Baroness Barker (LibDem) attempts to smear GC women's groups

[MrsSnippyPants]

"Many describe themselves as grassroots campaign groups, and are not registered charities so they don’t have a constitution that sets out publicly how their organisation is constituted or to whom and how it is accountable. And many say that they are funded by supporters, not by government – usually with bank details for people to send in donations."

www.openlynews.com/i/?id=49ee12f8-209a-4e2c-a2ce-7c3a675d9403

Oh, I had blocked out forgotten Aimee. I'll add Aimee to my ever-expanding list.

They completely (and conveniently) ignore how this segregation would be policed

The writer is too stupid to even realise what they are actually saying here: that males who wish to enter female spaces are likely to ignore women's boundaries and wishes anyway.

Which makes them, automatically, not people who should be there.

This view of TW with perfectly normal, healthy male bodies as some kind of disabled or disadvantaged female born person takes this to an extreme of bullshit that removes any last shred of reason to be 'kind' or play along. And it's exclusive to idiots like this, wholly unaware of their own ivory tower or how little respect they have for women, particularly women not like them.

They completely (and conveniently) ignore how this segregation would be policed

Not to mention

The fact that segregating or even bloody distinguishing TW from sex offenders, cross dressers, autogynephiles and any bloke who feels like it is impossible, is one of the main reasons why women need single sex spaces. It's twat politicians like this who 'completely and conveniently' ignore that it's impossible to police. This individual is bonkers.

We've been telling you this stuff for bloody years

The fact that segregating or even bloody distinguishing TW from sex offenders, cross dressers, autogynephiles and any bloke who feels like it is impossible, is one of the main reasons why women need single sex spaces.

Let us remind ourselves of Stonewall's definition of trans. It wasn't feminists who created this:

An umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth.
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.

They don't exclude sex offenders. They specifically include gender-fluid (aka men who say they are women part-time) and cross-dressers (aka transvestites).

Let's remind ourselves of the definition of woman:
Adult human female

We can READ!

You explain which definition is more confusing and harder to maintain single-sex spaces with: figuring out which of the men who say they are trans is "legitimate" (a false question, because Stonewall says they all are), or just keeping women-only spaces for biological females?

Baroness Barker (LibDems), Stephen Doughty MP (Labour) John Blair MLA (Alliance N.I) supporting/supported by (?) Pink News just before the Govt. Consultation on gender self-id had finished.

Its often interesting to see where Benjamin Cohen positions himself at these events.

LGBT Leaders: Lawmakers reject radical feminist transphobia
by Sofia Lotto Persio 12th October 2018

(extract)

LGBT+ people should be supporting the trans community in the reform of the Gender Recognition Act (GRA), a panel of LGBT+ politicians said on Friday (October 12).

With only a week to go before the public consultation on the GRA reform closes, support for transgender rights dominated a discussion on the future of LGBT+ rights in the UK at opening evening of the LGBT Leaders conference, presented by PinkNews and hosted by Freshfields.

“Within the [LGBT] community, the four initials right now, there is no excuse to do anything other than supporting one another,” said Baroness Liz Barker, a Liberal Democrat peer who publicly came out during the passage of the Marriage Act in 2013.

That delay, according to Baroness Barker, allowed “self-identified radical feminists” to organise and “put together a whole series of assumptions and generalisations.” She compared the strategies adopted by these groups to those historically adopted by people “to foster hatred agains minorities” and called for people to “reclaim feminism.” (continues)

Baroness Barker advised people to take part in the consultation, to talk respectfully to trans people—keeping in mind how personal this conversation may be for them—and to talk to your MP. (cont.)

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/10/12/lgbt-leaders-lawmakers-reject-radical-feminist-transphobia/

Baroness Liz Barker chaired the Westminster Social Forum, 'Next Steps for Trans Equality' which took place a month before the government's consultation on gender self id opened.

There were many senior & influential policy makers there.

thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3268237-Westminster-Social-Policy-forum-today-Next-steps-for-transgender-Equality-WSPFEvents

Recent thread asking, "Compulsary trans lessons in primary schools what will this involve?"

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3516346-Compulsory-trans-lessons-in-primary-schools-what-will-this-involve?pg=7

silentcrow wrote, Tue 26-Feb-19
"Just dropped I go my inbox via They Work For You, last night's Lords discussion on this topic:

www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2019-02-25a.68.3

Haven't time to go into it deeply now but two things jumped out - what is, and who us behind, the Sex Education Forum cited; and that Baroness Barker's comment is rather interesting. Anyone know her views?"

from link above:
"Baroness Barker Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Voluntary Sector)
"My Lords, the Minister referred to good tools and materials such as those made available by the Sex Education Forum, but he will know that there are a lot of tools and materials produced by groups that have a particular perspective that they wish to push that would not comply with the objectives of these regulations. What guidance could he offer to pupils, staff or parents in a school who find themselves forced to use materials that do not fulfil the objectives set out in these regulations?"

Im aware that many TRAs are keen to outlaw prevent educators considering school resources by Transgender Trend....

'Reclaim feminism' - by which they actually mean 'take it over and force it to stop centering women'.

The Baroness has clearly never read anything about how indigenous people have been taken over and driven out of their culture and language and societies and traditions in the name of 'progress' throughout the ages, or stopped to think about how history now looks back on the colonisers who did this, and the deep damage it did to the communities invaded.

Common features: (Using the force of law to punish and police:)

Prevent the words and language.
Remove the children from the direct influence of the culture that must be 'modernised' and 'reformed' to the right way of thinking - compulsory removal from families to boarding schools to be brought up the 'right way' were popular, the TRAs are missing a trick there.
Prevent the adults having access to their children to teach them 'wrong ideas' and to ensure the culture and knowledge dies out.
Prevent and ban meetings among the people being 'modernised'.
Ban symbols, costume, activities and traditions specific to the group
Enforce the new dominant culture ways of doing things upon the group (which is obviously superior.)
Write a lot of newspaper articles about the poor deluded old fashioned numpties who must be dragged into modern life, legisimising the treatment of them as an inferior breed less deserving of standard rights, while establishing one's own obvious superiority and higher degree of evolution.

Isn't it all so familiar?

Baroness Liz Barker appears to have a significant & mutually apreciative relationship with GIRES:

www.gires.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/GIRES-AGM-Minutes-September-2016.pdf
2016 GIRES AGM
'The Chair Celia Macleod welcomed members and guests
including Baroness Elizabeth Barker and Dr Helen Webberley to the 18th AGM of the Society'

1. Any Other Business

None. The Meeting closed at 3.30pm. Afterwards Baroness Barker spoke on Parliamentary and political aspects of current transgender issues and Dr. Helen Webberley spoke on transgender health care as a GP. Other matters discussed included the Report of the House of Commons Women & Equalities Committee Inquiry, Brexit, trans*formation and trans individuals in prison. There was also a workshop for families of gender nonconforming people. Bernard and Terry were thanked for their hospitality and we all clapped when Baroness Barker praised Terry for her great vision and persistence.'

from thread evidencing some of the history of successful trans rights lobbying:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007?pg=5

”The Chair Celia Macleod welcomed members and guests
including Baroness Elizabeth Barker and Dr Helen Webberley”

There you have it. Revelling in the company of a disgraced doctor who pushes medication on children. Sums it up really, doesn’t it? Yet she still has the idea she’s morally superior to women who are trying to defend women’s rights and safety.

To coin a phrase... “Wrong side of history, my arse!”

There are many long standing & influential TRAs within the LibDems: Sarah Brown (Stonewall), Zoe O'Connell, Helen Belcher (Trans Media Watch) etc

Both Brian Paddick & Layla Moran MP have publically acknowledged the influence Helen Belcher has had on their understanding of trans rights.

Thread discussing James Kirkup's article about Layla Moran's comment re 'seeing souls' rather than sex:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3431013-James-Kirkup-being-fab-again

Jane Fae's 2010 interview with Daily Mail:
(extract)
"John Ozimek was around 12 when he first secretly tried on women's clothes. It both thrilled and terrified him - so much so that he vowed never to do it again. For the next three decades, he simply locked those feelings away, hoping they would disappear.

He had a passion for politics and in 1979, aged 21, became Britain's youngest parliamentary candidate, contesting Newham South in London for the Liberal Party. A Labour safe seat, he lost, but remained heavily involved with the party's national executive.

Later, working in the macho environment of marketing and consultancy, Jane says felt she had to 'invent' a male persona to fit in, but at high-powered meetings would feel like a 'shy teenage girl', avoiding the dynamic males and gravitating towards the few women present." (continues)

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1252462/Andrea-Fletcher-devoted-fiancee-whos-sticking-man-John-Ozimek-despite-fact-wants-woman-named-Jane-Fae.html

Jane Fae's collaberation with another Lib Dem Baroness was discussed last year:
heresyandwitchcraft wrote Sat 04-Aug-18
"Oh sorry, I forgot to add the description of the documentary:
Hanging Perverts is a film manifesto journeying in the world of hardcore bondage pornography, attacking issues of censorship and personal liberty. Includes interviews with Guardian journalist John Ozimek, Baroness Sue Miller of the UK Liberal Democrats, bondage photographer Ben Westwood, barrister Leo Charalambides and BDSM pornographic actress Masie Dee. According to Britain's Criminal Justice Act, since January 2009, it is an offense for a person to be in possession of an extreme pornographic image, including consensually and legally produced depictions of erotic bondage acts. While production is still legal, simple possession of such material can assure anyone a three-year prison sentence, as well as the ignoble status of sex offender."
thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325623-Jess-Bradley-a-government-advisor-on-womens-rights-suspended-by-NUS-over-indecent-blog-Part-iii?pg=6

This OP, together with the many links provided by PP, make it impossible to ignore the depth and breadth of TRA involvement in government.

It's very disturbing, and I find myself wondering how long it will take to reinstate women's rights after the homophobia and misogyny of the trans agenda has been revealed.

From the Westminster Policy Forum last year chaired by Baroness Liz Barker (Lib Dems)

See picture for opening remarks by Liz Barker & worth being aware of comments with regards Ollie Entwhistle & government influence

Nic Williams (Fairplay for Women) response:

"I represented @fairplaywomen at the Trans Equality Conference. I was shocked by the opening remarks telling us there would be no dissent, no challenges & 'transphobes' would be removed. An appalling hostile tone set by the chair...
Imagine what is was like to have these opening words in a conf full of reps from the NHS, university, government, big business, charity. These remarks were designed to intimidate & silence. It did not. We still stood up and spoke"

twitter.com/AskNic/status/1012384349055045632

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3268237-Westminster-Social-Policy-forum-today-Next-steps-for-transgender-Equality-WSPFEvents#prettyPhoto

It's very disturbing, and I find myself wondering how long it will take to reinstate women's rights after the homophobia and misogyny of the trans agenda has been revealed.

I've been thinking about how information survives down the generations, especially in the face of hostility from the dominant group.

Baroness Liz Barker's opening remarks as session chair of Westminster Forum above.

Many here may remember the blog posted last year by Emma Healey (MN intern/ data breach).

I believe EH took down the blog and also made a statement expressing some regret.

However the blog along with its false claims that 'mumsnet are calling for a new section 28' have continued to be republished and quoted by some prominant TRAs, believed by some parliamentarians and absorbed as truth by many.

Emma Healey's blog is the document that the Baroness Barker is recommending, when she says, "Anyone trying to understand the campaign against review of the Gender Recognition Act should read this along"

twitter.com/LizBarkerLords/status/986646386010619904

The LibDemLGBT+ twitter account continued to assert false allegations against 'Mumsnet / Mumsnetters': twitter.com/LGBTLD/status/986610149837164544

see also thread re Andrew Gilligan's response to Zoe O'Connell (LibDems) complaints:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3263172-Andrew-Gilligan-Latest-bullying-transgender-complaint-swiftly-rejected-by-parliamentary-standards-committee

However the blog along with its false claims that 'mumsnet are calling for a new section 28' have continued to be republished and quoted by some prominant TRAs, believed by some parliamentarians and absorbed as truth by many.

This is a cross party issue.

During Parliamentary special debate on homophobia, transphobia & biphobia:
Thu 17-May-18
"Dawn Butler referred to a social media platform where there were calls for a new section 28."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3251616-Parliament-debate-on-homophobia-today-tweet-MP-if-you-would-like-lesbian-voices-to-be-represented