My local LibDem replied to my letter about Women's Rights. How do I reply without swearing?

[Slave2thekitty]

Weeks ago I emailed all candidates in my election ward (I'm in Michael Fabricants consituency - lucky me!) with a personalised version of the Sex Matters letter asking about protecting womens rights.
Yesterday I received this pile of word salad twaddle from Paul Ray, the standing LibDem.

"Thank you for contacting me.

Liberal Democrats believe we must ensure the safety, dignity and wellbeing of all people. We are committed to upholding women’s rights and trans rights, and do not believe that the two are in conflict.
That is demonstrated by the Equality Act, which makes it unlawful to discriminate against someone on the basis of any of a list of protected characteristics, including both sex and gender reassignment.
The Act sets out certain exceptions where differentiated treatment is permitted, including in relation to single-sex services, sports, and the selection of candidates by political parties. However, there is considerable debate and uncertainty for people over the use of these exceptions.

Liberal Democrats believe that individuals and service providers should be given more clarity over how to make decisions that are often very difficult and sensitive. The Government should publish clear and comprehensive guidance on the use of single-sex and separate-sex exceptions under the Act, using worked examples and case studies from organisations providing these services.

The aim of that guidance should be to ensure that everyone who needs single-sex services – such as survivors of sexual violence or domestic abuse – can access them safely, to prevent unjustified discrimination against trans people, and to provide clarity and certainty to service providers and the public. It should be produced in consultation with those most likely to be affected, including women who have experienced sexual violence or domestic abuse, trans people and providers of single-sex services.
Thank you again for contacting me." (bold is mine)

I am steamingly angry at his response. Oh wise vipers, how can I firmly point out that 1) I asked about WOMEN only and 2) govt law should not be built on case-by-case examples?
The only other response was from Fabbers himself stating his firm intent to retain sex-based rights. Pity that he is so awful in everything else!

You don't need to reply. You asked for his opinion. He gave it. If you don't like what he has said then don't vote for him - unless you agree with most other things he's saying and then do vote for him. Your decision.
You don't need to try to convince him to agree with you.

You’re not going to get the Lib Dem’s to change their policies or minds right now. But it might be worth writing back and pointing out how the word salad twaddle that prioritises male feelings over female safety is why he’s lost your vote.

I would send him this, if it wasn't in your previous correspondence, which is the single sex legislation from the EQA2010 which has very clear examples of the types of services that transwomen, even those who hold a GRC, can be excluded from -

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7

The effects of 'Stonewall law', the NHS removing sanctions relating to breaches to their single sex accomodation policy and Governments deliberately ignoring these examples to link funding to their 'inclusive' policy means that the legislation is simply being disregarded.

You have to decide if women being relegated to being second class citizens in the UK is the most important issue in this election

I wrote a similar letter to our LibDem, Labour and Green candidates. Got three word salads about inclusivity and diversity back. In each case my reply said

"Thank you for your reply. You will not be getting my vote on 4 July."

The LibDems are a lost cause for women. They and the Greens wouldn't recognise a cervix haver woman if they fell over one.

Unfortunately no politician will say a woman does not have a penis. They are too sensitive to the language. Poor boys.
Genuine transgender persons have surgery and no longer have male genetalia. It would be a cause for great distress for those with dysphoria. That should be the definition however again no one is brave enough to make this law. So we waste our breath arguing with people who protect a tiny number of 'I want it all men'. Shameful.

Whenever they talk about women they could be talking about the cunty ones or the dicks. If it is to criticise then it's the cunty type, if it's to praise then it's the dicks

I'm not sure why you are angry at how he has responded.

It's a very clear answer articulating the LibDem position.

I disagree strongly with them. Eg in the letter the implication that single-sex spaces are only 'needed' by people who have experienced trauma.

But he's told you their position. Now you can oppose it, or not vote for it.

Law and policy are made all the time by considering cases, as it should be.

And the political issue is the conflict between sex-based rights and trans rights. Mentioning them both is just recognising that fact.

All in all, it's one of the better replies I've seen from that side. No accusations of transphobia or bigotry or ignorance, talking about women's rights, clear and honest.

Great pragmatic view from a bloke, not so great if you are the sex being relegated to being second class citizens. Now men can apply for a GRC based on how feminine their appearance is and enter women only spaces and Labour, Lib Dem’s, greens, SNP want to to make it easier for them to do so.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5108465-a-male-non-binary-person-gains-a-female-grc?page=2

On the bright side, at least he knows that it's the Equality Act, rather than equalities. Most candidates don't seem to. I know that doesn't answer your question.

@Mycatsmudge I think the LibDem position is appalling.

But given that that is the Lib Dem position, how should the candidate have replied?

We either want politicians to be straight with us or we don't.

The reply is very clear, measured, and focused on policy and policy process. No obfuscating jargon, no name-calling. He mentioned trans rights, because that's relevant to the political question, as every grown-up in this debate knows. He didn't switch out women's rights in his answer for trans rights, as so many politicians do. He recognised and framed the debate, and explained how his party proposes to proceed on it.

If that's "word salad twaddle" it strikes me that the OP doesn't really want a reply on policy at all, just someone to say he agrees with her (when he doesn't).

As a society, we get the politicians we deserve.

“…who needs single-sex services – such as survivors of sexual violence or domestic abuse…”

I am very luckily not to have experienced either but I still demand and want single sex spaces without any justification. My 10 year old DD even recognises the need and whenever she’s had any medical issues which have required any physical check, she always requests that she’s seen by a female. This is a basic need which must not been trumped by a man (of any variety).

And the political issue is the conflict between sex-based rights and trans rights. Mentioning them both is just recognising that fact.

My rights as a women are not for shifting to accommodate another group of people.

The political issue is not as you claim. You don't give women's rights, privacy, dignity and safeguarding away, to meet the demands of others.

You've just given a clear example of how some Men keep attempting to link the two together. They are not the same.

Women aren't creating a conflict. They are defending what they have. The people who are creating the conflict are the ones telling us to hand them over to men.

Sunak has stated, women dont have a penis. If he can say it, so can others.

Genuine trans people often dont have surgery. It's pretty brutal surgery so I'm not blaming them.
Somewhere around 96% have no surgery.

I wrote to the Lib Dem candidate a week ago but so far, no response!

I was going to do the same, but when our Lib Dem candidate was prevented from posting party political stuff on our village FB group (which had in the rules that no political posts during election periods) he went on a massive rant at admin, got all his mates to post rubbish, then said they weren't bothered about our votes anyway! So I kinda think if they're not bothered about constituents how can I expect them to be bothered about women in general.

The fact you don't think sex-based rights should be sacrificed for trans rights illustrates that you see there is a conflict.

If two claims conflict with each other, that doesn't mean that both are equally valid, or that someone who recognises there's a conflict is proposing splitting them down the middle. They may be 100% in favour of one, or the other.

If you truly think there's no conflict between A. rights to spaces based on sex, and B. rights to spaces based on gender identity, then why don't you just grant B in full in all cases? After all, there's no loss to A, right? They don't conflict.

But neither you nor I believe that. Because they do conflict. That's a statement about the logic of conflicting claims, not the strength or validity of the claims.

Adding that I'll set my ballot paper on fire than vote for the Scottish Lib Dems. They're just as spittle flecked about all this as the Scottish Greens and the SNP.

@Bodeganights i have seen the surgery and employed two TW post surgery.
The take up now is young bio females wanting mastectomies and hysterectomies. Luckily we don't have the resources to offer this and few medics would do it due to come back at a later date. And yes I agree it's brutal and in general leads to a lifetime of medical issues.

Thanks all for your replies. @Clabony & @Mycatsmudge I agree with your response to the man telling us what to do & think! I KNOW the LibDems are a lost cause for women but I didn't want to just be seen accepting his response in silence. I will use the link from @Waitwhat23 in my reply. All the main parties are bin fires all round this election. I'm dreading the morning of the 5th July.

@Slave2thekitty Isn't your LibDem candidate a lawyer from Birmingham and ex councillor? So much crap in that reply.

I must admit to always be fascinated by Michael Fabricant's hairstyle which is very remiss of me. At least he replied to you without twaddling on. What's he like as a constituency MP, which is more important?

As pp have said, you aren’t just about to change LibDem policy. However, if you reply, I predict (based on personal experience) that you will receive exactly the same letter, but with the paragraphs cut & pasted in a different order! Nice to know how much effort they put in

"The Government should ..."

Why is he telling you what the government should do? Surely at this point in the general election he should be telling you what they will do if they get into government?

@Slave2thekitty

I'm really not telling anyone how to act or think. Clabony and the Lib Dems say there is no conflict between women's rights and trans rights. I disagree, and explained why I think it's important to recognise there is (especially if, like me, one thinks that aspects of trans rights need to be rolled back significant in order to restore sex-based rights.)