throws up all kinds of issues, especially given that the class people are demanding access to is also a vulnerable class which has protected status under the law.
To equate this to all other civil rights movement, and to smear anyone asking questions as a straightforward
To equate this to all other civil rights movement, and to smear anyone asking questions as a straightforward
bigoted enemy of progress is facile in the extreme, and it's not going to frickin wash.
To wit: Engage with the substance of the issues or stop intervening like a teenager who has just gorged themselves on Tumblr in a manner not befitting a member of our parliament.
To wit: Engage with the substance of the issues or stop intervening like a teenager who has just gorged themselves on Tumblr in a manner not befitting a member of our parliament.
