Update on interactions with the Green Party on self-id

[MsMcWoodle]

Update on my interactions with the Green Party for anyone who is interested.
Letter to Baroness Jenny Jones – reply from her office saying that she shared my concerns.
Letter to GP head office. I will share it here so that you can fully understand the response – then I’ll have to name change… This is after a bit of back-and-forth where they were trying to palm me off. My letter -

‘This is not a minor policy disagreement. This is fundamental. Please could I have an answer to my questions?

^1. I was abused by my male doctor. He has since been struck off. Are you really saying that I should not have a choice re the biological sex of my health care professional?
2. I was threatened by a group of transsexuals in a women’s toilet. One of them went on to commit murder. I would feel scared to be threatened by anyone, but these men had a huge advantage of me physically. Are you really saying that I should welcome physical males into female-only spaces
3. Why is the Green Party going against the Equality Act 2010 part 7?
4. Why is the Green Party seeking to silence debate on this subject?
5. Why is the Green Party silent on the threats to women who want to discuss this? (Link to terfisaslur website)

I thought that the Green Party was the party of science. Why is it ignoring basic biological fact?
You are not on the side of history. This will come back to bite you.
The Emperor has no clothes.’^

The response I got back was:

^‘As stated in our initial response, the Green Party respects all our members, and works hard to ensure we promote equality and fairness.

Please address your legal or medical questions with the relevant authorities.’^

Yesterday – a new development. A Green Party councillor was canvassing in my street. I got chatting to her and she seemed to understand my concerns. She took my email address and told me that she had linked to the petition on her Facebook page. She invited me on the page for a chat. I spent a good couple of hours there, so I won’t repeat it all but here are some of the gems:
In response to my comment about Mumsnet - 'I'm speechless. Mumsnet (possibly 100% heterosexual women with children) is not the place to educate yourself.

On the request for consultation with women –‘ It reminds me tragically of the kind of stuff right wing evangelicals come out with in the US.’
In response to my question about how self-id will play to religious communities – ‘Who cares?’
Despite many, many attempts to get them to define the word woman, no one responded.
About me personally –‘Appalling way to think. And if you're in the Green party then i'm utterly ashamed!’

There were several attempts to get the GP councillor to remove the petition -she still has not done so and seems to be sympathetic. Last night our area got a boost in signatures. – So some light.

She's only resigning as party leader, not as an MP.

Well, not standing again rather than resigning.

I understand Aimee Challoner is running for deputy leader of the Green Party.

I don't know, I think we're at nominations stage at the moment.

OK, I know others have referenced this above.

But I'm still a bit basic, and need to understand how this works.

Caroline Lucas says:

• our policy is trans women are women

• I absolutely support a woman’s right to see a woman GP and your experience clearly underlines why this is so important. Proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act will not affect someone’s right to see a woman doctor

I don't understand how any person who thinks more than two seconds about this could see why the two statements don't work together.

Unless you're really not bothered about females who require a doctor who is not male for whatever reason (particularly as 80% of transwomen are likely to still be in possession of male genitalia).

And even in writing this post, it's obvious how the first statement denies people the ability to write sensical statements about the second without getting tangled up in having to define 'men/male'.

I think sometimes seeing the words 'erasure of women' without context sounds hyperbolic (it's not!). But with context like this above, it's really obvious. The meaning of 'woman' is erased, unable to be talked about with any meaning.

It would be really good to ask a politicain who asserts 'trans women are women' what they specifically mean.

Oh -and to anyone who is saying that asking for a female HCP is the same as asking for a white HCP - all I have to say is - you are disgusting racists.
Black women are women. They are not comparable with men.
Now go away and look at the sexual crime stats for men compared with women, and preferably don't come back.

Oh -and to anyone who is saying that asking for a female HCP is the same as asking for a white HCP - all I have to say is - you are disgusting racists.
Black women are women. They are not comparable with men.

This.

That immediate leap to comparing women who believe in objective reality (ie transwomen are men) to racists is so telling, isn’t it?

It’s the go-to every single time, and it’s so offensive.

Believing in biology isn’t hateful or bigoted. Insisting that others share your delusion and gaslighting them with false comparisons to racism is typical MRA.

It's well written but, when you break it down, there's not much there for the GC side, plus that "I condemn all use of violence" phrasing resembles that used by Corbyn to avoid criticising Sinn Fein.

I'd suggest holding out for the next leader.

No a hospital in the UK would not be within its rights not to treat a patient who refused a black staff member. Most patients wouldn't express it that way for a start, but the patient is the priority not the staff. The patient has the right to refuse to be cared for and not give a reason.

In many hospitals you'd have a long wait for a non-black staff member, but that would be your problem. I'm white and was rejected once for being 'too Anglo'.

I think I was most disappointed by this bit in CL's response:

"I am personally deeply saddened by the violence and abuse that has been a feature of discussion about changes to the Gender Recognition Act, on all sides of the debate. "

That is simply a lie - there has been violence coming from one side only, and she must know this. This is the whole point. Women are at risk from TRAs but transwomen are not at any risk from women.

Her response put me in mind of Trump's response after Charlottesville.

Both sides are not equally good. One side contains people who regularly threaten to violently assault and rape women, and who have indeed carried out some of these threats. The other side contains women, who have not threatened anyone with any kind of violence and have not assaulted anyone. That is quite clear cut.

That CL seeks to deny that and present moral equivalence between both sides, that is shocking.

I think that policians have been presented with 'evidence' about women and transsexuals with GC views.

If you consider misgendering as literal violence then yeah - rape threats seem proportionate don't they?

Also, GC women seem to get the blame for the violence that transwomen suffer at the hands of violent men. Because men who murder people for transgressing gender boundaries have all been radicalised by Andrea Dwokin haven't they?

Always reminds me of that line. Men are scared that women will laugh at them. Women are scared that men will kill them.

Men are scared that women will laugh at them. Women are scared that men will kill them.

DJLippy I've just been listening to an interesting interview with Australian singer songwriter, Courtney Barnett on R4 Woman's hour. She discussed the influence of the quote and then performed live in the studio. Definitely worth listening to and adding to your wonderful spotify play list.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b4z02x

Heyy - I heard that as well! I was gonna post a link on that thread.
Also - that sounds already on, somebody recommended it months ago - LOVE IT!

Excellent, I hadn't heard of her. I'm really enjoying the playlist, great idea & thank you

It's mint isn't it! Got so many band recommendations from it. Have it on right now as I tidy my house #DiscoClean

I am about to do the same!

Guardian Article By Alfie Packham :
Aimee Challenor: ‘Yes, I’m trans, but I’m a Green politician and proud of it’
The Green party equality spokeswoman on Theresa May, fighting transphobia and why, aged 20, she’s aiming high

(extract)
"Far from not suiting politics, she is now standing to be deputy leader of the Green party. Voting takes place in August, when members will also select a new leader, after Caroline Lucas, the party’s first and only MP, announced last week that she was stepping down as the party’s co-leader. If elected, Challenor will be the first transgender person to hold the deputy role – and easily the youngest, at the age of 20. Is her age not a barrier? Challenor understands that people might see her as too young. “But just look,” she says, “at the amazing work that is being done by young people: by the SNP’s Mhairi Black in parliament; by young volunteers; by students coming together and campaigning.”

Challenor became involved in politics towards the end of the 2010-2015 coalition government. “That threw out the Conservatives and the Lib Dems for me because of tuition fees, austerity and a lack of action on climate change. I looked at other manifestos and the Greens’ stood out. I agreed with all of it.” The party was also “miles ahead of the competition” on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues at the time, she says." (continues)

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/06/aimee-challenor-theresa-may-lgbt-inequality-transgender-green-party

Link to current relevent thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3268333-Green-Party-Dissent?watched=1&msgid=78459854#78459854

Well it now seems that the greens are miles behind on women and lesbian rights.

Aimee is a very unpleasant human being. If SC is going to be deputy leader, I'm well out.
The Green Party were becoming like a branch of momentum anyway. Seem to hear less and less from them on actual green issues.

MsMcWoodle
My impression, increasingly, is that there are a number of people with considerable political influence who seem more active in advancing trans rights ideology than the wider principles of the political parties that they represent.

cf current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3270936-Liberal-Democrats-why-are-transphobes-protesting-Because-they-are-thick?pg=3