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. 🧵 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.

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. 👉🧵 Some examples or the use of these terms in the wild of the @LibDems. 'Othered' / 'othering' from Lib Dem Voice articles:

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 🧵 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.

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 👉 🧵 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!

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 🧵 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👉

Powerful speech from one of our Lib Dems @Bobby_Dean - bravely speaking about his and his wife's traumatic miscarriage in the hope of helping others. Bobby has raised a number of important issues this year relevant to women and violence against women and girls. 1/4

https://twitter.com/Bobby_Dean/status/1981311543653388334

In February Bobby spoke about the Online Safety Act. He spoke about the issues with pornography and violence. Importantly he highlighted "teenage girls are the group most likely to be victims of domestic abuse. That is attributed in part to the rise of misogynistic content." 2/4

This week at least two motions came to Lib Dem run councils regarding Supreme Court ruling. One motion to St Albans District Council - the motion was ultimately referred to a different committee but you can hear the LD Cllr propose the motion here 🧵:

https://x.com/WRNHerts_Cambs/status/1946258690404983142

Clearly a very emotional speech discussing her motivation as a mother of a trans woman. Prior to this speech our Chair @hollowood_zoe had asked a question regarding the motion. The reply indicated the council did its best to uphold the law.

One year into the new Parliament we looked to see how many spoken contributions in Hansard for the word ‘women’ from @libdems women MPs there were. *Totals were hand curated as occasionally the MP was talking about ‘trans women’ rather than actual women. 🧵 This is an exercise we did last parliament. Overall LD female MPs are speaking more about women than previously. On average in last parliament LD female MPs mentioned ‘women’ 7.6 times in Hansard per year – this year it was 8.5 times on average per MP.

https://x.com/LibVoice4Women/status/1875255457092399279

People have been shocked at MP Ben Maguire's outbursts this week. Firstly implying that @jk_rowling had only spoken out for women for "attention" and secondly saying @ForWomenScot has a "fascist agenda". Clearly unacceptable however not unusual behaviour within @LibDems - 🧵 In 2022, unlawful Defn of Transphobia was changed to say "Holding and expressing gender critical views, whether in internal debates or publicly, is protected by law under the Equality Act, Article 9 ECHR and Article 10 ECHR and is permitted." So English Party passed this motion

Today in HoC LD Women and Equalities spokesperson took aim at the Equality Act & Supreme Court ruling - questioning "whether we need fresh legislation in this country to deal with all the issues in the Equalities [sic] Act which have been raised by the...Supreme Court Ruling?'🧵 @cajardineMP also said issues were raised by EHRC 'interim guidance.' Leaving aside W&E spx referred to the Equality Act as the 'Equalities Act' and referred to the interim update as 'guidance' (despite being told it wasn't guidance by Bn Falkner last week') this is v. worrying

Interesting article by human rights lawyer & academic, revealing it was discussion of the spousal exit clause that provoked him to say “Trans rights don’t trump everything else!” Discussion in the @libdems party of spousal exit clause is v. different 🧵 telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/2… Last week during a Westminster Hall debate about gender self-ID two Lib Dem MPs spoke against the non-transitioning spouse (typically a women) having the right to consent to a fundamental change to their marriage contract @VikkiSlade72 & @cajardineMP

After this year's Spring Conference, where Lib Dems voted on a motion backing self-ID the @Telegraph ran an article highlighting that Lib Dem members did not agree with self-ID. Lib Dem voters feel the same as shown in various YouGov polls. 🧵 However @LibDems sources told the journalist @DominicPenna that our characterisation of the motion at conference was wrong - that the Lib Dems had sensible policies and did not back self-ID. But yesterday in the Westminster Hall debate @cajardineMP stated we backed self-ID...

Some astonishing exchanges on a question about women's sport in House of Lords yesterday. @SarahLudford spoke about women and girl's participation in sport, the fact many teen girls gave up sport and some women/girls excluded themselves due to males in their teams and sports. However in response Bn Twycross said this was tangling two issues. Only if someone thinks female participation in sports is not relevant to the Supreme Court ruling could that be true. Of course if the Bn listened to the voices of women & girls on this issue she would know this

It is now 13 months since the publication of the Cass Review. @LibDems have had 2 recent opportunities to state a formal position on Cass - the 1st at Spring conference with motion F9 and the 2nd in the recent puberty blocker debate – yet still we wait…🧵 Firstly, conference. Motion F9 was supposed to address @LGBTLD & @libvoice4women calls for a debate on Cass – both groups presented motions for Autumn conf. in 2024 but were told there would be a Spring spokesperson paper. However, F9 did not mention Cass at all

Important bill coming through parliament right now #DataBill where MPs voted last night not to collect accurate data on sex. This goes against the recent #SullivanReview (which @UKLabour sat on for 6 months) and is at odds with the Supreme Court ruling on collecting data. 🧵 One @LibDems MP spoke against amendment NC21 which would have ensured accurate collection of data on sex - showing a fundamental understanding of how digital ID would work. Currently to prove age people hand over a drivers license with name, address and age on for example

The Supreme Court ruling offers a golden bridge to those who were caught up in gender identity politics. It is right to give politicians the opportunity to walk over that bridge, even though many will never admit they were wrong. Some @LibDems are doing that, some not 🧵 Here is @libdemdaisy yesterday. She states she respects the ruling but says that it was a narrow ruling. Those who listened to the judgment know how detailed and holistically the judges opined, from sports to spaces to sexual orientation.

Many people ask why the @LibDems have adopted their extreme positions on trans people, women's rights and childhood transition. As @cajardineMP made clear at #LDConf for many in the conference hall room this issue is personal. 🧵 Most obviously it's personal for the many trans people in the party. Well known trans activists include Helen Belcher, Sarah Brown, Zoe O' Connell and Charley Hasted. Hear some of their speeches here about gender medicine, removing GRC safeguards, removing spousal exit clause.

‘Free to be who you are’ - proposed by @cajardineMP
- Discusses LD LGB history
- Recognises meeting LVW & some of our concerns; we don’t think they've been addressed
- Implies a boy who likes dresses, plays with girls may be trans
- Backs ‘gender affirming care’ amendment 1/ The mover of amendment 3 discusses the benefits of 'gender affirming care' they personally saw. There is no mention of the #CassReview which found the evidence base for these treatments in children with gender distress more generally was weak with emerging evidence of harm. 2/

A new UK you gov poll was released last week about the conflict between trans activists who want access to women's spaces/sports & rights of women. We analysed survey results for @LibDems voters. First question on sports. Overwhelming support for female only sport 🧵(bookmark) Across 4 surveys (from 2018) Lib Dem voters have always supported female only sport and over time those numbers have risen by over 20%. How about access to single-sex spaces? First question is changing rooms. Here we look at 2 questions on this topic (2nd qn introduced in 2020)

It is now 10 months since the publication of the Cass Review and the @LibDems have still not made an official statement about whether they accept it. We submitted a motion to Autumn conference 2024 on this. It wasn’t selected: 🧵 libdemvoice.org/wp-content/upl… Neither was the LGBT+ Lib Dem motion accepted. Note the motion was considered by Equalities – not Health. We believe decisions about the best treatments and care pathways lie with Health. The public rejection reason for both is screenshot here.

It is now 9 months since the publication of the Cass Review and the Lib Dems have still not said if they accept the findings and recommendations. The report from Autumn conference has now been published which asked this direct question, response below 🧵 Lots of words but a failure to directly accept the Cass Review’s findings from Lord’s leader Dick Newby and Chief Whip, @wendychambLD. More diversion and chiding about ‘toxic debate’ and a new term introduced ‘high-quality healthcare.’