news & politics:discussion

[fraybentos1]

It goes a little something like this:

Labour have a policy on X and starmer says this.

Then ozanne posts a tweet in here and says how great it is that Labour and starmer are doing X 

Couple weeks later Labour and Starmer change to the opposite point of view

Then ozanne comes back on here and posts a few tweets and posts saying Labour and starmer are spot on.

Then followed by a tantrum and calling other people tories. 

 

[steviewevie]

so, turns out UFOs are real.

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I'm curious as to who you think Labour is still standing up for. They're not standing up for immigrants, refugees, queer people, disabled people, part-time workers, public sector workers, protestors, or impoverished families. 

Yes, Starmer's Labour will be better than the Tories, but they've literally said they don't want to offer hope. They've scrapped so many pledges and promises that all I see left is "trust us to be better", but they're not telling us how. They're not giving a reason to trust them, or any way in which they will be better.

As I have said before I work in the NHS and patients/carers talk to me about political issues all the time. You can add trans issues to Middle East politics as issues that not a single person has ever discussed. What they talk about is the NHS, social care , education and housing for their kids and grandkids.

Whether we like it or not the country isn’t filled with people who think like us and labour need to find a platform that enough people can get behind. That’s probably focusing on majority issues, allowing them to get power and help minorities. 
 

We saw the issues that self ID caused in Scotland. Trans rights are absolutely something we should fight to defend. However there’s only one party who wants to go into election with trans rights front and centre and that’s the party in blue.

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

It's wrong. There's a lot of misinformation and abuse targeted at trans people and facts and arguments are twisted to try and reframe abuse as punching up.

Women's rights are more under threat by police officers than by trans women, and that's even before the fact that there are more trans men than trans women.

What’s the workable solution though? We saw what happened in Scotland. What could labour do differently that could help the trans community and gain public support. I think if they take the SNP approach they make anti trans feeling stronger and a Tory government more likely. That won’t help trans people at all.

[steviewevie]

19 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

As I have said before I work in the NHS and patients/carers talk to me about political issues all the time. You can add trans issues to Middle East politics as issues that not a single person has ever discussed. What they talk about is the NHS, social care , education and housing for their kids and grandkids.

Whether we like it or not the country isn’t filled with people who think like us and labour need to find a platform that enough people can get behind. That’s probably focusing on majority issues, allowing them to get power and help minorities. 
 

We saw the issues that self ID caused in Scotland. Trans rights are absolutely something we should fight to defend. However there’s only one party who wants to go into election with trans rights front and centre and that’s the party in blue.

So no one cares about it but labour should side with the majority opinion?

[steviewevie]

powerful words...

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

So no one cares about it but labour should side with the majority opinion?

The electorate aren’t too bothered about trans issues generally but there can still be blowback from policy as seen with the SNP. So Labour have adjusted their policy so there’s no risk of that happening and it becomes a bigger issue which risks taking over the narrative.

[steviewevie]

whole thing.

 

[pink_triangle]

26 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

So no one cares about it but labour should side with the majority opinion?

I think you need to focus on the things that the majority care about, so you can get in power to help some of the minorities.

You need to ask yourself what issues the Torys would like to be front and centre of the election campaign. Why would labour want to fight on those issues?

[Neil]

2 hours ago, Ozanne said:

From an electoral perspective it makes sense, why would they look at what happened to the SNP and want to have any risk at all that it would happen to them? That wouldn’t be very wise. 

true, why champion a failed policy:

we've got the tories for that.

 

 

[steviewevie]

 

[gizmoman]

14 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

Wrong thread, unless you want to bring up Sinead's politics. sh*t news though.

[steviewevie]

Just now, gizmoman said:

Wrong thread, unless you want to bring up Sinead's politics. sh*t news though.

"news" and politics.

but, if you want some politics...

 

[steviewevie]

anyway, RIP. Very sad.

[gizmoman]

4 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

It's wrong. There's a lot of misinformation and abuse targeted at trans people and facts and arguments are twisted to try and reframe abuse as punching up.

Women's rights are more under threat by police officers than by trans women, and that's even before the fact that there are more trans men than trans women.

It is actually the right decision but for the wrong reasons. Labour would clearly love to continue with the policy but have realised it would not be popular. The fact is, it is not as reported, "Labour drops pledge to introduce self-ID for trans people" the rule would apply to all, trans or not, ANYONE could claim to be another gender, this leaves the policy open to abuse and ridicule, something already seen in Scotland. Trans people are better served with the current system, once they have been through it they have a legitimate status, self ID would undermine that.

[gizmoman]

8 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

"news" and politics.

but, if you want some politics...

 

If you had added one of your trademark one liners such as "Sinead dead, so sad" I wouldn't have commented, still not everyone sees the In memoriam thread so fair enough.

[kaosmark2]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

As I have said before I work in the NHS and patients/carers talk to me about political issues all the time. You can add trans issues to Middle East politics as issues that not a single person has ever discussed. What they talk about is the NHS, social care , education and housing for their kids and grandkids.

Whether we like it or not the country isn’t filled with people who think like us and labour need to find a platform that enough people can get behind. That’s probably focusing on majority issues, allowing them to get power and help minorities. 
 

We saw the issues that self ID caused in Scotland. Trans rights are absolutely something we should fight to defend. However there’s only one party who wants to go into election with trans rights front and centre and that’s the party in blue.

What have Labour promised on NHS, social care, education, or housing? What pledges and ideas have they got remaining? I don't see a reform of the rental sector, schemes to attract more nurses, anything to add dignity to carers and their patients. I see a few half-pledges from 2-3 years ago that I expect will abandoned as surely as the last 20 were.

 

I completely believe that 80% of the population barely care about trans rights (in either direction). However, a vocal abusive minority are attacking some of the most vulnerable people in society and trying to craft a narrative that they're predators and abusers.

I don't think Labour should make trans rights a central issue for the party, or their campaign. What I do think is an issue, is that ~12% of this country are queer, and pride campaigns, leaders, groups, etc. are now vocally saying that Labour have positioned themselves as our enemies, not our friends. Starmer has abandoned a minority for hate and abuse in the same way Corbyn abandoned Jewish people by standing beside his antisemitic buddies.

Labour and their leadership are no longer welcome at Pride, and this has been stated a significant amount over the last 2 months with all the pride events. Even if you're purely concerned about electability, it should scare you that 12% of the population - in a group that are almost universally left-wing out of sheer protection for their own rights - do not believe Labour will advocate for them. 

[kaosmark2]

4 hours ago, zahidf said:

Yup. The anti-trans people are so obviously bigoted as well. Look how they transitioned in Italy to being anti-trans to homophobia. 

If you look at what elements of "trans" are being attacked, the rights of lesbian parents, the way people dress, and basically anyone not conforming to "traditional gender roles" are being targeted. Gay rights and feminism are vulnerable.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

16 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

anyway, RIP. Very sad.

I was about to really get into the news.

She meant so much to me to the point I am crying. I don't do that. 

f**k xx

[Guest]

4 days is a long time but I posted this at the weekend, Labours policies before their NPF.

 

[kaosmark2]

12 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

It is actually the right decision but for the wrong reasons. Labour would clearly love to continue with the policy but have realised it would not be popular. The fact is, it is not as reported, "Labour drops pledge to introduce self-ID for trans people" the rule would apply to all, trans or not, ANYONE could claim to be another gender, this leaves the policy open to abuse and ridicule, something already seen in Scotland. Trans people are better served with the current system, once they have been through it they have a legitimate status, self ID would undermine that.

You can't get a Gender Recognition Certificate until you socially transition.

You can't get hormone treatment and surgery until you socially transition.

If you can't socially transition, you are stuck. Part of socially transitioning is self-ID. Self-ID is what happens and works now. There are nuanced exceptions, and some of them need to be worked on. Most don't.

A pretty simple position to hold re. prisons would be "self-ID doesn't apply if the crime was sexual in nature". That'd get rid of the idiocy around the case in Scotland and the fuss over it.

[kaosmark2]

5 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

4 days is a long time but I posted this at the weekend, Labours policies before their NPF.

 

lmao. It ends, ~20 posts in where about 2/3 of them are on the same 3 policies, with:

"This thread will be completed later, Labour just have so many policies it's impossible to name them all at once."

Literally what's in there is 

"We'll invest in renewable energy, and that'll create some jobs and do some other sh*t"

"We'll have a look at the sewage dumping problem - come back for more details!"

"We'll probably tax private schools a bit, close the loopholes and such. This'll also work on equity fund managers, definitely, for sure."

[lost]

6 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

A pretty simple position to hold re. prisons would be "self-ID doesn't apply if the crime was sexual in nature". That'd get rid of the idiocy around the case in Scotland and the fuss over it.

A woman can have a penis unless she commits a crime with it and then she becomes a man again? It maybe a simple position but the problem is alot of people would see your position as transphobic. That's how the SNP got in the mess it did.

Edited July 26, 2023 by lost

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, kaosmark2 said:

lmao. It ends, ~20 posts in where about 2/3 of them are on the same 3 policies, with:

"This thread will be completed later, Labour just have so many policies it's impossible to name them all at once."

Literally what's in there is 

"We'll invest in renewable energy, and that'll create some jobs and do some other sh*t"

"We'll have a look at the sewage dumping problem - come back for more details!"

"We'll probably tax private schools a bit, close the loopholes and such. This'll also work on equity fund managers, definitely, for sure."

you should write their election leaflets.

[pink_triangle]

24 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

It is actually the right decision but for the wrong reasons. Labour would clearly love to continue with the policy but have realised it would not be popular. The fact is, it is not as reported, "Labour drops pledge to introduce self-ID for trans people" the rule would apply to all, trans or not, ANYONE could claim to be another gender, this leaves the policy open to abuse and ridicule, something already seen in Scotland. Trans people are better served with the current system, once they have been through it they have a legitimate status, self ID would undermine that.

I remember not too long ago Obama who is relatively popular on the left said marriage was between a man and a woman. Things change, but not as fast as some may want. I think labour will move the needle in the right direction.