Jo Swinson on Today programme now!!

[Taswama]

Tying herself in knots. Great interviewer.

I think it's more a case of a complete absence of intelligence on her part. She's as shallow as grapheme, but without the useful applications

Even for a politico, her mediocrity is quite spectacular. I read here she was instrumental in Charles Kennedy’s fall which has made me dislike her even more. I am not a Lib Dem but have the greatest respect for Charles Kennedy and his moral courage when it mattered in 2003.

I am so sick of hearing the old "some of the most vulnerable women in our society" trope.

Are they more vulnerable than child refugees? Adults with learning difficulties? Residents in care homes? It’s just the biggest load of shit.

Who are those who are fleeing domestic violence? Those living in abusive homes? Young women being forced into marriages?

Ans as for the ‘women can be abusive to...’and how exactly are refuge staff supposed to immediately assess a person on their doorstep as to whether they are genuine or a danger to the women? And will they be able to say ‘no Danielle, no room for you...’

What’s that whooshing sound? Mx Swinsons political career flushing down the loo?

I want to hear that line of questioning to Corbyn since he says he believes the same things.

Also Johnson. I know it isn't in the Tory manifesto but it is under a Tory government that violent men have been put into women's prisons where they have been, quelle surprise, violent to women. He needs dragging over the coals.

'It's just like the prejudice gays and lesbians faced in the bad old days'

... 1 minute later ...

'DANGEROUS LESBIANS!!'

And the never mention trans men.

Corbyn has been around the block a bit more. AWS to the average voter is unfair anyway and shouldn't exist (I dont agree) so there was never the big upsurge of traction from the general public about AWS that there has been from prisons, sport and refuges.

Please, please could interviewers quote the HO stats re violence and sexual violence in terms of male and female patterns of violence.

Also it’s not about having a violent trans woman in a DV refuge as much as women who may have suffered years of male violence being terrified to make a cup of tea in the kitchen in case the trans woman who looks like a man to her, is in there. They may be a lovely person, but SHE DOESNT KNOW that. Many men are lovely people but THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED into women’s spaces.

But yes, good interview. I liked the “I could do damage with a male body” comment. It is sinister, because it gets to the nub of the issue. Well done Justin. The interview made my mind up. I cannot vote Lib Dem. this is a priority of theirs. And it’s based on an ideology with delusion at its heart. One which puts the rights of those with male bodies above the safety of women and girls, above biological fact and reality. Every Lib Dem I have heard on this issue has elevated the interests of trans people above women. When asked about the safety of women they say “Lets turn this round. Trans people are the most vulnerable/at risk/oppressed in society”. There is a hierarchy of rights, and we know who the Lib Dems put at the top. This will cause a split, will divide people and that will NOT benefit trans people either in the long run.

This is not even about giving legal rights to a sector of society. This is a massive cultural shift. It gives the green light to brainwashing an entire generation from toddlerhood that they may have the “wrong body” and require cosmetic surgery and experimental hormones for the rest of their lives. The gender critical are not scaremongering. It is just scary.

Anyone else think Justin saying "if you were in the studio right now I could do you great harm with my male body" was a bit sinister!?

I was going to post in agreement, saying it made me uncomfortable. However, on balance, I think it was a very effective statement/question because it made me uncomfortable . Justin was right - most men can do most women harm, if they are minded to - and that is the risk of harm that sex-segregated provision seeks to address.

I do wonder if there are Lib Dem party members listening to this stuff in the cold light of day as opposed to the hot house of a Lib Dem party meeting and thinking

“Oh hang on!!!”

I think an awful lot of group think has been going on. In party meetings I imagine ppl are whipped up with ‘twaw/most disadvantaged group/it’s just like the section 28 fight’ and then a few trans speakers are wheeled out and by the end everyone is reinforcing each other, evangelical with the need to fight for these poor suffering ppl

And then they turn on the tv & radio & hear arguments that were not allowed at party meetings because “no debate/we start from twaw end of” and slowly they start to wonder if it’s just possible that there IS actually a discussion to be had.....

I hope so anyway

Every Lib Dem I have heard on this issue has elevated the interests of trans people above women. When asked about the safety of women they say “Lets turn this round. Trans people are the most vulnerable/at risk/oppressed in society”.

Let’s not forget, allowing males with penises (however they identify) into women’s facilities lets them in with young girls and boys (who are changing with their mothers). Where do children, often very small ones, sit in the “most vulnerable in society” pecking order?

My morning is bolloxed up now because DH and I are both late for work. Mr What are you on about, if this stuff were real it would be all over the BBC and Guardian, put your tinfoil hat away Towel stood there not moving, agog, during and after the interview. Then he ranted about Jo Swinson being a moron (he had plans to vote LibDem). Then I pointed out that it is in the bloody manifesto, which shows it isn't one David Icke. The whole party leadership was very easily captured by lobbyists and couldn't bring themselves to pivot when they actually thought it through and saw that this policy would hurt the actual most vulnerable women in society.

It actually out a wee spring in my step. People will have heard and though ‘what is she on about???’ And google it. And learn.

TimeLady "Yep, I bet that Hannah Mouncey and Veronica Ivy are shit scared of little old me"

Just checking, do you mean Veronica Ivy who used to be called Rachel McKinnon, the Masters Cyclist who competes in female cycling events because they are "legally a woman"? The one who recently changed their name?

As I heard it Justin Webb's point was that Jo Swinson could be superior to him in many ways but when it came down to physical strength endowed by biology he would be able to do her physical harm because he is a man and she is a woman.

He was making the point that when they are on opposite ends of a telephone line her superiorities could be effective. But that changes when they are in the same room.

Blunt. A bit shocking. But true.

Am I right in thinking that this is the third time Swinson has been questioned by a BBC interviewer about their gender recognition policy (ie Emily Maitlis, Emma Barnett and Justin Webb)? Isn't it strange that she hasn't bothered to work on her answers in the meantime? She's had plenty of time to reflect on the policy and rehearse answers, and yet she's still flapping around as much in the third interview as she was in the first. Remarkable.

She doesn’t come across at very good at being a politician.

Because she has no better answers @RoyalCorgi these are the answers to the questions because this is her belief.

I wonder if she ACTUALLY believes it, I’d love to know.

She's had plenty of time to reflect on the policy and rehearse answers, and yet she's still flapping around as much in the third interview as she was in the first.

It makes me cringe for her. As a human I feel embarrassed to listen to her doggedly pursuing this line. (As a voter, I am disappointed and as a woman, I am furious)

She's blatantly doing that virtue-signalling thing where she expects fulsome and wholehearted agreement immediately. She doesn't expect any blowback, let alone factual rebuttal. And she can't revert to cries of "Transphobe!" or "Bigot" because they are nonsensical and she knows it.

I put Swinson in the same politician-skills camp as Corbyn. Fantastic at internal party politics, will rise to the top within their party. No clue about the politics of the whole population, running a country, real life geopolitics.

I actually think that to the uninformed listener she probably came across as caring about a 'vulnerable' minority. I don't think it will have peak transed anyone.

Those steeped in this can pull it apart in a million ways but Justin needs to counter her points - particularly about the nonsense idea that there are loads or lesbian abusers trying to get into the same refuges as their victims.

And he needs to move it away from refuges which don't figure in the vast majority of people's lives and move it to the changing room your daughter uses or the place on the sports team.

He also needs to point out that according to Stonewall cross dressers count as trans and that trans women retain male pattern offending.

She won't have improved her answers as there's nobody for her to practice on. There are some very aggressive TRAs in the lib dems who have overseen not only the political agenda, but to date have had open season everywhere. So it's #nodebate and all questions are transphobic.

Of course, we all know that the ideology collapses under the most basic of questions but there are clever arguments and responses that could be made. Unfortunately those who rely on barbed wire wrapped baseball bats, threats and intimidation as the tools to implement social change collapse when faced with rational challenging points.

And as for her homophobia / lesbophobia - it really is time she was publicly challenged about her woman hating views.