My local LibDem replied to my letter about Women's Rights. How do I reply without swearing?

I only get a response from my Lib Dem candidate after the election. Not impressed by the content - what is this sexist rubbish about living in a gender??

The Lib Dems and I believe the current process is too bureaucratic and intrusive, [how intrusive? Is it as intrusive as say, being made to change in front of someone of the opposite sex?]which is something the Conservatives recognised themselves in 2018 when they brought forward proposals to reform the process. Liberal Democrats continue to support these proposals, which remove the requirement for medical reports.

The key point here is that with these proposals, we would still maintain crucial safeguards [what are they?] to prevent abuse of the system, including the requirement to provide proof that an individual has lived in their gender [what does that even mean and why does gender trump sex?] for at least two years, and for the individual to make a statutory declaration that they intend to live permanently in that gender until death.[This isn't enforceable or even ethical and doesn't change the fact that nobody has actuallychanged sex].

The guidance on single sex exemptions says this-
In the case of separate or single-sex services, providers must show that providing the service differently is a ‘proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’. This could be for reasons of privacy, decency, to prevent trauma or to ensure health and safety. The guidance includes a few scenarios where such exceptions are possible.

My bold
so toilets, changing rooms, intimate examinations and procedures are ALL covered under 'privacy and dignity'
the act is perfectly clear

the problem is that some legal opinion holds that a person with a GRC has a new 'legal sex' and can therefore access provision as if that was their actual biological sex
that's what needs clarification

I got some a reply from the Lib Dems basically saying 1. the debate is toxic 2. we need a nuanced discussion 3. safe spaces, and the best one: 4. sex is a continuum.....

I replied saying unfortunately I can't vote for them

And how is that even practical? I have unfortunately been assaulted but I didn't report it. Only dh knows. Would I have to report it to deserve privacy? The whole thing is ridiculous.

This! This is the bit of the response that made me angry, that only DV or sexual assault survivors deserve privacy.

So unless I (God forbid( experience domestic violence or sexual assault, I and my elderly MIL with dementia, just have to wave goodbye to privacy and dignity because some blokes have decided that I should.

That is just so fucking offensive.

I've written to my candidates on this issue. No reply from any, apart from the LD who said he'd try to reply in full but was busy out meeting constituents. What, like me? 🙄😕 I think I'm the wrong type of constituent.

Edited for clarity, quoted the wrong bit, doh.

There is a trans woman who insists on using the female changing rooms at a local sports club despite the women and teenage girls objecting. A third space is apparently humiliating. 😐 No thought for their feelings at all.

Yes, exactly!

And he's very clear that the exceptions (if they actually happened after consultation with both survivors and trans people!) would only be for specific services, like sexual abuse/DV clinics and shelters.

No mention of toilets, changing rooms, medical services, social/health groups, etc.

My 8-year-old DD is the same! Has more common sense than the lot of them. Recognises the reason that facilities are single-sex is because of "privacy"!

Thanks Slave2thekitty I don't envy your choices, a well meaning yes man or The Wig and his baggage.
At least Fabricant did try and help when you had a problem I suppose.

I think this is the first election I've genuinely struggled as to the candidates, and reading this Board it seems the same for many women. I'm underwhelmed with the choices I have.

What are "genuine trans people"? Can anyone define this without circular reasoning or magical thinking?

(Counting down till the censorship hits ...)

@Slave2thekitty

I'm really not telling anyone how to act or think. Clabony and the Lib Dems say there is no conflict between women's rights and trans rights. I disagree, and explained why I think it's important to recognise there is (especially if, like me, one thinks that aspects of trans rights need to be rolled back significant in order to restore sex-based rights.)

"The Government should ..."

Why is he telling you what the government should do? Surely at this point in the general election he should be telling you what they will do if they get into government?

As pp have said, you aren’t just about to change LibDem policy. However, if you reply, I predict (based on personal experience) that you will receive exactly the same letter, but with the paragraphs cut & pasted in a different order! Nice to know how much effort they put in

@Slave2thekitty Isn't your LibDem candidate a lawyer from Birmingham and ex councillor? So much crap in that reply.

I must admit to always be fascinated by Michael Fabricant's hairstyle which is very remiss of me. At least he replied to you without twaddling on. What's he like as a constituency MP, which is more important?

@Bodeganights i have seen the surgery and employed two TW post surgery.
The take up now is young bio females wanting mastectomies and hysterectomies. Luckily we don't have the resources to offer this and few medics would do it due to come back at a later date. And yes I agree it's brutal and in general leads to a lifetime of medical issues.

Adding that I'll set my ballot paper on fire than vote for the Scottish Lib Dems. They're just as spittle flecked about all this as the Scottish Greens and the SNP.

The fact you don't think sex-based rights should be sacrificed for trans rights illustrates that you see there is a conflict.

If two claims conflict with each other, that doesn't mean that both are equally valid, or that someone who recognises there's a conflict is proposing splitting them down the middle. They may be 100% in favour of one, or the other.

If you truly think there's no conflict between A. rights to spaces based on sex, and B. rights to spaces based on gender identity, then why don't you just grant B in full in all cases? After all, there's no loss to A, right? They don't conflict.

But neither you nor I believe that. Because they do conflict. That's a statement about the logic of conflicting claims, not the strength or validity of the claims.

I was going to do the same, but when our Lib Dem candidate was prevented from posting party political stuff on our village FB group (which had in the rules that no political posts during election periods) he went on a massive rant at admin, got all his mates to post rubbish, then said they weren't bothered about our votes anyway! So I kinda think if they're not bothered about constituents how can I expect them to be bothered about women in general.

I wrote to the Lib Dem candidate a week ago but so far, no response!

Sunak has stated, women dont have a penis. If he can say it, so can others.

Genuine trans people often dont have surgery. It's pretty brutal surgery so I'm not blaming them.
Somewhere around 96% have no surgery.

And the political issue is the conflict between sex-based rights and trans rights. Mentioning them both is just recognising that fact.

My rights as a women are not for shifting to accommodate another group of people.

The political issue is not as you claim. You don't give women's rights, privacy, dignity and safeguarding away, to meet the demands of others.

You've just given a clear example of how some Men keep attempting to link the two together. They are not the same.

Women aren't creating a conflict. They are defending what they have. The people who are creating the conflict are the ones telling us to hand them over to men.

“…who needs single-sex services – such as survivors of sexual violence or domestic abuse…”

I am very luckily not to have experienced either but I still demand and want single sex spaces without any justification. My 10 year old DD even recognises the need and whenever she’s had any medical issues which have required any physical check, she always requests that she’s seen by a female. This is a basic need which must not been trumped by a man (of any variety).

@Mycatsmudge I think the LibDem position is appalling.

But given that that is the Lib Dem position, how should the candidate have replied?

We either want politicians to be straight with us or we don't.

The reply is very clear, measured, and focused on policy and policy process. No obfuscating jargon, no name-calling. He mentioned trans rights, because that's relevant to the political question, as every grown-up in this debate knows. He didn't switch out women's rights in his answer for trans rights, as so many politicians do. He recognised and framed the debate, and explained how his party proposes to proceed on it.

If that's "word salad twaddle" it strikes me that the OP doesn't really want a reply on policy at all, just someone to say he agrees with her (when he doesn't).

As a society, we get the politicians we deserve.

On the bright side, at least he knows that it's the Equality Act, rather than equalities. Most candidates don't seem to. I know that doesn't answer your question.