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.

Public services are available to trans people. Transwomen have full equality with other males, and must have full access to all the services available to males. Transmen have full equality with other females, and must have full access to all the services available to females. Transmen's and transwomen's sex-based rights must continue to be protected.

Terf is a ridiculous term, because not one of us excludes transmen from our feminism, whether it not we are radical feminist ls.

I sent the following email to my local LD candidate on 16th November.

"Dear -name of candidate-
I have copied and pasted the following from a recent article in the Times.
"Jo Swinson claims anyone questioning trans rights is challenging human rights; this week her party said voters who don’t believe humans can change biological sex should vote elsewhere".

As a lifelong Lib Dem voter, a woman, mother of a daughter and as a retired midwife, I am confused and worried by this statement.

Please would you explain what human rights trans-identifying people do not have, and which of their human rights are being challenged and by whom? Please give clear examples with links.

Has a party spokesperson really said that anyone who doesn't believe humans can change biological sex should vote elsewhere?

Does the party really embrace the belief that human beings can change biological sex? If so, please would you explain, in detail, with scientific references, how this change can be affected? Including all changes necessary - chromosomes, primary and secondary characteristics, anatomy and physiology, production of gametes, ability to gestate and give birth.

I look forward to your reply at your earliest convenience, as I am considering the advice that I should vote elsewhere."

I have had a reply last week stating that they are too busy to respond.
Nothing else.

I suppose I am waiting in vain.
I won't be voting for them.

Don’t hold your breath. Or maybe get your husband to write the same letter and sign his name? They’d love the bit about him being ‘a woman, mother of a daughter and as a retired midwife’.

Great letter crossandperplexed.

I had a reply when I wrote to the candidate in the swing seat where my parents still live and where I grew up, but they fudged the issue and weren't prepared to comment one way or another on biological sex.

To be fair I think I got a reply from a volunteer who was just trying to help out, and I'm not even a current constituent.

However, until somebody clarifies their position I have to assume that the LD's policy is "voters who don’t believe humans can change biological sex should vote elsewhere".

I also contacted Lib Dem membership, but they haven't replied.

I don't know whether it's worth writing to the LD candidate where I live now. It's a completely safe Tory seat and the LD candidate lives about 100 miles away.

Oh.
Just realised I made a spelling mistake. I am normally a stickler for for SPAG.
Oh well. I don't think anyone has actually read it.

Wow, this Lib Dem candidate has it all: racism, misogyny, homophobia and creeper vibes. Thanks to @forwardnotback on twitter for this research.

Hallo please find the unroll here: Thread by @forwardnotback: "A twitter story about a candidate and his misogyny First up the candidate “Seed pimp bitch” “Lefty bitch” “A desperate o […]" t.co/uJqXndPh8k
Enjoy :) 🤖

Aaaand he's gone?

twitter.com/forwardnotback/status/1198708487263522817?s=19

"Crikey something has happened in #Hackney
Good job t.co/rg4Bbb4tfB "

What a charming person.
But why didn't he just quickly identify as a feminist?
It seems to have worked for that other Lib Dem candidate who went around calling women names. Still there.

Dr Elizabeth Evans, lecturer in politics at the University of Bristol and author of the book Gender and the Liberal Democrats (Manchester University Press, 2011), believes that the Lib Dem approach does not take into account the inequality between men and women and has little or no gender analysis : tps://standpointmag.co.uk/issues/june-2013/features-june-13-a-party-overrun-by-lads-and-libertines-julie-bindel-liberal-democrats/

My experience of Liberals, based on recent discussions, is that it is true they have no pathways for analysing women's oppression, or the reasons for it. All is submerged into individualism, equality and civil liberties.

The dominance of individualist, Orange Book liberalism and its advocates over the last decade has pushed issues of [women’s] inequality further and further away from mainstream Lib Dem thought,” says Cumbo. “Couple this with the lack of women’s voices, especially at the top, and you end up with a serious gender problem. How do you tackle sexual harassment at the root if you don’t link it to the ways in which men still have more power than women, if, indeed, you don’t really see gender as socially relevant at all?

crossandperplexed

Love your letter. Think I'll send similar to our candidate. The response is just classic - 'you're asking pertinent questions we can't answer so we'll either tell you you're a bigot or refuse to answer'.

"Critics of liberal feminism point to a lack of critique of basic gender relationships, a focus on state action which links women's interests to those of the powerful, a lack of class or race analysis, and a lack of analysis of ways in which women are different from men Critics often accuse liberal feminism of judging women and their success by male standards" : www.thoughtco.com/liberal-feminism-3529177

Every day the post brings new LibDem leaflets. The latest is a "letter" from Dr Mohsin Khan, and NHS Psychiatrist suggesting that the LibDems have always been at the forefront of the campaign for mental health services, championing the issue. e says there is a imbalance at the heart of the way the NHS treats patients.

He needs to Google ROGD urgently. The LibDems need to commit to reviewing the treatment of young people (and indeed older vulnerable people) presenting with gender dysphoria, research outcomes and the experience of detransitioning, and review the impact the loss of single sex spaces in prisons, refuges etc might have on the mental health of traumatised people.

It is so so easy to say "more money", but more money in the hands of the LibDems might do more harm than good.

I finally got a reply from our local Lib Dem candidate: ”sorry for the delay but I have been giving it serious thought and considering the issues you raise and the terrible prejudices that are also faced by Trans people.
Liberal Democrats are committed to upholding all rights outlined in the Equality Act and have no plans to make any changes to, for example, the provisions around sport. We fully support the Equality Act. Liberal Democrats are committed to ensuring that it is made easier for people to gain legal recognition of their gender status. This means reforming the Gender Recognition Act.
The current process means that trans people go through a series of intrusive medical assessments and long, demeaning interviews with psychiatrists in order to prove their gender identity. It requires a formal diagnosis of ‘gender dysphoria’, for trans people to live in their ‘acquired gender’ for two years, and provide evidence of this to a gender recognition panel (composed of clinicians who never meet the applicant) who can still deny an application. As well as this process being distressing, inaccessible and generally unfit for purpose, I fundamentally believe that trans people should be able to determine their own personal identity.
I also believe that, because transgender women are women, it is right that they should be able to use women-only spaces. Most trans-gender women would seek to find privacy in these areas, as they are often subject to abuse themselves. Abuse in any of these spaces, regardless of who is the perpetrator, should never be tolerated and government must take action to prevent it. I completely understand your point about the murder rate, I don't think we have to decide between the rights of women born female and those who have gone through a transition. Domestic abuse is disgusting whoever the perpetrator is.
Services should be properly resourced and proper safeguarding procedures for everyone should be in place. For example, in the case of refuges for women survivors of domestic abuse or violence, it is important that trans women have access to these services as they also experience violence and domestic abuse and need support. Such services already assess the risk that any possible service-user poses and any woman – transgender or not – can be excluded from such services if they are considered to place other service users at risk. It should also be stressed that men can also be victims of domestic abuse and there are very few facilities for them.
We need to do much more to root out abuse and prejudice wherever it exists and create a more tolerant society. I hope that this clarifies my position and goes some way to explain the reasoning behind it.” I’m glad she took the time to send me a lengthy response, but obviously disappointed with her stance. Back to the drawing board over who to vote for then!

But surely she can see that making ‘women only’ services mixed sex now excludes some of the very people those services were intended to help?

"I also believe that, because transgender women are women, it is right that they should be able to use women-only spaces. "

Karen White? Danielle Muscato? Alex Drummond?

Seriously?

I wish politicians would consider the 'terrible prejudices' women and girls face.

Our sex class seems to have fallen out of fashion.

Sarah Woolaston on Newsnight about trans stuff now.

In her capacity as a doctor.

Matliss going after her big time.

Going on about Woolaston being patron as rape crisis.

Matliss asking if that was OK for women to share that space?

"Why should trans advances come at the expense of women's, particularly vulnerable women's rights?"

Matliss going for it.

Sarah Woolaston is just not getting it, is she?

Fuck me, Wollaston hasn't a clue about AGP, or anything else for that matter.

Abuse of self ID would be "very rare". So as long as it's only a few women or girls that are harmed, that's OK then?

I wrote to my Lib Dem MP about this and have got a "sitting on the fence" type of reply acknowledging the conflict of rights and indicating that on some issues he would be prepared to vote against the whip. I suspect that he doesn't fully agree with the party line on the issue but can't say so. He's a decent MP, I'd like to be able to vote for him and if he was an independent I would. But nationally they're a shit show and Sarah Woollastons response on Woman's Hour about women's spaces was a disgrace so I'm not sure I can.

Emily Matliss has just done sarah wollaston over well and truely. I am so anti-Brexit that I was going to hold my nose and vote Lib Dem. I really can't after listening to that.
Completely got tied up about gender assigned at birth and what biological sex is.

That was shockingly bad from Wollaston. Though I was shouting at Emily to not let her get away with "assigned at birth" rather than "observed at birth". Also letting Sarah get away without explaining how she can tell the difference between a tw and a predatory, dangerous man taking advantage of her stupid self-id crap BEFORE they do harm.

She was just reiterating what we all know to be true: that what happens to women at the hands of men less important than the feels of men. Presumably she thinks that those naughty men will get picked up by the justice system once they've actually raped, killed or otherwise harmed a woman.

I used to quite like the LDs, I really did. SW disgusts me.