Headline No 37
Keir Starmer's ex-girlfriend is pro-trans judge
The Facts
Lead-in: EXCLUSIVE After the Prime Minister's years of dithering over the true definition of a woman, a new biography reveals ...
On a day when most of the print media are focused on important world events including the funeral of Pope Francis and the face-to-face meeting between Trump and Zalensky, it is truly shocking that the Mail on Sunday printed this headline. It is a desperate attempt by the extreme right to keep trans issues and Keir Starmer in the news at any cost.
This is a complete non-story. An ex-girl friend of Keir Starmer from 27 years ago, before he was married, is now a successful barrister. She is involved in 'numerous cases advancing the rights of women and girls'. This has nothing to do with Keir Starmer.
The story is from an updated book by the controversial former Tory Party deputy chairman, and Tory donor, Lord Ashcroft, who can hardly be regarded as an impartial obeserver.
Headline Analysis
Potential Right-Wing Bias: The headline, "New biography reveals Keir Starmer's ex-girlfriend is pro-trans judge," could be interpreted as an attempt to negatively associate Keir Starmer with a "pro-trans" stance, framing it as controversial and appealing to potential anti-trans sentiments among certain readers.
Biased Arguments and Counter-Arguments
Argument (Implied): Being "pro-trans" is inherently negative or controversial.
Counter-Argument: Support for transgender rights aligns with principles of equality and non-discrimination, and is supported by many medical and psychological organisations. American Psychological Association - Transgender People, Gender Identity and Gender Expression. The Equality Act 2010 protects transgender people from discrimination.
Argument (Implied): Linking Starmer to a "pro-trans judge" is politically damaging.
Counter-Argument: Public opinion on transgender rights is evolving, and support is growing, particularly among younger generations. While some may view this association negatively, others may see it as a positive reflection of Starmer's tolerance and open-mindedness.
Wondering what could drive such a misleading headline?