Keir Starmer has called for the next James Bond to be female and women across the country are overcome with joy to be thought of so highly. This is what we care about: the right to represent a franchise which is well past its sell-by-date.

Jokes aside, this is yet another example of how lost the Labour Party has become when it comes to dealing with its “woman problem”. Newsflash: women care about James Bond as much as Starmer appears to care about their rights. 

It is baffling that a former barrister and QC has become so blind to objective truth and reality. This is the same man who thinks that saying “only women have a cervix” is “not right and shouldn’t be said”.

I might not be a high-flying barrister, but at least I understand the basics of human anatomy

Not only is this unsettlingly authoritarian, it is ridiculous to anyone who refuses to be bamboozled by trans orthodoxy. In case it hasn’t already been made clear, only women (adult human females) have cervixes. This is all pretty standard, entry-level biology. Was Starmer this imprecise as Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor? I suspect not. Surely clear and intelligible laws led to him moving intelligible and clear prosecutions. So why is he now determined to spout gobbledegook?

Women have grown increasingly weary of the nonsense peddled by Labour. Declaring that the next James Bond should be female feels like a desperate attempt to woo us over. But how can Keir Starmer want a female James Bond when he can’t even define who and what a woman is?

Left-leaning women are made to feel as if they should shut up. Our dissonance has become an inconvenience to Labour’s morally superior form of politics. When David Lammy discussed trans rights at a fringe event during the Labour conference, he declared that. “There are some dinosaurs on the right […] dinosaurs exist within our own party [who want to] hoard rights.” Lammy also believes that a “cervix is something you can have following various treatments and hormone treatment”.

Well, if I’m a dinosaur he should come and join me in the Jurassic period because his knowledge of basic biology is prehistoric. What do Lammy and Starmer have in common? They’re both former barristers. Now, I might not be a high-flying barrister, but at least I understand the basics of human anatomy.

Starmer offered a James Bond-shaped olive branch while Wayne Couzens was handed a whole-life prison term

Starmer has some nerve, I’ll give him that. His own party refused to allow the Labour Women’s Declaration to appear on the official conference fringe list. Instead they gathered in secrecy (very 007) to discuss sex-based rights, language and protections. Ostracised Dinosaur-in-Chief Rosie Duffield even spoke at the event. Allegedly, another female MP was told not to participate. And yet, while women are silenced, here is a man who goes on Good Morning Britain and pretends to care about women’s rights so much that he thinks Daniel Craig should step aside and let one of us have a go at playing Bond.

This isn’t just semantics; if Starmer doesn’t know what a woman is then he can never understand our struggle. On today of all days he offers this James Bond-shaped olive branch while Wayne Couzens is handed a whole-life prison term for his despicable crimes against Sarah Everard. Couzens had manipulatively used his powers as a police officer to rape, strangle, and kill a young woman. The threat of male violence against women and girls is real and present; women need sex-based protections because of this. Men with bad intentions will go to extraordinary lengths to abuse women and I — like many others — worry that Labour’s policy of self-ID and the refusal to “debate” it is just another step to eradicate women’s sex-based rights.

I don’t want to be Bond; I want to be taken seriously. I want to speak openly and I want to discuss matters that relate to my own sex and reality. I am appalled by the direction of the Labour Party under Keir Starmer’s leadership and all the quips of female inclusivity in the arts won’t change my mind.