That Starmer fella...

Really? I think a lot of people who might be natural Labour supporters would be disappointed to read what he said.

Or do you mean those disappointed people have nowhere better to go?

Gotta be both right?

Labour supporters fully behind all of BLM aren't going anywhere. Labour supporters posting WLMT won't take it as a negative. Maybe.

Not sure it's that cynical though.

I googled the quote and just got a tweet, then some reddit posts about the tweet.

i did not care to dip my toes into either of those places

I'm not trying to be angsty, fighty or still less trolly, but do you disagree with either of his central points:

1. “protect the trans community”
   
2. “protect women who are concerned about safe spaces”
   
   

and if so, which one? At the risk of seeming even more Centrist Dad, I can see that there's a conflict between the two. Both represent noble and valid viewpoints in my opinion, and on that basis any solution has to reflect a balance between the two positions.

FWIW, I agree with him that sensible adult debate has become more difficult these days due to tribalism, where people identify with a particular point of view and rather than trying to listen and absorb another side's point of view, and even argue the merits of that point of view, resort to hurling abuse at the 'opposite' side, despite the fact they probably have more in common than the real enemy.

Gender recognition is not a simple issue. It demeans the debate to polarise it between 'good' and 'bad'. It would be nice if life was that simple, but it's not.

I recognise I'm firmly in the centrist dad camp on most things but can you explain for my benefit what is wrong with calling for people to work together rather than being pushed into opposing camps on things?

Page read fail. Wot he said ^.

^ this

rather than trying to listen and absorb another side's point of view, and even argue the merits of that point of view

The classic last resort of a centrist dad.

We see you.

“There’s a broader issue here. The Black Lives Matter movement – or moment, if you like – internationally is about reflecting something completely different. It’s reflecting on what happened dreadfully in America just a few weeks ago and showing or acknowledging that as a moment across the world.”

Woah, that's totally fucking missing the point. Even as a fence-up-the-arse Centrist Dad, that's painful.

I'm sorry, but that's a really cheap response. There are times when there are two competing interests, both of which are valid, and any response requires a balance between the two.

If you can't see that, then so be it. Your loss.

I now can't tell if you are joking, or if you didn't realise @hugo7 was.

Whooosh^^

Yeah, irony fail. soz @hugo7

Peace out.

I won't edit to try and cover up the total irony fail.

I now can't tell if Will is saying whoosh to me or @danstuff . Time to go to sleep.

Neither, he has most people on ignore and it was a reply to a comment about a month ago.

What kind of a mess would Jezza have made of all this? Still think KS is the best we* have

*Labour supporters

Yep. Those who are disappointed to read it are still going to vote to keep the tories out.

He'd have fucked it up before opening his mouth and the press would smash shit out of him.

Now, the press aren't sure.

I now can't tell if Will is saying whoosh to me or @danstuff . Time to go to sleep.

whoosh^^

I read it as two little rocket ships making a "whoosh" noise

Starmer should not have tried to cast British structural racism as somehow less important than American racism. This country is built on slavery and many BAME people are trapped in a cycle of economic inequality. Disappointed.

great that you want to "bOtH SidEs" this, but when one side is suggesting that transwomen are really just men intruding on women-only spaces and are there to behave in a predatory manner towards women and that anyone that defends their status as women is eroding the definitions of sex and womanhood, you really need to ask yourself if a debate in good faith is even possible.

but centrist dad's gonna centrist dad.

Perhaps then that the one side that are spouting the same bullshit about predatory men that went around about the gayz in the 80s will be heard and we'll say this is bollocks and fuck off.

If women have concerns or think they have concerns because of the shit that's in the media, the concerns should be heard. Shurely?

but is calling out bullshit the same as "having a debate"? - debate presumes that both positions are of equal value, which they ain't.

It's easy to dismiss "trans women are women" with pointed comments .that needs to stop.

It's more difficult to listen to people's concerns about how a trans woman's lived experience is as relevant as a cis gendered lived experience. And also "how can trans women be women".
but they need to be listened to and countered.

no i get that, and i don't disagree. i guess i'm just concerned that this "both sides" bollocks inevitably results in some sort of fucked compromise where we accommodate terfy bullshit by the back door.

Given that it is cis men who have committed violence against cis and trans women throughout history, maybe cis men aren't the ones to arbitrate the dialogue?