Thoughts on Jo Swinson?

Sorry, certain, I wasn't meaning to speak for you. I had just been thinking, like another user upthread, that my initial reaction to trans issues was pretty much the same as MrsMcgarries.

There are many, many good points on these boards, and those of us in Jo Swinson’s constituency should probably write and ask her? We might get the bland LibDem reply someone got from Vince Cable but worth a try.

You should be delighted to know that there will no longer be testing for sex characteristics in the Olympics, so men can now enter as females without any testing of their testosterone levels. Isn’t that fucking marvellous MrsMcGarry? Doesn’t it give you a nice warm glow to know that men that can’t win in male sports can now I’d as women, without any testing, and race against real women MrsMcgarry. Nice to know your young female relatives don’t have to waste their time doing sports, as they’re never going to win anyway, isn’t it? Sure it doesn’t matter, so long as those poor oppressed TIMs get what they want. FFS

Female crime statistics, that is.

unequal pay, violence against women, toxic masculinity, and inequality in health care funding

So how exactly are you going to measure that, if men can put on a dress and id as a woman. You do realise that they will be classified as women in all the areas you want to fight for, don’t you? So there will be men who id as women being included in the crime statistics, so are you going to be happy with that?

I doubt any libdems will go on the record against gender.

Of course we don't know what she is saying behind the scenes but we need politicians to take a stance in public. It's too important an issue to ask people/voters to cross their fingers and hope some whispered conversations are going in the right direction.

unequal pay, violence against women, toxic masculinity, and inequality in health care funding

Can't do much about any of that if you can't measure it.

And I do wish that more feminists would make as much fuss about issues such as unequal pay, violence against women, toxic masculinity, and inequality in health care funding, all of which are far more injurous to women and society in general than transwomen

Funnily enough, feminists worry about those things too. But this ridiculous 'any person who says they are a woman is a woman' rubbish is an absolutely huge threat to womens rights right now so unfortunatly the push for self-ID has completely taken over. With one swoop, everything that has been fought for for the pass hundred years will be gone.

Put quite simply, if you cannot define the word woman, and descibe who this class people actually are, then womens rights are utterly meaningles.

Male people are not female. A woman is an adult human female. Womens rights are for adult human females, not adult human males. To pretend women are not a real thing, to refuse to see sex...is to refuse to see sexism.

I do agree that we have no way of knowing what any politician thinks behind the scenes. Many will just be too frightened to speak up and I don't blame them at all.

Another Lib Dem here.

I think the party have gone a lot further than the other parties in recognising gender inequality and are bending over backwards to address it. It’s much tougher than it would have been few years ago, simply because so few seats are winnable. I think they’re so anxious to show they’re doing something that they’re implementing policies that they think are ahead of the curve.

Jo has been very vocal in the party about the need for gender equality and gets a lot of support from the party’s feminists. Currently, that section of the party are supportive of the trans activists, so Jo lines up with them.

She’s a thoughtful woman and I don’t believe she hasn’t thought through these issues. It’s her job to represent party policy when she speaks publicly, so I don’t think it’s just ambition that keeps her to the party line. You don’t know what she’s saying to colleagues behind the scenes.

I don't wish to be defined by my genitalia.

Christ alive. Your womanhood is defined by your XX chromosomes (together with the resultant primary and secondary sexual characteristics including genitalia) because human beings are a sexually dimorphic species capable of producing only two types of gamete.

Your genitalia don't define your personality or how you express it.

How is this so hard to grasp?

HiMrsMcGarry. Sorry you are getting some snappy answers here.

I think at that point on this thread mine was the only answer which could have been thought 'snappy'. Please don't apologise for me. You really don't have any right to do that.

it's partly cos earlier today I looked up my first post on trans matters on here, under a different username, and what a self righteous twallop I was

That was some time ago.

Anyway, the lib dems are super on other stuff - and I think would be open to a discussion in the party on this. They just haven't had the pleasure of that yet.

I have hope because they're very hot on the clash of rights concept.

Anlaf, you are much more patient than I am. I am just so tired of the dishonesty. But I should follow your example . The funny thing is I am married to a Lib dem, and thought they may provide a political home after my disillusionment with the current Labour party. I think the principle of tolerance for all is such a part of their ideology that thinking about what happens when rights collide just doesn't seem to happen. And they made such a mess of the Tim farron homophobia thing that they won't want to get their fingers burnt again.

Lib Dem here. I think the party goes along with the idea that this is the latest civil rights frontier -we must let people be themselves - and there are a number of trans councillors who are very vocal on transwomenarewomen type issues. I think one of them was quoted in the refuges piece in the Times.

I have the feeling that women are permitted to get along better in the party if they are cool girls - there does not seem to be a vocal rad fem presence (for e.g.). The banhammer is heavily applied on any party policy facebook posts which dissent from we must let all transpeople live their best lives.

Anyhoo, I don't blame McGarry. I once was fully behind the transactivist quest for rights: I thought people (with vaginas) were being terribly mean to transpeople.

That I didn't know what rights were being asked for, nor did I listen to closely to what the women were saying, is my shame.

Still, very very common experience. Worth sticking around here @MrsMcGarry, even just to keep an eye on the opposing arguments. , no?

Mrs McGarry seems bewildered. So no name for people with vaginas, but yes, they are definitely denied their rights. And she doesn't want to have a name for her genitals, so, the other 3.7 billion other people with similar genitals can't have a word either.

But she's definitely totally committed to fighting for vagina-people. Who shouldn't be defined by genitals.

Right ho.

What rights are trans people denied?

MrsMcGarry your argument just seems to be that you (and women like you) don’t see your rights as threatened by self-ID and therefore the problem is not a significant one.

For those who do see their rights as threatened, the problem IS a significant one.

So, you would need to explain how my (and other women’s) rights and existing provisions are not threatened, to convince me.

I just spoke to my mum, aged seventy-one, about this. She is not a conservative person at all. She said she would have to give up her ladies’ gym class if there would be non-female people there when she was dressing and undressing, because she would not be comfortable, if self-ID went through. Why do her rights to same sex changing facilities not count?

What about when I have got my period, and I am flooding everywhere, and I need to shout to my daughter to get my handbag from the restaurant, or even worse, miscarrying on the bathroom floor? What about the thing I have mentioned before, if I did not get a female bodied rape counsellor?

You cannot self-identify as a gender, because there is no such thing as gender. Gender is the set of social rules and norms we apply to each sex. We can and should expand those gender norms, but not at the cost of erasing biological reality (sex).

Just because you are cool with all that, it does not mean that other women should be, or that they are wrong. Their concerns should be listened to as much as any trans identifying person, regardless of what you personally think. It’s great that you are not bothered by the prospect of self-ID, but that does not make it a non-issue.

So the lib dems are using thought provoking arguments such as whatevs and I can't explain what a woman is. I can completely understand their meteoric rise in the polls.

Quite.

Really don't; have time to debate with self righteous loons and their straw men. Too busy overthrowing the patriarchy. You should try it sometime - it can be quite fun.

Lolz it's so feminist to dismiss the concerns of actual women while rushing to pander to the feelings of men.

So the lib dems are using thought provoking arguments such as whatevs and I can't explain what a woman is. I can completely understand their meteoric rise in the polls.

I will say although people may not agree with her stance on trans issues but that doesn’t negate her trying to fight the fight against the patriachy.

It seems like you, and every trans rights activist, are vehemently AGAINST the idea that the entire group of people born with XX chromosomes, ovaries, and unequal status should actually have a NAME with which to refer to themselves and their rights.

Yep. I am. I don't wish to be defined by my genitalia. I don't agree that that means I hate women. Though I admit I dislike some very much. I also dislike some men very much, but its usally because they have done something worng. I refuse to hate someone beause they have a penis.

I think people should have rights. I think people with vaginas have been denied many of those over the years by a patriarchical society. I work my butt off to stop that on a daily basis. I don't think that denying rights to other people helps with that fight.

Let me translate career politician since you're pretending you don't know what it means. It means a politician who is motivated by achieving high office rather than by their principles. It's not a compliment and has no connection to sex (see also Clegg).
I would like you to explain how self-id protects transwomen from violent males. You have such strong opinions, I'm sure you must have considered it and have a solution that has escaped everyone else.