[Misnomer]

 Wooden Spoon, on 22 April 2025 - 10:38 PM, said:

Coz it’s not bollocks HB - it’s how the party has been for ages. Up until this week.

A few quotes from Starmer

2021 - it is not right to say only women have a cervix

2022 - it is the law that trans women are defined as women

2023 - 99.9% of women do not have a penis

This week - a woman is a biological female - compare that to his 2022 policy direction.

Did it really take a judge to tell this muppet what a woman is? Jesus he’s been married to one and had kids with one.

And you’re right about the focus in the real world - How a handful of activists and like 0.1% of the population drive the leader of a party to make it part of a keynote speech at the annual party conference and ignore 50% of the non trans population is crazy.



Like I said, no trans rights have been removed, no change in trans rights yet the extreme activists have been out vandalising statues monuments, protesting and yelling on social media about……… nothing. No change for them.

You’ve been had, hook line and sinker.

Another top post....

[frearsghost]

 Wooden Spoon, on 22 April 2025 - 10:38 PM, said:

Coz it's not bollocks HB - it's how the party has been for ages. Up until this week.

A few quotes from Starmer

2021 - it is not right to say only women have a cervix

2022 - it is the law that trans women are defined as women

2023 - 99.9% of women do not have a penis

This week - a woman is a biological female - compare that to his 2022 policy direction.

Did it really take a judge to tell this muppet what a woman is? Jesus he's been married to one and had kids with one.

And you're right about the focus in the real world - How a handful of activists and like 0.1% of the population drive the leader of a party to make it part of a keynote speech at the annual party conference and ignore 50% of the non trans population is crazy.





Like I said, no trans rights have been removed, no change in trans rights yet the extreme activists have been out vandalising statues monuments, protesting and yelling on social media about……… nothing. No change for them.

You've been had, hook line and sinker.

I wonder if Sir Flip Flop will make an apology today to the vast majority of women whose biological gender he has refused for months to recognise as unique. Lots of clips on TV this morning of him and Raynor defending the rights of trans women to use womens' spaces. Now it's illegal for them to do so but how remarkable is it, that it takes a law to make this middle ranking, plodder of a lawyer recognise the factual uniqueness of biological gender. Sort of begs the question, is it the law he respects rather than the obvious?

Now he has a rebellion on his hands. Many Labour MPs, including front bench ministers, are deciding how to circumvent this law. Will they, I wonder, be joining left wing activist marches who have particpated in vandalism, violence and death threats now under police investigation. (another test for our two tier policing system.)  Truly remarkbale is that we have a PM who has been so befuddled and confused about the whole issue because of his dishonest utlitarianism of saying anything his believes his various audiences want to hear. His judgement has always been suspect and so it continues. The man is a danger to himself and our country.

This post has been edited by frearsghost: 23 April 2025 - 09:28 AM

[Misnomer]

Starmer and Liebour offering faux patriotism �� he's 'reclaiming' the St George flag.... it's not yours to have, you flip-flopping, treacherous t...

How insulting, thick and divisive can you get. Insinuating that the flag somehow belongs to far-right racists. Thornberry strikes again....what a sneering.. 

[frearsghost]

 frearsghost, on 23 April 2025 - 09:27 AM, said:

I wonder if Sir Flip Flop will make an apology today to the vast majority of women whose biological gender he has refused for months to recognise as unique. Lots of clips on TV this morning of him and Raynor defending the rights of trans women to use womens' spaces. Now it's illegal for them to do so but how remarkable is it, that it takes a law to make this middle ranking, plodder of a lawyer recognise the factual uniqueness of biological gender. Sort of begs the question, is it the law he respects rather than the obvious?

Now he has a rebellion on his hands. Many Labour MPs, including front bench ministers, are deciding how to circumvent this law. Will they, I wonder, be joining left wing activist marches who have particpated in vandalism, violence and death threats now under police investigation. (another test for our two tier policing system.)  Truly remarkbale is that we have a PM who has been so befuddled and confused about the whole issue because of his dishonest utlitarianism of saying anything his believes his various audiences want to hear. His judgement has always been suspect and so it continues. The man is a danger to himself and our country.

No apology, no compunction. Just a pre-wrttten script which he read out.A man unable to say he was wrong.  She was right no balls.

Couldn't even apologise to Rosie Duffileld whom he hounded out of the party after she spoke the truth now enshrined in law. A silppery, weasal of a man and a coward to boot.

This post has been edited by frearsghost: 23 April 2025 - 12:20 PM

[Mr Mercury]

 Misnomer, on 23 April 2025 - 11:30 AM, said:

Starmer and Liebour offering faux patriotism �� he's 'reclaiming' the St George flag.... it's not yours to have, you flip-flopping, treacherous t...

How insulting, thick and divisive can you get. Insinuating that the flag somehow belongs to far-right racists. Thornberry strikes again....what a sneering.. 

It’s beyond mind boggling how often and how dramatically this Labour government fail to read the room and get it so catastrophically wrong. Like the WFA, the Waspi women, the snouts in the trough freebies, the inheritance tax on farmers, the disastrous budget and NI tax, the grab off of disabled benefits, the Southport cover up, classing huge swathes of the population as far right, the lack of conviction on the getting justice for victims of the rape gangs, the skyrocketing numbers of illegal immigrants crossing the channel with no purpose to reduce the numbers, the list goes on and on. It’s almost as though it’s done on purpose.
I remember when I frequently mentioned the parliamentary Labour Party being nothing more than the Metropolitan elite when in opposition and I was regularly shouted down for mentioning this mythical political entity, well this Labour government isn’t one that millions of Labour voters and supporters recognise or even relate to, you’ve only got to talk to life long Labour voters, listen to interviews with people, we’ve even seen on here Labour supporters aghast at what’s being delivered. So I stand by what I said before this isn’t a government of the working class or even middle classses, it’s a self serving elitist government who’s agenda is about as far away from the views, aims and wishes of millions upon millions of ordinary British people as you can get. They’re rotten to the soles of their feet and they’ll never be forgiven for what they’re trying to do to the UK.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 23 April 2025 - 03:23 PM

[Mr Mercury]

 frearsghost, on 23 April 2025 - 12:19 PM, said:

No apology, no compunction. Just a pre-wrttten script which he read out.A man unable to say he was wrong.  She was right no balls.

Couldn't even apologise to Rosie Duffileld whom he hounded out of the party after she spoke the truth now enshrined in law. A silppery, weasal of a man and a coward to boot.

The man is an absolute walking talking contradiction. He’s despised and vilified in equal measure because of how he behaves and acts. He’s zero credibility, he’s a louse of a PM and sooner or later the party must surely recognise they have to get rid of him before he ruins them for a generation, if he hasn’t already.
His stance, answer, demeanour and evasion when asked if he’d apologise to Rosie Duffield said more than a million words ever could about him.
Having a case of political turrets isn’t apt anymore, he’s simply not worthy of even the most base of profanities.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 23 April 2025 - 03:53 PM

[oldgoat]

 Mr Mercury, on 23 April 2025 - 03:00 PM, said:

The man is an absolute walking talking contradiction. He’s despised and vilified in equal measure because of how he behaves and acts. He’s zero credibility, he’s a louse of a PM and sooner or later the party must surely recognise they have to get rid of him before he ruins them for a generation, if he hasn’t already.
His stance, answer, demeanour and evasion when asked if he’d apologise to Rosie Duffield said more than a million words ever could about him.
Having a case of political turrets isn’t apt anymore, he’s simply not worthy of even the most base of profanities.

Politics aside wow you love to hear your own voice

[Mr Mercury]

 Mr Mercury, on 23 April 2025 - 03:00 PM, said:

The man is an absolute walking talking contradiction. He’s despised and vilified in equal measure because of how he behaves and acts. He’s zero credibility, he’s a louse of a PM and sooner or later the party must surely recognise they have to get rid of him before he ruins them for a generation, if he hasn’t already.
His stance, answer, demeanour and evasion when asked if he’d apologise to Rosie Duffield said more than a million words ever could about him.
Having a case of political turrets isn’t apt anymore, he’s simply not worthy of even the most base of profanities.

Tourettes* damn spell checker.

[Wooden Spoon]

 Mr Mercury, on 23 April 2025 - 03:00 PM, said:

The man is an absolute walking talking contradiction. He’s despised and vilified in equal measure because of how he behaves and acts. He’s zero credibility, he’s a louse of a PM and sooner or later the party must surely recognise they have to get rid of him before he ruins them for a generation, if he hasn’t already.
His stance, answer, demeanour and evasion when asked if he’d apologise to Rosie Duffield said more than a million words ever could about him.
Having a case of political turrets isn’t apt anymore, he’s simply not worthy of even the most base of profanities.

What do labour stand for right now?


Who do Labour represent right now?


What is their political ideology right now?


3 fairly simple questions and you know I can’t answer any of them. I wonder if you put those questions to the front bench could they answer those questions themselves? In a straightforward way without the usual crap about working hard, rolling sleeves up, doing the best for the people non answers?


Could the tories answer those questions themselves? Watching the absolutely hapless Badenich on the news today was just pitiful. A poor man’s version of a chancer trying to make hay and just oh so falling short of the mark I’m embarrassed for her. Absolutely dreadful performance.


Lib Dem’s - are they still a party? Nothing to say on anything, standard Lib Dem’s but this is worse than I can ever remember from them. Literally nothing to say

[Wooden Spoon]

 Misnomer, on 23 April 2025 - 11:30 AM, said:

Starmer and Liebour offering faux patriotism �� he's 'reclaiming' the St George flag.... it's not yours to have, you flip-flopping, treacherous t...

How insulting, thick and divisive can you get. Insinuating that the flag somehow belongs to far-right racists. Thornberry strikes again....what a sneering.. 

Thornberry is another one if these extremist lunatics who have no connection to the working class did this country


They literally sit in their metropolitan elite north London million pound ivory towers pontificating over the huddled masses - it’s a nice view from Hampstead

[dart in the crossbar]

 frearsghost, on 23 April 2025 - 12:19 PM, said:

No apology, no compunction. Just a pre-wrttten script which he read out.A man unable to say he was wrong.  She was right no balls.

Couldn't even apologise to Rosie Duffileld whom he hounded out of the party after she spoke the truth now enshrined in law. A silppery, weasal of a man and a coward to boot.

Genuine question.

To what extent do you think that the root cause of the ruling is the danger to women of trans women (born as men) going into women's toilets v a view that people shouldn't be allowed to be trans?

I ask because I've not read anything about trans men (born as women), including those with beards and deep voices. I assume that they are now banned from using men's toilets - and so would be required to use women's toilets as they were born female.

As I say, genuine question.

[Wooden Spoon]

 dart in the crossbar, on 24 April 2025 - 06:37 AM, said:

Genuine question.

To what extent do you think that the root cause of the ruling is the danger to women of trans women (born as men) going into women's toilets v a view that people shouldn't be allowed to be trans?

I ask because I've not read anything about trans men (born as women), including those with beards and deep voices. I assume that they are now banned from using men's toilets - and so would be required to use women's toilets as they were born female.

As I say, genuine question.

No where has I seen anything about someone it “allowed to be trans”


Where have you seen this?

[dart in the crossbar]

 Wooden Spoon, on 24 April 2025 - 09:25 AM, said:

No where has I seen anything about someone it “allowed to be trans”


Where have you seen this?

No, I haven't. It hasn't been said as far as I'm aware.

I was wondering whether there are some who are behind the ruling because it will make life harder for trans people (which one assumes it will). Or the ruling is based on solid evidence that women are at risk by trans women (born as men) in toilets. If it is the latter, I'm puzzled as to how requiring trans men (born as women) to use women's toilets squares with that. I think that there was one trans person in Scotland who (I think) got sent down for assault, but not a wider issue.

Like I say, I'm genuinely interested. On the face of it, the ruling could seem like a sledgehammer that doesn't really crack a nut (no pun intended!)

This post has been edited by dart in the crossbar: 24 April 2025 - 09:37 AM

[Wooden Spoon]

 dart in the crossbar, on 24 April 2025 - 09:37 AM, said:

No, I haven't. It hasn't been said as far as I'm aware.

I was wondering whether there are some who are behind the ruling because it will make life harder for trans people (which one assumes it will). Or the ruling is based on solid evidence that women are at risk by trans women (born as men) in toilets. If it is the latter, I'm puzzled as to how requiring trans men (born as women) to use women's toilets squares with that. I think that there was one trans person in Scotland who (I think) got sent down for assault, but not a wider issue.

Like I say, I'm genuinely interested. On the face of it, the ruling could seem like a sledgehammer that doesn't really crack a nut (no pun intended!)

I don’t know anyone who’s against trans people, honestly I don’t know anyone who gives a flying f@¥# if a bloke want to wear a dress and be a girl. No one.


I know a lot of women who aren’t comfortable with not having same sex safe areas such as bogs etc.

[dtp]

I think there is a lot of fuss about nothing as far as which toilets people should use.

Most places nowadays have unisex toilets by way of disabled toilets. These can be used individually by anyone, make, female, trans-female, trans-man without discrimination.

So, no need for a man dressed as a woman having to go into the Gents or a woman dressed as a man having to go into the Ladies causing confusion.

[Goku]

 Wooden Spoon, on 24 April 2025 - 09:40 AM, said:

I don’t know anyone who’s against trans people, honestly I don’t know anyone who gives a flying f@¥# if a bloke want to wear a dress and be a girl. No one.


I know a lot of women who aren’t comfortable with not having same sex safe areas such as bogs etc.

What do these women do in the many scenarios where there aren't toilets segregated by sex?

[Burgerman]

 dtp, on 24 April 2025 - 09:56 AM, said:

I think there is a lot of fuss about nothing as far as which toilets people should use.

Most places nowadays have unisex toilets by way of disabled toilets. These can be used individually by anyone, make, female, trans-female, trans-man without discrimination.

So, no need for a man dressed as a woman having to go into the Gents or a woman dressed as a man having to go into the Ladies causing confusion.

Go down that route and you'll have the Trans community going apeshit at being classed as disabled. Unless of course all disabled toilets are renamed but not sure that would work

[Wooden Spoon]

 Goku, on 24 April 2025 - 09:58 AM, said:

What do these women do in the many scenarios where there aren't toilets segregated by sex?

What do you think they’d o

[Goku]

 Wooden Spoon, on 24 April 2025 - 10:04 AM, said:

What do you think they’d o

Probably use the toilet and be absolutely fine

[Wooden Spoon]

 Goku, on 24 April 2025 - 10:09 AM, said:

Probably use the toilet and be absolutely fine

My mrs doesn’t use them. She will wait or go elsewhere.


I’d suggest you ask a few women and LISTEN to what they say, oh they have - at the high court.

Why do you think these women took it to the high court? Clearly they were not fine with it.

I find it strange that you’re fine with forcing the lack of safe spaces on 50% of the population, and not fine with 0.1% having this issue.