LGB Conservatives think the Tory party is captured too.

Update. According to the Spectator last night, Kemi Badenoch has taken over the Equalities Minister post from Liz Truss.

AFAIK, it is Ms Badenoch's only ministerial responsibility (as well as her first) whereas it was just one line on Liz Truss's job spec.

As someone who grew up with "Yes, Minister", I suspect the Civil Service is a far bigger problem than the government of the day.

Someone in the CS employed the aforementioned MN intern in 2019; a quick search of her name would have undoubtedly brought up her shenanigans here on Mumsnet, but being the source of a data leak was clearly not regarded as an obstacle.

It reminds me of sleeper cells - who knows how many supporters, declared or otherwise, of Press For Change/ Stonewall/ Beaumont Society have been beavering away behind the scenes in the CS for years, gaining influence with every promotion? There is even a separate organisation within the organisation - a:gender

www.agender.org.uk/

My Tory MP dismissed my gc questions, focusing only on the spousal veto issue, which the MP was adamant was an infringement on a trans person’s rights. My MP dismissed me quickly and wouldn’t discuss it further. This was a year or so ago at the MP’s local face-to-face surgery, and I knew less then to argue.

The Tories know to be careful. Dominic Cummings wife (Boris' very powerful advisor) is deputy editor of the Specator and Andrew Gilligan, who wrote some very good GC articles for the Times, is also a No 10 advisor.

However they have plenty on their agenda, not least Brexit, and my guess is that nothing much will happen, giving time for public understanding and concern to evolve. Then perhaps we will see responsive action, ie over free speech on campus, or policing guidelines. The assumption being that this (rather weird) reverence towards transgenderism will burn itself out.

The GIDS case will be important. I would really like to see the Government act to ensure proper consent and to minimise the medicalisation of children. Also a review of prison guidelines, possibly after 'another' Karen White, which should then act as a precedent for the protection of other same sex spaces involving vulnerable women.

So piecemeal action to roll some of the nonsense back, largely led by evolving public concerns. Not from-the-front leadership. But better than nothing.

Hopefully this will lead to more questioning of the value of Stonewall. And an on-going virtuous circle. I think the TRAs overplayed their hand.

I trust him more than Labour tbh. I am planning to contact my conservative (female) MP. She’s new in the job. Just wondering where to start with it all - it’s such a massive topic. Something specific like the dodgy EHRC guidance or the CPS schools nonsense or a more general set of concerns about women and girls’ safety.

Of course they are. No way would the police be acting like the genderist gestapo without behind the scenes government approval. Anyone here seriously trust BJ to keep women and kids safe from male people?

This is purely anecdotal so make of it what you will.

In the run-up to the election in December, the only canvasser on my doorstep was my local Conservative councillor. He was surprisingly well-informed when I raised the subject of the GRA proposals. He said it had come up on the doorstep a number of times already and made no bones about his strong concerns about TWs in toilets, changing rooms, refuges, prisons and in women's sports.

I asked him what the view was at CCHQ and he said they knew it was a hot potato and it had been kicked into the long grass. Forgive the mixed metaphors. I can't remember his exact words but that was the gist.

Also anecdotally, I had previously emailed my Conservative MP to ask her to support Safer Schools Alliance's push for a wider public consultation on the schools guidance pack. Her reply was careful - she is a woman and in the public eye, after all - but the strong impression I got from her response was that I was pushing at an open door and she would welcome as many objections and concerns as possible.

I do not think it was a coincidence that the Equalities Minister role was taken off Penny Mordaunt and given to Liz Truss. I also note that the narrative has moved on a fair bit since Theresa May was PM - Tavistock, formation of LGB Alliance, Harry Miller, etc - and people are more generally aware. The media is also getting braver at reporting concerns. It's not just a few lone voices any more.

If the government is due to announce its decision in about a month, time to push even more.

RunningWild12 Thank You, yes I think that's it. I meant to start a thread about it when I came across it then forgot all about it.

Well, well, well. Tomorrow's Times, "No. 10 backs free expression ruling on trans tweets". Downing Street prepared to press for a review of the College's guidelines.

All the concerns highlighted in Caroline Criado Perez’s book disappear in a puff of genderism.

A puff of woke, perhaps?

By that stage, matters will have moved on and there will be litigation that will have established the parameters are. The Labour Party are not going to return to power with a serious trans rights agenda - that is what makes their current pledge or die requirement so daft. To win they must capture a huge number of Conservative and ex Labour voters - very few of whom will care about this at all. Eventually they will stop obsessing about an issue that affects a tiny minority - but if history is any guide, it will take them a long time.

I dunno which way the Tories will jump on this but sooner or later, whether in five years or fifteen, Labour will return to power, whether alone or in coalition with Lib Dems, Greens and SNP. So, even if the Tories decide to oppose self-ID, it will ultimately happen unless left-of-centre opinion can be won over.

That said, as someone else said, if the Tories decide to oppose self-ID, that at least gives us some breathing space in which to influence the debate.

High earning ex military transgender professionals meet the PM who describes gay men in unflattering terms. I think there’s a huge amount to be done to get anywhere near the traction that was on the last government.

The era of manifesting genital doubts as public policy is over. The question will be “what rights do you need?”. Legally, none.

And Tories are not big on extending rights or laws to those who don’t need them - and particularly not in state institutions.

The Harry the Owl case is significant. The PM has made a living on freedom of expression - he’s not going to decide that an aggressive campaigning group with all the same rights as everyone else in this country need more laws. They don’t.

This government is not interested in minority rights. Nothing it for them, is there?

If I was a TPA, I would be framing this to the Conservatives as a matter of individual self-determination, of private individuals making private and personal decisions. I would rein the "most oppressed group ever" identity politics right back in and frame it in terms of individual rights. And I would send high-earning professional-type people to do the talking, ideally ex-military, ideally already Tory-aligned, and ideally in same-sex (so opposite "gender") marriages to keep up the "born in the wrong body" narrative. So keep an eye on who Jane Crofton (whose Twitter feed is proof that trans privilege activism and male privilege activism are a 100% ideological overlap) and similar people meet with.

The Tories will presumably be aware of all the problems with detransitioners and sports etc and the growing problems in schools. They'll surely recognise that when it all goes pearshaped it will be on their watch. They now have full responsibility there will be no hiding place.

There is not one member of the Cabinet who will want to start putting their head above the parapet on this - and recent government ministers are giving the correct interpretation of the law to Parliament.

This being the case, they have much to do to re-establish Safeguarding & application of the Rule of Law so that children, women & vulnerable adults are not put at further risk of harm.

The Tories aren’t going to touch the GRA. They don’t need TRA now and the top people have zero interest. There is not one member of the Cabinet who will want to start putting their head above the parapet on this - and recent government ministers are giving the correct interpretation of the law to Parliament.

If you think a lot of gay conservatives have much influence with them that is wrong too. The new government is not socially liberal and transgender politics is a kiss of death; want to be seen as a leftie loon? Align yourself with the kind of nutty statements made in the Labour trans policy. Watch your career implode.

David Davies MP October 2018 on the silencing of discussion:

twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1052203110335217664

October 2018 David Davies MP described how he was threatened with police action by a Caonservative colleague for hosting meetings for women to discuss the impact of the proposed changes to the GRA

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3396459-David-Davies-MP-speaks-out-about-harrassment-calls-for-stop-to-GRA-reform-urgent-review-involving-womens-groups

September 2018 transactivist conference 'We're Still Here' organised by Jane Fae.

OP TheHarpySings reported:
(extract)
6) GETTING THE GRA WE WANT

This was a workshop with 3 experts sitting with groups and talking through activism. They were:

Helen Belcher (Lib Dems, Trans Media Watch)
James Morton (Scottish Transgender Alliance)
Alex Moore (GenderJam). Moore is from N Ireland.

James Morton gave some insight into tactics the TRAs will probably start using in England and Wales as they were successful in Scotland.

He said the TRAs need to build allies in mainstream women and children’s organisations so it looks like they care about them.

He also said what worked in Scotland's was a “constructive, friendly, innocent” tone when debating or in dialogue with the GC side. To be mindful about who is watching- essentially like what we do with the lurkers on the FWR board. To make the TRAs look like the reasonable side.

James also said that in dialect with elected officials, to clarify that the trans side aren’t silencing anyone but want to clarify the misconceptions being bandied around by GC feminists.

The Scottish GRA changes will probably be put forward in the 2019-2020 parliamentary year.

Belcher has been meeting with MPs and members of the House of Lords. Most of them don’t really understand the GRA and don’t have much time to think about it thanks to the Brexit FUBAR. “Education” of law makers is needed and that’s what Belcher is doing.

Apparently the TRAs lack the infrastructure they had in the 1990s and early 2000s so they need to think carefully and coordinate.

Belcher said to re-iterate to MPs that the EA2010 is not being affected and no one is losing any rights (wtf).

Apparently in terms of political support, the Tories are split about 50/50, Labour, Lib Dem's and SNP are all onside. The Greens were NOT mentioned.

The big fear on the TRA side is that this Government won’t survive long enough to get this through- again because Brexit.

According to Alex Moore, Arlene Foster of the DUP went to a Pink News event and didn’t seem to know much about this. In NI no one really cares about the trans issues because everyone is focused on same sex marriage and abortion.

Alex then moaned about the Together for Yes campaign’s transmisogyny and that the campaign completely erased the experiences of trans and NB people who need abortions. Alex would like a legal change of gender to be free of charge and as easy as changing your name.

Helen Belcher was annoyed at GC feminists using “emotive arguments” regards rape.

HB said that the pile ons pro self-ID MPs get from the GC side if they say something supportive of the trans side are not helping the GC cause. Maria Miller told Belcher that MPs got loads of abuse in the run up to marriage equality and that abusive messages, tweets from GC feminists will only harden MPs against the GC side.

HB also said something snide about “mouthy” female Labour MPs who speak before thinking on Twitter- especially on a Friday or Saturday night after they’ve had a few drinks.

Apparently the TRAs have civil service support and that the Stonewall report and Gov survey are strong bits of evidence they have which is helping them win arguments.

They are saying there is no risk to reforming the GRA and are asking MPs “what is the risk?”

In the group I was in they also talked about how changing your gender multiple times should be allowed and shouldn’t be seen as “bad intentions”.

James Morton talked about how they can get rid of “gender” markers on things like IT systems and places where it isn’t relevant- apparently GDPR might be able to help them here.

JM’s campaigning tips were to gain trust in the local community- and to approach moderate feminists, “correct misconceptions and forgive any ignorance they may have displayed”. They want to gain trust and make themselves likeable.

Apparently small acts like helping to campaign about period poverty or retweeting the local branch of Women’s Aid will make a difference and result in some reciprocation. They want to make it look like they care about Women's issues so they don’t appear threatening" (continues)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3398737-We-re-Still-Here-Conference-8th-September-A-report-from-the-inside

No more women’s sports? Who’s bothered?

I think the forthcoming summer Olympics might peak-trans a lot of the general public.

Even people who are generally supportive of minority rights - as most of us were and are - and who support trans individuals might baulk when long-held women's world records tumble, and it's clear that the new records will never be beaten by natal women.

I would urge anyone who historically was a Labour voter in the 'red wall' but voted differently to write to their new conservative MP and say this is a key issue for whether that will prove to be a one-time only change of vote. Boris likes his majority.

The Tories have no interest in this. There's little money to be gained from it, and a whole host of sticky lawsuits. The key reason they picked it up in the first place was because they thought it would be an easy way to scoop up more centre votes. After a bit of research, they saw that it was more trouble than initially thought, which is why it's disappeared without a trace.

If I was a transactivist lobby group I’d concentrate on Tories. I’m not sure how bothered would be introducing a self id bill, won’t affect him or his ilk. And the Labour Party (and Lib Dem’s, Greens and SNP) would have troop through the voting lobby with the Tories. Imagine how that plays to your voters? Not saying Tory govt will do it, but even if many Tory MPs voted against it, they’d have opposition support. And I think it would suit a Tory govt not to bother collecting data on sex and just get Gender Id in Equality Act and erase sex. Never mind sex discrimination in pay. Violence against women? Well, what does that mean when we don’t know what a man or woman is anymore. Mixed sexed wards - cheaper. No more women’s sports? Who’s bothered? Court cases where gender id of plaintiff and defendant is recorded not sex will hide MVAW. Brilliant wheeze. All the concerns highlighted in Caroline Criado Perez’s book disappear in a puff of genderism.