Maybe not the election but this current leadership contest they are
Also, the SNP here have been pushing through this GRA act with zero discussion which many women MPs and activists are pissed off about.
In which case I think whatās most relevant is what the current membership of the Labour Party are interested in, rather than the general population of whom 80% donāt care about idpol. Whoever winds the contest, I wouldnāt expect their rhetoric and focus to be the same when pitching to the wider public as it is when trying to appeal solely to the membership, a comparatively narrow base.
But this is Labour so that level of common sense canāt be taken for granted lol.
But I wonāt discuss the leadership election any further as it would probably be fair to say Iāve paid essentially no attention to it whatsoever, so Iām not at all informed about how it has been playing out 
If she gets anywhere near the shadow cabinet Labour are fucked. Why do Labour have the least qualified MPs?
1 Like
It sounds like she said born, and then corrected it to āformedā, so perhaps she was referring to a foetus existing initially and the sex then being formed at a slightly later stage of development?!!
So if I were to hazard a guess, my answer would be no, I donāt think she did just tell the nation that children are born without a biological sex.
The question would still remain as to why she felt that that was something relevant and worth saying, and why she was not able to express the point even semi coherently or articulately, so please donāt take this as a defence of her, because it really isnāt lol. Iām just trying to seek some sort of logic here as I do find it hard to believe that any (even vaguely) mainstream politician would actually try to argue that children are born without a biological sex in the vaaaaaast majority of cases lol
1 Like
Thing is, they clearly have no idea what they are talking about, probably off camera they donāt even agree with it, they are just hostage to this garbage. If they donāt say it they will be hounded out of public life. So here we are through the looking glass with a Labour Party committing suicide before our eyes.
3 Likes
Some of your posts sound a touch emotional, perhaps a little over the top. Maybe youāre a bit too close to this? Just not sure things are quite as cataclysmic as your posts are suggesting.
Labour leadership candidates denying biological sex is emotional and over the top?
1 Like
No, Iām saying thatās how you sound, to me. No offence intended but probably an unnecessary and unhelpful comment on my part, granted.
Only point being Iām not convinced itās the doomsday situation you are portraying it as.
No itās fine, always good to be probed like that.
Well given the election result and the extent of what Labour lost itās already pretty doomsday. Our response to the new near doomsday condition is to spout off about biological sex. I mean imagine your an average person sitting down in the morning to watch Good Morning Britain only to hear Dawn Butler say that a baby isnāt a sex. It wins back no one, and pisses off practically everyone.
2 Likes
Who are these new candidates for? Itās seems that they are out to garner the vote of the fringe left of the party or the silly blue check marks on Twitter. Normal voters believe in two genders and male rapist should stay in male jails and women have a right not to agree in men being female spaces despite them having a dress on. To these people everyone that disagrees is a bigot, ist or a phobe. This is why labour go so badly beaten and now they are doubling down on this ideology.
2 Likes
Thereās an MP, possibly more than one, who thinks homosexuality can be cured, so I tend not to be surprised these days.
Thatās not true technically either though.
A Foetus has their chromosomes from the start, from the first cell after egg has been fertilised. Either XY for a boy or XX for a girl, so I have to say children are formed and born with their sex.
People may have different gender identities and thatās fine. You do you, I donāt have a problem with that.
But you canāt change your chromosomes and you canāt change your sex.
Dawn Butler was just illustrating the kind of anti-Science stuff that the British left seem to be using as their weapon of electoral suicide, as they piss off everyone in the country thatās not some middle-class hardcore uni liberal.
8 Likes
Iām pretty sure thatās wrong mate but if you want to counter reference me Iām interested to learn more. You first get a Zygote, then it develops to an Embryo, which then develops to a Fetus.
And a quick google:
A human fetus does not develop its external sexual organs until seven weeks after fertilization. The fetus appears to be sexually indifferent, looking neither like a male or a female. Over the next five weeks, the fetus begins producing hormones that cause its sex organs to grow into either male or female organs.
1 Like
You have to look at how Labour got into power and maintained power last time. They had the quad core of Blair, Campbell, Mandelson and Brown. They controlled and dominated the media narative and conversation. I donāt condone it but they forced newspapers editors such as Andrew Marr into unemployment, such was their power. They had The Sun on their side before the '97 landslide.
Brown clearly didnāt have the same Machiavellian traits as the other 3, otherwise heād have won the election.
The only thing aside I suppose is The Tories offered Labour a few open goal elections.
1 Like
To be clear, Iām not trying to say that she was correct to say that. I was just answering what was probably a hypothetical question in the tweet, because I donāt think what she was trying to say was that children are born without a biological sex. That I tried to find the distinction between the tweet and what I think she was trying to say hopefully isnāt construed as me endorsing the validity of the statement I think she was trying to make.
I am totally ignorant of the science surrounding the issue, which is why I tend to steer clear of offering an opinion on what science says about the matter.
1 Like
That paragraph you posted is right. The foetus does appear to be indeifferent sexually, but it has already been ordained what kind of sexual organs will be produced.
The hormones (and the inhibitory signals) that allow formation of a penis or vagina as activated through the chromosomes, which are in every cell of a foetus from the start. So I still maintain that while they may not be fully formed, it has already been decided what they will be from the start.
EDIT: here you go, wikipedia coming in strong as per 
Again, things can wrong with that leading to things that can fall everywhere in the gender spectrum, but sex-wise you are either a male or a female.
Iāll have to read up on this and figure my scientific opinion on this in the morning.
In terms of being sympathetic to their viewpoint, I think there should be a reasonable degree of sympathy to these people whether itās clearly scientific or not.
1 Like
Oh yeah 100%. they clearly go through a lot, and should get the help they need. I just donāt think denying basic biology helps them or anyone in the long run.
Anyways, glad she admitted it in the end. But unfortunately, damage seems to have been done.
I think from most people the sympathy is there. The objections come into play when there is a clash of rights, so if it became normal to say there is no such thing as biological sex, where does that leave women? They require a clear unambiguous scientific descriptor of what they are. Womanhood needs a definition.
I am not at all convinced of this if online discourse is anything to go by lol