Baroness Liz Barker (LibDem Lords) interview, "There has been a vicious campaign against Trans women. Orchestrated by extreme right wingers from the US, but it is perpetrated by.. women of the left"

It's probably on Facebook. Lib Dems all seem to be mothpeices for Belcher's ravings.

Layla Moran MP acknowledged the influence of her friend & colleague Helen Belcher in the 2018 debate when she also asserted that she preferred to prioritise her capacity to see people's souls rather than recognise sex in the context of women's safety, dignity & privacy in female single sex spaces. This debate was in response to a male sex offender, K. White, being convicted of sexually assaulting women in the female prison estate.

Hansard 21 November 2018
Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)
(extract)
"I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in the debate today, especially because it is Trans Awareness Week. Yesterday was the Transgender Day of Remembrance, a day when we are meant to remember the huge inequalities and the number of transgender people who have died over the years because of the oppression that they faced. I hope the Minister will join me today in solidarity with the community that over the past few months has had inordinate amounts of abuse hurled at it from all quarters. However, today is an opportunity to shed some light rather than heat on this debate, particularly on the issues that underpin some of that heat.

I want to place on the record my thanks to my Liberal Democrat colleague and friend, Helen Belcher, whom I have worked with closely on this matter. I also want to place it on the record that I am wholeheartedly behind the Government’s proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act 2004. I believe that they are proportionate and well thought through. It is time that Britain caught up with many other countries around the world—a point I will come to later." (continues)
hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-11-21/debates/BE06C5D4-E549-4F94-87B1-9B77F32EA155/Self-IdentificationOfGender

Spectator James Kirkup
This MP has summed up everything wrong with the transgender debate
21 November 2018

(extract)
"Ms Moran has said she believes trans women are women. Mr Davies has said he believes that a person with a penis cannot be a woman.

Their exchange is here:

David T. C. Davies:

'I hear what the hon. Lady is saying. May I bluntly ask her whether she would be happy sharing a changing room with somebody who was born male and had a male body?'

Layla Moran:

'I believe that women are women, so if that person was a trans woman, I absolutely would. I just do not see the issue. As for whether they have a beard, which was one of the hon. Gentleman’s earlier comments, I dare say that some women have beards. There are all sorts of reasons why our bodies react differently to hormones. There are many forms of the human body. I see someone in their soul and as a person. I do not really care whether they have a male body.'

And that, in a nutshell, is the transgender debate. Remember, Ms Moran, an intelligent and educated member of Parliament was speaking in a debate about laws that help determine how and whether people with female bodies can chose to separate themselves from people with male bodies. I’ll repeat her key observation again, just for clarity:

'I see someone in their soul and as a person. I do not really care whether they have a male body.' (continues)

concludes:
But what about those women who do not possess Ms Moran’s remarkable gift, and who might just be a little concerned about the anatomy of the people they share changing rooms and bathrooms with? Women who might not subscribe to the fact-free, anti-evidence superstitious gibberish contained in talk of seeing souls? Women who might just consider material reality, biological fact and thousands of years of accumulated evidence about male violence, committed with male bodies, to actually matter? Women who might be left asking, if even MPs debate laws on sex and gender on the basis of 'souls' not bodies, what hope is there?

Sadly, Ms Moran did not say anything about those women who are not fortunate enough to share her special gift. Perhaps she’ll get to the next time MPs debate this issue"

www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-mp-has-summed-up-everything-wrong-with-the-transgender-debate

And she actually believes this utter nonsense?

She seems to believe a lot of false narratives.

Pink News
'LGBT Leaders: Lawmakers reject radical feminist transphobia'
SOFIA LOTTO PERSIO OCTOBER 12, 2018

(extract)
“Within the [LGBT] community, the four initials right now, there is no excuse to do anything other than supporting one another,” said Baroness Liz Barker, a Liberal Democrat peer who publicly came out during the passage of the Marriage Act in 2013.

Baroness Barker commended Prime Minister Theresa May for choosing to champion transgender equality, but criticised how long it took for the government to launch the consultation, in July, after first announcing plans to reform the GRA in October.

That delay, according to Baroness Barker, allowed “self-identified radical feminists” to organise and “put together a whole series of assumptions and generalisations.” She compared the strategies adopted by these groups to those historically adopted by people “to foster hatred agains minorities” and called for people to “reclaim feminism.” (continues)
www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/10/12/lgbt-leaders-lawmakers-reject-radical-feminist-transphobia/

Her intensity on this topic is something I found genuinely alarming two years ago when she was speaking out in the Lords and not a single politician seemed to even question it, let alone argue the opposite viewpoint.

11/2/2020 Spectator article by James Kirkup
'The minister who politely refused to play the trans language game'
(extract)
The debate ended with a summing up speech by Lord Keen of Elie, the advocate general for Scotland and a justice minister. Before becoming a minister, Keen was a working QC at the English and Scottish bars. In other words, he’s a senior and serious lawyer.

And this is what he had to say on the 'spousal veto': there is no such thing.

Here’s the relevant bit of his speech:

“'The noble Baroness, Lady Burt of Solihull, raised the question of transgender people, or persons who wish to transition, which she acknowledged was outwith the scope of the Bill—which it certainly is. However, if and when we come to address that, I think that we would have carefully to approach her use of the unqualified term “veto” in respect of this matter.

'The noble Baroness, Lady Hunt, very charmingly used a “Jack and Jill” kind of illustration of certain matters; perhaps I may seek to deploy a similar approach. Mary marries Paul; Paul decides that he will transition to become Pauline. To complete that process, he will either require the consent of Mary or he will have to secure a declarator of nullity of marriage—so there is no actual veto. [My bold] The point of the present situation is this: Mary who married Paul should not find herself married to Pauline without her consent.'

And that, I think, is significant and worth noting here. One of the interesting characteristics of the transgender debate is how trans advocates have used language with care and deliberation and repetition to create an orthodoxy that few people in public life will analyse let alone question." (continues)

www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-minister-who-politely-refused-to-play-the-trans-language-game]]

October 14th 2019 Baroness Liz Barker tweeted:

"Today I submitted my first Private Member's Bill to abolish the spousal veto (sic). Fingers crossed for a high slot in UKHouseofLords ballot."
mobile.twitter.com/LizBarkerLords/status/1183756357251543041
thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3717744-Liz-Barkers-potential-private-members-bill-Spousal-veto

OP TinselAngel wrote:
"Did you know the Liberal Democrats are currently proposing changes to the Gender Recognition Act which could have the effect of trapping trans widows in same sex marriages against their will?

A woman could go from being in a hetrosexual marriage, to being in legally a same sex marriage, without her consent.

A motion was passed at the Liberal Democrat party conference (proposer Layla Moran MP ) to change the clause of the GRA which allows for one party to a marriage to have the marriage annulled / dissolved before the other party is able to be issued with a Gender Recognition Certificate.

Trans Activists inaccurately refer to this section of the GRA as the "Spousal Veto". It is not a veto. It does not prevent transition. At worst it might delay the issue of a GRC.

Never mind, you might think, the Lib Dems aren't going to get into power any time soon? Putting aside the possibility of a hung parliament in an imminent general election, the Lib Dems appear to not be able to wait to get into power to introduce this, as now Baroness Barker has submitted a private members bill in the House of Lords.

Google "spousal veto" and you will see pages of accustions that it can be used by an abusive controlling spouse to maliciously prevent their partner's transition. However no evidence is ever provided that this has ever happened. Those of you who have read the trans widows threads will have your own opinion of how likely this is.

Not all women in this situation will be able to get divorced. Some cannot get divorced for religious or cultural reasons. Maybe they can't afford it, or maybe their husband will refuse to consent to an Unreasonable Behaviour petition and drag the marriage out for 5 years or more.

Please contact the Liberal Democrats (particulary if you have a Liberal Democrat MP) and any prominent feminists you know to get people talking about this. It is a completely unjustified assault on one of the few rights that trans widows have. Any attack on Womens Rights is an attack on all women."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3717872-Trans-Widows-the-Liberal-Democrats-and-the-Spousal-Veto

Make More Noise article:
"Trans Widows and the Spousal “Veto”: a modern fable of male entitlement"
(extract)
What you won’t find, is anything explaining the effect that abolishing the “veto” would have on trans widows. So here goes.

First of all it is not a veto to transition, and it is gaslighting to suggest that it is. Who could have predicted that trans widows would be treated by the politicians in almost exactly the same way that we were treated by our ex-husbands? Why, those of us with a rudimentary understanding of patriarchy, that’s who!

Under the GRA, the transitioning spouse (usually the husband) has to have the consent [for the change of marriage status] of the non-transitioning spouse (usually the wife) before he can obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate. Whilst that consent remains outstanding, an interim certificate is issued. This gives any woman who does not consent, the space to get the marriage annulled/dissolved before her husband legally changes sex and becomes her wife. It prevents her being in a same sex marriage that she didn’t sign up to.

This is why this section of the GRA would more accurately be called the Spousal Exit Clause rather than the Spousal Veto." (continues)

makemorenoisemanc.wixsite.com/mysite/post/trans-widows-and-the-spousal-veto-a-modern-fable-of-male-entitlement

Baroness Barker is completely wedded to trans ideology.

Baroness Barker has apparently been a regular special guest at GIRES AGM
Drs Helen & Mike Webberley likewise.

2016 GIRES AGM minutes
(extract)
Afterwards Baroness Barker spoke on Parliamentary and political aspects of current transgender issues and Dr. Helen Webberley spoke on transgender health care as a GP. Other matters discussed included the Report of the House of Commons Women & Equalities
Committee Inquiry, Brexit, trans*formation and trans individuals in prison. There was also a workshop for families of gender nonconforming people.
Bernard and Terry were thanked for their hospitality and we all clapped when Baroness Barker praised Terry for her great vision and persistence."
gires. org.uk/wp-content /uploads/2016/11/GIRES-AGM-Minutes-September-2016.pdf

2017
(extract)
"Bernard Reed reported on GIRES’ developments (including the GIRES website, tranzwiki, incidence statistics, translation of the WPATH SOC, Awards for All, corporate members, awards received, and trans prisoners), as well as the accounts. Terry Reed summarised the year’s meetings and training , and thanked everyone (particularly Baroness Barker) who had given support to the organisation during the previous year, plus all those present for attending. Baroness Barker spoke on the parliamentary forum, and the Albert Kennedy Trust.

1. Appointment of Independent Examiner

1. Any Other Business

Afterwards members discussed three ways to influence government policy. First, NHS England is seeking views, by 16 October, about its proposals regarding gender identity services for adults. Secondly, the Government Equalities Office (GEO) has launched a survey, which runs until 15 October, among LGBT people about their experiences and the improvements they seek in public servicers. Thirdly, the GEO plans a consultation in the autumn on reducing the bureaucratic and medical burdens in obtaining gender recognition.
There was also a concurrent workshop for families of gender diverse people."
www.gires.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/GIRES-AGM-Minutes-September-2017.pdf