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

Why would Lord Herbert care about women? He's upper class and has primogeniture writ large on his frontal lobe

I'm sure there was a transwoman who stood in the last election. It was either for The Brexit Party or UKIP, I remember reading an article at the time.

That's probably not the sort of person LGBT activists had in mind though! Caitlyn Jenner hasn't exactly been popular across the pond.

If you take a position of responsibility in public office you have to be able to be impartial, unbiased and represent the interests of all people you represent, and not merely your own.

I know that I’ve had enough of white, middle class, gay men, telling women what to do.

'Where it does harm there has to be limits to religious freedom'
This bit jumped out for me.
Not that I would advocate harm, in any actual sense, but if we currently define mild disagreement or challenge as harm, this quote reads to me as a curb on freedom of expression.
I'm thinking of the school chaplain who voiced concerns about some aspects of transactivist ideology for eg

I'm all for proportional representation.
50% women
1% trans
20% disabled

I trust this person with absolutely no agenda will be pushing for representation of all minorities...

I saw written on a charities website, 'mothers, birthing persons and babies', yesterday and am in despair at the total lack of guts from major bodies too afraid to come out and say, biological women have rights too and need representation that reflect their vulnerabilities

I know a trans women who is desperate to get into politics and shouts very loudly.

This person is a lying, self absorbed self publicist. Also not very clever, can’t string a written sentence together and has no idea about the real world.

I can see them going down well in Westminster.

No problem with trans people - transmen and
transwomen - being in the public sphere including the commons.
Need a proportionate (to population) number of women in the commons too -and a strong clampdown of targeted bullying of women in the public sphere.

He means more men, though, doesn't he, to make up the theoretical 52% female representation with trans women. He's not talking about increasing diversity by having more disabled MP, or those of colour, or LGB ones, or even women - he's talking about having more white men in parliament. How can people not see the misogyny shining through?

Maybe we need some detransituoners then. And what about representation for those with disabilities?

The really worrying bit was Herbert's pushback (apparently with Johnson's support) in favour of Stonewall and against Truss.
Now, Herbert acknowledges that the government doesn't back all of Stonewall's demands (though one suspects that Herbert himself does), but he thinks the government should nevertheless support the Stonewall programme and that departments should sign up and fund the programme (and he implies Johnson thinks so too).
So, according to him, it's fine for the government to hand over money to Stonewall, a political pressure group that will then use that money not only to misinform people about the law but to try to pressure the government into adopting extremist policies.

Many of the comments beneath the article are sensible, although there are some that one can quibble with. Someone asked "Has the Times turned into the Guardian?", which is really weird, because the article is reporting on Herbert's views, and Herbert is a Tory appointed by Johnson (but even if he were Labour, it might still be appropriate to report on his views, of course). It's not an endorsement - readers can and do make their own minds up, as so many have.

Is this a safe place to unpick what representative would actually mean here? If we are talking about more people with gender dysphoria, diagnosed and treated, then which other MH conditions are we seeking to have represented?

If we’re talking about people who have taken radical and pretty irreversible surgical steps to change their appearance, then why stop at surgery that feminises?

If we’re talking about people who choose to dress in a way that defies stereotypes, then do we need to look at the proportion of punks or goths in society at large?

If we’re talking about people who are infertile due to medical treatment, why not those who have had early hysterectomy due to cancer?

If we’re talking about people who have made a lifestyle choice or are from a culture that makes them more prone to abuse or ridicule, why not those from the GRT community, or obese?

As PPs have said, there are so many more ways public life could be representative of women, people with disabilities, families with children with SEN, the elderly, yet this cause is the one given a champion. Why?

Does it?

Should every minority be overrepresented in public life so that it feels 'represented'? There are ca. 1% trans people in the country, would 1% representation in public life be acceptable? If not, what would be acceptable? And what about the next minority group, that should then also get the same amount of representation. And so on and so on.

If nothing, this shows just how much trans people are being milked to garner support from the woke.

We can’t even get balancer representation for women, the disabled, all ethnic minorities... so why the push for this?

I want to be represented by someone who is emotionally intelligent and inhabits my reality: the one where Scientific fact trumps wishes and feelings.

If I had any reason to suspect that an MP might be concerned with simply furthering a niche agenda, or indulging a narc fantasy - then I would deem them particularly unworthy of public office.

To be fair though, I do consider most of the crooks, thieves, liars and villains in politics unsuitable for public office. So I'm an equal opportunities critic.

@toffeebutterpopcorn

We can’t even get balancer representation for women, the disabled, all ethnic minorities... so why the push for this?

Because provision for women, disabled and ethnic minorities requires change and provision. White men who are GNC require no such changes.

Why should there be? What about this group makes it hard for them to get involved in politics so they need to be promoted compared to, say, a single mother bringing up a young family? The latter would certainly be more representive of their consituents.

Just a wee stripe of paint.

Oh whilst I remember - which council is it that has just spent over £5k of supposed ‘covid rejuvenation’ money on painting a footpath with the ‘new’ pride flag (the rainbow y-fronts).

I'm sure either men or women are totally able to represent transwomen now. After all, transwomen are totally okay with speaking for women, aren't they? Proportionally representing society sounds good... but we should aim for 51/49 women to men first.
And if only we had accurate data on the make up of society, we could aim for better regulation. Some men might have to take a step back/transition to help.

Or we could just work to get the best person elected regardless of identifying features.

What we really need is a Pantheon of Woke Gods, and Munroe B can be the first one there.

Will there be proportional representation if detrans people too?

🤔

There's a lot of push back, in general and I've just been reading about how CRT (from which most of this springs) is undergoing an awful lot of criticism. This will be helpful for us because a lot of big corporations have been backing and if they see things reversing, they will have to re-think this trans with everything approach. I will be interested to see what the Bank of England does with its lighting scheme next year (unless of course there's another Pride event before then) and Barclays, will they continue down this route. Business doesn't like to be unpopular for long. Eventually it destroys their image - no matter how big they are.

Sorry, just fed up and need to blab - you might find me ranting on other threads. I need

I should have said CRT in the US

Hopefully this will put paid to the myth that the Conservatives support women's rights.

Apparently BJ invited Stonewall to Number 10 last week.
epaper.thetimes.co.uk/the-times/20210703/283665417753409

It was always a question of who is the least worst.