Baroness Sarah Ludford under attack from the beardbros

[SomepeopleareTERFSgetoverit]

Baroness Sarah Ludford (Lib Dem) tweeted the BBC story and is now getting tweets from quite senior male Lib Dem activists calling for her to be expelled from the party for transphobia.

If anyone wanted to express support her publicly listed contact details are

House of Lords
London
SW1A 0PW

Email: [email protected]

I don't believe gay rights were won through 'No debate' tactic, were they? There appears to be plentiful Hansard evidence to show otherwise. That is how change is meant to be achieved in a democracy. So why 'No debate' on this issue? Would history of gay rights be the same if one of the parties to the democratic debate chose this slogan at the time?

That is, if your cause is just, you should be able to justify it in an open public debate, including through media, which the transactivists refuse to do, as apparently they 'should not justify their existence to transphobes'. That, to me, is the difference between gay rights activists and trans rights activists-refusal to engage in a public debate. Is it because they know they'll lose? Who knows, but the ' No debate' tactic automatically was a red flag slogan . Having grown up in Soviet Union I'm quite good at recognizing purely ideological slogans. That, and TWAW - no thank you, I haven't moved thousands of miles as a teenager to be made to repeat mindless mantras, again. This is meant to be a democracy, last time I checked

I immediately become suspicious if someone brings in gay rights. Whenever I hear the words “section 28” or “moral panic” I start looking for which boundaries this person wants to breach.

These terms are used as a stand in for an argument the speaker would rather not have to spell out in too much detail or, more simply, in an attempt to shame others into allowing the breaching of boundaries of either individuals or whole demographics.

As others have said, the right to same-sex marriage and equal age of consent didn’t impact on anybody not wanting to marry or have sex with someone the same sex as themselves.

But giving men the right to access everything and everywhere set aside for women impacts women a lot, and changing the whole understanding of gender as something external to individuals, a social and cultural constructs that places certain expectations on people based on their sex, back to the archaic idea that gender is internal and innate, harms women tremendously. It posits we are innately suited to doing all the shitty work that no one wants to do and isn’t even paid, and claims there is some innate feeble-minded fuckblobbery about all women.

The fight for gay rights never made claims that denigrated all heterosexual people.

On a really basic level it just feels to me like men standing with other men.

One of the most vociferous critics of Baroness Ludford has been shown the clips of the protestors at the Woman’s Place event more than once and it hasn’t affected his insistence that trans women should have access to all women’s spaces at all.

Perhaps because, as we all should be and as liberals so often have, we have to stand together anytime there is an attach on one minority group

Oh, the irony. Attacks on women don't matter though because we are not real people.

Men are really loving this opportunity to harass and oppress women.

Gay men weren’t trying to coerce or rape heterosexual men though.

Hetero men had and still have, a right to say no thank you to sex with another man if they don’t want it. Gay men are ok with that.

Not being pressured into it much though.

So, because gay men were once attacked for having sex with who they are attracted to, lesbian women should pay for that by having sex with those they aren’t attracted to?

Not getting the logic here.

Sarah Ludford sounds like a brave woman, but I fear that she is onto a losing wicket.

I had a somewhat one-sided correspondence with the LDs a while ago, and they answered none of my substantive questions about women's sports and so on. Just gave me a load of flannel.

The LDs are captured, and do not give a shit about women's rights.

vivariumvivariumsvivaria

"Supposing one had a Lib Men MP."

They are quite rare creatures, one might say endangered to the point of extinction, possibly due to self inflicted harm by way of ridiculous policies and views.

I’ve emailed her, thanking her and explaining that while I appreciate her support I’d be very unlikely to vote LD again unless they drop - publicly renounce - all this nonsense. And I was a paid up active member for decades.

All these women are very brave to expose themselves to the fury of the misogynists in their party and the howling batshittery of many TRAs. So few men, with the exception of Shahrar Ali in the Greens and a couple of Tories.

And Labour peer Lord Hunt.

@borntobequiet

I’ve emailed her, thanking her and explaining that while I appreciate her support I’d be very unlikely to vote LD again unless they drop - publicly renounce - all this nonsense. And I was a paid up active member for decades.

And yet Coventry BeardBro insists that their popularity goes up when they denounce women for being on the wrong side of history. Baffling. I’ve done years of doorknocking and canvassing for them, never again while the misogynsts rule the roost.

Just e-mailed my support. I am interested in And yet Coventry BeardBro insists that their popularity goes up when they denounce women for being on the wrong side of history. Baffling. I’ve done years of doorknocking and canvassing for them, never again while the misogynsts rule the roost. Perhaps their popularity is going up, but it is from one of their lowest ever bases. I would imagine there is a ceiling. Loads of the disaffected TRA's from Labour will be gradually moving over but there will be a limit and the more TRA's join, the more those women's rights advocates will have to leave. All those who protest vote using the LibDems will no longer do so. Interesting short-termism

@andyoldlabour

vivariumvivariumsvivaria

"Supposing one had a Lib Men MP."

They are quite rare creatures, one might say endangered to the point of extinction, possibly due to self inflicted harm by way of ridiculous policies and views.

Between Jamie 'I am a trans rights activist' Stone and Tim 'liberals should come to the defence of JK Rowling' Farron I can only imagine what the conversation between the 4 male Lib Dem MPs must go like on this issue.

@LK1972

That is, if your cause is just, you should be able to justify it in an open public debate, including through media, which the transactivists refuse to do, as apparently they 'should not justify their existence to transphobes'. That, to me, is the difference between gay rights activists and trans rights activists-refusal to engage in a public debate. Is it because they know they'll lose? Who knows, but the ' No debate' tactic automatically was a red flag slogan . Having grown up in Soviet Union I'm quite good at recognizing purely ideological slogans. That, and TWAW - no thank you, I haven't moved thousands of miles as a teenager to be made to repeat mindless mantras, again. This is meant to be a democracy, last time I checked

I empathise. It is a shock to many of us oldies born here in the UK that freedom of speech has so come under attack in recent years.

There are 12 LD MPs, 8 of whom are women. Well, that's an assumption on my part, I suppose what I should say is "eight of whom appear to be female".

I am assuming that none of them are in safe seats. Certainly, not if they continue to believe they don't need the votes of the likes of me, a female person who would prefer to keep my rights to privacy, safety and dignity.

Seems there is a bit of a resistance movement going on

liberalvoiceforwomen.org/blog

Some good speakers there....

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

Lib Dems problem is that they have totally committed to the "I see people's souls" thing. So, it's quite hard to balance that with, you know, what people actually see with their actual eyeballs.

Suspect the ability to "see souls" is an ability developed best with a massive donation by a pharmaceutical who manufactures puberty blockers.

Not all the LibDems are loonies. There's a growing group of members who are working to rescue their party from the gender ideologues. They were at a women's conference this month (Filia) with representatives of the other parties, ALL of whom have the same problem of institutional capture. Women Uniting is the name they use to lobby government on the serious issues. The Lib Dem group is called @LibVoice4Women on Twitter; web liberalvoiceforwomen.org

Wow! Sarah Ludford used to be libdem royalty.
It would be massive if she goes out and out GC

The libdems have a long history of not being female friendly. The women's groups have been captured.
I do support the breakaway group and are on their mailing list.

@Deliriumoftheendless

Gay men weren’t trying to coerce or rape heterosexual men though.

Hetero men had and still have, a right to say no thank you to sex with another man if they don’t want it. Gay men are ok with that.

Not being pressured into it much though.

I mean, simply because of the way the world is, SOME gay men (a minority) were (and are) rapists. And plenty of homophobic people are happy to use reports of those crimes to condemn all gay people/justify violent attacks on gay men (I mean, this has been used to justify murder many times). But if I, as a woman, were to publicly tweet that actually "I think straight men shouldn't complain if they are raped by gay men" - that would NOT be being an ally. That would be massively harming gay men as a group (and if anything drawing more hatred their way). It would also be helping rapists of all persuasions by weakening the line on rape being bad - hurting male and female victims alike. Which is why most people would be horrified at me doing so I would hope, and say as much. Not clap my bravery/allyship. In the long term - this is going to draw down such a backlash on trans people just trying to live their lives. But by then the "allies" will have moved on to another cause/grift.

It always goes like this, doesn’t it.

Rightsideofhistorytweeter: “What rights are c** women going to lose?”
GC women: here is a helpful list
Rightsideofhistory: ——— [silence]

twitter.com/maryregw/status/1453656582538072067?s=21

Seems that they are at it again: twitter.com/SarahLudford/status/1465728119550189572

There are so many vile anti women misogynists in the Lib Dems. It defeats me why women want to be associated with them.

[quote Dimpsey]Seems that they are at it again: twitter.com/SarahLudford/status/1465728119550189572[/quote]
The person in question has locked their account. How very brave.