P M Qs - Why Should The Pm Apologise?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68229785

It's fair game, Labour still don't know what a woman is.

[Untitled]

some trans women do but they are an extremely small number of people... some people with intersex conditions (such as 46 XX intersex) who are assigned female at birth may also possess micropenises...again a very small number of people. 

[naomi24]

But that's not what we're talking about, is it untitled.  No one should be required to apologise for telling the truth.

[Deskdiary]

"it's the other way around for PMQs... the pm gets briefed on what the LO will ask about and he chose to respond to an unrelated question with a dig about trans people."

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Sunak did not have a dig about trans people. He had a dig at SKS the reasons for which have already been shown on this thread.

[jackthehat]

100% of women don't have penises.

Karmer is wooing a vote by claiming that even a vanishingly small percentage of 'women' do. 

Sunak (even though I am no great fan of his) was pointing out  Starmer's failure to carry through his promises.....it's a pity he didn't wait 24 hours and then he could have added the implosion of Labour's Green policies to the list.

[Mozz71]

//You wonder why Brianna's mother was even in Parliament, don't you ...//

 

Something to do with a campaign that's been launched that she's involved in about limiting social media access for kids.

[naomi24]

I said that at 9.25, Mozz.

[Countrylover]

/Frankly IMO all politicians should steer clear of this topic as far as possible: all that happens is you get statements whether by Starmer, counterstatements by people like Sunak, that get help up to ridicule as it's easy to do./

Agree with Ich. And this subjec is getting far too much publicity.

[Mozz71]

Apologies Naomi, I missed that post.

[naomi24]

No problem.

[Ellipsis]

> something about her call for under 16s to be blocked from social media 

That's the what, not the why ...

Let's put it this way. If Sunak was in a meeting with Esther Ghey, would Sunak refer to Brianna as Esther's daughter or Esther's son?

And would the answer be different if it was Starmer rather than Sunak?

And would the answer be different if they weren't speaking to Esther Ghey, but to ... hmm, let's say TTT.

[naomi24]

That is the why too.  She's campaigning.

[Old_Geezer]

Speaking to Esther one assumes he'd avoid the use of pronouns as it was a delicate situation.

 

He can be more forthright and honest elsewhere, and needs to be to a leader of a political party that apparently doesn't even understand that only women bleed. That surgery or dressing unconventionally doesn't change one's sex, or that thinking you are the sex you aren't despite the evidence to the contrary doesn't make your confusion fact.

 

Such a lack of basic understanding in an individual suggests they don't have what it takes to be a politician let alone a party leader. Furthermore to try to turn the incident into a slur against those unfortunate individuals, when the issue was clearly his response to the PM's observation, shows a lack of integrity on his part, and apparently he is now to meet (or has met) Esther to try to persuade her that the PM's comment to him was really against her dead son and their family instead.

 

That is pretty low, toying with the family's emotions like that in order to get out of apologising for his behaviour. Shame on him.

[sp1814]

Trans women have penises until they're removed by a surgical operation.

 

untitled - your earlier post ...so good.

[sp1814]

Asked if he would apologise, he [Sunak] told reporters in Cornwall: 'If you look at what I said, I was very clear, talking about Keir Starmer's proven track record of U-turns on major policies because he doesn't have a plan.

'A point only proven by today's reports that the Labour Party and Keir Starmer are apparently planning to reverse on their signature economic green spending policy.

'That just demonstrates the point I was making. He's someone who has just consistently changed his mind on a whole range of major things.

'I think that is an absolutely legitimate thing to point out and it demonstrates that he doesn't have a plan for the country.'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay - fair enough. But if he wanted to highlight SKS's record of U-turn why the hell finish it off with a trans joke?

Kemi Badenoch summed it up thus:

"Every murder is a tragedy. None should be trivialised by political point- scoring. As a mother, I can imagine the trauma that Esther Ghey has endured."

[Ellipsis]

> Speaking to Esther one assumes he'd avoid the use of pronouns as it was a delicate situation.

Who would avoid it - Sunak or Starmer?

[naomi24]

This is what Kemi Badenoch actually said.

 

//Every murder is a tragedy. None should be trivialised by political point-scoring. As a mother, I can imagine the trauma that Esther Ghey has endured. It was shameful of Starmer to link his own inability to be clear on the matter of sex and gender directly to her grief.//

 

Shameful to deliberately attempt to mislead by blatantly selectively editing, SP.

 

[Canary42]

As a staunch Leftie, I weep at Starmer's incompetence.  Where are the giants of yesteryear (on both sides).

[Untitled]

the only thing that's "delicate" about the situation is that some people including many tories do not wish to allow transgender people to transition. if you insist that trans women cannot and never can be women and also wish to see that position reflected in government policy then that is what that means... it is not escapable. if you're ok with people transitioning then there's no "delicacy" about it at all....

[Redhelen72]

Yes - he should apologise if some consider the timing insensitive  - it was not meant to be but needed to be debated

At the same time he should apologise for taking a £1000 bet from pier morgan

[Untitled]

starmer was pretty clear... kemi badenoch just doesn't agree with him and wishes to disguise her rather nasty attitude toward trans people with a veil of politeness.