Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Motion against Liverpool ReSisters by Liverpool City Council

340 replies

LiverpoolReSisters · 13/09/2018 11:59

Council motion can be found here: councillors.liverpool.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=305&MId=16817&Ver=4

Our reply:

Dear Councillors,

I am writing to you on behalf of a group of local women who have grave concerns about the government’s proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

The government have recently launched a consultation on changes to this law which will effectively render women’s sex-based rights under the Equality Act 2010 redundant. Under the proposals for ‘self identification’ or ‘self ID’ of gender, any person can legally change their sex by simply signing a form, with no checks or balances. This has many consequences for our community, and we feel some of our Council representatives have not considered the full implications of this issue and have made hasty public comments as a result. The motion put forward by these council members is well-meaning, but has clearly not been assessed for the wider impact it will have on the community they represent.

We would like to comment on item 14 in the City Council Meeting Agenda, dated Wednesday 19 September, 2018.

“Hate crime can be devastating for victims and their families and has the potential to divide and damage communities and neighbourhoods.”

We, as members of the group Liverpool ReSisters, agree that hate crime has the potential to divide and damage individuals and communities.

As defined on gov.uk, a hate crime is a crime committed against someone because of their disability, gender-identity, race, religion or belief, or sexual orientation.

Is Liverpool City Council accusing Liverpool ReSisters of a hate crime? Naming our group in the Agenda item directly below this commentary is a clear effort to tie our name with criminal activity.

“A hateful campaign has been set up by Liverpool ReSisters that has seen stickers regarding Trans women and gender recognition defacing public art works and buildings across Merseyside.”

We would like to point out the following facts:

  1. We have not “set up” a “hateful campaign”. On August 17 2018, Liverpool ReSisters tweeted a picture of a packet of unused stickers that stated the biological truth, “Women don’t have penises”. At this point, media attention came our way, and we were reported to the Merseyside Police for a hate crime. Apparently this is still under investigation, with the professed assistance of Mayor Joe Anderson .
  1. On August 18 2018, Liverpool ReSisters tweeted 4 pictures of one sticker on one Antony Gormley statue on Crosby beach, and one sticker on one information placard about the statues. There is no evidence of these objects being defaced by stickers which – by their very nature – are easily removed by anyone with the wherewithal to do so. Crosby beach is within the boundaries of Sefton, and to our knowledge, no other stickers have been reported to be found in areas “across Merseyside”.
  1. Liverpool ReSisters does not feel these stickers condone hatred towards anyone, but have served to raise awareness about the problems inherent in “self ID” and the fact that the government’s consultation on the proposed change to law is open to the public until 19 October 2018. (see consult.education.gov.uk/government-equalities-office/reform-of-the-gender-recognition-act/consultation/intro/ for more information)
  1. In our press release, which can be found on the homepage of our blog, we state the sincerely held belief that legislation must be drafted that benefits trans people, protects children, and upholds women’s rights. We refute the claim that any of these views are hateful in any way.

“The campaign has created a platform for some people to share offensive comments about the trans community particularly on social media”

Liverpool ReSisters do not own, run or moderate the content on social media platforms. We are not liable or responsible for any views other than our own, which we state clearly in our twitter and blog, and invite Liverpool City Councillors to view for themselves: @LiverpoolResis1 and www.liverpoolresisters.wordpress.com

We do remain anonymous on our twitter and blog accounts, because women have been attacked for expressing the view that women don’t have penises. Our group has been on the receiving end of many disturbingly hateful and violent messages. Please see the following blog post that shows clear examples of such behaviour:

liverpoolresisters.wordpress.com/2018/08/24/why-are-we-anonymous/

“Liverpool ReSisters do not recognise Transgender women as women”

Women don’t have penises. This is not hate speech, it is not transphobia, it is a simple statement of biological fact.

Many people are under the impression that the term ‘transgender’ is interchangeable with ‘transsexual’ – i.e. referring to people who have lived with severe gender dysphoria their entire lives, and embark on a social, medical, and surgical transition to live life as if they were the opposite sex. It is this tiny minority of people who the original Gender Recognition Act was there to help, and the reason why most people have always been supportive of trans rights, accepting of preferred pronouns and so on.

Stonewall (officially Stonewall Equality Limited) is a registered charity that lobbies UK government for changes in equality laws for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people. Stonewall defines trans as:

“Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, genderless, agender, nongender, third gender, two-spirit, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman,trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois.”

Over 80% of males who now identify as ‘trans’ never intend to make any bodily changes, so remain fully intact males, despite claiming a female identity.

To clarify, we share with Liverpool City Council the following dictionary definitions:

Male: of or denoting the sex that produces gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring

Female: of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes

We repeat: Women don’t have penises. This is not hate speech, it is not transphobia, it is a simple statement of biological fact.

“There is no place in our city for hatred and bigotry”

Again, we require urgent clarification from Liverpool City Council – are Liverpool ReSisters being accused of a hate crime? Is the Council united in accusing us of hatred and bigotry, and on what grounds and evidence is being used for such an accusation?

“Liverpool is a haven for inclusivity, acceptance and tolerance and we are proud to stand with our LGBT+ community in their endeavour to strengthen their rights both here and around the world”

The goals and aims of Liverpool ReSisters is to raise awareness of the potential threat to sex based rights and women’s rights from current proposed changes to law. We live in a democratic society wherein we have the privilege to debate and discuss changes to law that will affect members of our society. Our main focus is on women’s rights. We are a women’s group.

Women and girls need spaces of their own for a variety of reasons, but principally because we continue to face male violence and harassment in public and in private spaces. The World Health Organisation calls violence against women and girls a “major public health problem and a violation of women’s human rights”, and estimates that one in three women will endure violence from a partner or ex-partner, or non-partner sexual violence in their lifetime. This violence is perpetrated by males. Until this despicable violence ends, women need safe female-only spaces.

As city councillors, we would expect you to have an understanding of the need for safeguarding for women and girls, and to oversee the statutory duties of the Council to provide for the specific needs of this sex class.

Given the recent news story about Merseyside Police being unable to monitor the thousands of sex offenders on Liverpool’s streets, as well as the endemic problem of male violence, we should be prioritising the safety and safeguarding of vulnerable women and children.

Recent statistics show that 90% of all sexual incidents in public changing rooms (voyeurism, harassment, assault and rape) occur in mixed sex facilities (despite the vast majority of facilities remaining single sex). If self-id becomes law, all spaces will become mixed sex by default, and women and children will be put at much greater risk.

“TRANS WOMEN ARE WOMEN”

We encourage Liverpool City Councillors to refer to the above dictionary definitions of Male and Female.

A recent poll by Pink News/YouGov showed that only 18% of the public is in favour of self-identification. Most of the public are under the impression that transgender is the same as transsexual, completely unaware that the majority of (what is now defined as) transgender women do not undergo any treatment, continue to retain their penises and are heterosexual. Once explained, the overwhelming majority of people can see the dangers and problems with self-id. We have already seen horrendous events come to light; there will be more and the public will be unforgiving to those elected representatives who allowed this to happen.

Liverpool ReSisters fully intend to continue raising awareness about this issue.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
BernardBlacksWineIcelolly · 20/09/2018 08:31

well done Liverpool resisters

what a load of nonsense from the city council

Ereshkigal · 20/09/2018 08:32

Well. It does rather sound like someone is making a lot of sound and fury to deflect the public's attention from a rather large financial issue.

No! Surely not!

Ereshkigal · 20/09/2018 08:33

Don't post a link, but do you have a crowdfund? Would like to support.

AspieAndProud · 20/09/2018 08:38

"If you'd approached it in a different way, then we'd have listened"

Same as denying an assaulted pensioner compensation because she 'misgendered' her attacker in court.

Women are punished for a lack of deference.

Tellin · 20/09/2018 08:43

Just wanted to say thank you for all you are doing, Liverpool Resisters. I find it so profoundly depressing that this is the state of women's rights today. It's again been made abundantly clear that our needs, rights and concerns are lesser than those of men. And instead we're prioritising the feelings of these men over the sex based rights of women. It is so very very wrong.

OrchidInTheSun · 20/09/2018 08:45

You are so brave and heroic. Brava to all of you.

What a fucking arsehole Anderson is.

silentcrow · 20/09/2018 08:48

No! Surely not!

Clearly I am just a nasty cynic Grin

ILuvBirdsEye · 20/09/2018 09:02

I went looking but couldn't find a crowdfunder. Is there one? (No links please)

WarmWishes · 20/09/2018 09:17

To echo twitter's @scouserepublic's words this morning.

*The fightback starts now.
*
Let's use this anger as energy.

LangCleg · 20/09/2018 09:32

I would also send cash if I knew where to send it (even via hint).

LiverpoolReSisters · 20/09/2018 10:16

That's a very kind offer, but we have no need for a crowdfunder. :) Our efforts have cost very little money - we know how to make noise.

OP posts:
ILuvBirdsEye · 20/09/2018 11:42

That's great Smile

You're on the Sky news website - so definetely making a loud noise!

StableGenius · 20/09/2018 11:43

I realise I'm not contributing to the debate but I just wanted a moment of appreciation for AspieAndProud's joke about cunty and cnuty women down the thread. Well, I laughed Wink.

vaginafetishist · 20/09/2018 12:28

AspieandProud is coming out with some corkers this week.

Well done Liverpool ReSisters, they are total blerts.

arranfan · 20/09/2018 12:49

I just wanted a moment of appreciation for AspieAndProud's joke about cunty and cnuty women down the thread.

I misread that as Canutey/Cnutey women and wondered if we were at the point where we feel we're shouting at the tide to stop it coming in (I know that's not the real Canute story but it's what it's come to mean). (Yet another parenthesis to note that Canute was aka Cnut the Great.)

R0wantrees · 20/09/2018 13:34

Apologies if this has already been linked, I haven't read the whole thread.

I was aware of the articles about the Mayor with regards contracts / finances etc but not this one until today:

2013 'Liverpool teacher acccused of downloading child porn quizzed over deleted files
(extract)

"A FORMER councillor accused of downloading child porn deleted hundreds of files off his computer the day after his party leader revealed he was under investigation.

One-time Clubmoor councillor Benjamin Williams, 35, admitted he had removed 207 files from his computer's memory the day after speaking to Liverpool Labour leader Cllr Joe Anderson in December 2007.

He was arrested two days later on suspicion of making indecent images. But Williams, of Townsend Avenue, Norris Green, yesterday insisted he had deleted the files to simply make his computer work more quickly.

History and politics teacher Williams had originally fallen under suspicion in October 2006 after the IT manager at Southport's King George V (KGV) college discovered he had been putting explicit terms such as “Lolita” and “child porn” into school computers.

During his second day of evidence yesterday, Williams confirmed Cllr Anderson had told him a section 47 enquiry was underway. A section 47 enquiry is a joint social services and police investigation into child protection issues.

But Williams insisted he did not realise the police would be involved.

But prosecutor Peter Davies questioned Williams over why the very next day he deleted 207 files from his computer's temporary internet cache." (continues)
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpool-teacher-acccused-downloading-child-3445705

LiverpoolReSisters · 20/09/2018 15:43

The speech is up. Starts about 16 minutes in.

OP posts:
Procrastinator1 · 20/09/2018 15:48

R0wantrees - what sleezy people. Hope the Liverpool News continue to investigate how public funds are spent.

scepticalwoman · 20/09/2018 15:53

Wow R0wantrees.
Yet another man undermining safeguarding of children and enabling an alleged sex offender to cover his tracks.
Is it on the person spec for public office that men must be prepared to undermine the safeguarding of children as that's what it's starting to look like?

silentcrow · 20/09/2018 15:56

Williams was cleared, according to a later report, but I'd really like to know more about a section 47 investigation - I would have thought that should have been confidential?

Lefty99 · 20/09/2018 16:07

It went to trial twice and the jury failed to reach a verdict, it wasnt that he was found not guilty. Joe was leader of the council and very pally with the police.

arranfan · 20/09/2018 16:10

Thank goodness that Liverpool is renowned for being one of the safest university cities for women such that the Council's resolute firmness in wanting to allow the transgression of women's safe spaces won't have any consequences.

What's that, Daphne? Liverpool is The Worst university town in the UK for sexual assault, sexual harassment and rape of Women By Men?

thetab.com/uk/2017/09/02/map-shows-uni-towns-highest-number-violent-sexual-crimes-46526

R0wantrees · 20/09/2018 16:12

LiverpoolReSisters

I hope that the speech made by a woman from LiverpoolReSisters is watched alongside the Mayor's response by as many people as possible.

It is impossible not to see the stark contrasts both in content and delivery.

The bullying and intimidatory tone of the Mayor whilst he castegates others (with apparently no self-awareness) is painful to watch.

Watching so many of the council clap and stand after his speech is chilling though.

Cascade220 · 20/09/2018 16:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

IfNotNowThenWhen1 · 20/09/2018 16:24

Its almost as some members of the Establishment have a vested interest in destroying women and girls' boundaries. But why would they want to do that? I'm sure they just have the best interests of the city at heart.
After all, Men in Charge have never before conspired to cover each other's tracks with regard to various unsavoury activities.
Oh...wait...