I will not back RLB. Watch

Ferrograd
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#1
I was always skeptical about backing her in the leadership challenged. In my hustings, I actually backed Nandy first and her second, although as a whole we ended up backing Thornberry. Today RLB wants to ban womens groups for supposedly being "transphobic". I am surprised at her for this, perhaps because she is catholic and personally is against aboriton, so it would make no sense for her to support this, politically or personally. It is certainly not pragmatism as it is with aboriton; I'm sorry to say this, but the vast majority of the population literally couldn't give a toss. These womens groups protect women, and to ban them you are driving women away from the labour party, a party where over 50% of its members are women. Now how many transgenders are in the Labour party? Certainly no Labour transgender MPs. And nationally, there are v ery few transgenders. So if I had any doubts about not supporting her, they have been gone. I will still probably vote for Lisa Nandy, albeit I believe Keir starmer will win, I don't like him a great deal, but I think we will never get into office if RLB gets elected.
0
reply
ZenoEX
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 week ago
#2
She does not want to ban womens groups, she wants to ban transphobic womens groups. A difference really. These groups despise trans women etc etc. And personally I think no current Labour candidate will get elected. Elections are decided on values, not policies, and every one of these leader's idea of "socialism" is a laundry list of free stuff that the government gives you, to which most people would respond "get in the ****ing bin". Socialism is about working class self-emancipation, not "government doing things for you". Ideally a labour candidate would support the creation of worker co-operatives. Really the future of Labour has to be within some form of libertarian-socialism if it stands any choice of actually getitng back power. Look at Preston and the Preston Model
2
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#3
(Original post by ZenoEX)
She does not want to ban womens groups, she wants to ban transphobic womens groups. A difference really. These groups despise trans women etc etc. And personally I think no current Labour candidate will get elected. Elections are decided on values, not policies, and every one of these leader's idea of "socialism" is a laundry list of free stuff that the government gives you, to which most people would respond "get in the ****ing bin". Socialism is about working class self-emancipation, not "government doing things for you". Ideally a labour candidate would support the creation of worker co-operatives. Really the future of Labour has to be within some form of libertarian-socialism if it stands any choice of actually getitng back power. Look at Preston and the Preston Model
Who decides who or what is not transphobic? If its by her standards, I'm probably a transphobe. And please don't tell me its about values - if that's the case, why has the Tory party been elected every single time in the last few years?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 week ago
#4
She doesn't want to ban women's groups, she wants to ban transphobic groups.

I'd personally ban all groups gender and race groups! Why on earth can we just not see people as people and stop playing this indenity politics BS!
1
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#5
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
She doesn't want to ban women's groups, she wants to ban transphobic groups.

I'd personally ban all groups gender and race groups! Why on earth can we just not see people as people and stop playing this indenity politics BS!
I agree, but are the aforementioned groups actually transphobic? There is no universal definition of it, unlike say antisemitism which is generally well defined.

Having legitimate concerns about what is a fully grown male, who is transitioning to a woman, using a girls changing room for instance is reasonable. Not irrational, reasonable.

It's a shame because I actually like most of her policies given they are basically Corbyn's, she's a woman, and also a woman of faith, but even if it wasn't for this, I fear we will lose the little electability we have right now. Nandy all the way right now, although I think my vote will be one of protest rather than an actual worthwhile vote.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 week ago
#6
(Original post by Ferrograd)
I agree, but are the aforementioned groups actually transphobic? There is no universal definition of it, unlike say antisemitism which is generally well defined.

Having legitimate concerns about what is a fully grown male, who is transitioning to a woman, using a girls changing room for instance is reasonable. Not irrational, reasonable.

It's a shame because I actually like most of her policies given they are basically Corbyn's, she's a woman, and also a woman of faith, but even if it wasn't for this, I fear we will lose the little electability we have right now. Nandy all the way right now, although I think my vote will be one of protest rather than an actual worthwhile vote.
I'm disappointed with labours response to the GE, I'm thinking of voting for RLB to keep KS out.

It does make me laugh, how people say I like x person shes a woman.........FFS:facepalm:
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#7
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
I'm disappointed with labours response to the GE, I'm thinking of voting for RLB to keep KS out.
How should they have responded?

We couldn't have kept going on the way we were. I really, really liked Corbyn but he's lost two general elections now, we couldn't make it a third.
Vote Nandy, she is a far better candidate than RLB. My CLP voted for Thornberry, I think it was because she was the only one who turned up, the fact she was a good speaker and we wanted to get her on the ballot in the interests of democracy.
0
reply
Em.-.
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 week ago
#8
I’ve actually never liked a single politician. Anytime I agree with things one says, I then find other things I totally disagree with.

Don’t really care who wins this, they’re all bad. Though if they want to be successful it would be wise to elect the one who’s least like Corbyn.
2
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#9
(Original post by Em.-.)
I’ve actually never liked a single politician. Anytime I agree with things one says, I then find other things I totally disagree with.

Don’t really care who wins this, they’re all bad. Though if they want to be successful it would be wise to elect the one who’s least like Corbyn.
Ha - that would be thornberry and she's the most unpopular one of the lot of them.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 week ago
#10
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Ha - that would be thornberry and she's the most unpopular one of the lot of them.
Emily Thornberry isn't really likely to win over floating voters either, I guess you could call me one of those now as my last 3 GE votes have been mainly brexit based, but there is no chance of me voting for Labour with her as a leader and the same goes for RLB.
Like you I feel Lisa Nandy is the best choice Labour could make and she would almost certainly get my vote if she continues with the conciliatory tone she has set out.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 week ago
#11
Not sure why anyone who backs hate groups would think they belong in labour to start with tbqh? RLB and Nandy backing this have moved them up in my assessment.

Like, I get why people fall for it, but the LGB alliance are not in any way supportive of LGB people, they're actually an incredibly homophobic organisation who look to weaponise LGB folk against trans folk in a divide and conquer approach (hence their close links with the heritage foundation - a "conservative family values" think-tank), and Women's Place UK, like all TERF groups, looks to promote harm to trans women and GNC folk (they often forget trans men exist because it's harder to fear monger) by rigidly enforcing gender roles (although they call them sex instead and consider themselves gender abolitionists, as if crossing out the word gender and writing sex instead was abolition) and spreading the idea that anyone who fails to conform, particularly "men" (i.e. trans women) are just sexual deviants (solid rehash of homophobic tropes from the last century there) from whom women's spaces must be protected - which in itself is just a rehash of the lesbophobia of the 60s and 70s with scaremongering about "the lavender menace"; you don't protect women or women's spaces by just denying women access to them.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (363)
66.97%
No (179)
33.03%

Watched Threads

View All