Do you count GC feminists as LGBT?

[AdamRyan]

Apparently Kemi Badenoch is a bit confused about the difference, claiming wide consultation with LGBT groups but actually only meeting GC feminist groups.

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1760281735990738972?s=20

It reminds me a bit of when Maria Miller did the consultation on trans rights and didn't consult any feminists.

I would expect MPs to be consulting both sides, but more than that I'm kind of offended to be described as LGBT for my GC stance . Seems unfair to both gay people and feminists and like the old anti-feminist "you are all hairy lesbians" trope

Oh I'm feeling free, believe me.

I think "what do they know" only get answers to questions asked through the website.
Bradshaw was very clear in what he said so I'm assuming he's confident in his data or he'd be in trouble for misleading the house.....

Can you post a link to the FOI request? I can only find that one I've already posted on the what do they know site, and I can't find anything about this on the government site.

The point is, Adam, there is no such thing as an LGBT group. It doesn't exist. If you believe in the L, G and the B, you don't believe in the T. And vice versa

It's fake, in order to give the T legitimacy.

I have no idea what Kemi is referring to. You'll have to ask her. I can't read her mind.

I doubt she's deliberately lying, though.

Yes, I said in my first post on this thread that there might be something else on the government site. Do you have a link to the whole response? That graphic in the tweet was obviously part of a much longer reply.

I'm not sure how thoroughly MPs check what their advisors tell them. He will have to apologise if they have misled him on this.

Why do you think Sex Matters and Transgender Trend represent only GC women?

I’ve seen webinars from both groups that include women, men, straight, and gay/lesbian contributors to the topic under discussion.

The Sex Matters Board and Advisory group contain both men and women and both straight and gay members.

Transgender Trend state that they have a diverse range of members too.

No, I only have what I saw. I guess we will wait to see what comes up. Maybe some other groups for same sex attracted people will come forward to say she engaged with them. I hope so or she looks like a twerp

Their purpose is to represent GC interests. The sexuality of the members of kind of irrelevant.

Similarly it would be strange to for example say the National Farmers Union represent gay matters, because some farmers are gay.

I’m not surprised the request was rejected on the basis that it would exceed the limit on the time involved in locating all the information.

The request was was far too broad.

A “send me absolutely everything” request is never going to comply with the cap on the staff time involved.

Ditto for failing to specify “between date X and date Y”.

There are specific barriers same sex attracted people face that they need specific representation on.

LGB doesn't have anything to do with TQI and neither have anything to do with GC to be honest :)

Zactly!

Following your example: the NFU can represent gay farmers on issues of farming that are of interest to gay farmers or that specifically apply to gay farmers. They can have an advisory group that contains gay farmers and this advisory group of gay farmers can give feedback to policy committees to formulate NFU policy that benefits, or prevents exclusion of, gay farmers. The NFU can run campaigns supporting the rights of gay farmers.

The group Sex Matters deals with areas of policy where sex matters - being gay or lesbian or bi means that sex definitely matters in your life because you are often discriminated against for being same-sex attracted.

Yes, but in this case Badenoch was specifically asked which groups she had met regarding same sex attracted issues, and only named two GC groups (if you take what Bradshaw said at face value).
It's a very strange response, I can only assume she didn't want to leave the whole spreadsheet blank.

Ministers diaries are a fact of record so it should be easy for her to prove if he's lying. Obviously she's also got other priorities right now though

Imagine rocking up on a feminist board and whining that a government is talking to a couple of groups that to date, have been excluded from representing the interests of women and have concerns about safeguarding fails for children. 😱
The OP has maybe forgotten the influence, the places at the table, the secret & public meetings and the literally millions of £££ that this & previous governments (national and local) have thrown at Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence, Mermaids, GIRES, Press for Change, Global Butterflies, Educate & Celebrate All about Trans, Trans Media Watch, The Proud Trust and all the rest - all of whom have been in receipt of massive government funding and attention.

These groups have had unprecedented access to schools, the NHS and civic society, being able to comprehensively remove women's rights, child safeguarding and to reinvent the law for their own niche interests.

And the OP moans about Transgender Trend & Sex Matters being allowed a few meetings.

What an odd thing for a woman to complain about

if you take what Bradshaw said at face value

Which clearly you are very keen to do, while absolutely refusing to take what Kemi said at face value.

If indeed she said anything at all - so far we have a clip of somebody else speaking, a refused FoI, and a screenshot of 1 page of an incomplete document that is claimed as the answer to an FoI but with absolutely no source or evidence to back up that it is - or if it is, that it is the answer to that FoI.

Perhaps this chap can provide some hold music while we await something a bit more robust.

I'm not complaining about that. At all. I think its great she's meeting them. At risk of sounding like a broken record, I'm complaining she appears to have lied when she said she'd "extensively" consulted LGB groups and I'm complaining she's tried to shoehorn GC feminists into LGB because I'm fed up with the "feminists are all lesbians" trope.
As a mum/stepmum to LGB children (bi and lesbian before anyone starts) I'm worried she is not actually taking the time to understand gay people's issues. Not great for the "Minister for women and equalities"

The two statements are contradictory. Bradshaw has evidence, Kemi doesn't.

I also note that the 'evidence' of who Kemi met states that the minster present was 'MWE'.

Not KB.

I assume MWE = minister for women and Equalities aka KB

It's assumptions all the way down.

(Yes, I know these are tortoises not turtles - the GIF library is lacking.)

How do you know? Have you seen his evidence? If so, please post it here.

How do you know KB doesn't have evidence?

You're missing the point. LGBT groups / activists are completely embedded in government - in the civil service, health, education, the MoJ, the Home Office, the Cabinet Office, parliament , the police, the fire service etc.

They're already in the meetings alongside their numerous allies. Not a paper comes out from any government source that isn't Stonewalled. Rarely a policy is allowed to emerge using the word woman. Countless organisations are Stonewall diversity champions. They're completely embedded.

I can't help you if you're bothered about a "feminists are all lesbians" trope. 🤔
I believe the response is "we're lesbians, we're here, so get over it" (or similar)

That's not true. Her full tweet relates to self id, specifically the question of the legal sex of people who have been recognised as transgender in other countries..

I don't even know what to say without getting told I'm following TRA tropes.

That reads to me like you are saying LGB people don't need specific representation in government policy making? That's not what you mean is it?