Read on Twitter
I feel bad about this, generally discipline for internal elections is extremely important, but I can’t vote for Pidcock or Henderson for the NEC.
One important thing, moving away even from moral concerns, is a left majority on the NEC isn’t happening but perhaps, though also a long-shot given the position of the leadership, an NEC which takes concerns of trans people seriously could happen.
When I’ve discussed this before, I’ve had some honest replies asking what’s the problem with Pidcock in particular so it’s worth setting that out, I think.
Firstly, the 2019 manifesto was, to say the least, ambiguous over "single sex exemptions". Butler suggested that ambiguity would be resolved in favour of trans women, Pidcock did not -the opposition here between women and trans people is telling, of course https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/23/labour-confused-messages-women-only-spaces-transgender-rights
The same opposition structures what was deeply troubling in the Tribune piece. "The women’s movement needs the space to talk about sex and gender, without fear of being ‘no platformed’." Trans people again presented as external to the women's movement. https://tribunemag.co.uk/2020/02/letter-to-the-movement
I think too the presentation of discussions which have done considerable harm to trans people in this abstract way "talk about sex and gender" is incredibly cruel and mystifying.
These could be read as careless but particularly given pieces like this in a far-right publication, anyone worth voting for would have corrected these misapprehensions if they believed they were giving the wrong impression about their views. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/in-defence-of-laura-pidcock
One other thing to add, it would be incredibly condescending to suggest Pidcock or Henderson are “ignorant” & need political education, they’re both serious political people who know exactly what they’re doing.
