Woman's Hour - 16 June - scrapping the proposed GRA amendments

There's a review of today's WH in the Telegraph:

www.telegraph.co.uk/radio/what-to-listen-to/has-womans-hour-flinched-trans-issues/

I have sent WH an unhappy-gram. Had to write it twice because I was interrupted by the GC and came back to a blank screen. Of course I did not save it. Numpty.

Belcher's opening Salvo was the story of sitting on the toilet that morning crying for five minutes. That was a horrible mental picture frankly. Jane Garvey followed by saying too much detail far too soon. Completely agree Jane, opening up Women's Hour with a graphic tale from Belcher of their morning sitting on the toilet was not really the analysis of the GRA anyone wanted or expected. Where's the coy "bathroom" decorum gone? It will take me a while to get past that visual invasion.

On the relationships board posters are always told that suicide threats are abusive tactics designed to coerce you & you’re not responsible for their behaviour

Scottish Trans, in their survey of 60 transgender people, listed attempts and threats of suicide by the partners of transgender people as a form of emotional abuse.

Emotional Abuse: Threatening Behaviour by Partner or Ex-Partner
Threatened or attempted to kill themselves as a way of making you do something or stopping you doing something

www.scottishtrans.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/trans_domestic_abuse.pdf

So why are threats of suicide coming from trans people not seen as equally manipulative and abusive?

helenbelcher.uk/en/

Joanna talks about how she was 'walking on eggshells' before Helen's transition, and how Helen had a 'very short fuse'.

Being able to articulate ones argument under questioning is surely a prerequisite for an MP?

Yup. And if Belcher has ever seen the House of Commons in action they'll know that it's like a bear pit. Lots of shouting and abuse towards MPs they disagree with. Lots of sexist insults towards women.

And I'm guessing Belcher has seen the H of C and still wants to be an MP. So either mature feminists like Joan Smith are more terrifying than anything in the House of Commons, or Belcher is simply lying because they imagine (falsely, as it turns out) that people will be more sympathetic if they pretend to be too vulnerable to debate.

HB won’t have an on air discussion with a feminist but want to become an MP? How does that stack up? Being able to articulate ones argument under questioning is surely a prerequisite for an MP?

On the relationships board posters are always told that suicide threats are abusive tactics designed to coerce you & you’re not responsible for their behaviour

resource thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3452784-Coercive-Control-a-need-for-better-awareness

The dramatic drama of the first guest 🙄 dear me. Odd to hear an older educated adult talk like that sounded like one of my teens.

Love Joan smith have read her stuff for years

Every time I read what Joanna Belcher says my heart goes out to her. The man she married threatened to kill himself if she didn’t go along with what he wanted.

On the relationships board posters are always told that suicide threats are abusive tactics designed to coerce you & you’re not responsible for their behaviour

She didn’t exactly get a free choice did she

Whatever HB May say the spousal veto doesn’t exist. Ruth Hunt asked for it to be abolished in her first speech in the Lords only for one of the Law Lords to very politely put her right.
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-minister-who-politely-refused-to-play-the-trans-language-game/amp

so if HB has no GRC, they are legally Male....and have no right to be in the womens facilities, why would they not just get a GRC? It makes no sense to me at all. Why do they feel they are above the law? Might they have applied and been turned down?

Anyone who does not have a GRC is of course for all purposes to be regarded as their sex.

Joanna Belcher (Helen Belcher's wife) speech at the LibDem conference prompted a resolution to remove the spousal exit clause & provides some background.

New Statesman article by Ailbhe Rea
14 SEPTEMBER 2019
'Liberal Democrats decide to remove the controversial trans ‘spousal veto’
A moving debate culiminated in the party conference backing a boost to trans rights.'
(extract)
"In a moving debate at the party’s conference this morning, Joanna Belcher, the wife of Helen Belcher, the Liberal Democrat’s prospective parliamentary candidate in Chippenham, told the conference about her own experience of the spousal veto during her wife’s transition.

“Sixteen years ago I was living with a depressed husband who had recently stood over a railway bridge and seriously contemplated jumping. We had two young children,” she told the room.

“We were both trying to work out the ramifications of the realisation that she needed to live her life openly as a woman. It became clear that in order for my spouse to change her legal gender, and for us to remain in our marriage, I would be asked to sign a consent form.

“I didn’t want to sign anything that said this was what I was choosing. I was supporting my other half, while trying to hold myself and our family together, but it wasn’t my choice.

“It wasn’t my choice and I knew this had to happen, that a second female parent was way better for our kids than a dead male parent. But shouldn’t have been my decision to make. This was a burden I didn’t want. Only my other half knew who she truly was.”

Belcher added that the law as it stands allows spouses to “use this veto as a weapon to hurt their exes and prevent them from moving on in their lives”. (continues)
www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/09/liberal-democrats-decide-remove-controversial-trans-spousal-veto

It does seem to me that the ‘I won’t debate with someone who denies my right to exist’ tactic is going as they realise it simply won’t wash any more.

I've just listened on catch-up to the Belcher and Joan Smith interviews. Joan Smith was excellent, so clear and concise. Belcher, on the other hand, spouted nothing but me-me-me twaddle and misinformation. You have to laugh that someone who wants to be elected as an MP felt 'unable' to debate the issue live on radio. It was frustrating that Jane Garvey didn't challenge more of what was said. However, one thing that was made crystal clear to me, and hopefully to others, is that Belcher had no actual arguments to make.

I thought that Joan Smith did an excellent job. HB by contrast was trying to present herself as a victim without actually explaining why. I think Jane Garvey sounded exasperated with her. Joan sounded like the calm grownup.

I really dislike the pulling of the vulnerability card by ppl who seem as vulnerable as a Sherman tank!

It's deeply unconvincing, unless you're of the generation that sees "vulnerability" as a trump card in any argument.

I may have made this observation before, but when you look at past political movements for minority rights such as black civil rights, or women's rights, or gay rights, you simply don't see them playing this vulnerability card. Martin Luther King didn't say he was too frightened to debate with white racists. Germaine Greer didn't shy away from sharing a platform with Norman Mailer in front of an audience of millions. Those activists were pretty damn fearless which is why we admire them.

The idea that Helen Belcher is too scared to debate with someone as fearsome as, er, Joan Smith, is, frankly, pathetic.

Ro so if HB has no GRC, they are legally Male....and have no right to be in the womens facilities, why would they not just get a GRC? It makes no sense to me at all. Why do they feel they are above the law? Might they have applied and been turned down?

May 2020 Liz Barker (LibDem Lords) interview for #IDAHOBIT day by Matthew Hulbert

(special mention for H Belcher)

“There has been a vicious campaign against Trans women.”A special interview, marking IDAHoBiT, with Baroness Liz Barker'

(extract)
LB: Yes, I work closely with trans groups, intersex groups and non-binary people. When the government’s LGBT Action plan was published there was some optimism that long overdue legal reform would happen. Sadly for the last three years there has been a vicious campaign against trans women. It is orchestrated by extreme right wingers from the US, but it is perpetrated by people, many of them women, who are traditionally on the left. Despite a stark lack of evidence, the constant assertions that trans women pose a threat to other women are fanned by journalists. We are not talking about the usual suspects like the Mail and the Murdoch sheets, media such as the Guardian and the BBC have endlessly and relentlessly given credence to views which on any other subject would be subject to journalistic scrutiny and dismissed. Worst of all, lesbians and gay men, many of whom know what it is like to be subject to discrimination and misrepresentation, are now subjecting trans women to that same unfair treatment. That is utterly disgraceful.

What is life like as an Out Parliamentarian? Are there still those who are negative about it?

LB: That is the case at the moment, and I hope it can remain so. I wasn’t able to come out for many years for personal reasons. To work every day under the threat of being outed took a toll on me, but also friends and colleagues who worried for me. When I could come out I did and I decided to use my position and influence to make life better for others, especially those who still face discrimination in their communities. There are now more LGB parliamentarians, sadly no trans MPs or peers yet, but I do hope that the brilliant campaigner Helen Belcher can break that barrier. I co-founded the APPG on Global LGBT Rights and, despite current restraints on the Lords imposed by government, I hope to continue that work. And I have worked a lot on building LGBT issues into discussions about equalities, especially with parliamentarians from abroad. I try to help activists from other countries too. I consider it my duty to help as many groups and activists from our communities to engage effectively with parliament and government. I hope that I can continue to do this work, because in this COVID world I think it is more necessary than ever, because since Brexit there has been a rise in intolerance of minorities and that is unhealthy, for everyone."

mathewhulbertonline. wordpress.com/2020/05/17/there-has-been-a-vicious-campaign-against-trans-women-a-special-interview-marking-idahobit-with-baroness-liz-barker/

November 2019 Make More Noise
'Trans Widows and the Spousal “Veto”: a modern fable of male entitlement'
(extract)
"A motion was passed at the 2019 Liberal Democrat Conference that vowed to remove the spousal “veto”. Baroness Barker followed this up with a Private Members Bill in the House of Lords, which proposed to replace the wife’s right to obtain an annulment/dissolution, with the right to be informed that a GRC is being issued. Yes, you read that correctly. A right to be informed.

So a woman could wake up one morning to find a letter on her doormat that essentially tells her that as far as the state is concerned, she’s a lesbian now. I suppose it’s a new opening for greetings card companies.

Fortunately at the time of writing, this bill has automatically fallen due to the dissolution of parliament. It could rear up again like the Terminator, after the General Election though. Would the Lib Dems think it acceptable in any other contract for one party to entirely change the terms, yet the other party still be bound by it? It seems unlikely." (continues)
makemorenoisemanc.wixsite.com/mysite/post/trans-widows-and-the-spousal-veto-a-modern-fable-of-male-entitlement

I don't know if HB has a GRC or not, but I would not feel comfortable seeing someone of that build following young girls into a female only bathroom/changing room. No hatred towards HB just concern as to what is going on in front of my eyes.)

Helen Belcher has been open about not having a GRC & has been campaigning hard to remove the spousal exit clause for many years.

I don't know if HB has a GRC or not, but I would not feel comfortable seeing someone of that build following young girls into a female only bathroom/changing room. No hatred towards HB just concern as to what is going on in front of my eyes.) The problem is someone (goodness knows who) told these men that after they transitioned they could use womens spaces..... that is the cause of all this madness now!

Why can't Womens Hour find transwomen willing to have a live conversation with anyone gender critical?

This is getting ridiculous.

HB would be hopeless as an MP if they feel too vulnerable to debate with Joan smith. I mean have they seen the behaviour in the House of Commons?

I really dislike the pulling of the vulnerability card by ppl who seem as vulnerable as a Sherman tank!

I had to laugh when Garvey said something about Belcher feeling too "vulnerable" to debate the issue with her. Really? An adult with years of political experience vulnerable at having their ideas challenged by another adult? How utterly pathetic. I suppose they've had so much success with the "poor me" narrative up till now they think it will carry on working when tried on the Radio 4-listening public. Frankly, I think they're in for a shock.

November 2018 Woman's Hour ran a series of sex & gender discussions after the government consultation on proposed changes to the GRA.
Bex Stinson (former Stonewall Trans Equality lead) claimed the same vulnerability as Belcher about a studio discussion with Jane Garvey & Helen Lewis. Bex Stinson's interview was pre-recorded as a consequence.
It was this announcement which 'peaked' my Dad who was listening to Radio 4 at the time. I think his words were, "bloody ridiculous."

thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3428918-Womans-Hour-Tues-20-11-18-Why-is-the-current-debate-about-sex-and-gender-so-often-called-toxic-we-hear-from-Bex-Stinson-and-helenlewis

I just listened to the Joan Smith interview. I decided not to waste my time listening to Belcher whine on.

I was amazed at how much Smith managed to pack in. She was very calm, very authoritative, very fact-based. I had to laugh when Garvey said something about Belcher feeling too "vulnerable" to debate the issue with her. Really? An adult with years of political experience vulnerable at having their ideas challenged by another adult? How utterly pathetic. I suppose they've had so much success with the "poor me" narrative up till now they think it will carry on working when tried on the Radio 4-listening public. Frankly, I think they're in for a shock.

September 2018 Jane Fae organised a TRA conference, 'We're Still Here'. Dawn Butler MP (former shadow minister Women & Equalities)

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