Kemi Badenoch appointed new Minister for Women and Equalities

[Manteiga]

And International Trade Secretary. I'd have preferred to see her as Secretary of State for Education in addition to Minister for Women and Equalities, but this is good news.

twitter.com/Conservatives/status/1584957913059454976

I’m gay, I’m a member of the LGBT community. It very much does exist - whether those in it accept the T or not.

Having (skim) read the debate on buffer zones, KB made no contribution (other than voting against) so I'm not sure what her reasoning was. Could have been from the pov of defending freedom of speech, thought, belief; or from a concern about police training; or from a pro-life pov; or from thinking existing laws were already in place and concern over poorly made legislation.

Unsurprisingly, it was a far more complicated and nuanced discussion than some posts might have suggested. I can see both sides, although I personally would support buffer zones. And the vote carried, anyway.

NYT is the heart of woke! 😀

• well, it's going through HoL just now.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-63302710

Sorry I’m on my phone so it’s difficult for me to right my responses to your individual points. Yes I agree with your first point - because those who are not GC have labelled it as exclusionary, they are likely to see it as anti progressive and therefore right wing. I don’t know this for definite - this was just a suggestion about why GC views may be seen as right wing. I think the progressiveness of the left is associated with better rights for everyone, particularly minorities. Trans people are a minority. I don’t think the advancement of LGBT rights is about everyone doing what they want with no consideration for everyone else - the right to love who you love doesn’t impact anyone else. The only LGBT rights that may impact anyone else are obviously to do with the T. It’s a complex argument and it’s difficult for me to articulate myself well because I simply don’t know enough about the history of transgenderism to argue why it’s left wing - I just think those in favour of better rights for trans people would view themselves as on the left. I don’t think the left and right really exist in terms of social values anymore, it’s not as clear as it is in terms of economics etc. I also think trans people would see themselves as a class in the same way that women are, and most don’t necessarily want their rights to override that of women, but women’s sex based rights and trans gender rights can’t simultaneously exist, so the conflict arises.

As someone who is not part of the LGBT community, could you explain to me what the connection is between 'T' and LGB? Up until a few years ago, there was no 'T' tagged on to LGB.

Most older adults who transition are males who are attracted to women. What do these men have in common with the LGB community (apart from being the same sex as some of them)?

I'm a homosexual female and I don't agree. Unfortunately the 'LGBT community' is now a statement of a political group of people of any sexuality, straight included, who hold a particular political position, much of which is homophobic.

It's no community I'm part of, it doesn't want me and I don't want anything to do with it. It doesn't speak for me.

The community ended the minute it stopped being a diverse group of people who's one and only characteristic in common was homosexuality, whether fully homosexual or experiencing homosexuality alongside hetersexuality as a bisexual person.

No longer the case. No longer a 'community' that anyone homosexual is forcibly hoovered up into.

I'm no longer willing to use the words 'lesbian' and 'gay' for the same reason. They've been made political labels, signifying nothing more than political TQ+ compliance.

I’ve been asked this question before and I’m honestly not sure how to answer it. I think the only thing that unites us is that we’re “different” and the fear that once people have come for the T, they’ll come for us. The same arguments about gay men in particular used during the 80s and more historically, are now used against trans people. I’m not saying I’m pro trans, or that I’m GC. I don’t understand trans people - I’m not trans, I don’t know what it feels like to be “in the wrong body”. But then heterosexual people don’t know what it’s like to be attracted to the same sex and yet most support my right to do so, so I feel as though I owe the trans community some understanding as the general public understand me. I think because of things like the stonewall riots and the history of the link between LGB and T we’ve been linked together, but we’re completely different things. One is about sexuality, one is about gender/sex. I do think there is a sense of community between all branches of LGBTQ+ though, I don’t know what it is that actually unites us, but I think we can somehow relate to one another. Just from attending pride events and reading about experiences of LGBTQ+ individuals, there is something that makes us a community. But at the same time, any minority who’s been persecuted could also unite under the same umbrella. Sorry that’s so long winded and doesn’t actually answer the question - in simple terms, I don’t know.

Sounds fair, so long as police forces have got two police officers spare to monitor all protests and arrest the "protestors" who will inevitably be harrassing women as that is the entire point of their "protest".

Yeah, I don't agree with the arguments and hope the bill goes through with that clause added.

Surely there is an L community and a T community and a LGB community and a T community and an LGBT community?

Assuming I am correct the next question is "do all of those communities make sense?". IMHO all make sense apart from LGBT.

The LGBT community makes no sense unless the T says that a TW who likes men is a gay man, or that the L says that TW who likes women is a lesbian. Given that the L ceases to exists if the L says men can be Ls, then he only way the LGBT community makes sense is if the T accepts biological reality.

It is also possible that she supported buffer zones but with reservations, and voted against in the knowledge that the legislation would go through anyway, but that the closer the vote the more it would be clear it was a complex issue. I have certainly voted for things I don;t want in the past for similar reasons (eg in an incredibly safe labour seat years ago I have voted green in order to send a message to the inevitable labour winner that the environment is important.)

"Has never voted on allowing marriage between two people of the same sex"

Well no shit, equal marriage became law in 2013. Kemi only entered Parliament in 2017. She's never had the chance to vote on the issue.

This is precisely why the simplistic statements made by that site are unhelpful. There is no context and no nuance.

@electricdreaming said - It’s a complex argument and it’s difficult for me to articulate myself well because I simply don’t know enough about the history of transgenderism to argue why it’s left wing - I just think those in favour of better rights for trans people would view themselves as on the left.

Surely the whole trans debate shows precisely why we have to ignore how people view themselves and focus on reality?

It is perfectly possible for people's self-perception to be 100% a provably the complete opposite of the truth, so the idea that self-perception on something subjective (whether one's views are left or right wing) has any real value seems nonsensical.

To my mind the left is about fighting for the rights of the oppressed - both large oppressed groups like "ordinary people" and smaller oppressed groups like lesbians or trans people. It is about economic justice, and believers in justice often seek social justice as well.

The left includes two groups who are doing massive harm, both directly and by diluting the potential of the economic left to achieve change

(1) Good people who have not thought the T issue through.

(2) People who support queer theory, either out of naivity or a desire to destroy society.

It only appears to be a left wing issue because the left tends to be more progressive and if you don't think at all deeply the issue appears to be a progressive one.

It was the Northern Ireland vote in 2019. She was absent, as were 189 other MPs.

www.theyworkforyou.com/divisions/pw-2019-07-09-427-commons/mp/25693

Really disappointed by Badenoch's appointment TBH. Her position on reproductive rights is pretty awful. Her opposition to buffer zones around clinics to stop women being harassed by evangelical nut jobs was appalling, as are the arguments that this is somehow an restriction on civil liberties - pure BS - people can protest in any number of locations and can pray at home. As was her opposition to abortion pills by post. She has sat on the fence on several other important issues. I'm a lot more sympathetic to getting a more balanced view on trans issues, including ensuring safe spaces for women and fairness in sports, but she is not really providing that either, instead making trashy comments on trans rights to appeal to the tabloids rather than trying to establish a principled balance of rights. Under most circumstances I'd leap for joy at a young black woman moving into a senior government position, but she is just awful. I think it is a repugnant appointment.

Well no shit, equal marriage became law in 2013. Kemi only entered Parliament in 2017. She's never had the chance to vote on the issue.

I thought this deserved to be in bold for the sillies that came and posted links to that misinformation site but hadn’t bothered checking the basics about the woman they were demonising without knowing anything about her.

They have a desire to have sex with lesbians, just like lesbians do?

They have a desire to do things sexually that would be rejected as immoral by a stereotypical vicar from the 1920s?

Nope, can't think of any other reason why straight men should be lumped in with the LGB.

@WhyAmIPayingFees have you read the full thread or anything more on buffer zones?

Having had a medical abortion and having gone home alone for it to happen, I think I can understand some objections to it.

Under most circumstances I'd leap for joy at a young black woman moving into a senior government position, but she is just awful. I think it is a repugnant appointment.

Not the right kind of black woman? Repugnant, really? Your comment is appalling. Truly.

How do you balance the right of a man to destroy women's spaces by making them mixed sex, and the right of a woman to have a space for women?

Agree.

I suspect there are pros and cons of both set ups.
Clinics will have dedicated staff who are all signed up to the specifics of the job whereas a hospital environment will have some conscientious objectors on staff (even in an OB/GYN department, although why doctors choose that specialism if they won’t even help women with ectopics or spontaneous partial or unviable pregnancies due to serious illness of woman or foetus is beyond me).

I expect the real reason for separate clinics is private providers and NHS commissioning of private providers. The one clinic I’ve been to had a very long gated drive with an intercom so in effect, it’s own built in ‘buffer zone’.

The right to peaceful protest (against anything) is an important one, and women accessing a legal service have a right not to be harassed, but surely we have enough laws already in place to prevent protest becoming harassment?

The Christian religious protestors here used to turn up on the weekends leading up to Easter (IIRC). Sometimes counter protestors would go and make fun of them in a mild ‘down with this sort of thing’ Father Ted way.

Perhaps a more productive way to support women and circumvent protestors would be free (crowdfunded?) taxis for clinic users (perhaps dropping at a fire exit) on days that protests are scheduled (and any unscheduled protests can be dispersed by police?).

I don’t necessarily have the answers but I’m uncomfortable with any moves to reduce civil liberties any further regardless of good intent - authoritarianism does not tend to work out well for women and I don’t think it’s unfeminist to recognise this.

It's not misinformation. As I already posted, it was the Northern Ireland vote in 2019 when she was absent. They only include voting records for the time when the MP was in Parliament.

I approve of your reservations and believe that in theory harrassment laws should be able to do the job... but my problem is that their "protests" are literally nothing but standing around waiting for someone to harrass.

There is a big difference between protesting the law and "protesting" indivuduals exercising their rights under the law.