Lord Paddick resigns the LGBT LD executive

[RedToothBrush]

LGBT+LD @ lgbtlb
Public statement by the LGBT+ Liberal Democrats executive regarding the resignation of our honorary president, Lord Paddick:
1/4
The LGBT+ Liberal Democrats executive has reluctantly accepted the resignation of Lord Paddick as our honorary president.
2/4
Lord Paddick previously tended his resignation, which we declined when he made certain undertakings about his meeting with a group set up to oppose transgender equality legislation.
3/4
We regret that those undertakings have not been honoured. Subsequently Lord Paddick tended his resignation again, which has been accepted.
4/4

Lord Paddick has form for resigning

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brian-lord-paddick-quits-over-tim-farron-gay-sex-comments-lib-dem-liberal-democrat-general-election-a7789816.html%3famp
Lord Paddick quits as Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokespeson following furore over leader Tim Farron's views on gay sex
The former Lib Dem London Mayoral candidate said the decision had been made 'weeks ago.'

He quit as LD home affairs spokesperson as he was uncomfortable with Tim Farron's views on gay marriage. The resignation prompted Farron's ultimately. He is an important and influential figure in the party.

I'm not quite sure what's going on here or why. It sounds like the LGBT LD didn't want him to resign. It sounds like its connected to trans issues and Paddick's position. The timing is interesting.

I don't want to read too much into this. But its suggesting a split in opinion and approach. (I don't believe this shows that Paddick is pro-women's rights. I suspect he is more pro-due process, at least at this stage). And that its damaging to the executive as a whole.

When is the meeting with Paddick scheduled for? It could be very interesting now. Looks like Paddick really is sticking his neck out.

Qumquat. Afaik, he never said both sides were as bad as each other, he said there's a lot of hatred on both sides, which there is.

RedToothBrush thank you for this read, and especially for the explanation. I was struggling to understand the tone, especially as I had the impression of him that he was quite far down the rabbit hole and only asking to hear from feminists so he could play the "I've listened to both sides and now I'm sure that you're all literally violent TERFs" card, as played by a number of lefty liberal political men already.

I'm glad it's given him pause for thought. Suggests he really listened.

Also, didn't Piddick get a lot of grief on here not long ago for wanting to listen to feminists' views on the subject?

I believe he got a fairly frosty assessment on MN yes. It wouldn't surprise me if that it spilled over on twitter.

Genuine concerns we can work with it's the all out transphobic hatred that a lot of people are apposing. If we can get back to that then as in all the discussions on trans rights comprises can be found all of our rights have them the gra is a comprising law it as quite a few caviats in it that were compromise at the time. If both sides could condemn the extremist views on both sides maybe we could get to actually reform the gra in a positive way for all at the moment no part will touch it given the extreme views

I'm cautiously hopeful also.

Paddick is going to get a trenchant lesson in which activists are doing what to whom. And I think he might even begin to realise that threats and abuse of women aren't the best declaration of womanhood a male born person could make. You never know!

Bespin I am not sure what you mean.

You suggest 'genuine concerns' can be worked with - all concerns should be worked with, with a genuine commitment to understanding said concerns, whoever holds them. I don't like the idea of someone cherry picking the concerns they are willing to listen to by unilaterally deciding what is or isn't a genuine concern.

I have yet to hear any transphobic hatred coming from WPUK, yet alone 'all out hatred'. If you think some of the views expressed by WPUK are transphobic, this again sounds like a vehicle for excluding certain concerns from being explored.

You suggest 'the gra is a comprising law it as quite a few caviats in it that were compromise at the time'. Some people think there are too many compromises, some people think there are sufficient, some think there are insufficient. Again, all views should be considered.

I don't think both sides need to condemn 'extremist views'. Views are views and exist on a spectrum. I would get behind you in getting both sides to condemn behaviour designed to silence people and suppress debate. I would not get behind you in condemning some views from being heard and considered - this goes for ones that I vehemently disagree with.

Remember what happened to Nick Griffin - you should rest assured that if WPUK's views are extreme and full of hatred, the more people hear them the more they will be discredited by the public at large.

If both sides could condemn the extremist views on both sides maybe we could get to actually reform the gra in a positive way for all at the moment no part will touch it given the extreme views

Only one "side" uses the hashtag #nodebate. As Brian Paddick is finding out.

And perhaps if the "side" doing the doxxing, no platforming, threatening, punching would stop all that, perhaps we could get to a position where a debate could begin.

It is not an extreme view to say that only adult human females are women.

it worries me that he's suggesting in his pinned tweet that both sides are as bad as each other

Well yeah...but until recently its just been anyone even vaguely gender critical that have been the bad ones

And least now an exasperated 'youre as bad as each other'

It sounds like he is holding back a class of naughty schoolkids saying, 'Behave, you will get your turn'

He is also trying to look demonstrably even handed in a policey sort of way.

If the group that he is resigning from is related to that feral LGBT twitter group, can't blame him. I would be running fast for the hills.

I hope he listens and something comes of it. Unfortunately, I think things have been going on behind the scenes for so long, it may turn out to be a big bodge up. Still, being listened to is number one aim

melamin

Exactly

It goes from

stop hitting your little sister

To

You are as bad as each other

Any minute now little sis is going to get the shock of her life when mum says

Stop annoying your big sister

Disclaimer: i do not have a little sister

If the group that he is resigning from is related to that feral LGBT twitter group

It is.

Talking of nursery analogies:

I had a little sister who sat in the middle of the floor screaming and crying that her brother was hitting her - dad came flying in and smacked brother, telling him to leave his sister along and walked straight out. I think that happens more than you think

What i am confused

Who are the gender critical people in that analogy

Who is dad going to smack...us??? Why would he do that , she bloody started it!

I may be too invested in this analogy

You didn't have a little sister . This was real life. She did it on purpose to get the brother into trouble. He wasn't hitting her. She did it because she could and was wielding that power. Dad only looked at what was going on on the surface and was non the wiser.

I had a little sister who sat in the middle of the floor screaming and crying that her brother was hitting her - dad came flying in and smacked brother, telling him to leave his sister along and walked straight out. I think that happens more than you think

Solidarity Melanin, I had this with my younger sibling. It only took an hour or two of sticking to my Dad like a shadow to reveal the tactic.

So im right

She started it

Ds2 tried that once unbeknownst to him i was watching as i heard a bit of noise and was wondering what was going on

He was sat there quite happily yelling 'ow stop hitting me' while his siblings just looked at him

It wasn't just mine then . I always thought it rather shocking that someone would do this, but it must go on quite a lot.

It seems to me that there is a lot of calling 'transphobia', because there are people who will hear and believe and act without finding out for themselves.

Its progress. And definitely significant. The fact Paddick is a man and is gay means the TRAs can't throw the same.abuse and arguments at him. Certainly they can not use the section 28, wrong side of history thing. Unfortunately such is the nature of the debate, I don't believe a woman MP or Lord could necessarily be the first to take such a line.

Unfortunately, it's the 'man' bit that is crucial here not the 'gay' bit. Loads of lesbians (myself included) are opposed to self-ID including a number of prominent speakers on the issue (didn't the House of Commons meeting have a panel comprised entirely of lesbians?). We still get the 'anti-LGBT' stuff thrown at us, even if we've been fighting for equality all our adult lives.

But I like that analogy.

We're the big brother - happily playing with our train set (rape crisis centre/smear test provision)

And little sis (TRA) is sitting in the middle of the room shouting 'Ow! You're denying my very existence! It's literal violence.' via the medium of Twitter.

Whereupon Dad (Maria Miller/Jezza/Theresa May/take your fucking pick frankly) walks in, wallops us, takes away our sex segregated spaces and instructs us to 'BE NICE!'

The end.

I think its both man and gay spending. But yes the man bit makes the bigger difference.

BP says he will be meeting with WPUK 'soon' on his twitter.

I have no idea what that means, whether it means imminently, or whether it means some time in the near future?

Really hoping the WPUK/Mumsnet et al antidote is working. Maybe he has peaktransd. If so, then the contrast between the civilised debate of the former and the vile behaviour of the TRA’s can’t go unnoticed. The TGLWGH approach must be the most effective strategy.

I’m new to all this. I think you are all amazing.

It was Paddick resigning from something or other that forced Farron out of the leadership, wasn’t it?

It was Paddick resigning from something or other that forced Farron out of the leadership, wasn’t it?

Pretty much. There was clearly other stuff going on in the background and the LGBT executive seemed to be involved as a whole. I wouldn't pin it all on Paddick but certainly he seems to have been a central figure in what happened.