26
Starmer’s squandering of a historic election victory is a tragedy nearing its finale | Rafael Behr
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2025
26 points (100.0% liked)
UK Politics
4390 readers
134 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just to speak on this point. Regardless of what the intent of the supreme court ruling is said to be, it has resulted in many trans people being kicked out of sports teams, forced to out themselves at work and banned from toilets alongside increased harassment. So it has resulted in a very real loss of rights for trans people. And even though it is technical not Starmer's ruling, he had done nothing to push back against it or even criticise it.
That is not even mentioning Wes Streeting making the conservative's temp ban on puberty blockers permanent and therefore banning health care for all trans kids under 18. Also the introduction of new guidance discouraging schools from teaching about trans issues - effectively a new section 28 for trans people. The online safety act has also made it more difficult to access LGBT resources and communities. Its not an exaggeration to say that this labour government has been the worst for trans people in 30+ years.
I don't know how much this has affected Starmer's popularity, but anyone who is LGBT or an ally will be majorly put off, and thats not an insignificant fraction of the population.
The practical effect of the supreme court ruling has indeed been horrible in cases, but I would lay the blame mostly with the media, and perhaps with the Court for failing to provide sufficient clarity to the media. The actual ruling is so much narrower than the conversation immediately afterwards, with the BBC asking unqualified people if they thought it meant that women's bathrooms were now only for biological women, when there was simply no need to ask this question - the ruling is clear that it doesn't say this.
This reporting then feeds the situations you're talking about. Now, should Starmer have spoken out about this? I can see the argument for doing so, but not from the popularity point of view. The basis on which he could reasonably speak out would be narrow and legalistic, and risks treading on the authority of the Court. It wouldn't be the resounding pro-trans rally I imagine you might want, because that just plays into the hands of those trying to turn trans rights into a wedge issue.
I'll just point out that, tragically, this is another one of those things which is stupid but popular.