Lib Dem canvassing guidance

This is what we need ultimately, anyway - clear, sensible, practical and down to earth solutions that protect women and girls.

At this isn't to deny that men who identify as transwomen may well have problems - but their problems are going to be with other men's attitudes and it's not up to we women to sort it out for them.

This is what we need ultimately, anyway - clear, sensible, practical and down to earth solutions that protect women and girls.

Yes, or asking very clear, specific questions.

One that may be relevant to many women is if they have daughters in school - will the councillor support mixed sex toilets or support separate toilets for boys and girls?

Maybe start conversations as though you agree twaw then lead into areas of conflict so they don't get their guard up?

I wonder if the better approach here is not to allow canvassers to start spouting that TWAW, and pretend that any one who dares to disagree is a transphobe, but instead to pin them down on what the Equalities Act says about single sex provision. It means knowing what it says ourselves. I know that Stonewall don't like it, but what Stonewall says isn't law, however much they want it to be.

Samphire, That statement stuck out for me too. But there's a sleight of hand involved in it too. Even before you get to the point about who they may be alleging would be affected by violence, to start off by saying 'implementing restrictions' is to imply that this is something new, when it isn't. We have a long established system of separate facilities which is the very reason that women and girls are comfortable and safe in public facilities.

I used to be on friendly terms with our lib dem councillor. I now can't look her in the eye when we cross in the street.

This demonstrates the utter contempt they have for all their voters. To them, everyone else is a moron and can be hoodwinked into voting for them because ordinary voters can’t possibly think for themselves or work out they’ve been had, hahaha.

@Abitofalark its an interesting point you make and while I agree with the principle, I actually think giving examples are precisely what is needed to show how outrageously indefensible the TWAW stance is. It is only within the last year to 18 months that I have seen the light on all this I’m fairly liberal and the trans rights movements seemed like an extension of the gay rights movement. The penny only dropped when the implications of TWAW were made clear by reference to specific examples.
It is easy in the abstract to offer platitudes about trans people deserving dignity and respect (and I agree with that - in principle), but when you give concrete examples (womens prison’s, rape crisis centres, school changing rooms etc etc etc) it is much more difficult to offer any credible defence.

Perhaps I should have mentioned that the candidate with whom I was corresponding is a woman…! (Not that it should make a difference I suppose but it’s interesting context).

@SamphirethePogoingStickerist as to your final query about whether she was held down and made to type some of her nonsense, it does indeed appear that she has been given some third party input - I can tell from the fact her reply contains different fonts. But who know what she meant by “intrusive checks”.

However, I can only assume that she would have no issue with her 13 year old daughter sharing a changing facility with, eg transgender Jamie Wallis MP and him exposing his female penis and testicles to her (JW still presenting as a man having said he still prefers to use male pronouns).

But in her world we cannot even ask someone who appears to be male if they are a transwoman, meaning she must also be happy for any and all men to use the women’s changing room and expose themselves to her daughter, regardless of their motivations for doing so. 🙄

Thank you for posting this. Disturbing and sinister strategies. I had no inclination to vote LD but will be ready respond dhould they come knocking. Shame as years back we had the most amazing female LD Councillor elected in our ward. She was formidable and a real champion for local people and local issues. I'm sure she would be dismayed at this nonsense.

So glad I'm no longer a member.

@girasol Crikey, that's all a bit of dog's dinner, isn't it? Who knons what they are actually saying? Other than some women, who seem to be mostly transwomen, may be hurt by such things.

The part that screamed out at me was: Implementing restrictions based on appearance or on sex assigned at birth increases the risk of violence and abuse that all women and girls face, and would constitute a completely unacceptable level of intrusion.

He said that restricting spaces to one sex would increase the risk of violence that ALL women and girls would face.

He said that such restrictions would be intrusive

He didn;'t mean ALL, did he? He meant transwomen... in some alternative universe were the statistics are completely different to those that exist in this version of the UK!

Intrusive? Did he mean he envisaged such restrictions would require checks on genitalia? Or just asking, refusing access to men?

I wonder if someone held him down and threatened his guinea pig whilst he typed that? It isn't the output of a sane and sensible mind, is it?

That is interesting because my local Lib Dem councillors were very receptive to my concerns - in fact they agreed with me. I raised the issue of TW in women's safe spaces and they both (one male one female) were in complete agreement - I asked for it to be filtered up the system and they said they would as they had been asked this question more frequently recently.

I'm quite fortunate that in my area for next week, the LibDems have chosen not to field a candidate against a fairly strong independent local residents' party so as not to split the anti Tory vote. So at least I don't have to vote for this. Much much harder for national elections.

"I was that close to voting Lib Dem because I do support the stance they are taking on a local issue, but having read that patronising ‘we can’t think for ourselves’ guidance, they can do one. I shall have to spoil my ballot paper again."

Has your candidate repeated the guidance answers? They are written by the LGBT Liberals, some of whom are trans activists. There's no obligation for candidates to use them.

Ask your candidates to state their own position. If you agree, then I don't see why you can't vote for them.

That exchange with Lib Dem illustrates why it I don't think it is helpful to introduce argument for special cases. It simply undermines the claim for rights of all women and girls which is the case that needs to be made. My rights or those of girls in any school aren't trumped by others'. The Lib Dems do the predictable dance and seize on the special case and oh yes they will make a concession on that basis, as indicated above. Recognition of our needs does not and must not rely upon a basis of special cases and special concessions and the rest can go hang.

Also shows why we must insist on maintaining the meaning and use of words such as 'woman', which doesn't require qualification as if there is some additional meaning included in the word which makes it necessary to specify what we mean by prefacing it with an adjective.

Thank you girasol - clear and well argued.

Sooner or later this dogma that transwomen are anything other than of the male sex needs to stop. I read somewhere though that it was like the Berlin Wall - when just one person tried to cross, they got shot. When thousands stormed the wall they had to let them through - even the guards weren't callous enough to massacre people.

I was that close to voting Lib Dem because I do support the stance they are taking on a local issue, but having read that patronising ‘we can’t think for ourselves’ guidance, they can do one. I shall have to spoil my ballot paper again.

no one could seriously be suggesting trans men in male prisons

The Lib Dems have some of the most extreme TRAs as members and policy influencers.

The Lib Dems have lost my vote, I can't face voting Tory, Labour are a lost cause and even the Women's Equality Party believe TWAW....I am spoiling my ballot paper and writing Woman = adult human female - God - it is depressing.

I'm pretty sure this isn't the policy- no one could seriously be suggesting trans men in male prisons. Just an example of how poorly thought through this all is.

I’ve not had a chance to digest fully but it seems in LibdemLaLaLand a transwoman can only ever be a victim of sex/gender based harassment, violence and sexual violence and the mere act of thinking themselves a woman means they will never be a perpetrator 🙄

LIBDEM COUNCILLOR SECOND REPLY
To be clear, I believe that safeguarding is very important in all settings, especially those involving vulnerable people. Public order laws apply to all single-sex spaces, but they are based on behaviour, not identity. A crime is a crime no matter who commits it. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are very clear that supporting trans rights does not contradict women's rights.
Although as you say, transwomen are a minority, members of a minority still have the right to have their rights protected. They deserve to have their identity recognised and their dignity respected, but far too many face discrimination, harassment and intimidation.
Implementing restrictions based on appearance or on sex assigned at birth increases the risk of violence and abuse that all women and girls face, and would constitute a completely unacceptable level of intrusion. You may be interested to know that the British Medical Association has voted to support self ID for trans and non-binary people and have called on the Government to make the process of legally changing gender less medicalised and instead via a witnessed, sworn statement.
However, single-sex spaces are often very difficult and sensitive decisions for service providers to make. In many cases we’re talking about women – trans or not – who’ve been the victims of sexual assault or domestic abuse at the hands of men. Making sure all women get the support they need, and that they can feel safe, is critically important.
It’s right that each organisation needs to look at their own specific case and decide what’s best for the people who use their services. What they need is clear guidance about what’s lawful and appropriate.

I’m afraid that, even with this new guide from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, there still isn’t enough clarity for those organisations or for individuals who want to use their services. Six relatively specific examples just isn’t enough to cover the vast range of different circumstances.

What we need from the government is much clearer and more comprehensive guidance on how to make sure everyone can access the services they need, safely.

I appreciate that this may not have been the brief bullet pointed response you were looking for, but I hope this has been helpful in setting out my views.

MY SECOND MESSAGE:
Thank you for taking the time to reply to me when I know you are very busy.

I note what you say in relation to your example of maintaining single sex spaces at XXXX Community Centre washrooms. But the point is not whether these spaces exist, it is about who is permitted to use them. In particular, do you agree

• that any male bodied person who claims to identify as female should be able to access women’s toilets/changing rooms, and (in relation to the latter) to undress and expose their male genitalia to women and girls there? Because this is the implication of the LibDem policy “Trans women are women”.
• that natal women should accept this without challenge or complaint, and if they do challenge a male bodied person entering eg a women’s and girls’ changing room that they are being transphobic?

This is not some hysterical Daily Mail made-up scenario, this is already happening! In schools (girls are forced to accept any boy who claims to identify as a girl into their changing rooms) as well as leisure centres, rape crisis centres, domestic violence refuges, women’s prisons (Google Karen White, a transwoman sex offender who sexually assaulted women in prison), women’s hospital wards (see the speech made by Baroness Nichols last month in the House of Lords, detailing how an NHS trust spent a year denying a woman patient had been raped by a transwoman because there were “no men on the ward” so a rape could not have occurred).

It is a serious safeguarding issue and it is difficult to understand how the “feelings” of a tiny number of people can be allowed to take precedence over it.

I completely agree there should be a respectful debate from both sides, but unfortunately women who dare to speak out publicly receive death threats and harassment (Rosie Duffield MP, Kathleen Stock, JK Rowling, all of whom have made clear they believe trans people should be treated with dignity and respect). And the likes of Stonewall try to intimidate and silence us with #NoDebate.

The sporting issue is not, with respect, complicated at all. We do not have women’s sports categories so that people who “feel feminine” can compete agains each other. We have different sports categories (women, veterans, para athletes, U16s etc) due to physical and physiological differences between these groups and male / able bodied / young adults.

If we open women’s sporting events up to athletes who have enjoyed the physiological benefits of male puberty, should we not allow people who “identify” as disabled to enter a para athlete event, or a young at heart 20 year old from and U14s competition? When you have more time, I would highly recommend this article by Olympic swimmer Sharon Davies who makes the point more powerfully than I can:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sharron-davies-injustice-of-transgender-athletes-has-echo-of-the-dopers-i-faced-x8lzv9hj7

I appreciate you have many other issues and voter queries to contend with and having made my points I do not propose prolonging this exchange. I would, however, welcome a short, definitive answer to my two bullet points above.

REPLY 1 FROM LIBDEM COUNCILLOR:

Firstly, whilst we support trans-rights wholeheartedly and are committed to fighting for both gender equality and equality for all LGBT+ people, we still recognise the importance in some instances for single sex spaces, especially where young girls and people from some backgrounds and cultures are affected. For example, in our recent redevelopment plans for XXXX Community Centre, we have ensured that there are single sex spaces for washrooms, and bathrooms as they are frequented regularly by the Muslim community where separated areas are a must. We must remain mindful and inclusive of all, whilst navigating this sensitive, divisive and hostile debate which has recently become very toxic.
Just like the other main parties (Labour, Greens and Conservatives), we all support the Equality Act which has been around for over a decade and protects woman, trans people and others. We believe in the safety and dignity of every individual. We do know that this is a difficult issue, but we are not proposing any dramatic change in law, we simply agree with this Government when they say that gender recognition processes are bureaucratic and intrusive.

With regards to your question surrounding sports... this is obviously a difficult question which is best decided by each sporting body/club in relation to their sport. There are three priorities which need to be balanced here, safety, fairness and inclusion. That balance and individual situation will vary from sport to sport, and from location to location. Again, this is part of the wider debate which has become toxic and hostile. We need to get past that, and have a good-faith conversation about ensuring everyone's safety and dignity.

Thanks again for your questions and I hope that helps you cast your decision.