Searching for a party - LibDems on trans

[crosstalk]

This is the response the LibDems gave me. My concerns are in bold
The Liberal Democrats will introduce a policy which will allow people to be recognised as their gender, without the dehumanising process of being diagnosed and proving their identity.

This will mean that trans people will be able to transition and receive support from the NHS without a gender dysphoria diagnosis. This will also stop the two-year waiting period to get a Gender Recognition Certificate a period which is routinely ignored, forcing trans people to be denied their gender recognition for even longer.

This waiting period and diagnosis is often dehumanising and distressing for trans people, it includes invasive personal questions and outdated understandings of gender and sex. By allowing people to self-identify, the Liberal Democrats would ensure trans people are treated with respect throughout their transition.

A person’s trans identity is not one which it taken lightly, and they are often faced with abuse and rejection after coming out.

While it is true that women often struggle to have their voices heard, it is similarly true for trans people who often find themselves the subject of ill-informed and misleading comments. We are further concerned at the tone of a misleading campaign run across the media over the past couple of years which unfairly conflates issues. It seeks to present trans people as a threat to women but does so without evidence. We support the rights of all women to justice, dignity, and equality.

Trans rights are not in opposition to women’s rights, and trans women have used single sex facilities for decades without a problem. Behaviour in those spaces is covered by public order offences, meaning that any individual causing concern in those spaces can be removed.

We support removing the various obstacles trans people have in getting their gender legally recognised and note that this is separate to amending the Equality Act or weakening its provisions.

Thanks for the link and info. As trans women can use female spaces now with or without a GRC then strengthening the exemptions still seems logical.

As trans women can use female spaces now with or without a GRC then strengthening the exemptions still seems logical.

How would this work in practice?

The Lib Dems told me in February when I wrote to them after Baroness Featherstone's comments that there was no debate, that my views were not welcome and my membership and direct debit were cancelled.

Even with that, I'm still hoping they will see sense and at least allow a debate about this. It seems utterly illiberal to #nodebate anything, let alone something as important to women as this. I have written to my local candidate - here's hoping that he will not respond by calling me a bigot. If he gives me an answer evidencing a liberal thought process that at least acknowledges that there may be concerns that are not rooted in bigotry, I may still vote for him. We'll see.

Maybe someone could lay some paper suffragettes in front of their campaign bus so that they can run them over.

(I wouldn't trust them with the real thing).

It would be great to see some more lib dem responses to constituents to see if they match the others. As I said upthread (about the Posie Parker video and the posted response to OP from a local Lib Dem) I think Helen Belcher may have drafted/work on a stock response to any questions about the trans agenda.

@Xiaoxiong your DD and membership was cancelled?? That is just extraordinary. I wonder if there are any other views members hold that results in the LDs cancelling their membership? So if a member says they are against tuition fees for example, or are keen on brexit, are they booted out of the party. Or is it just this oasis that is treated in this draconian manner (I think we know the answer).

Organisations are made aware of the exemptions and they are encouraged to uphold and enforce them.

So organisers of women's sport know they can prevent transgender athletes from competing.

Rape crisis centres, women's hostels and providers of therapy know they can clearly specify any job roles advertised for women are only open to biological females.

This is already happening but needs to happen more.

Rape crisis centres, women's hostels and providers of therapy know they can clearly specify any job roles advertised for women are only open to biological females.

No, they don't. This is the law yes, but they are being told by trans organisations and some government policy makers it's likely to constitute discrimination. In Scotland it is mandatory for government funding to include MTFs.

Swinson attacked by bees. (Alright, eco-fascists in bee costumes.)

Bee Girl said, "We need to go beyond what is politically possible," and she '"absolutely agreed."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2019-50652995

'Writing in Equal Power about her time working at Viking FM in the 2000s and how male-dominated radio is, she says: “In fact the gender balance was slightly better than we knew at the time, as our anchor breakfast presenter was Stephanie Hirst, at the time known as Simon.” She does not appear to be joking.'

Wow. That's properly gobsmacking.

Ereshkigal should have specified that was to OldCrone's question of how it would work in practice.

I realise they aren't being upheld properly at the moment but if Labour are promising to strengthen them if they get in power then I plan on putting a lot of pressure on my MP to make that happen.

Rape crisis centres, women's hostels and providers of therapy know they can clearly specify any job roles advertised for women are only open to biological females.

So what happens when someone applies, and all their ID identifies them as female, and they say they were born female (and provide a birth certificate to support that statment)?

So what happens when someone applies, and all their ID identifies them as female, and they say they were born female (and provide a birth certificate to support that statment)?

They would be breaking the law as the EA exemptions include those who have fully transitioned and have the GRC and other ID documents.

Strengthening the exemptions could mean serious consequences for anyone deliberately ignoring them.

They would be breaking the law as the EA exemptions include those who have fully transitioned and have the GRC and other ID documents.

How would the law be enforced? How would they prove that the exclusion was proportionate?

The exemptions are already unworkable. How can they be changed to make them work?

I don't think they are unworkable. I saw a job advertised recently for a female women's officer that clearly stated applications were not open to transgender women.

As long as organisations know they are acting lawfully then I am cautiously optimistic that strengthening these exemptions could make a real difference.

As long as organisations know they are acting lawfully then I am cautiously optimistic that strengthening these exemptions could make a real difference.

But they would have to get rid of the ridiculous clause 'proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim' in the EA2010 - and I don't think any party has said that. This leaves it up to every organisation to make a decision about what might be 'proportionate' or 'legitimate' and leaves them open to legal action if someone thinks they've got it wrong.

In practice, how do you apply the exemption to a transwoman who declares that they were born female?

Toots yep - after the article by Baroness Featherstone I wrote and said "is this official policy, that if you don't support gender neutral toilets then you are not a feminist and your views are not welcome in the Lib Dems and I should cancel my membership and direct debit?" The reply was basically - yes. Then I got two emails saying my membership and direct debit were cancelled.

I mean, I suppose they interpreted my initial email as me saying "Please cancel my membership". But as I had made it clear that I was a Lib Dem voter of many years' standing, with a direct debit and everything, I was somewhat expecting them to at least try and persuade me to stay??

OldCrone these are the questions to be pressuring MPs with.

I'm not aware of any other party manifesto other than Labour that even acknowledges the GRA, EA and exemptions.

I've heard people claim on here we should be campaigning for the GRA to be repealed but that is so far off any party's political agenda it seems like a waste of energy. Aside from that even the most GC people don't necessarily want to repeal the GRA, let alone the general population.

At least the EA exemptions have been acknowledged and are something concrete to badger the politicians about.

Latest from Swinson

They are going to change EQuality law to include gender expression and identity

Tackle the rise in hate crimes by making them all aggravated offences, giving law enforcement the resources and training they need to identify and prevent them, and condemning inflammatory rhetoric – including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia – by those with public platforms.
Provide funding for protective security measures to places of worship, schools and community centres that are vulnerable to hate crime and terror attacks.
Complete reform of the Gender Recognition Act to remove the requirement for medical reports, scrap the fee and recognise non-binary gender identities.
Introduce an ‘X’ gender option on passports and extend equality law to cover gender identity and expression.
Ensure accurate population data on sexual orientation and gender identity by including a question on LGBT+ status within the 2021 Census.
Increase accessibility to public places and transport by making more stations wheelchair accessible, improving the legislative framework governing blue badges, setting up a benchmarking standard for accessible cities, and banning discrimination by private hire vehicles and taxis.
Introduce a British Sign Language Act to give BSL full legal recognition.
End period poverty by removing VAT on sanitary products and providing them for free in schools, hospitals, hostels, shelters, libraries, leisure centres, stadiums, GP surgeries, food banks, colleges and universities.
Scrap the so-called ‘Pink Tax’, ending the gender price gap.
Require schools to introduce gender-neutral uniform policies and break down outdated perceptions of gender appropriateness of certain subjects.
Outlaw caste discrimination.

No mention of the "spousal veto"?

No

But this rebuffal from Sarah datum

unherd.com/2019/12/jo-swinsons-feminist-credentials-are-a-joke/?=frpo

The LibDems' policy doesn't seem to be going down well on Twitter:

twitter.com/joswinson/status/1202224088619659264?s=20&

At least the EA exemptions have been acknowledged and are something concrete to badger the politicians about.

But they didn't mention the gender reassignment exemptions, did they? They only mentioned the single-sex exemptions. So they will retain the ability for organisations to have separate male and female spaces and services, but they want men to be able to be legally women just by signing a form.

Single-sex exemptions + TWAW = mixed sex spaces.

I saw a job advertised recently for a female women's officer that clearly stated applications were not open to transgender women.

Do you have a link/photo/screenshot? I don't think I've ever seen anything like that (but I'm not currently looking for a job, so I've no reason to look).

I've heard people claim on here we should be campaigning for the GRA to be repealed but that is so far off any party's political agenda it seems like a waste of energy. Aside from that even the most GC people don't necessarily want to repeal the GRA, let alone the general population.

The 2004 GRA is where all the problems started, it was brought in quietly so that the public wouldn’t object to it, as it was acknowledged that most people would object to it if it was well publicised.

The pension age has now be equalised and same sex marriage is now legal, the two reasons that were given for its existence, there is nothing that the GRA offers others except the right to enter the spaces of those of the opposite sex, fill quotas of the opposite sex, make stats meaningless etc.

Moreover, those that do believe others should have the legal right to change sex, assume those who desire it have had full genital surgery, very few are in favour of those who have not had full surgery being able to legally change sex.

Furthermore, it now becoming abundantly clear to many people that allowing males to change their legal sex, harms females, and props up the ideology that people can choose their sex, which is now being taught to kids in schools.

People should be protected from discrimination on the basis of how they dress, and what beliefs they hold, that can be achieved without a law which allows someone the legal fiction of changing their sex. Most people understand that when it is explained to them, and I believe would be in favour of repealing the GRA, if a open and free debate on the pros and cons of this law were to take place.

The only supporters of the tweet seem to be woke bros. They are tone deaf on this, I’m embarrassed for them or at least I would be if they weren’t prepared to throw my rights under the bus without a second thought