Times 'Lib Dem trans activists ‘hounded’ abuse victim (Natalie Bird)''.Article refers to Zoe O'Connell & Sarah Brown

[R0wantrees]

article by Lucy Bannerman
(extract)
"A victim of domestic abuse was removed as a judge of a radical thinking prize and “hounded” out of her role within the Liberal Democrats for saying that she did not believe that men who identified as women should have access to women’s refuges.

Natalie Bird, 38, a mother of two who fled an abusive former partner, was accused of “dangerous transphobia” by transgender activists in the party. She had said that opening up safe spaces without proper safeguards to anyone who said that they were female could put women at risk.

She opposed segregating women’s refuges by chosen gender instead of biological sex, and said that it was not fair to make female victims of domestic violence, abuse and rape share services with people with “functioning” male anatomy.

After being allegedly bullied on social media by party activists, Ms Bird was brought before a disciplinary hearing to face a complaint in the name of Zoe O’Connell, on behalf of the LGBT+ Liberal Democrats. The correspondence says that Ms Bird had “expressed troublesome views”.

The hearing found no evidence to support the complaint of transphobia, but Ms Bird lost her position as chairwoman of the Radical Association, made up of party members, following a vote of no confidence. This cost her her role as a judge of the Ashdown Prize for Radical Thought; an ironic move, Ms Bird said, given that the prize’s aim was to reward “big, bold, radical” solutions to society’s most “daunting problems . . . no one has the courage to argue for” (continues)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lib-dem-trans-activists-hounded-abuse-victim-b6dx39tv3

Hopefully many LibDem Members will stand in support of Natalie Bird.

O'Connell and Brown make a mockery of the LibDem priciples and their bullying abusive behaviour has been allowed to run unchecked within the party.

The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. We champion the freedom, dignity and well-being of individuals, we acknowledge and respect their right to freedom of conscience and their right to develop their talents to the full. We aim to disperse power, to foster diversity and to nurture creativity. We believe that the role of the state is to enable all citizens to attain these ideals, to contribute fully to their communities and to take part in the decisions which affect their lives.

Hey @sorospaysme

Do you consider Sarah Brown a terrible person for tweeting at a lesbian to "suck my formaldehyde pickled balls"?

JoanSummers No :) It was a pretty funny comeback tbh

because she is a horrible, mean, abelist transphobe and her values and views were incompatible with being the Chair of said organisation.

By saying...?

@JoanSummers Also she didn't tweet that at a lesbian, she tweeted it to a cis man. Its misinformation/fake news propagated by the anti trans lobby that it was directed at a lesbian

Yes, that is true. Because that is the stance of not just the Radical Association, but the federal Liberal Democrats, each of the state parties, the Young Liberals and the policy of our Parliamentary Party. If you don't agree with that then you are at odds with our fundamental values.

and there you have it, not liberal or democratic.

You don't understand the difference between policy and values.

The very clear implication from Luke's post on Twitter was that if you don't believe 'Trans Woman are Woman, Trans Men are Men', then you will be removed from the Radical Association.

Yes, that is true. Because that is the stance of not just the Radical Association, but the federal Liberal Democrats...

I take it the Liberal Democrats do not understand, how language works.

What about the bit about calling trans women's smegma after a prominent lesbian feminist? Anything to say about that sorospaysme?

It was a pretty funny comeback tbh

If you're 12.

So Soros, a few questions if you are still here.

From the times article:
Ms Bird was brought before a disciplinary hearing to face a complaint in the name of Zoe O’Connell, on behalf of the LGBT+ Liberal Democrats. The correspondence says that Ms Bird had “expressed troublesome views”.

The hearing found no evidence to support the complaint of transphobia,

So are you now saying even though the hearing found no evidence of transphobia, you have a different judgement to the hearing based on a different definition of transphobia?

Just getting this clear. Also highly amused at the "edgy" nature of managing not to be stupid enough to pretend men really are women ….....

Actually what is your personal theory while you are here? Is it a RADICAL one, please tell? Or is it just a "nice" idea?

Datun The transphobia was her being hostile and rejecting the RA and LibDem fundamental view that Trans women are women. Trans men are men and Non-Binary people are legitimate and real. She also acted in an unprofessional and horrible way, but as ive said im not going to go into any specific examples because its private information that you don't have a right to know about.

a horrible, mean, abelist transphobe

So give us an example of her transphobia. If I assume you're not just on here because you're a masochist who gets their kicks having their arse handed to them by a bunch of strangers, I have to assume that you want to actually convince at least someone reading this thread of what you are saying. You must have an example, so why not provide it?

Was that the Aimee Challenor who claimed to have an autism diagnosis checked & rechecked. Utter fantasist.

So are you now saying even though the hearing found no evidence of transphobia, you have a different judgement to the hearing based on a different definition of transphobia?

The old disciplinary process was fundamentally flawed and not fit for process, and at our last conference we passed a motion to set up a new disciplinary process that will be more effective at dealing with issues like transphobia :)

And regardless of if a technocratic disciplinary process makes one judgement on if someone had broken the members code of conduct, that does not stop members of a party organisation removing someone because of their values and conduct.

No @sorospaysme - Brown tweeted that at a cis man first, yes. Then when called out on it Brown repeated it towards a lesbian woman on twitter.

When women's criticism of Brown mounted they claimed that they had been driven to a 'nervous breakdown' by feminists.

Then they hid their social media for a whole before staging a secret comeback on the LibDemLGBTs account.

Any comment on that?

FatherBuzzCagney Rejecting that trans women are women, trans men are men and nonbinary people are legitimate is transphobia.

The transphobia was her being hostile and rejecting the RA and LibDem fundamental view that Trans women are women. Trans men are men and Non-Binary people are legitimate and real.

This may be a current policy expression.

Not a 'fundamental view.

It was a pretty funny comeback tbh

If you're 12.

And a misogynist.

Sorry, cross post. You think she's a transphobe because she thinks that women are adult human females. That's barking mad but at least it's finally clear.

SorosPaysMe Sorry I have to break it to you, and I really feel bad about making you look stupid, but, you know, but you really can't say who is or isn't a woman, as long as you can't define the term 'woman'. It is called logic101.

*SorosPaysMe

The transphobia was her being hostile and rejecting the RA and LibDem fundamental view that Trans women are women.

Unless you agree on the definition of what a woman is, that explanation is meaningless.

You think she's a transphobe because she thinks that women are adult human females.

No, because trans women are also adult human females.

The old disciplinary process was fundamentally flawed and not fit for process, and at our last conference we passed a motion to set up a new disciplinary process that will be more effective at dealing with issues like transphobia

Oh good lord. This is just so ridiculous, it's difficult to believe.

We didn't get we want last time, so we changed the rules.

As I said - utter self obsessed children.

Rejecting that trans women are women, trans men are men

A fact that only the seriously deluded or dangerously manipulative would deny.

and nonbinary people are legitimate is transphobia.

Legitimate what? They're people, yes. Non binary however is a philosophical concept open to debate.

Sorry, cross post. You think she's a transphobe because she thinks that women are adult human females. That's barking mad but at least it's finally clear.

& must therefore be disciplined for troublesome views.

(sounds a bit like Gulags again)

Demanding from people to recite nonsensical stuff in order not to 'fall from grace' is pretty totalitarian stuff. Hannah Ahrendt wrote about this type of mechanism used to subordinate people in totalitarian regimes.