Britain needs more trans people in public life, including the Commons

[Igneococcus]

Says Lord Herbert, Boris Johnson's first special envoy on LGBT rights:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0e8d186e-db6a-11eb-8f14-0bb645f59db0?shareToken=8cf210f54c9d71aa462bb34a9c3e2aa7

I came here to post too! Share tokens working now... Comments not having it again.
I found the article worrying he doesn't mention women's rights on a quick scan?

The word woman appears once in the article and that is Liz truss' quote that women have vaginas.

I don't necessarily disagree. But if someone wants to be elected, firstly they have to be electable.

Was lilly madigan electable? What about jess Bradley? Aimee Challenor? Eddie izzard might be hilarious and a lot more knowledgeable on a range of issues than the others, but would you vote for him?

Munroe bergdof, would she be a vote winner? She seems to want to be a spokesperson and get involved in politics, but then proved herself unable to to understand even the most basic principles of deplomacy.

I would vote for a candidate that had good policies on the environment, the economy and Europe as well as the inclusion whether they were transgender or not but do far, any candidate I have seen has been an expert on one issue only, and seems to have only the interests of a very small minority as a priority.

And of course, the no debate stance has alienated voters. If you won't engage with your electorate, they won't vote for you. If you stand for election on a trans rights ticket, then tell the majority of your electorate that they have no right to an opinion on trans issues, and you won't address their questions and concerns, they won't vote for you.

Yes, I was going to comment about the lack of mention of women.

It's not a 'culture war'. It's more important and basic than that. It's about Rights and safety.

(and I have not misgendered izzard here, unless there has been an update....)

Yay! A highly privileged white man has finally got a position where he can start to influence things. Cambridge-educated, former master of the hunt, is going to bring so much more understanding of oppression and intersectionality than anyone else might have done.

FFS. All the timid optimism I felt over this last few weeks has vanished.

It’s perfectly reasonable to say that we should see trans people in public life. MPs should reflect everyone in society. I can imagine that someone GC might challenge other things in the article but not that, surely? I don’t think that part is contentious in the slightest.

Although, he is quoted as saying re Stonewall, who he thinks have done “brilliant work”,:

“there are certain thing they might be pressing for that we’re not willing to do. Self-certification in relation to gender identity was one of the disagreements.”

But then says, “we should continue to have a dialogue with them.”

Just once,, just once, could it not have been a lesbian? Or an openly bisexual woman?

More lesbians in Parliament is what we need. No, wait a minute, they are all evil transphobe genital fetishists. What a shit show.

Yeah I strongly suspect the first trans person in Parliament will be in the house of lords to bypass the annoying getting elected by the public part.

I think it is reasonable to expect proportionate representation for transpeople.

What they should not be doing is, for instance, attaining roles set aside for females when they are males or vice versa.

In fact, I would be happier with there being proportionate representation on boards if there was a proportionate number of trans roles set aside and then split for female/male. So, how about we get that census data we now have and put it to use. Oh… trans people ignored the question and dishonestly answered … well, they were told by the census people to be honest.

But yes. Of course there should be trans people in public life. More? Well, no just the same proportion that is reflected in the UK population.

And how about we fix the lack of female representation first. Starting with 50/50 panels that are only ever representational of females. Starting with women’s officer roles being for females and if you are trans, you apply for roles suited to your sex or the officer roles set aside for trans people (and if LGB feel better represented separately to trans people, then they need their own representation too ) .

In countering SEX discrimination, sexist matters and it is not transphobic to say this.

I would welcome that.

It would be good to have a breakdown of the composition of parliament by the key groups in the equality act compared to society as a whole

I would also like a class /family income group as well

Why? We've already had women's officers who are trans and we've been told that there's no difference or conflict of interest. Surely women can represent tw then?

And I'm not saying I wouldn't vote for a trans mp. I would if I agreed with their politics but you can't have it both ways.

There should be less public school educated white men in public and more people with brains, including people of both sexes, a range of sexual orientations, a range of racial backgrounds and yes, trans people. As long as they are all highly qualified and know what they are doing.

This needs to start at lower levels and work its way up though. Local councils etc.

Competent politicians of any gender presentation would be welcome. Single-issue fanatics, not so much.

If your politics are in alignment with my politics then I’ll vote for you. It’s as simple as that.
It’s got nothing to do with what demographic you represent. For instance, as a feminist, I could never have voted for Margaret Thatcher despite her being a woman.
If a trans person was taking part in an election, it wouldn’t be their trans ness that would make me vote for them, it would be their policies. I’d never vote for Bergdorf but would for Debbie Hayton. If there was a man and a woman up for election that had the same stance on things I believe are important, then yes, I’d vote for the woman. But I wouldn’t do so automatically.
It’s not a personality contest or a shopping list, representation should be about choosing the best person for the job. FWIW, I do believe that people with disabilities are the most underrepresented people in government.

I can think of trans people right now I would vote for if they went into politics - eg Sophie Wilson, highly successful tech entrepreneur and developer. I also think Helen Belcher of the Lib Dems is a truly frightening formidable fixer and persuader, and increased the LD vote when she stood last time (not elected). Quite likely to get there at some point. Sadly her influence on policy has made the LDs unvotable for me but I'm sure lots of people are fine with it.

But the most likely first trans MP will be an existing one who comes out, I guess.

I don't disagree either to be fair, we should have fair representation ever, I'm happy to see anyone in the commons, I'm only really against people in protected spaces like prisons etc
I think more diversity of all streams is needed in politics and public life!

No problem with trans people in politics, why on earth should I object to that? Was Nick suggesting that a transgender person should just be parachuted in, in order to make up the numbers.

I want a culture war because I'm sick of not being counted and I want people now to be f*cking scared of women

@Lonel

Why? We've already had women's officers who are trans and we've been told that there's no difference or conflict of interest. Surely women can represent tw then?

Nicely done, Lonel!

It was good to see that most of the article actually mostly placed LGB front and centre, despite the goady headline. Makes a pleasant change from the usual overwhelming focus on the singular T at the expense of all others. I did chuckle when the Times’ only real passing glance at the whole thing was “last month [Liz Truss] said “women have vaginas.” .”

I’m imagining thousands of readers saying ‘well, durrr!’ over their cornflakes. Here’s hoping that some of them will go on to investigate why such a self evident truth needs to be reasserted… ☀️

That article is frankly terrifying. There are so many things wrong with it it’s difficult to know where to start.

“Herbert says that he delivered a stern warning to his colleagues in government wanting to join the battle against the LGBT activism.” So, let the activists walk all over the rights of women and girls, then? You don’t stop a culture war by taking one side of it - you fan its flames!

And painting Liz Truss’s views as “traditional” rather than sensible and grounded in biology. And saying that the government should not withdraw from the schemes of an organisation that has consistently misrepresented the law of the land.

I despair. I’m going to write to my conservative MP. Again.

Just a thought, but there are probably a few trans MPs already aren't there? I mean, given that trans now includes "cross-dressers" (as per stonewall's glossary). We've certainly had cross-dressing MPs in the past. But I suppose it only counts as representation if they are open about it.

Based on the rest of the interview I'm very concerned that this man doesn't understand the issues, nor have much interest in balancing the rights of all impacted groups. Plus ça change.