Chair of LGBT APPG complains that deals worked out behind the scenes not adhered too

[Kit19]

“In privately agreeing a way forward with the wider LGBT+ lobby both in parliament & outside”

Nice to have it confirmed that this was all being sewn up behind closed doors

So that webpage claims there's 200,000 trans people and 13,800 who are waiting for treatment. What proportion of the 186,200 are already "treated" and how many are not going to seek treatment for their trans identity?
Only 5,000 GRCs have been issued from memory.

It seems for the vast majority this is an identity only.

Baffled at the legal push for recognition of under 200,000 people with a preference for labelling their personality. 1st world problems.

Non-binary. The identity for people who don’t have a personality.

Archived;
archive.is/fQZHm

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20200923083404/www.appglgbt.org/news/appg-lgbt-statement-in-response-to-the-governments-response-to-the-gra-consultation" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20200923083404/www.appglgbt.org/news/appg-lgbt-statement-in-response-to-the-governments-response-to-the-gra-consultation

@DancelikeEmmaGoldman

Non-binary. The identity for people who don’t have a personality.

And need a certificate to prove it.

An utterly outrageous attempt to stitch this up behind the public's backs. So where is the paper? Still "private"?

I wonder which "relevant civil society groups" it was shared with. Did any women's groups (the ones that still represent women's interests) see it?

Good grief.

Well that's a scandal that should be all over the papers. We knew it happened, but that they're being this blatant about it without the faintest awareness of how it makes them look?!

The outrageous statement that they told the government what to do about the bloody silly women who wouldn't shut up women with concerns without the faintest thought that those women should actually have a voice themselves in this as key stakeholders? They couldn't be much clearer in their utter disrespect for female people and their utter unfitness due to this open prejudice to be in anyway involved in national policy that will affect females.

And I am not fucking 'cis'.

Blunt is getting some forthright feedback on Twitter

mobile.twitter.com/CrispinBlunt/status/1308474414372184064

Just goes to show how much the sunlight around this is needed. Government kicking it into the long grass isn’t helpful. Government reviewing the GRA with a view to if GRA is still working and still needed, would be helpful. Self ID was an obviously dangerous move so it’s good that’s off the table, but there’s still lots else to talk about.

I’m intrigued from that screenshot in the OP how external lobby groups can be so confident of what advice is being given to Ministers by the Minister’s staff. Why are external interest groups privy to that information? How do they get to see it?

Is there an appropriate distance between lobby groups and the officials working in this area? Strikes me that I have never heard of women’s groups apparently already knowing the contents of civil servants’ briefings to ministers..

Incidentally has anyone ever seen, anywhere, in any form at all, from anyone , any 'respect or reassurance' for female people's stated concerns about making single sex spaces mixed sex? Any attempt to meet these 'anxieties'?

I've seen a hell of a lot of denial, rage, threats and whataboutery; respect and reassurance or even basic willingness to listen has been mindboggling in its lack.

Wow.

The figures are very revealing. It's largely people without any actual need for mental health treatment for their dysphoria supporting the erosion of sex exemptions in the Equality Act.

How can anyone take this seriously?

[email protected]

Have just sent her an e-mail. I now have a feeling that there's a lot of activity because I can't get a direct link now. Which is why I've pasted it here

Elsewhere, how much attention various organisations pay to ethics is going to be looked at:

www.gov.uk/government/consultations/standards-matter-2-public-consultation-and-public-sector-survey

Really heartened by the furious responses on Twitter to this underhand attack on women’s rights. Even a year ago, it would have all been simpering agreement, back patting and virtue signalling. Now it’s outrage at the disregard for democracy and the shameful way they tried to sacrifice 51% of the population in order to push the demands of a vocal and tiny minority. We are winning. Don’t let up - we can take nothing for granted, but the tide has very definitely turned.

The more I think about this the more the data from the consultation proves conclusively that this is just a massive amount of hyped up heat influencing people that know nothing about the impact on discrimination law and the Equality Act.

Stonewall and Level Up responses will be mostly from people with no idea of the impact.

The 18000 from Fair Play for Women actually knew the impact.

Certainly my own two adult DS were mad keen to berate me about being on the wrong side of history but when I explained women were simply responding to a consultation which would affect our existing legal rights in this act they had no idea that was what it was about.

Liz Truss has done a fantastic job. Blunt is out of order.

Actually it's not just Liz Truss is it? Well done to all the team that worked on this if you are reading. We are proud of you.

@Escapeplanning

The figures are very revealing. It's largely people without any actual need for mental health treatment for their dysphoria supporting the erosion of sex exemptions in the Equality Act.

How can anyone take this seriously?

Yes. I've been saying for a long time that these activist thugs can't genuinely be trans (not the majority, anyway). The way TRAs have been carrying on it's like they were absolutely determined to harm the cause.

The vile threats and the horrific misogyny seems to be coming from men under the "umbrella". Because Stonewall has made them believe that cross dressing, AGP, gender fluid, non binary, and gender queer is as important as a trans person suffering dysphoria and should therefore have access to women's spaces, and everyone should be forced into calling them 'she' I'm not denying their existence either, and they're entitled to respect, but why the fuck should they be entitled to special protections because of their personality or how they like to dress??

The people kicking off about it are exactly the kinds of people that should be nowhere fucking near women and children in confined spaces. Making trans an umbrella term including everyone has been hugely detrimental to trans people.

It shows how far things have gone when not only does Crispin expect dodgy backroom dealings to be honoured, but he also feels entitled to complain about it when democracy wins out.

Lobbying truly is going to be the next scandal. He may as well say that he made some agreements on the golf course.

If James, Janice or any other journalists are reading this there's definitely an article here about this MP's blatant admission about backroom deals, lobbying and general disregard for democracy. All in his own words.

I never thought I'd say this, but that god for Liz Truss (I also think Andrew Gilligan's appt to No 10 has been very influential).

Yes, it's all about bringing the Philip Bunce identity into work. If Stonewall and corporates want cross dressing at work for men to be ok then they can tell men not to bully them in the men's toilets and showers. My Equality solicitors did advise me that cross dressing for sexual purposes should not be included in workplace policies. (Despite this Tara Hewitt advises the NHS that it's ok)
Bunce has of course stated that in his case it's not sexual.

Yes, I'm absolutely gobsmacked that not only that he had secret meetings, but that he feels confident enough to brag about it on twitter.

And the threat of publishing the private paper? Where's that then? Is he trying to blackmail somebody into changing their mind before he drops all the info onto social media??

Ugh.

@Escapeplanning

Yes, it's all about bringing the Philip Bunce identity into work. If Stonewall and corporates want cross dressing at work for men to be ok then they can tell men not to bully them in the men's toilets and showers. My Equality solicitors did advise me that cross dressing for sexual purposes should not be included in workplace policies. (Despite this Tara Hewitt advises the NHS that it's ok) Bunce has of course stated that in his case it's not sexual.

This is the thing. Stonewall absolutely claim cross dressing and transvestism is included under the trans umbrella.

It's not included in the equality act, or the GRA.

How is this circle squared?

Next job on the to do list Datun.

@Imnobody4

He says he's releasing the paper - has anyone seen it, or do we have to contact him. That a politician should demand a government follows the dictats of a special interest group seems pretty undemocratic to me.

A number of us in various groups are hunting this paper down.