The Earl of Chesterfield, on 16 February 2023 - 05:47 PM, said:
However the point is we've contributors who recently trumpeted womens' rights when discussing trans stuff, yet who've shown scant regard for them when talking about Sturgeon or Markle or Merkel or many, many others.
Simple truth is there's no evidence confirming the First Minister quit 'cos of the trans tangle she created. No matter how much it might suit some agendas to pursue that largely non-issue. And whilst we might be opposed to her nationalism (how the hell does championing EU membership correspond with leaving another successful union?!) most can recognise and respect the huge role she's played over the last twenty or so years...
PS: why is the trans thing some sorta challenge for Labour and not the tories....?
Well, I don't have much to say about Nicola, Meghan or Angela. They are powerful women, which is a great thing. Do I agree with everything that they say or do? No. But they're not causing women an issue, so I'm not quite sure what I'm supposed to say.
I don't think the gender debate is a non-issue. Well, it's not for me anyway. Whether it's the reason that Ms Sturgeon quit, I don't know: I'm simply not privy to that info.
The reason that the "trans thing" is a challenge for Labour is that SKS struggles to articulate whether men have a cervix or women have a penis. I'm a working class woman from a mining town in Yorkshire with a state school education. And I can categorically state that: "They don't" and "They don't".
I read the view of many left leaning women, who consider themselves politically homeless as a result of this issue. I am one of them. Whether you like it or not, the gender debate will have a bigger affect on women than it will on men. That's why so many women find themselves in this position. The economy, health, education and defence are also important to us. But it's not up to anyone else to minimise our concerns or say that we should be casting our vote on other issues. We can, and will, vote as we please.