Guess how I got suspended from the Labour Party?

[IAmDavidLewis]

Well, one of the weirdest days in my life concluded with me receiving a letter informing me of my immediate suspension from the Labour Party. They believe I may have breached the rules by subverting the intention of All Women Shortlists, Women’s Officers or minimum quotas for women. Unfortunately, this does mean that my political ambitions are on hold for a while. I shall of course be continuing to self-identify as a woman every Wednesday, as that is my gender identity...

I have to say a huge thanks to @namechangeah for all her help, guidance and, more importantly, proof-reading! I wouldn’t have gotten to this point without it. I’d also like to thank everyone for their support today. I hope this has helped a bit.

And the Telegraph called me an “activist”! Achievement unlocked

Yes yes yes let's get it out there.

@CertainHalfDesertedStreets Yes, it does seem as if they believe that my belief in my identity is unbelievable, but if I’d believed that they’d believe that, then I believe I would have asserted my identity belief in a way that would allow them to believe it.

“i” before “e”, “i” before “e”...

Another one wanting to add my voice to thank David and all that she is doing today to help the cause of women. If someone had written a novel about all this self-id stuff, it would have been dismissed as too far fetched. Self - id - the clue is in the name - all it takes is someone to say the magic words 'I identify as a woman' and Bob's your auntie.

Debate on LBC now. The guy has just said, re women's concerns, that men don't get to tell women they shouldn't have the concerns they do. Although he now seems to be saying that non genuine trans women shouldn't spoil things for genuine trans women.

Can't help thinking there might be a lot of cross over with the traditional stereotype of a lady conservative.

Yes! See Pips Bunce (on womanly days) - sorry I am obsessed with her/him today! (can he/she be mis gendered if identifies as both?)

Well, looks like David Lewis won't need to buy his own gin for the foreseeable future!

He's just asked a question: established that caller identified as a woman five years ago, then asked if she then from that point regardless of surgery etc wanted immediate access to women's hospital wards and facilities.

@SarahAr "I am wondering, if legal self-id comes in, would you be willing to make a false statutory declaration and become legally female. My fellow MNers including at least one self-identified lawyer think nothing would happen to you. My money is on prison time, especially if you have previous"

obviously I won't answer for David. But if self ID comes in I will ID as male. What the hell is a false statutory declaration? Would the Science Museum exhibit that told me I had a male brain be able to act as legal back up?

and what is "previous" - previous for what, changing religious beliefs?

I don't believe in gender as anything other than a set of social stereotypes. So under self ID I should be allowed to be a man - I don't wear dresses or makeup and according to the Science Museum have a male brain. I should probably whisper it but good heavens, I can even reverse park!

so what about my declaration would be false?

wingsoverscotland.com/

They have done some polling as well which is interesting and shows there is no public appetite for this legislation in England or Scotland.

James O'B seems to have moved on from last time we talked about this with him. Is he getting further each time?

I think he's not quite ripe for peaking but he's getting there.

Oh god here come the brocialists - comparing us to xenophobes and bigots. Both men, ofc.

oh wow
so does James now see why I might not want to change in a curtained cubicle next door to Travis?

Irrational fears? We have the stats, we have the evidence, we're told we're wrong. Fucks sake.

Yes, it does seem as if they believe that my belief in my identity is unbelievable, but if I’d believed that they’d believe that, then I believe I would have asserted my identity belief in a way that would allow them to believe it.

“i” before “e”, “i” before “e”...

Thank you again David. You have approached this in a reasoned and thoughtful but media-friendly way. Lots in this debate needs challenged so proper discussion can be had and all voices can be heard, thanks for being brace enough to do this.

Hi IAmDavidLewis

Thank you!

Please could you keep requesting the Labour Party clarify why they don't believe your identity, why it was cause for suspension. It would be good to have some parameters in writing from them, if self-ID is a national policy then we need to be able to make sure that it is applied equally to all.

I personally feel that you may have been discriminated against on the grounds of your gender identity and that this needs to be taken up.

It would be good to have some parameters in writing from them, if self-ID is a national policy then we need to be able to make sure that it is applied equally to all.

It would also be helpful to know who was involved in drawing up any parameters if these are made available.

Sarah gives away the game that Sarah expects all these males and many more to immediately apply to become legally female. Despite all assurances that it only affects a small number of people

Not at all. I think only a few people would take advantage of legal self id.

As an act of protest, the OP chose to abuse the Labour Party's policy around self-id. He chose to do this and is getting lots of publicity. But he also has to face the consequences. As I said previously, a robust policy around those who abuse self-id benefits everyone.

Should legal self-id come in, then I was wondering if the OP would also like to change his legal gender to female as an act of protest. According to MNers nothing would happen except presumable more publicity. I think otherwise.

Ooohhhh James O’B read out my tweet

Well done David. You put your arse on the line to stand up for women and for that I think you'd make a great women's officer. Unfortunately, Labour don't want to admit they've made a big mistake by implementing a policy which is supposed to ensure representation for women, but which doesn't. They could change the policy and add another one to ensure representation for trans people, but even though that would be fair and would improve things, they won't because it's more important for them to appear not to have made a mistake, even at the cost of your membership.
It's their cock up, your arse.

As I said previously, a robust policy around those who abuse self-id benefits everyone

Such as the current system for issuing a GRC?

But Sarah - how would this 'robust policy' be policed? By its very nature, surely it can't be? If David Lewis hadn't made his point publicly, he could have gone on to be selected as a women's officer. As, presumably, any woman-hating Momentum misogynist could in the future?

As I said previously, a robust policy around those who abuse self-id benefits everyone.

How do you define abuse and who decides? Many feel Madigan and Peto have abused it, others disagree. If you have criteria they need to be clear, communicated and objective enough to be applied in all cases. If you have criteria that is no longer self-id though.

But he also has to face the consequences

What consequences? I'm sure it is their loss, rather than the reverse.