Mick Hartley

I wondered the other day why Starmer has such a perverse reluctance to apologise to Rosie Duffield. Could it be that he's been warned by colleagues that he mustn't go there, on pain of rejection by all the trans-friendly Labour figures who hate her and have been so rude to her?

Jean Hatchet at The Critic:

Why is Rosie Duffield so terrifying to Keir Starmer that he cannot say her name, cannot speak with her, cannot answer questions about her directly in interviews? He would have to do just one thing; he would have to say that she is not wrong. He would have to tell the Party he agrees with her views, which he does when they are expressed by Tony Blair, and that would be it. The thorn would be out and the painful interrogations over.

The fact that he cannot do this is, I believe, very much to do with his real, and legitimate fear of what would come next. This would be the point where he would have to admit the root of the “toxicity” he is so keen to point to whenever Duffield is mentioned. If Starmer stood up against the misogynist, trans activist bullies in the Labour Party and backed Rosie Duffield, a rage would be unleashed that would tear his leadership to shreds. Women know this because it has happened to us as individuals and collectively in groups. We have been demonised, ostracised, harassed and silenced. Starmer knows this and he rightly fears it more than he fears the much more reasonable feminist women. 

Facing down the calls of women’s groups is significantly safer to do than facing the vicious trans juggernaut and trying to stop it rolling over you….