Comments by "Betty Swunghole" (@bettyswunghole3310) on "Sunak trans jibe: calls for PM to apologise over comments in PMQs" video.

At least he knows what a woman is.
13
Starmer's the one who's taken an innocuous (and correct... ) statement and "politicised" it. What a vile and utterly inappropriate example of opportunism.
7
@shaunpowelluk There is no connection between Sunak's (correct...) statement and Starmer's reply. You (like Starmer) are trying very hard to whip up "controversy" and "outrage" where there is none. The fact that Starmer has to employ cheap tricks of this nature speaks volumes about the flimsiness of his ideology, integrity and fitness to lead a political party. God help us when he becomes PM.
7
What "bigotry"?
6
Sunak has nothing to apologise for. Starmer's the one who's trying very hard to turn this into an "issue" where none exists.
6
To be fair, Sunak's no great shakes either...
5
So sad reading all the Lefty comments here. You people are still under the delusion that Labour are somehow going to be "better" than the Tories. Daaaaaamn, you're in for a nasty shock...
4
@shaunpowelluk You're misconstruing my remarks in order to try and reaffirm your own prejudices. I have nothing whatsoever against trans people...what I'm disgusted by is Starmer's extremely low blow of trying to make political capital out of a non-issue. Did he ask Brianna Ghey's mother whether she wanted to be a "victim"? Of course he didn't...he used her a political football, and now he's trying to deflect attention away from his gaffe by trying to make out that Sunak said something "offensive". You might not hold Starmer culpable, but the public will.
2
@spicyfiction4429 No "psychologist", or biologist, or geneticist or any other practitioner of serious science would agree with him. The only people that would are the adherents of the pseudoscience of "gender theory", those with a with a political agenda to promote the trans ideology or those who profit financially from it. You're either remarkably naive about the nature of directed scientific research or have the intelligence and experience of a 14 year old.
1
@spicyfiction4429 Are you actually certifiably delusional? No... really... In what way was Sunak's remark "hateful"? Please explain...I'd be fascinated to know just how your warped, resentful mind works. Starmer demonised himself by his extremely clumsy and entirely inappropriate attempt to make political capital out of a non-issue. He should be the one to be apologising to Mrs Ghey, not Sunak. You're just doing the usual kind of "professional victim" whining associated with the "woke" left, and as such it's very hard to take you seriously. I have plenty of human decency. I will admit to have unlimited contempt for people of your ilk, however.
1
@dragonfly6908 I can't argue with that.
1
@spicyfiction4429 "Publicly calling" for an apology is not the same thing "the public" calling for an apology. You're about the only person still arguing the toss on this point...the rest of the world has moved on. So much for the "public outcry"... The fact that Sunak knew who was in the public gallery is irrelevant... You're still not "getting it", are you? All Sunak said is that Starmer couldn't correctly define a woman...which he can't. What's this got to do with Brianna Ghey's mother or her deceased son? Again, you're spouting on about "transphobia". Where is this "transphobia"? Implying that a man who pretends to be a woman ISN'T in fact a woman is in no way "transphobic". It's just a fact... ...which is why I'd be very careful about making recourse to "science". "Trans" has no basis in scientific fact whatsoever.
1
@spicyfiction4429 https://youtu.be/eBCzH8o3Ukg?si=Pg66uDVFqclypew_
1