Lily Madigan, TIM, elected Labour women's officer

[jMillicentFawcett]

Lily is 19. Lily was instrumental in the hate campaign against Anne Ruzylo which resulted in her standing down.

You have to be a woman to be women’s officer but ‘The Labour councillor said that “lived experience as a woman” should be considered an advantage — but not a prerequisite — for the role of women’s officer.’

Lily could also have gone for the LGBT officer role but they didn’t want that. No, they wanted to show women that they can shit all over them and we will applaud them for doing it.

I’m absolutely furious about this ( as you can probably tell)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-teenager-lily-madigan-voted-in-as-a-labour-women-s-officer-mwchkhzq8?shareToken=472df23aa6315582a4f6558d7a1be5ba

SnowBalls seriously? I'm in sound mind, it's all done through a solicitor, and all the rest of it. What ground could they possibly have for challenging my will if I fell under a bus tomorrow?

Charities employ Legacy Officers. Had to deal with one in the past. I'd do what Snowballs suggests - say that you have 'excluded any possibility of leaving them money' because of their stance.

Many charities have budgets set aside to appeal for legacies and where necessary (in their eyes) to contest wills, and it's in their financial interest to contest some wills and to push for an out of court settlement.

Yanbu. A woman knows what it is like to be a woman.A man to be a man
Someone who is transgender to be transgender. I am really pissed off with this.

I've just seen this blog by Miranda Yardley about Ruth Hunt, but as it touches on the lesbophobic harassment of Anne by Lily, I thought I'd put it on this thread rather than start another one

Worth a read when you get a chance

The blog is good (although I stumbled over some of the innuendo).

It does raise a question at the end which is interesting. She suggests Stonewall could play a role in purging transgender culture of its homophobia and misogyny. Therefore, the question is what that culture looks like? So historically speaking, those who change sex or live as the other sex are not new; but the activism around this is. I think the question of a transgender culture is important because it seems to be about having public spaces for transgender individuals which does not impinge on the same sex spaces of women.

However, the notion of a transgender culture as its own thing is distinct from (and at odds with) the idea that trans women are women and thus want access to female spaces, rather than their own spaces.

She = Miranda Yardley, not Ruth Hunt

The trans agenda (as pursued by MRAs) is in direct conflict with the LGB agenda IMO. TRAs are pushing for a world in which gender non-conforming people (adults and children) are actually trans, where children should be fed drugs like sweeties and lesbians who don't want to have sex with men should be correctively raped. It's deeply homophobic and I think Hunt knows that but also knows her position is untenable if she says anything of the sort.

Lily's Instagram page (just search her name) makes me weep for the future of my daughters (and woman in general) if this is what womanhood has been reduced to,it also makes me weep for the deeply confused child that is Lily that the adults around have failed to safeguard and allowed to be groomed by predators with their own agenda. I WILL NEVER VOTE LABOUR AGAIN.

I think the question of a transgender culture is important because it seems to be about having public spaces for transgender individuals which does not impinge on the same sex spaces of women.

This could be a fairly easy thing to resolve in my opinion. Reclaim 'trans' as meaning 'transsexual', get rid of the ridiculous 'trans umbrella' as no-one besides transsexuals are actually trans anyway, and all of the entitled narcissistic males with anger issues disappear in one swoop. Thats near all of the current transactivists. Leaving only the sensible ones (of which there are actually some. They are just rare)

Nearly every transsexual I speak to both in real life and online, says they would be happy with a separate space for themselves as its mainly about being safe, not validation as they tend to readily admit that they are their real sex rather than any of the 'female penis' rubbish.

This would also solve children being caught up in this too. As it would not be about stereotypes. It would be about actual sex (not gender) dysphoria. As it should be anyway.

There could still be some bumps along the way of course. But it would be the fastest way to 'cut out the rot' so to speak.

Does anyone have any idea why the BBC and all the other newspapers are not running this story? It appeared only in The Times.

Issue with the BBC is how the story competes with other stories of the day. They can only coverage a certain number of stories according to how they rate their importance. On the scale of things, and with many other bigger political stories happening on a daily basis, this one is squeezed out. Yes this is important, but its not as dramatic or obviously significant as many other stories. I don't think its a particularly fair criticism of the BBC in that context. Broadcast media has more limitations than other forms of media.

Its a story that belongs in a newspaper which has a much broader remit and ability to publish a wider range of stories. One of the reasons its probably not appearing is because so much space has been devoted to the trans debate in the last couple of weeks. Editors might decide that it won't interest readers or add anything to what has already been said. Its also possibly a reflection of who editors are - mainly male - and this story is at its heart to support a butch lesbian. The wider democratic issues it throws up, are also not necessarily part of the current language of newspapers which is about creating this notion of 'the enemy' and reducing talk of encouraging proper democratic debate. This is something that is happening on both the left and right.

Print media is currently very weak at performing its role in a democracy across the board, and is more concerned about what generates revenue and how it can maintain its influence and political bias over readers.

Unless there is a ground swell of interest in criticism of trans activism overall, editors will view stories like this, as only having a small readership and not generating enough clicks or interest. (Basically the newspapers don't gain anything themselves from running it and it might undermine the loyalty of those captivated in their echo chamber).

Superlandlady - I imagine on the surface it looks like a petty local politics squabble (and there's plenty of that at branch level, in all parties)

Thank you REDTOOTHBRUSH for the explanation.

Why did The Times bother running it, then?

Thiiiiiiiiiiiings can only get better!

twitter.com/racybearhold/status/933245328823693312

This is a useful summary of the Twitter stuff but also contains a quote from the Deputy LEader of the Medway Labour Group, who said that she is supporting Lily "to develop", that the comments made before election are a matter for Lily but any future similar comments could see Lily removed from position.

Crucially there have been no complaints received locally and the issue is going to be discussed at the next executive meeting on Dec 5. If anyone on here lives locally, please consider contacting the Rochester and Strood CLP to complain about a) the election of someone who does not meet the Labour Party's own requirements for the post (ie being a woman); and b) allowing someone to stand who has made rape and paedophilia (arguably even necrophilia) jokes in their very recent past.

www.rt.com/uk/410541-rape-twitter-transgender-labour/

Hang on, so he's denying he said it and that the account was faked.

Bit they include the date and make point that he said things before he was the woman's officer and it's up to him.of he apologises.

So they know he's lying then

someone has pointed out that the account hasn't actually been deleted, someone (ahem) has logged into it, wiped everything out, then changed the @name.

twitter.com/memetology/status/933280085737697281

if you search for liamxliam in twitter it comes up with this twitter.com/jumpingjacka

Which is the same account. So Liam's just logged in, changed the name and claimed it's been deleted by Twitter. Even though it very clearly hasn't.

TiM Lily Madigan wants to be the first transgender MP. I'm not knocking ambition but I'm sure Sophie Cook will have something to say about this.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-transgender-candidate-mp-sophie-cook-general-election-a7712286.html

He would have been far better off just admitting it and apologising

How is anyone supporting someone so arrogant as to think people are stupid enough to believe it's faked when it's 4 years old and has conversations with his own brother.

Except they can't sack him now given it would count as dead naming wouldn't it? And hed have them for transphobia

Well Sophie Cook stood in a safe Tory seat and lost and probably isn't currently a candidate for anywhere. Also not a Momentum supporter so relatively little chance in Labour.

Except they can't sack him now given it would count as dead naming wouldn't it? And hed have them for transphobia

Yes, I was wondering about that. A man does a load of bad stuff, changes "gender", and then it's transphobic to link the "new person" to the bad stuff of their previous identity.

Since "logically" I see no reason why changing gender should be once only/unidirectional and could instead have unlimited returns, then this means someone could erase a whole series of previous identities by hopping between genders.

Next on the list. More than two genders to be given protected status and then a person being able to have multiple genders at the same time.

Since "logically" I see no reason why changing gender should be once only/unidirectional and could instead have unlimited returns, then this means someone could erase a whole series of previous identities by hopping between genders

But of course you could argue that they have apparently always been a woman so how are you a different person altogether when all you did was correct the appearance...

Who say the argument has to be used consistently? It works in the context of shrugging off past identities but when it comes to claiming continuity of identity then the opposite argument can be used.

Be amazingly convenient wouldn't it