Lib Dems actively deterring GC women

[DontBuyANewMumCashmere]

Today I emailed the Lib Dems expressing an interest in joining their party.

I stated no one should receive discrimination or abuse for their transgender status but explained that I am GC and I asked if there was room for GC women in the party.

I received the following response:
Thank you for getting in touch. Whilst we appreciate your interest in joining, you should be aware that the Liberal Democrats are a trans inclusive party, and we have made it clear that we fully behind trans communities. As liberals we champion everyone’s right to live the life they want. By the sounds of your email it appears that your values are not aligned with ours so we are probably not the right the party for you.

I am flabbergasted. I didn't expect that I would have to believe that humans can change biological sex in order to be a member of the Lib Dems.

I am so disappointed. I was going to vote for them in the GE (passionate Remainer) but I cannot if this is their response.

There is no one to vote for. I am lost.

Factsdontcare, as you are at least here and bothering to respond, and the issues are not solely about marriage:

Do you have any limits in your own mind as to the difference between men and women, or boys and girls, and when one jumps category to 'become' the opposite?

If you see a stranger, or hear a voice on the radio, do you ever assume 'man' or 'woman'? Or are you genuinely open-minded?

If you are walking home alone at night, say, and hear a voice or see a figure following you, does it alert you more if the voice or figure is male, or female?

In your view, is it ever justified for something to be single-sex rather than single-gender?

Wow I can't believe that GC activists won't listen to women. Disgraceful.

@Factsdontcare I don't understand what you mean here.

Of course Helen Belcher's wife should be listened to. But why won't the Lib Dems listen to women who say anything different?

I'd like to throw that back at you with 'Wow I can't believe that Lib Dem activists won't listen to women', but sadly it's actually what I expect of the Lib Dems now.

I've been saying for years that "GC" people should put forward a motion to Libdem conference to show they would be "listened to", and I would take great joy in speaking against and destroying it

Why?

Surely you would listen to it first, think about it, and then decide whether you agreed with all, parts, or none of it?

'Listening' involves slightly more than just 'having words spoken in your presence'.

@Factsdontcare

But what if the self ID stuff passes before the no fault stuff, or in a coalition would you insist on both?! And how immediate would the divorce be?! Still far slower than just getting an annulment at the same time as a gender recognition certificate is issued I would imagine.

DodoPatrol the best way I can probably show my mindset and thinking on this topic without droning on, is to say that I am a gay man who has had relationships with trans men. I wouldn't date a woman, I'm not interested in women. Trans men are men.

But why won't the Lib Dems listen to women who say anything different

We do. I've spent an unhealthy amount of time reading Mumsnets to read up on what the other side thinks. I just don't agree with you. That's the issue you don't see to understand, we do listen to you, we know what your arguments are. We just think you are wrong.

"I'm not interested in women"

Yep, got that

Newuser123123 having known trans people growing up, and knowing a number of trans men in my personal and work life outside the libdems, I am totally unconcerned with younger people starting transition.

@Factsdontcare

And we think you’re wrong and won’t be voting for you. Enjoy never being in Government

Luckily I have a local independent candidate to vote for

@thetoddleratemyhomework Still far slower than just getting an annulment at the same time as a gender recognition certificate is issued I would imagine.

To be clear, and this is one of the incorrect facts that I came here to correct. This is not now the spousal veto works. Post-SSM there are no annulments, now the spouse is asked to consent, if they don't then the trans person has 6 months to get a divorce or their GRC application is voided.

@Factsdontcare

Do you think that it would be objectionable for the process for getting a GRC to be that the marriage would automatically be ended (so no delay to GRC - would be treated as if never existed for legal purposes, just like the person who transitioned), unless spouse opts in?

It's about removing the mandated delays, cost, medical recognition. It's about shortening the time, not making it instant.

A bit like applying for a passport as far as I can gather. So a few weeks then. Not much time in there for his poor wife who has to come to terms with what her husband wants to do and decide on her best strategy. With all the emotional load that comes with that and people like @Factsdontcare lauding her husband for being 'brave and stunning' while she watches her whole life collapse and is told to be 'supportive'.

Can you please show some consideration for women for once?

And please tell me about the 'medical recognition'.

Nice bit of casual homophobia there

I entered into a marriage with my husband, let's call him Fred.

Fred decides he is now Francesca, and is going to apply for a GRC.

I am not gay. I did not consent to marry Francesca. I consented to marry Fred.

As the entire nature of my marriage is being changed, I no longer consent to be married. I wish to divorce, BEFORE my husband becomes my wife. I did not agree to have a wife. I do not consent to being married to a woman as I did not choose to marry a woman.

Fred doesn't want to delay * transition to Francesca. I don't want to delay my divorce to Fred.

The Lib Dem position is that my consent is meaningless, my wants are inconsequential, but Fred must get everything Fred wants?

Hmm. I wonder why the person born with a penis is so much more important than the one born with a vagina? Could it be... misogyny??

Do you think that it would be objectionable for the process for getting a GRC to be that the marriage would automatically be ended (so no delay to GRC - would be treated as if never existed for legal purposes, just like the person who transitioned), unless spouse opts in?

I wouldn't structure it in terms of opt in, but I wouldn't oppose having an expididated divorce process attached for partners who don't want to continue the marriage. But the ability for a spouse to block the application until they get a lengthy and costly divorce has to end

@Factsdontcare

Ok, fine not annulment. But at least a divorce in which the transitioning person has no interest in slowing it down and indeed wants it to happen. LD policy is for quick no fault divorce to be available, but as far as I understand it, doesn't go as far as saying one person can initiate it without any consent from the other, so if transitioning person wants to transition and stay married, no fault divorce may not help the spouse if they need cooperation for it to move quickly.

I am totally unconcerned with younger people starting transition.

So the LibDems stand against FGM & breast ironing, but have no problem with young people’s healthy genitals being operated on or their healthy breasts being crushed / amputated if those young people identify as trans?

I've been saying for years that "GC" people should put forward a motion to Libdem conference to show they would be "listened to", and I would take great joy in speaking against and destroying it

Have you not considered that their arguments might be persuasive and you may no longer wish to destroy their motion? If you're not considering that possibility you are not intending to listen to them, so we'd be no further forward.

Yeah, heard enough on this one. Gay man gives no shits about women and would delight in 'destroying' anyone trying to put forward pro-woman viewpoints.

Hope everyone's clear what the position of Facts?Don't care is. Callous disregard for women, but a really thoughtful personal note that he'd definitely fuck a trans man. I'm sure it's won you all over.

I've spent an unhealthy amount of time reading Mumsnets to read up on what the other side thinks. I just don't agree with you.

Have you read the transwidows thread @Factsdontcare? Can you explain what you 'don't agree with' about their experiences with their husbands?

OK, so you don't 'get' my concerns about men in supposedly single-sex female facilities because you are a man. That makes sense.

You have never been a teenage girl and therefore have no idea of the pressures they face. I am assuming you are also not a parent of a teenage girl.

You will never be pregnant or need maternity leave.

Don't you think that on issues specific to women, you have a lot to learn rather than a need to lecture?

YourOpinionIsNoted

Your wants aren't inconsiquential. You should be able to get a divorce as quick as is physically possible. You clearly don't know any trans people, because literally nobody goes straight from coming out to getting a GRC and I don't see that that would change much even after self id

@Factsdontcare

Why no opt in? Why force these women to go through a divorce process at all and to be in a legal same sex marriage for any period of time?

Nice bit of casual homophobia there

If you see homophobia please report it. It's not tolerated here.

@Factsdontcare

If most trans people go through a lengthy process, the spouses will likely be able to say whether they want their marriage to continue.