OK, have added Layla Moran and Sarah Brown. I think it might be a bit waffly but it's in!
Thanks for your swift response.
I've been concerned about the Lib Dem's stance on women's rights for awhile and after receiving an email from Lynne Featherstone that stated "I also have a message to those people who believe they can restrict trans women’s rights, deny their human rights, or exclude them from women-only spaces in the name of feminism: You are not feminists. Your views are not welcome in the Liberal Democrats" I feel that I can no longer support the party.
I am worried that women are losing the right to define themselves and it is us women who are losing our rights to sex-segregated spaces. There are no rights that trans people currently lack, and I am certainly not wanting to deny them their human rights. Preserving some sex-segregated spaces is not removing rights from trans people, it is simply protecting rights of women. There are some women's spaces that must be segregated by sex, not gender, in order to preserve the safety of women and to allow us to participate in a fair society. The reason we have sex-segregated spaces in prisons, hospitals, sports and other areas is because women are oppressed on the basis of our biology and are also vulnerable because of this. 98% of sexual violence is perpetrated by men and it would be naive to think that predatory men would not take advantage of a system of self-ID - one where they merely had to proclaim they were a woman with no medical gatekeeping or even surgery to be regarded as one - to gain access to vulnerable women. Self ID gives any man the ability to claim they are a woman and we will lose the protection afforded by sex-segregated spaces, which we have in the first place not because we think all men are violent but that we cannot tell which ones are and this is an appropriate safeguarding measure to reduce risk. I am not reassured by Layla Moran's comments in a debate about violence against women that "[she] see[s] someone in their soul and as a person. [She] does not really care whether they have a male body." Sadly I lack the ability to see into people's souls and cannot tell if a man is a genuine trans person or someone taking advantage of access to women.This is not saying that trans people are a threat but that the system of self-ID has serious flaws that men can exploit and it needs consideration.
In sports, allowing male bodied people to participate in women's events, even if they've had sexual reassignment surgery (and it is estimated that over 80% of transwomen don't), will be allowing people who are on average, taller, stronger, and faster and have greater endurance due to their larger, stronger muscles and bones as well as having more circulating red blood cells to compete against women. This will be the end of women's sports and is one inevitable conclusion from accepting that transgender women have the right to be treated exactly as women in all scenarios. Insisting that transwomen are women in every respect means that women who have been raped will not be able to recover and heal in male-free spaces. Saying it is bigotry to distinguish between women and transwomen will mean that women - some of whom will have been abused, or have cultural sensitivities, or who simply wish to exercise informed consent over their bodies - will not be guaranteed a woman if they request a female healthcare practitioner for intimate care. None of this is to discriminate against trans people but to fail to acknowledge that there are differences will cause women suffering, set backs and strips us of our current rights. There are solutions that can protect both groups of people but these are not being sought and it is women who are expected to cede their legal protections.
I am also concerned that in the rush to appear progressive, the Lib Dems are abandoning due diligence, for example appointing Aimee Challenor as the Diversity Officer in Coventry when a recent independent investigation found that Aimee Challenor, a transgender activist and candidate for the Greens’ deputy leadership, committed a “serious error of judgement” by appointing her father, David, as her agent at two elections even as he faced trial for kidnapping, raping and torturing a 10-year-old girl.The inquiry criticised the Greens for “failing to see the safeguarding issues that arise”. The investigators found that the party’s “support for diversity” did not remove the need for someone like Aimee Challenor to have proper “training and support” in a leadership role and I am very concerned that despite this, the Liberal Democrats have so quickly - a mere 28 days after this report has been published - appointed Aimee Challenor to a role in the Party. I fail to see how these serious issues can have been addressed in so short a time frame and fear that this will result in more safeguarding failures, this time under the watch of the Lib Dems.
With so many concerns ranging from safeguarding to eroding women's opportunities,I am therefore not happy to be labelled transphobic for simply trying to find a way that balances the needs of women and trans people that doesn't come at the cost of women. If we can't define women on the basis of our sex, which is the root cause for our oppression, then we will not be able to tackle sexism, which still has a huge and crippling impact on over 50% of the population.
Liberal traditions rest on the value of debate and bringing people along with you by exchanging views, not imposing a particular stance on others. Liberalism is a tolerance for others and understanding a broad spectrum of ideas and looking for a way to accommodate different values and beliefs; an understanding of education through engagement and understanding the fundamental principles of democracy. To have such an important topic declared undebatable, when so much is at risk, runs counter to my understanding of what it means to be a liberal and I am dismayed that women in the Liberal Democrats such as Natalie Bird are attacked for voicing their concerns. I am also concerned that as recently as yesterday, Sarah Brown, the former Lib Dem Cambridge City Councillor for Petersfield and current member of the LGBT+ Liberal Democrats executive wrote "violence worked for the suffragettes...” “the gloves are off” and "you know when things started to change for LGBTQ+ people in the first place? When our predecessors started to smash shit up after one provocation too many". I find it alarming that a serving Lib Dem member is advocating violence against people simply for wanting to discuss how new legislation might affect their rights.
I cannot, therefore, support a party that is liberal only in name, and that dismisses women's concerns as hatred and refuses to discuss this. I am sad to leave as I have only ever voted Lib Dem and enjoyed helping the local party with leafleting, canvassing and telling, and will miss the camaraderie of working together for a shared goal. However, in it's current state, I cannot in good faith continue to help a party who has unambiguously stated that I am viewed as intolerant and bigotted and as Lynne Featherstone made very clear, a party in which I am no longer welcomed.