Thoughts on Jo Swinson?

[Ekphrasis]

I'm starting to listen to Women’s hour as much as possible on catch up partly as I'm a fan and partly to see if I can catch any whiff of what's going on there about silencing Women’s voices.

I caught the bit on Jo Swinson (deputy Lib Dem leader) last Thursday, she's published a book about 'Equal Power.'

Given the things going on in the LP I thought it interesting and possibly pertinent. Can't see much that's gender critical on her twitter though she does seem to be aware of gender stereotypes being v damaging in childhood.

Just wondered if anyone knew any more about her?

That doesn't mean I don't believe that there are issues which large subgroups of women suffer from which society needs to address.

Men who think they are women are not a subgroup of women. Your position is ludicrous. You do realise that the trans umbrella covers transvestic fetishism now? Who is genuinely a "transwoman"? Who doesn't make the cut?

Imo Jo is a career politician and very ambitious. She won't put her head above the parapet on this or anything else controversial

MrsMcGarry if you introduce self-id how do you propose to distinguish between genuine trans people and men trying to access women's spaces for nefarious purposes? How do you propose to keep genuine transwomen safe from violent men when the latter can claim they self-id as women?

A couple of days ago a serial sexual abuser of young girls went along to Rose McGowans book tour about her experience of sexual assault deliberately to scream at her about her lack of active support for trans identified males. Is this a woman?

Whatevs. Really don't; have time to debate with self righteous loons and their straw men. Too busy overthrowing the patriarchy. You should try it sometime - it can be quite fun.

But are you really criticising Jo for being a woman who is a "career politician and very ambitious" Who are the misogynists here?

Jo Swinson is a career Lib Dem.

She was shit over Rennard - and watched four amazing Lib Dem women walk.

She was shit over her former colleagues Huhne and Hancock.

She is happy with self-ID - well, keeps quiet. As is her habit.

I have met Jo while she was not an MP and she definitely isn’t clueless about the issues.

Since returning to politics I’m not sure how much she will stay true to her thoughts or let party shape her - she is definitely a career politician.

Let me translate career politician since you're pretending you don't know what it means. It means a politician who is motivated by achieving high office rather than by their principles. It's not a compliment and has no connection to sex (see also Clegg).
I would like you to explain how self-id protects transwomen from violent males. You have such strong opinions, I'm sure you must have considered it and have a solution that has escaped everyone else.

It seems like you, and every trans rights activist, are vehemently AGAINST the idea that the entire group of people born with XX chromosomes, ovaries, and unequal status should actually have a NAME with which to refer to themselves and their rights.

Yep. I am. I don't wish to be defined by my genitalia. I don't agree that that means I hate women. Though I admit I dislike some very much. I also dislike some men very much, but its usally because they have done something worng. I refuse to hate someone beause they have a penis.

I think people should have rights. I think people with vaginas have been denied many of those over the years by a patriarchical society. I work my butt off to stop that on a daily basis. I don't think that denying rights to other people helps with that fight.

I will say although people may not agree with her stance on trans issues but that doesn’t negate her trying to fight the fight against the patriachy.

So the lib dems are using thought provoking arguments such as whatevs and I can't explain what a woman is. I can completely understand their meteoric rise in the polls.

Really don't; have time to debate with self righteous loons and their straw men. Too busy overthrowing the patriarchy. You should try it sometime - it can be quite fun.

Lolz it's so feminist to dismiss the concerns of actual women while rushing to pander to the feelings of men.

So the lib dems are using thought provoking arguments such as whatevs and I can't explain what a woman is. I can completely understand their meteoric rise in the polls.

Quite.

MrsMcGarry your argument just seems to be that you (and women like you) don’t see your rights as threatened by self-ID and therefore the problem is not a significant one.

For those who do see their rights as threatened, the problem IS a significant one.

So, you would need to explain how my (and other women’s) rights and existing provisions are not threatened, to convince me.

I just spoke to my mum, aged seventy-one, about this. She is not a conservative person at all. She said she would have to give up her ladies’ gym class if there would be non-female people there when she was dressing and undressing, because she would not be comfortable, if self-ID went through. Why do her rights to same sex changing facilities not count?

What about when I have got my period, and I am flooding everywhere, and I need to shout to my daughter to get my handbag from the restaurant, or even worse, miscarrying on the bathroom floor? What about the thing I have mentioned before, if I did not get a female bodied rape counsellor?

You cannot self-identify as a gender, because there is no such thing as gender. Gender is the set of social rules and norms we apply to each sex. We can and should expand those gender norms, but not at the cost of erasing biological reality (sex).

Just because you are cool with all that, it does not mean that other women should be, or that they are wrong. Their concerns should be listened to as much as any trans identifying person, regardless of what you personally think. It’s great that you are not bothered by the prospect of self-ID, but that does not make it a non-issue.

What rights are trans people denied?

Mrs McGarry seems bewildered. So no name for people with vaginas, but yes, they are definitely denied their rights. And she doesn't want to have a name for her genitals, so, the other 3.7 billion other people with similar genitals can't have a word either.

But she's definitely totally committed to fighting for vagina-people. Who shouldn't be defined by genitals.

Right ho.

Lib Dem here. I think the party goes along with the idea that this is the latest civil rights frontier -we must let people be themselves - and there are a number of trans councillors who are very vocal on transwomenarewomen type issues. I think one of them was quoted in the refuges piece in the Times.

I have the feeling that women are permitted to get along better in the party if they are cool girls - there does not seem to be a vocal rad fem presence (for e.g.). The banhammer is heavily applied on any party policy facebook posts which dissent from we must let all transpeople live their best lives.

Anyhoo, I don't blame McGarry. I once was fully behind the transactivist quest for rights: I thought people (with vaginas) were being terribly mean to transpeople.

That I didn't know what rights were being asked for, nor did I listen to closely to what the women were saying, is my shame.

Still, very very common experience. Worth sticking around here @MrsMcGarry, even just to keep an eye on the opposing arguments. , no?

Anlaf, you are much more patient than I am. I am just so tired of the dishonesty. But I should follow your example . The funny thing is I am married to a Lib dem, and thought they may provide a political home after my disillusionment with the current Labour party. I think the principle of tolerance for all is such a part of their ideology that thinking about what happens when rights collide just doesn't seem to happen. And they made such a mess of the Tim farron homophobia thing that they won't want to get their fingers burnt again.

it's partly cos earlier today I looked up my first post on trans matters on here, under a different username, and what a self righteous twallop I was

That was some time ago.

Anyway, the lib dems are super on other stuff - and I think would be open to a discussion in the party on this. They just haven't had the pleasure of that yet.

I have hope because they're very hot on the clash of rights concept.

HiMrsMcGarry. Sorry you are getting some snappy answers here.

I think at that point on this thread mine was the only answer which could have been thought 'snappy'. Please don't apologise for me. You really don't have any right to do that.

I don't wish to be defined by my genitalia.

Christ alive. Your womanhood is defined by your XX chromosomes (together with the resultant primary and secondary sexual characteristics including genitalia) because human beings are a sexually dimorphic species capable of producing only two types of gamete.

Your genitalia don't define your personality or how you express it.

How is this so hard to grasp?

Another Lib Dem here.

I think the party have gone a lot further than the other parties in recognising gender inequality and are bending over backwards to address it. It’s much tougher than it would have been few years ago, simply because so few seats are winnable. I think they’re so anxious to show they’re doing something that they’re implementing policies that they think are ahead of the curve.

Jo has been very vocal in the party about the need for gender equality and gets a lot of support from the party’s feminists. Currently, that section of the party are supportive of the trans activists, so Jo lines up with them.

She’s a thoughtful woman and I don’t believe she hasn’t thought through these issues. It’s her job to represent party policy when she speaks publicly, so I don’t think it’s just ambition that keeps her to the party line. You don’t know what she’s saying to colleagues behind the scenes.

I do agree that we have no way of knowing what any politician thinks behind the scenes. Many will just be too frightened to speak up and I don't blame them at all.

And I do wish that more feminists would make as much fuss about issues such as unequal pay, violence against women, toxic masculinity, and inequality in health care funding, all of which are far more injurous to women and society in general than transwomen

Funnily enough, feminists worry about those things too. But this ridiculous 'any person who says they are a woman is a woman' rubbish is an absolutely huge threat to womens rights right now so unfortunatly the push for self-ID has completely taken over. With one swoop, everything that has been fought for for the pass hundred years will be gone.

Put quite simply, if you cannot define the word woman, and descibe who this class people actually are, then womens rights are utterly meaningles.

Male people are not female. A woman is an adult human female. Womens rights are for adult human females, not adult human males. To pretend women are not a real thing, to refuse to see sex...is to refuse to see sexism.

unequal pay, violence against women, toxic masculinity, and inequality in health care funding

Can't do much about any of that if you can't measure it.

Of course we don't know what she is saying behind the scenes but we need politicians to take a stance in public. It's too important an issue to ask people/voters to cross their fingers and hope some whispered conversations are going in the right direction.