Well I've asked all my PPC THE question

[FairfaxAikman]

Repeatedly. Via Twitter and Email.

Not one has responded. Despite the trans-supporting one (Labour) stating on Twitter she's happy to answer questions.

It's a straight fight between SNP and Labour here and in the absence of an idea of the SNP candidate's stance on women's rights I'm torn between spoiling my ballot (as SNP party line is pro-GRA reform) or voting SNP to keep out a Labour candidate who is demonstrably in favour of stripping women of their rights.

I emailed all of mine weeks ago and haven’t heard a single peep

We have a choice of SNP/Tories/LibDem/Labour. I have emailed them all and only the LibDem has replied. My questions to him were:

#Do you believe that humans can change sex?

#If the definition of women now includes male bodied people how will you monitor the negative impacts that female bodied people suffer because of their biology ie problems with child care; wage and pensions inequalities because of time taken out for child rearing; gynaecological health issues; violence from the physically larger, stronger, more aggressive possessors of a male reproductive tract?

#Why is it that any man who says he is woman must be believed and treated as such, even a rapist, but exemptions exist within the GRA 2004 (for peerages and priesthoods) to say not all transmen are men? Why the difference? Why are transmen more suspect than transwomen? How could our law makers anticipate and act to prevent potential problems for the tiny minority of men who are peers but not care enough to consider the potential problems for all women?

#If male bodied people are women how are you going to ensure that concerns and opinions of female bodied people are still heard? Do you think that a focus group that consists of 50% men and 50% transwomen will be able to adequately consider female needs and points of view? And yet ostensibly that group would have equal numbers of each gender.

#GIRES estimate 80% of UK adult male to female transwomen will have no bodily modifications whatsoever. Children however, who should be protected by adults, are being given hormone treatments, girls are breast binding and young women are being offered surgery to remove their breasts before they are 18. There is no research on the long term effects of such extreme intervention. We are experimenting on children. How is this acceptable?

#How many assaults on female bodied people by male bodied people in women’s prisons are considered acceptable?

#Do you think it is acceptable that male bodied people are competing in women's sports?

#I would be grateful for any answer to any question.

The LibDem candidate replied,
"Thanks for your emails. I don't know what the Lib Dem manifesto will say on this subject. I will reply to you after I've had a chance to read that and decide my views on it. However, it should be noted that any party's manifesto policy on this will only apply in England. In Scotland, the Scottish Parliament decides and there is no sign of the Scottish Government following up on their consultation."

I haven't heard anything since, so either he didn't read the manifesto, or couldn't decide his views, or couldn't answer my questions, or just didn't care.

As for his suggestion that I shouldn't worry what happens to women girls in England and Wales as long as Scotland is ok, not true I don't trust the SNP on this and anyway what gob-smacking callousness.

Depends on where you are, but in my experience those SNP candidates in favour of GRA reform are not shy in letting you know. So I would, despite being engaged in a fierce battle with the Scottish Government over GRA reform, still vote SNP because their stance on Brexit is clearer (which matters to me).

Labour seats in Scotland is not what wins Corbyn the election - he needs to win England first. And while I'm sure there are rubbish SNP MPs, on the whole they do make a difference for Scottish constituencies (at least for me locally).

I'd have a serious problem if my candidate was Mhairi Black, but she might still be the least worst candidate (if you know what I mean).

I would quite honestly even consider voting LibDem if they had a realistic chance of winning against a Conservative candidate but only because I think an unfettered Conservative government under Johnson is an acutely serious problem I would want to do anything legal and possible to prevent. But obviously that is just me and it still took me weeks to get to this position.

Another one who's had no replies to my emails. I live in a very large constituency so also asked when they were going to be campaigning in nearby towns so I could pop down for a chat. Fed up of seeing photos on Twitter of them after the event! No hustings either.

I haven't made my final decision yet, but it's likely I will be writing a lot of this on my spoiled ballot paper.

*Figureof80, very good questions!

I'm in the fortunate position of having one candidate who has made it clear that she is GC so she will get my vote, not that it will make any difference to the outcome, as I'm in an extremely safe Labour seat. My STB Re-elected MP (barring a political earthquake) makes woke noises and apparently has at least one uber-woke researcher who has probably told her what to think here.

Those are really good questions, Figureof80, and I hope you won't mind that I've cut and pasted them. I like the way you've linked the fact that the issue of inheritance of titles has been considered and transmen discounted, while the everyday issues of women coping with men-who-say-they-are-women go undebated. Doesn't that totally sum up the utter contempt in which 51% of the population are held by our legislators?

I'd love to hear this question asked again and again. There has been no open debate in either house regarding the wholesale giveaway of women's sex-based rights, yet the inheritance rights of 0.001% of the population have been discussed and settled in the favour of men. What better illustration is there of how little we are valued?

I didn't get any replies to my emails either.

Figure’s questions are dynamite

I hadn’t realised the (presumably) Catholic priesthood has also managed to wangle an exemption. Where are all the trans men would-be priests kicking and screaming about this? Why have the good doctors Adrian and Christian not been all over Twitter on this issue? This whole thing fucking stinks. By men, for men, as usual.

Yup, Badger. Those with power and influence – the church, the aristocracy – have made darn sure that their rights are protected but there hasn't been a squeak about the majority of the population because we're only women and we've got to be nice about this.

I have had a few knockers this month.

One was the Conservative candidate (a female candidate with a career in a male dominated field with teenage daughters) who is totally for further discussion and research to be done before any changes to the act as she is just as concerned for future generations (all aspects sports, career and safeguarding). And has seen the current ‘trend’ in her daughters’ classes so is very concerned with the approach of Tavistock and the lobby groups.

I have had two lib dem Campaigners separately (not the candidate) who both admitted it was something they were NOT happy supporting without further open discussion and research and that they felt a ‘few at the top’ had decided the GRA reform was the direction to take the party.

Don't mind at all thatdamnwoman. The questions are a distillation of seven frustrating months trying to get a response from the libdems and the SNP. And yes, "utter contempt", sums up the attitude demonstrated by the GRA legislators and the politicians' current refusal to engage with our genuine concerns. Men in power talk and make these decisions while women remain invisible. That is only going to get worse as the bepenised women claim to represent our views and shout over the voices of the cervix havers/bleeders/vagina owners/host bodies/or whatever particular physiological function they label us with next.

Great questions, Figure, much clearer than the one I sent to our 4 PPCs - none of whom have bothered to reply.

I've a choice between a woke Lib Dem who's come out in favour of TWAW-andwhyareyoumakingafussaboutthissillywomen, and a woke SNP who thinks that suggesting women's rights are affected by GRA is a "harmful argument".
On other policies it's easy for me to see who to vote for, on this one there's not a slither between them.
I resent voting for either of them.

I finally got replies from 3 of my 5 candidates.

Green Party: gender is complicated now, didn't answer any of my specific questions.

Lib Dem: TWAW and hoping I change my views.
I replied that the above was nonsense and could she address my specific concern of what happens when I ask for a female nurse for intimate procedures.

She replied that she saw problems with disclosing people's trans status (!) and that I already had the right to ask for another person for any reason.

Labour: late last night I got a really considered reply, he does acknowledge that it's not straightforward, but pointed out exemptions. He fully supports self-Id.
Sports can be separate where physically dangerous or unequal.

"On prisons, believe that once an individual has completed the process of transition they should be accommodated in a facility that respects this." I need to ask how self-id relates to this, no transition required.

Finally on the health question "The healthcare one is harder. I would support your right to not have intimate treatment carried out by someone you are not comfortable with but I can't say I support a situation where patients "choose" their practitioner. My thoughts aren't fully formed on this - I have never encountered it either in my time in Parliament or the years before working in the health-related sector." Completely contradicts the Lib Dem person who thinks I can choose anyway.

Cons and brexit no reply.

So that's a spoilt ballot for me.

I got replies from LD and Con, labour didn't bother to reply. But then I'm in a LD/Con marginal. First two responses from LD relatively hopeful but when I clarified became clear its self-ID all the way. Con thoughtful reply, sadly not come out against self ID but are at least aware that the issues need examining.

Unless Labour come out with a commitment to examine this issue and to include women in the process (not happening today!) then I think it's a spoilt ballot for me. Will not vote for Swinson any more than I would vote for Johnson and as for the Greens.... no words.

Great list of questions!
I found this useful for finding my candidates’ email addresses whocanivotefor.co.uk/
I was quite surprised how lots of the PPCs seem to properly publicise only the social media route to contact them. Not great for women contacting them on sensitive issues.