Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Lib Dems publish revised "Transphobia" definition

69 replies

Birdsweepsin · 15/11/2022 07:04

Well, having had at least two sets of legal advice, the Liberal Democrats have reviewed and revised their previously ridiculous 'definition of transphobia'

While not perfect, this new version is a massive improvement. Mainly, it has removed all references to Stonewall, and accepts that members are totally ok to hold 'gender critical' views and that these views are not in themselves transphobic.

Much wailing and teeth gnashing from the TRA wing of the LDs at the moment.

More here: twitter.com/LibVoice4Women/status/1592290749839998977?s=20&t=ZL6QIrC3gsmIqd3AbNgNiA

OP posts:
IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 20/11/2022 01:14

democracycoma.wordpress.com/2022/11/19/not-so-liberal-dem-voice/

VestofAbsurdity · 19/11/2022 18:24

You just gotta love the way they shout It's the Law then when The Law comes along and says No, it isn't the response is they were not in possession of all the facts.

Cannot bear anyone or anything proving them wrong.

Original poster
Birdsweepsin · 19/11/2022 18:05

twitter.com/CharleyHasted/status/1594013142698409985?s=20&t=sREdl4kyESVNCxIfQvkDug

We (Lib Dem LGBT+ group)

have evidence they (Lib Dem Federal Board, the body that commissioned, and then pulled the illegal definition of transphobia)

were not in possession of all the facts (when they got legal advice that they were breaking the law)

Oh yes?

OP posts:
JellySaurus · 19/11/2022 10:59

Rainbowshit · 19/11/2022 10:15

https://lgbt.libdems.org.uk/en/article/2022/1437811/statement-on-revision-of-definition-of-transphobia

Publishing this on the first day of trans awareness week was also, frankly, shocking.

Oh FFs is there any day that isn't some trans celebration day?

This week was Interfaith Week. No huge fanfare. Just lots of people with different, often conflicting, strongly-held beliefs in something unprovable, got together, listened to each other, and tried to find common ground and ways of understanding each other, and accepting each others' beliefs without adopting them or submitting to them.

Rainbowshit · 19/11/2022 10:15

https://lgbt.libdems.org.uk/en/article/2022/1437811/statement-on-revision-of-definition-of-transphobia

Publishing this on the first day of trans awareness week was also, frankly, shocking.

Oh FFs is there any day that isn't some trans celebration day?

Rainbowshit · 19/11/2022 09:57

So looking at IW's tweet and the comments underneath it seems like there can never be any compromise or middle ground found between trans people and GC people. There is to be no acceptance from them that trans people have not changed sex and that we are allowed to say so.

nilsmousehammer · 19/11/2022 09:39

Of course. Yes. And bats.

Original poster
Birdsweepsin · 19/11/2022 09:17

Balls, I believe Nilsmouse.

OP posts:
nilsmousehammer · 19/11/2022 09:04

Ah. So unless they can oppress females without conscience they're taking their ball home?

OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 18/11/2022 18:04

Happylittlechicken · 18/11/2022 17:14

So hold on, if non trans people can’t define transphobia, surely only women (female ones) get to define what a woman is? Or is IW invoking double standards

In a sense, it doesn't really matter. We can all come up with whatever outlandish definitions we please. It isn't going to change the fact that a transwoman is male, not female.

Happylittlechicken · 18/11/2022 17:21

Ahhh yes. I forgot about that. My fluffy lady brain. It only I had a clever person if the make persuasion to help me. Maybe IW will be free…. I hear IW is at a bit of a loose end these days.

nilsmousehammer · 18/11/2022 17:19

You're doing that thing of expecting logic and fairness/equality of standards again.

It doesn't work like that. It's ok for TQ+ people to do many things that it's absolutely forbidden for female people to do.

For example it's awful to seek to lobby in ways that TQ+ political activists disagree with and feel may infringe their rights (unspecified), but righteous and perfectly acceptable for the TQ+ political lobby to seek to remove and destroy female rights (actual). In fact its evil for females to resist. Apparently.

Happylittlechicken · 18/11/2022 17:14

So hold on, if non trans people can’t define transphobia, surely only women (female ones) get to define what a woman is? Or is IW invoking double standards

TheBiologyStupid · 18/11/2022 14:20

IW not very happy: archive.ph/RJXzX

LadyMonicaBaddingham · 15/11/2022 19:15

Phobia refers to an irrational fear. My concerns are very far from irrational. I have no issues with trans people per se, I just feel that they should have their own 'safe spaces', instead of stealing those that women (and exclusively women, oddly enough not) have fought so hard for for generations.

Lib Dems publish revised "Transphobia" definition
Wheresthebeach · 15/11/2022 19:09

That's great! Going to check it all out now.

JellySaurus · 15/11/2022 15:38

Misogynistc behaviour may include (i) attempting directly or through advocacy to remove womens' rights, (ii) misrepresenting women, (iii) abuse of women, and (iv) systematically excluding women from discussions about issues that directly affect them.

ZandathePanda · 15/11/2022 13:35

…though I suppose it all depends on how they are defining gender.

ZandathePanda · 15/11/2022 13:34

Had a laugh at this quote from a PP:
The Liberal Democrats use ‘trans’ as an umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth. Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a variety of terms.

That would be most of the posters on these boards being designated ‘trans’. And of the last sentence, describing ourselves in the terms of ‘woman’.
Transwomen being women!!!!

ArabellaScott · 15/11/2022 11:57

I'm never sure whether arse covering is better or worse, tbh.

Do we chip away at the madness tiny bit by bit? Carve out a space where we can debate openly, and allow the issues to be addressed slowly, using sunlight and evidence?

Or do we just keep raging against the entire monolith?

I honestly don't know which is best in the long run.

lifeturnsonadime · 15/11/2022 10:57

This is merely playing lip service.

'removing rights' will be seen as attempts to retain women's rights to safe spaces.

PandoraVox · 15/11/2022 10:52

It's not easy being Green
or Labour or Lib Dem
women's rights are now mean
to those who would be fem.

Repent but first confess
to a jury of they and them
every no to be a yes.

Without a handmaiden's kiss
that frog can't become a princess.

Embrace your erasure cis.

zanahoria · 15/11/2022 10:45

Definitely arse covering but it is always good to see the results when TRA bullshit meets the cold reality of the law.

TheirEminence · 15/11/2022 10:05

Yes, it’s the asymmetry that’s striking. For decades, women have not been consulted on laws and policies that affect them. People of gender remain a ‘special case’.

Previous poster is right, this is mere arse-covering.

Swipe left for the next trending thread