Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture
@LibVoice4Women
Dec 14, 2024 • 10 tweets • 4 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
It is now 8 months since the Cass Review was published and still there is no formal statement from the @libdems about whether the Party accepts the findings of the Cass Review. For those who are still wondering why, the events of this week help exemplify. 🧵
On the 11th Dec the Secretary of State for Health, @wesstreeting, announced an indefinite ban on puberty blockers for treating children with gender dysphoria. He cited an unsafe prescribing environment and lack of safety and efficacy data in this cohort. See 👇 Image
He also called the historic situation of prescribing puberty blockers to children with gender dysphoria without a proper evidence base a ‘scandal.’ Strong words indeed from a Secretary of State. Observers may assume the @LibDems would finally come off the fence re Cass Review Image
Three Lib Dem MPs spoke inc. the Health spx @HelenMorganMP and Equalities spx @cajardineMP - neither stated they accepted Cass. Instead they chose to speak about long waiting lists and toxic debate. A new MP @VikkiSlade72 then spoke see 😢
The LGBT+ Lib Dems then released the following statement about the indefinite ban. Image
Without a formal statement on Cass or Streeting’s latest decision, some people think this is the Lib Dem position. Hard to know where to start with the hyperbole and false equivalency, e.g. calling a 4-yr review with 7 peer-reviewed studies equivalent to ‘anti-vax research’
There are activists in the Party with the ear of senior leaders. One of them wrote in Bylines Times with echoes of the LGBT+ statement. TL:DR Belcher agrees with MP Sobel - it’s discriminatory not to give these drugs to gender distressed children because they’re used elsewhere. Image
So, onto why the Party has stayed quiet. Institutional capture? Yes. Not wanting to upset the vocal trans lobby in the Party? Yes, definitely that. Divided opinion in the Party? Yes. Not just Slade but others, including the 4 Lib Dem Cambridgeshire MPs

Just this week Dr Cass was asked about the non-response of the Lib Dems to her Review in an interview. In the Politics Home interview they describe her as having a ‘defeated look.’ politicshome.com/thehouse/artic…Image
However strong leaders and those with integrity know the right thing is rarely the easy thing. When a Secretary of State for Health is calling the historic medical treatment of children a scandal, the @LibDems need to take note, they need to break their silence. #CourageCalls Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Liberal Voice for Women

Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LibVoice4Women

Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture
Nov 19, 2025
The @LibDems have been held over a barrel this election by LGBT+ LD ('Plus'). Firstly their treasurer brought 'Move to Next Business' motion. This meant a conf. debate on changing the quota designed to help women's representation ('women's' quota) couldn't be changed at conf. 🧵 Image
Then when @LibDems obtained legal advice agreeing the quotas were not compliant with the Equality Act and so put forward revised guidance for the elections, Plus were furious and used the entire Party machinery to get rid of the guidance. Presidential candidates, appeal panels
They called for all diversity-quotas to be suspended if they couldn't get their way. We pointed out this could also be detrimental for ethnic monitories and those with disabilities but of course 'trans demands trump all' (TDTA) lgbtlibdems.org.uk/civicrm/petiti…Image
Read 14 tweets
Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture
Nov 14, 2025
In this second post on the revisionism currently going through the @LibDems is the general acceptance that the quotas do need to change and so now clearly everyone is saying 'why didn't someone do something sooner?' Of course we first tried in 2023 after the first FWS case. 🧵 Image
The above is a fairly typical response from the trans lobby. Already in 2023 it was clear that self-ID couldn't be used as the basis of quotas and allowing non-binary people into both the men's and women's quotas was inherently unfair. But we were told to leave for raising it. Image
That wasn't the only abuse we received for daring to try to make the quotas compliant with the Equality Act. Councillors and Party Officers liked and shared messages likening us to a pubic lice infestation & speculating how much insecticide it would take get rid of us. Image
Read 12 tweets
Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture
Nov 13, 2025
One reason @LibDems found it hard to change the quotas is that the trans lobby have convinced them of several 'misdemeanours' of knowing what sex someone is and treating them as such (either through words or policies) or by not performatively agreeing they've changed sex. 👉🧵 Image
Some examples or the use of these terms in the wild of the @LibDems. 'Othered' / 'othering' from Lib Dem Voice articles: Image
'Outed' or 'outing': being used here in articles about the quotas in Lib Dem Voice by both of the presidential candidates. This ignores the Lib Dem election regulations which states that giving info to access quotas may allow people to discern information about candidates: Image
Read 7 tweets
Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture
Nov 7, 2025
What this email reveals is the contradictory task of the @LibDems trying to meet demands of LGBT 'Plus' & abide by law. Plus has told the Party for years that misgendering is the worst thing you can do. This means ppl who ID as non-binary are now not included in the 2.5 quota 🧵 Image
Of course people who identify as non-binary do have a biological sex. If the Party & Plus could understand 2.5 is a quota on sex not gender - so they could tick a male or female box - they could still be included. Whilst Plus shout 'misgendering' this is a consequence.
Also term 'cis' is used to avoid misgendering - now means trans ppl excluded from 2.5. The email discusses those with a GRC - some with a GRC have intimated ticking a box that is opposite to their 'acquired gender' goes against statutory declaration to 'live in that gender'
Read 9 tweets
Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture
Nov 5, 2025
Another day ending in Y so another LDV article about the quotas. Onyx says "Most of this party fundamentally disagrees with the Supreme Court ruling." Onyx provides no evidence for this. Indeed our polling shows majority of LD members support single-sex spaces & sports See 👉 🧵 Image
Onyx goes onto say "I’ve seen the emails and messages this week from members resigning over it, and I understand their pain." Not recognising the numbers who've left or considered leaving over the Party's extreme stance on this issue. For example 1,100 signatories to this! Image
Also not recognising that even though LVW disagree with the Party's stance on this issue we have chosen to stay. Many of us continue to give up time to campaign, canvass and deliver for the @LibDems despite the abuse and discrimination we've faced including being told to leave.
Read 6 tweets
Liberal Voice for Women Profile picture
Nov 3, 2025
The @LGBTLD petition to the quotas change is worth reading. Charley, the Chair, wanted the @LibDems to get rid of all diversity quotas. This means quotas that help address genuine under-representation of:
🔸Women
🔸Ethnic minorities
🔸People living with a disability.
in LDs 🧵 Image
Again just as we had with the Forstater decision ("LDs not an employer so ruling doesn't apply" nonsense) note this line "as a non-governmental private members’ organisation, the Lib Dems are not bound by quota provisions designed for public-sector decision-making bodies." See👉 Image
This is the EHRC guidance for political parties explaining how s.158 of the Equality Act applies to them. It is not about whether an organisation is a 'public-sector' body. As an association the @LibDems are bound by the Equality Act and the relevant provisions within.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(