LGB Conservatives think the Tory party is captured too.

[Fallingirl]

About to go to sleep, and I came upon this.

According to LGB Conservatives (don’t actually know who they are. An actual group within the party?), the Tory party is strongly allied with Stonewall and “may not hold out much longer”.

If this is true, we really are up against it. The only action that springs to mind, is contacting as many Tory MP’s as we can, to let them know cancelling women’s rights will be noticed, and we really do care.

Likewise with safeguarding of children in schools.

I don’t know what this group knows, or where their information comes from, though.

In another thread, In AIBU, someone was suggesting Dominic Cummings is busily undermining the civil service, and hoarding power for himself. We know the civil service is captured, anyone know anything about Cummings?

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1227991141318086656.html

[TimeLady]

It's on her LinkedIn. Transport. Been there since Jan 2019.

It was recently reported that Civil Servants regularly move around within the Service as a way of getting pay rises, so it'll be interesting to see where she ends up.

[Freespeecher]

I don't know Cummings' opinion on this (though I imagine he's GC) but I think he's very much aware what will and won't play well in the North. As this is very much a 'bubble' issue then I think there's every reason to be positive, all the more so since MPs like David Davies have seen which way the wind is blowing.

[Floisme]

And to think some of us were concerned in case an idealistic but impressionable intern had ruined her career

I agree that Johnson is probably too smart / streetwise to actively pursue changing the law on self ID (although it does worry me that they won't publish the consultation results). But a leader who was smart but also ... let's say untrustworthy, lazy, vain and not interested in detail could still be played. It just needs a different line of attack.

[Kantastic]

On the subject of things being kicked into the long grass - did anyone spot this from two days ago?

The government has delayed publication of its long-awaited decision on changes to the Gender Recognition Act, but it is expected to make a call on whether to push ahead with allowing people to legally self-identify their gender as soon as next month. Liz Truss, the trade secretary and women’s and equalities minister, is leading on the policy
www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/12/labour-leadership-row-over-support-for-trans-rights-charter

[TimeLady]

From April 2018:

Cabinet Minister Liz Truss has incurred the wrath of the transgender community – and risked angering the Prime Minister – by supporting Mumsnet users leading a backlash against militant transgender activists.

Ms Truss, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, posted a magazine article on Twitter which praised the internet forum for letting its users ‘question the tenets’ of transgenderism – such as whether ‘self-defined gender trumps biological sex’. Last night she was condemned by the transgender lobby as a ‘terf’, a derogatory term used for feminists they deem to be transphobic.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5642853/Cabinet-minister-prompts-transgender-row-backing-Mumsnet-users.html

[R0wantrees]

OP @Barracker wrote Tue 16-Oct-18
'We've been lied to about 'Single SEX' wards since 2010'

//medium.com/@anneharperwright/sex-gender-the-nhs-1e8f4e6363a6

They were ALWAYS based upon 'gender'.
The evidence is in NHS documents from 2010.
And the Department of Health were told, by the NHS team, not to tell people wards were segregated by sex, because they knew the policy was based on gender.

But the DOH purposefully used the word sex to the public instead.

We've been deliberately misled."


www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3396859-Weve-been-lied-to-about-Single-SEX-wards-since-2010

see also this twitter thread with evidence:
twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1052296768115888128

[R0wantrees]

Sue Pascoe has enjoyed rapid rising success in media & politics since first testifying to the Women's & Equalities APPG Trans Enquiry about recent 'transitioning' experiences.

Sue Pascoe's own words on the LGBT+ Conservative site:
(extract)
"My career went from strength to strength. I became partner of a very well respected accounting firm. We had a lot of money and a beautiful home. However, when my wife became pregnant with our first son, her feelings towards my identity as Sue changed. She felt that to be good parents, there wasn’t space for Sue in our lives. I needed to be seen to be male and only male.

For more than 20 years, I did my best. But in my 50s, once my children had grown up, I felt I had to explore my feminine side again. I finally told my wife I needed to seek professional help without guilt, and I needed to be honest with our children. She felt our relationship couldn’t continue and filed for divorce. Unfortunately it was very acrimonious, and included bitter disputes and the freezing of assets.

At my lowest point I was homeless, penniless, without my family and living with health problems and gender identity issues. I had lost everything. It was only then that I started living as Sue full time.

Eventually I spoke to my doctor and saved up for surgery. I went to India for my gender surgeries. The NHS could not support me without many years of waiting." (continues)
//www.lgbtconservatives.org.uk/news/idahotb-my-story-sue-pascoe

August 2018 thread following Sue Pascoe's appointment as diversity adviser to Channel 4:
//www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3331095-Channel-4-appoints-a-new-advisor-on-inclusion

[RunningWild12]

AI1Langdownthecleghole
It could be that company you’re thinking of was actually the Perm Sec of civil service in Scotland, Leslie Evans, tweeting from Scot gov account abasing herself and gov before Stonewall. Can’t find the tweet! Thought I had saved it.

[R0wantrees]

Vulvamort's twitter questions from October 2018 remain unanswered & should be put to the current Conservative government & The Rt Hon. the Lord Lansley in the House of Lords.

twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1052296768115888128

"Here's even more NHS clarity:

“The Current Gender input controls are used to record the gender, according to how a patient currently describes themselves, whereas the Sex input controls records their phenotypic sex”

The NHS know EXACTLY the difference between sex and gender.

So maybe Andrew Lansley was confused then?

Nope.

He was one of the few Tories who voted for the #GRA2004, to allow gender to supercede sex in priorities. He was aware of the difference in 2004, and he was aware when he became Health Secretary.

And Andrew Lansley was aware when the NHS team brought up the fact with him that he was asking them to segregate wards by self-declared gender identity, but calling it sex. Because they DID bring that up.

And he explicitly told them it was to be represented to the public as SEX

So what I'd like to know, is WHY?

Why,
@ AndrewDLansley
, didn't you tell us wards were never in fact same sex, but same gender, which is to say, often mixed sex?

Why were we misled?

The NHS knew.
You knew.
Why couldn't we know?

And now that the NHS are projecting that the numbers of people identifying as transgender have changed from the 2004 projections of 5000 people
... to the 2018 projections of TWO MILLION people

This doesn't seem like an insignificant impact to hide any more."

[RunningWild12]

If I was a transactivist lobby group I’d concentrate on Tories. I’m not sure how bothered would be introducing a self id bill, won’t affect him or his ilk. And the Labour Party (and Lib Dem’s, Greens and SNP) would have troop through the voting lobby with the Tories. Imagine how that plays to your voters? Not saying Tory govt will do it, but even if many Tory MPs voted against it, they’d have opposition support. And I think it would suit a Tory govt not to bother collecting data on sex and just get Gender Id in Equality Act and erase sex. Never mind sex discrimination in pay. Violence against women? Well, what does that mean when we don’t know what a man or woman is anymore. Mixed sexed wards - cheaper. No more women’s sports? Who’s bothered? Court cases where gender id of plaintiff and defendant is recorded not sex will hide MVAW. Brilliant wheeze. All the concerns highlighted in Caroline Criado Perez’s book disappear in a puff of genderism.

[GeordieTerf]

The Tories have no interest in this. There's little money to be gained from it, and a whole host of sticky lawsuits. The key reason they picked it up in the first place was because they thought it would be an easy way to scoop up more centre votes. After a bit of research, they saw that it was more trouble than initially thought, which is why it's disappeared without a trace.

[Fallingirl]

In this respect, the Labour leadership debacle is doing us a very big favour.

The Tories are unlikely to care about women’s rights, in fact as Running points out, they benefit from obscuring them, but lobby groups will with absolute certainty be working tirelessly.

However, the more publicity the whole issue gets,and the more we keep reminding Mp’s the public is aware, the more they should be able to see it is very unpopular and more trouble than it’s worth.

[EwwSprouts]

I would urge anyone who historically was a Labour voter in the 'red wall' but voted differently to write to their new conservative MP and say this is a key issue for whether that will prove to be a one-time only change of vote. Boris likes his majority.

[Xanthangum]

No more women’s sports? Who’s bothered?

I think the forthcoming summer Olympics might peak-trans a lot of the general public.

Even people who are generally supportive of minority rights - as most of us were and are - and who support trans individuals might baulk when long-held women's world records tumble, and it's clear that the new records will never be beaten by natal women.

[R0wantrees]

September 2018 transactivist conference 'We're Still Here' organised by Jane Fae.

OP TheHarpySings reported:
(extract)
6) GETTING THE GRA WE WANT

This was a workshop with 3 experts sitting with groups and talking through activism. They were:

Helen Belcher (Lib Dems, Trans Media Watch)
James Morton (Scottish Transgender Alliance)
Alex Moore (GenderJam). Moore is from N Ireland.

James Morton gave some insight into tactics the TRAs will probably start using in England and Wales as they were successful in Scotland.

He said the TRAs need to build allies in mainstream women and children’s organisations so it looks like they care about them.

He also said what worked in Scotland's was a “constructive, friendly, innocent” tone when debating or in dialogue with the GC side. To be mindful about who is watching- essentially like what we do with the lurkers on the FWR board. To make the TRAs look like the reasonable side.

James also said that in dialect with elected officials, to clarify that the trans side aren’t silencing anyone but want to clarify the misconceptions being bandied around by GC feminists.

The Scottish GRA changes will probably be put forward in the 2019-2020 parliamentary year.

Belcher has been meeting with MPs and members of the House of Lords. Most of them don’t really understand the GRA and don’t have much time to think about it thanks to the Brexit FUBAR. “Education” of law makers is needed and that’s what Belcher is doing.

Apparently the TRAs lack the infrastructure they had in the 1990s and early 2000s so they need to think carefully and coordinate.

Belcher said to re-iterate to MPs that the EA2010 is not being affected and no one is losing any rights (wtf).

Apparently in terms of political support, the Tories are split about 50/50, Labour, Lib Dem's and SNP are all onside. The Greens were NOT mentioned.

The big fear on the TRA side is that this Government won’t survive long enough to get this through- again because Brexit.

According to Alex Moore, Arlene Foster of the DUP went to a Pink News event and didn’t seem to know much about this. In NI no one really cares about the trans issues because everyone is focused on same sex marriage and abortion.

Alex then moaned about the Together for Yes campaign’s transmisogyny and that the campaign completely erased the experiences of trans and NB people who need abortions. Alex would like a legal change of gender to be free of charge and as easy as changing your name.

Helen Belcher was annoyed at GC feminists using “emotive arguments” regards rape.

HB said that the pile ons pro self-ID MPs get from the GC side if they say something supportive of the trans side are not helping the GC cause. Maria Miller told Belcher that MPs got loads of abuse in the run up to marriage equality and that abusive messages, tweets from GC feminists will only harden MPs against the GC side.

HB also said something snide about “mouthy” female Labour MPs who speak before thinking on Twitter- especially on a Friday or Saturday night after they’ve had a few drinks.

Apparently the TRAs have civil service support and that the Stonewall report and Gov survey are strong bits of evidence they have which is helping them win arguments.

They are saying there is no risk to reforming the GRA and are asking MPs “what is the risk?”

In the group I was in they also talked about how changing your gender multiple times should be allowed and shouldn’t be seen as “bad intentions”.

James Morton talked about how they can get rid of “gender” markers on things like IT systems and places where it isn’t relevant- apparently GDPR might be able to help them here.

JM’s campaigning tips were to gain trust in the local community- and to approach moderate feminists, “correct misconceptions and forgive any ignorance they may have displayed”. They want to gain trust and make themselves likeable.

Apparently small acts like helping to campaign about period poverty or retweeting the local branch of Women’s Aid will make a difference and result in some reciprocation. They want to make it look like they care about Women's issues so they don’t appear threatening" (continues)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3398737-We-re-Still-Here-Conference-8th-September-A-report-from-the-inside

[R0wantrees]

October 2018 David Davies MP described how he was threatened with police action by a Caonservative colleague for hosting meetings for women to discuss the impact of the proposed changes to the GRA

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3396459-David-Davies-MP-speaks-out-about-harrassment-calls-for-stop-to-GRA-reform-urgent-review-involving-womens-groups

[R0wantrees]

David Davies MP October 2018 on the silencing of discussion:

twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1052203110335217664

[LexMitior]

The Tories aren’t going to touch the GRA. They don’t need TRA now and the top people have zero interest. There is not one member of the Cabinet who will want to start putting their head above the parapet on this - and recent government ministers are giving the correct interpretation of the law to Parliament.

If you think a lot of gay conservatives have much influence with them that is wrong too. The new government is not socially liberal and transgender politics is a kiss of death; want to be seen as a leftie loon? Align yourself with the kind of nutty statements made in the Labour trans policy. Watch your career implode.

[R0wantrees]

There is not one member of the Cabinet who will want to start putting their head above the parapet on this - and recent government ministers are giving the correct interpretation of the law to Parliament.

This being the case, they have much to do to re-establish Safeguarding & application of the Rule of Law so that children, women & vulnerable adults are not put at further risk of harm.

[Imnobody4]

The Tories will presumably be aware of all the problems with detransitioners and sports etc and the growing problems in schools. They'll surely recognise that when it all goes pearshaped it will be on their watch. They now have full responsibility there will be no hiding place.

[bd67thSaysReinstateLangCleg]

If I was a TPA, I would be framing this to the Conservatives as a matter of individual self-determination, of private individuals making private and personal decisions. I would rein the "most oppressed group ever" identity politics right back in and frame it in terms of individual rights. And I would send high-earning professional-type people to do the talking, ideally ex-military, ideally already Tory-aligned, and ideally in same-sex (so opposite "gender") marriages to keep up the "born in the wrong body" narrative. So keep an eye on who Jane Crofton (whose Twitter feed is proof that trans privilege activism and male privilege activism are a 100% ideological overlap) and similar people meet with.

[LexMitior]

High earning ex military transgender professionals meet the PM who describes gay men in unflattering terms. I think there’s a huge amount to be done to get anywhere near the traction that was on the last government.

The era of manifesting genital doubts as public policy is over. The question will be “what rights do you need?”. Legally, none.

And Tories are not big on extending rights or laws to those who don’t need them - and particularly not in state institutions.

The Harry the Owl case is significant. The PM has made a living on freedom of expression - he’s not going to decide that an aggressive campaigning group with all the same rights as everyone else in this country need more laws. They don’t.

This government is not interested in minority rights. Nothing it for them, is there?

[transdimensional]

I dunno which way the Tories will jump on this but sooner or later, whether in five years or fifteen, Labour will return to power, whether alone or in coalition with Lib Dems, Greens and SNP. So, even if the Tories decide to oppose self-ID, it will ultimately happen unless left-of-centre opinion can be won over.

That said, as someone else said, if the Tories decide to oppose self-ID, that at least gives us some breathing space in which to influence the debate.

[LexMitior]

By that stage, matters will have moved on and there will be litigation that will have established the parameters are. The Labour Party are not going to return to power with a serious trans rights agenda - that is what makes their current pledge or die requirement so daft. To win they must capture a huge number of Conservative and ex Labour voters - very few of whom will care about this at all. Eventually they will stop obsessing about an issue that affects a tiny minority - but if history is any guide, it will take them a long time.

[Antibles]

All the concerns highlighted in Caroline Criado Perez’s book disappear in a puff of genderism.

A puff of woke, perhaps?