Layla Moran on Nick Robinson's Political Thinking on Radio 4

So if her friends turned out to be horrible people she wouldn’t be so keen? Interesting policy.

She also spoke in that interview of having trans friends.
I do wonder if she really means she knows some trans people - the trans activists who have ingratiated themselves in with the LibDems, and are trying to direct policy. Not really that they are her genuine friends.

Another thing she said in the interview was that it wasn't until she was doing a masters in education that she realised that there were poor people in the UK, and that the outcome for children from impoverished backgrounds was strongly linked to the socio-economic background of their parents.

She's not only from an incredibly privileged and sheltered background, but she's obviously found it hard to see what life is like for people outside that privileged bubble.

@OldCrone puzzling???

There used to be intellectuals associated with the Liberal Party such as John Stuart Mill, Keynes and Beveridge.

Do Layla Moran and Ed Davy measure up😁

To be fair, that could be said of most parties. I expect the LibDem support to continue to plumet

That’s exactly it whereyouleftit

Moran clearly knows what a woman is but having lived an immensely privileged life (I mean roedean is posh af) she has no idea what it’s like to not have choices or simply throw money to the problem

I’m sure she’s spent many a night with Helen belcher telling her empowering tale of how they became a woman and his helens wife doesn’t mind at all and that therefore all women who mind are hateful bigots plus she’s got the lesbian baronesses telling her the same. I mean how can she be wrong eh?

If anything, her warbling on about what Liberalism is has put me off the party as a whole. I foolishly used to think of them as 'middle-ground' but they're not, are they? And knowing that, I don't think I could ever vote LibDem. Ever.

I think that is a common mistake that I have made too. If you think right wing/ left wing then they are middle. There is probably a reason they lost their power in the early C20th and have since made coalitions that result in them being rejected.

"Mind you doesn't say much about her private school that they turned out someone so ignorant of biological fact. But I'm guessing the incidence of sexual assault or period shaming is considerable lower at Roedean than your average UK comprehensive."

I don't think she is ignorant of biological fact. I think it's far worse, that she is prepared to LIE about reality for ideological ends. She knows women are adult human females. But that doesn't fit in with the narrative she wants to spin, so she bends words to suit her purpose. Yes, all politicians do that; but traditionally, facts (e.g. unemployment levels) were acknowledged and then the ideology would influence what the politician believed to be the cause and what was the solution. Here, we have bare-faced denial of facts. And not even a difficult fact, just the definition of a word. (And then building from there.)

She also spoke in that interview of having trans friends. So we've got the 'well my trans friends are nice people and therefore all transpeople are nice people' misconception too. She can't see that her 'nice' trans friends are individuals who are no more representative of trans people in general than she is representative of women in general; I expect they're from the same privileged background that Moran has. A background where you are protected and coddled and SAFE. And she lacks the empathy required to put herself in the shoes of women who are not protected and coddled and safe. And can't see that a politician's job is to look out for those whose lives aren't as nice as hers, whereas she's more for those just like her.

If anything, her warbling on about what Liberalism is has put me off the party as a whole. I foolishly used to think of them as 'middle-ground' but they're not, are they? And knowing that, I don't think I could ever vote LibDem. Ever.

Have noticed date 20/3/19 of acceptance. So way before their disaster in the election

There was another £100,000 in November 2019. For some reason there's no date for that in the 'accepted date' column, you have to scroll over to the right of the table to see the date.

The donations started in 2013 when the Lib Dems were part of the coalition government with the Tories, so could have been viewed as a party with influence. But that doesn't explain why they continued after 2015.

What I really meant was that for a drug company, you'd think they would want a political party with influence, so they could get their drugs used in the NHS?

Have noticed date 20/3/19 of acceptance. So way before their disaster in the election

Why on earth would a drug company fund them?

There's a lot of discussion about that on the other thread I linked to. They have had funding from Ferring Pharmaceuticals since 2013. Total donations of £1.4 million.

LibDem donations from Ferring

Ferring sponsored the Dutch trial into puberty blockers.

"Ferring was interested in this novel use for their expensive drug because they market Triptorelin, one of the GnRH antagonists used in gender clinics under the brand names Diphereline and Gonapeptyl."
www.transgendertrend.com/puberty-blockers-safe/

I looked up one named activist and found that this person is very active on Twitter (at least a decade after that earlier bout of activism) creating long lists of TERFs, and trying to create lists of everyone who has ever liked a tweet by a TERF.

So I understand that people do not exactly want to anger that breed of trans activists. Natal women are extremely unlikely to cause as big a threat, so are safer to mistreat.

[quote OldCrone]It's not just twitter influencing the Lib Dems. Helen Belcher and some other TRAs in the party seem to have an enormous amount of influence over policy. Or maybe it's the funding from a pharmaceutical company which produces hormone blocking drugs which is influencing them.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/puberty-blocker-drug-firm-donated-cash-to-lib-dems-cf3x77nh3

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3762937-libdem-funding-own-thread[/quote]
Why on earth would a drug company fund them? They have absolutely no influence. Must have done it before the election

If she ever did come into power, unlikely she's have a proper tussle with PHE and many other public health initiatives who resolutely need sex to be defined for targeting purposes.

Think it’s clear where Nick’s thoughts lie, he had a run in with Paris Lees on air a few years ago. Wish he had made the point that for many if not the majority “woman” is linked to sex/being female and not an identity. He did well but so many questions I’d like to hear her asked on this.

Complete waffle. Nick did a good job but I would have liked him to go one further - if ‘woman’ is now a ‘gender identity’ then can you describe it? How would I know I’ve got a ‘woman’ gender identity as opposed to something else? When straight questions are asked the response is always waffle waffle waffle virtue signalling nonsense. Never ever a straight reply. There isn’t one of course that makes any sense but I just wish every bit of wriggle room was removed to really make them nail their colours to the mast.

The ICA of which I'm a member suddenly turned all its loos which had previously been marked male/female into unisex loos. I think this is what women object to, not trans women in themselves. It's the blanket one size fits all approach and that you just have to lump it.

Does Layla think the higher mortality rate for covid-19 is in people who are male, or in people who have stereotypically masculine interests? I'd really like someone to ask her this.

She can't have it both ways.

And yes, everything I've heard about her suggests she's incredibly privileged with little to no understanding of the lives of the majority of women and girls (those who don't go to expensive private schools).

Mind you doesn't say much about her private school that they turned out someone so ignorant of biological fact. But I'm guessing the incidence of sexual assault or period shaming is considerable lower at Roedean than your average UK comprehensive.

I was interested so I looked up Roedean. This is from their website about the 'aims of the school'

Roedean School was founded in 1885, to provide ‘a thorough physical, intellectual and moral’ education with ‘as much liberty as is consistent with safety’. The founding Lawrence sisters believed that girls deserved an education which was at least as good as boys had.

Do we think the Lawrence sisters might be turning in their graves at the way Layla is discounting the safety of normal girls in the Uk and limiting their liberty?

ErrolTheDragon
Brilliant headline: The lesser of two feebles
Never a truer word spoken.

YY, what OldCrone said. It's mostly internal.

because she’s decided that keeping a tiny minority of people on Twitter happy is a viable strategy for long term success as a politician

I think it's more the case that she and other politicians recognise that a tiny and vocal minority can have a disproportionate impact on your career if they decide you've said something that warrants 'cancellation'.

It's not just twitter influencing the Lib Dems. Helen Belcher and some other TRAs in the party seem to have an enormous amount of influence over policy. Or maybe it's the funding from a pharmaceutical company which produces hormone blocking drugs which is influencing them.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/puberty-blocker-drug-firm-donated-cash-to-lib-dems-cf3x77nh3

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3762937-libdem-funding-own-thread

Actually, I take back what I just said about Davey. He is just another uninformed, arrogant bloke who can't see this from the pov of women, but at least he came here for a bit of debate.
But he is firmly in the TWAW/self id camp, so journalists should ask him the same questions.
What is a woman, Ed?

I think she’s stupid, not because of her answer to such a simple question, but because she’s decided that keeping a tiny minority of people on Twitter happy is a viable strategy for long term success as a politician. It’s barmy.

That's interesting Errol, but as mad as Layla Moran sounds on this topic, I think Ed Davey is actually worse. He did a MN chat last year and told us that TWAW, end of.

The bit that caught my eye was:

^ There’s no great enthusiasm for either candidate,” says a party source after meeting some London councillors. “An interesting thing was that women backed Ed Davey because they didn’t like Layla Moran.” (NB: this is not a scientific opinion poll.)
A West of England councillor says colleagues fear Moran could be another Jo Swinson^