r/LibDem • u/[deleted] • 4d ago
News Lib Dem Suspended over Pro-Trans Tweet
https://archive.ph/azDFg39
u/stewcelliott Social Liberal 4d ago
Bird's views are repellent but it's pretty easy to see how that tweet is not appropriate. Frankly it's probably the inclusion of the gun that made this a suspending matter.
7
-29
u/CarMeltScratch 4d ago
In what way repellant? As far as I can tell, Natalie Bird believes humans can't change sex, a view that isn't controversial among the electorate, and is scientific fact.
She has been targeted, vilified and harassed and the party has had to compensate her. Plus and ALDC, together with the weird, legally illiterate 'definition of transphobia' have done the Lib Dems a lot of damage with the public. This is another stupid, unnecessary blemish on our - hardly stellar - record.
23
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
It's interesting how the people spreading this "scientific fact" are usually scientifically illiterate, and how actual scientists reject it outright.
-4
4d ago
What’s not scientifically factual?
12
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
The view that sex is perfectly binary and non-changing. This is objectively false.
-5
4d ago
Ill preface this with me asking questions largely out of unintentional ignorance.
Is there an example of a person changing sex, genetically, hormonally and physically without outside intervention?
Whilst I do understand there are foetal development issues that can cause genetic defects causing persons who could be defined as "inter-sexed" (if thats the correct term).
7
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
Is there an example of a person changing sex, genetically, hormonally and physically without outside intervention?
Yes. Individuals with 5-alpha-reductase deficiency (5-ARD) are born as typical females but at puberty begin developing XY chromosomes and prototypically male characteristics.
And yes, "intersex" is the correct term for anyone born outside of the male-female bimodal clusters.
-3
4d ago
I dont believe thats the strongest of cases as it's a very rare genetic condition....with a higher chance of this occurring during interbreeding or populations with close genetic similarities.
Those born with XY chromosomes do have male reproductive parts. Testes etc, however are un-developed due to the condition.
This is not an example of a person changing sex, genetically, hormonally or physically.
12
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
Thanks for making my point that the people spreading "basic biology" don't understand basic biology.
0
10
u/Mr_Rinn 4d ago
If your views on any minority group align with the far-right then that’s a huge red flag. Trans people aren’t your enemy, or the enemy of women.
1
3d ago
You mean if our views align with the consensus view of the west for like the last 2000 years until recently? That's far-right now? Crikey.
1
u/Mr_Rinn 3d ago
Not sure I understand your point, for the last 2000+ years misogyny and treating women like 2nd class citizens was the consensus, now it's generally a far-right view.
0
3d ago
misogyny has overwhelming opposition. This issue is much more split. We can't say almost half the country are transphobic or far-right.
1
u/Mr_Rinn 3d ago
Why not? We also don't know it's that high.
From what I've seen most of the Terf marches have pretty low attendance for instance.
0
3d ago
Well it's certainly a significant number on many different trans-related topics.
1
u/Mr_Rinn 3d ago
Okay, but that leads me back to: Why not?
How well is uncritically grovelling to bigots working out for Starmer?
2
3d ago
Why shouldn't we call a significant number of the voters far-right or transphobic?
Well, for starters, it puts off voters which is not a way to win anybody over. So we could start there.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/LeChevalierMal-Fait The Last Cameroon 3d ago
I agree, now did you know Hitler was a vegetarian and loved german shepards careful if you see any veggies or dog lovers now
7
u/ThwMinto01 Rawlsian Liberal 4d ago
It is against the councilor code of conduct
He posted an image of an anime girl pointing a gun at the reader 😭 I fully agree with the message and find it pretty funny, but at the same time it's pretty obvious why sitting councillors* shouldn't be posting an image like that on their main account
-3
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
Don't care, if firing a transphobe for expressing a transphobic view violates Equality Act 2010 then firing a pro-trans counsellor for expressing pro-trans views also violates Equality Act 2010. You don't get to have it both ways. I hope he sues your party.
11
u/Doctor_Fegg Continuity Kennedy Tendency 4d ago
They aren't "firing a pro-trans councillor for expressing pro-trans views", they're suspending him for tweeting a threat of violence.
I mean, personally I think Graham Linehan should be fired straight into the sun, but I'm not a councillor and no elected official, of any party, should tweet threatening images.
(Also, a "counsellor" and a "councillor" are quite different things.)
1
u/ThwMinto01 Rawlsian Liberal 4d ago
We lost the lawsuit, we had to pay Natalie Bird compensation. It is also fact (it's an absurdity and terrible ruling but is fact) that since Maya Forstater UK courts have said "gender critical" (transphobic) views are legally protected under the EA2010
This isn't the same scenario as it isn't for the view, it's for the inclusion of the gun which I don't think it's shocking
Professional politicians should probably realise posting an image with a gun isn't a good idea on their main account.
I don't disagree with the sentiment at all in his post, but it's also a very stupid thing to include a gun in your post
0
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
NO. THEY. ARENT. 🤦🏻♀️
See my other comment explaining why, I'm not repeating myself .
20
u/CalF123 4d ago
No elected politician should be sending gun imagery to people who disagree with them. We would rightly be angry if a Reform councillor did this.
It is the natural consequence of seeing political opponents as sub-human rather than simply individuals who disagree with them about a particular issue. We should be above it.
5
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
You don't get to "disagree" over which other humans get which rights. Human rights are non-negotiable.
19
u/Mr_Rinn 4d ago
Yes, but showing support like an idiot just feeds into the tranphobe's victim narratives.
2
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
You can't reason with someone who wants you dead.
7
u/Mr_Rinn 4d ago
Not usually, but their rhetoric is going to be more effective towards the wider public the more evidence they have of "violent TRAs".
0
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
I'm angry, justifiably so. Now isn't the time to tone-police. Liberals aren't meant to lick the boot, and here you are deep-throating it.
7
u/Mr_Rinn 4d ago
No if I was deepthroating it I’d be doing what Starmer is doing. And yeah, it is the time for tone-police, the damn Terfs have the backing of the media and political establishment who will gladly jump at any chance to make you look like a violent misogynist.
-1
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
who will gladly jump at any chance to make you look like a violent misogynist.
They're going to do that anyway. If I get a job, exist in public, or go take a shit, I'm "a threat to women and children".
The argument is OVER. People who have already been indoctrinated into JK Rowling's cult are too far gone but they're mostly Boomers and Gen X who so give them a few decades and most of them will be gone and those who are left will be in too small numbers to do anything.
In the meantime, we've already got a far-right Tory occupying the Labour Party and the next government is going to be either Cyan Nazis or Red Nazis.
The government is, literally, committing a genocide against my community. I'm allowed to be angry about that. Fuck you and fuck everyone else with trans blood on their hands.
5
u/CalF123 4d ago
Good luck convincing people with that approach
1
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
I don't need to convince anyone that I have rights. I have them, and I will defend them with whatever means are necessary, whether you agree or not.
5
u/theendisloading_uk 4d ago
Regardless of my own opinions on Natalie Bird (I can't stand her) this just isn't acceptable for someone to post, let alone from an elected councillor. It's not productive in the slightest and only further inflames tensions.
We have to be better than this.
3
4d ago
A few things disappointing here, the fact this was sent directly towards Natalie Bird, so an obvious attack on her views.
However, also, the whole arresting/taking action on people over tweets I have never felt comfortable with and verges on totalitarianism.....
18
u/Mr_Rinn 4d ago
Linehan was inciting people to attack women they think are trans if they see them using a ladies toilet. That’s a bit more than just a tweet.
I’m assuming you’re referring to him at least partially.
4
4d ago
From what I understand its based on the following tweets
April 20, 2025 (approx.) One post read: “if a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.”
Another post featured a photo of protesters likely holding transgender/LGBT+ Pride flags, with his comment: “A photo you can smell.”
A reply to that photo, saying: “I hate them. Misogynists and homophobes. F*** em.”
Rightly or wrongly, I dont use X so the full story has probably bypassed me.
4
u/Mr_Rinn 4d ago
I used to use it pre-Elon and paid attention to the anti-trans movement there, and I honestly think Graham Linehan has lost his mind. He's made going after trans people his entire life and has done for years, to the point that he's completely neglected his personal and professional life and driven his own family away.
3
4d ago
I can see how it's easy to get so engrossed on such a subject it can pretty much devour you.....it's easy to fall down that particular online rabbit hole.
-7
u/Aggravating-Gap4897 4d ago
Where do you get the idea GL was advocating attacking women? He said if a man was in a female only space and was abusive, call the cops and if all else failed punch him in the balls. Advise as old as time.
5
u/Mr_Rinn 4d ago
When he says man he means a trans woman, and that kind of mindset also isn't just a danger to trans women, women who aren't trans have also been attacked by men who've mistaken them for being trans in the past.
And I got this from the fact that over the past 7 years he's increasingly made transphobia his entire life at the expense of even his professional and family life. I strongly suspect the man is mentally unwell.
8
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
Linehan is accused of harassing someone repeatedly, doxing them, and causing £300+ worth of damage to their phone. It's extremely disingenuous to frame this as him being arrested "over tweets", you may as well accuse the 911 bombers of "violating airplane etiquette". Like yes, they did technically also do that... 🤦🏻♀️
2
1
u/Aggravating-Gap4897 4d ago
That’s the charge he’s currently in court for. His arrest at Heathrow was for a different offence.
2
3d ago
Pro-trans tweet? It was an awful tweet. Aren't the lib dems supposed to be the sensible party rather than the party of nasty attacks?
I don't think she's said anything that nasty to anyone herself as far as I can tell, so why the attacks on her?
If you don't like what Natalie Bird believes, then vote against her when you have the chance. But to descend into attacks like this seems sad. The party were right to suspend this person.
Oh, and yes I'm a 0 day old account. Just stating it clearly so you don't have to tell us. No need to farm upvotes now I've let everyone know how old it is.
0
3d ago
I know she was suspended from the Parry for wearing a tshirt saying “women: adult human female”.
And being bullied and harnessed and labeled a terf for safes spaces for vulnerable women.
She rightly won damages for her expulsion.
Like you, I would have hoped a Lib Dem would be above this “radical” vitriol and would be calmer and more sensible on the matter.
3
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 3d ago
TERFs made up the term "TERFs" to describe themselves. TERF stands for "trans exclusionary radical feminist" but there's nothing radical or feminist about transphobia. It's not an insult or in any way "bullying", it's a euphemism used by bigots to hide their bigotry behind acronyms.
0
3d ago
And when people hold up signs or send pictures of “Kill the terfs” or shoot the terfs? 🤷♂️
1
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 3d ago
TERF still isn't a slur, it's a term bigots use to describe themselves.
If someone held up a sign saying "Kill the trans people" does that mean anyone who calls me "trans" is using a slur and bullying and harassing me?
1
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
I hope he sues the party and wins. If transphobic views can't justify being dismissed from the party then neither can pro-trans views.
15
u/ThwMinto01 Rawlsian Liberal 4d ago
The issue is that he posted an image with a gun, I imagine that's the issue and not the message
Posting a meme which is implying you will shoot the other person (however clearly sarcastic it is) isn't appropriate will be the reasoning I expect
1
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
"I want to deny you access to healthcare, toilets, and other basic civil rights"
"Fuck you here's a picture of an anime girl with a gun"
The British government is literally committing a genocide against the trans community. The euphemisms and bad faith being used to back that decision up are actually violent, much more so than an image ironically implying violence.
The Liberal Democrats' website falsely asserts that transphobic views are protected by Equality Act 2010. They're wrong about that, but the incorrect argument which made them think that ought just as well to protect pro-trans shitposts too.
8
u/ThwMinto01 Rawlsian Liberal 4d ago
I don't disagree with any of that, I still don't think it's shocking that posting images of an anime girl with a gun goes against the councilors code of conduct
Also they are not wrong about that, the Maya Forstater ruling said they were no? I fully agree that it is a terrible ruling and that they shouldn't be illegal, but under the current law that isn't a false assertion. Its insanity that "gender critical" (transphobic) views have so much legal protection, and I hate that
But here the issue isn't the expression of the view, it's specifically again the inclusion of a gun which violates the councillors code of conduct I imagine. I don't tink it's really surprising imagery like that wouldn't be allowed
For the record again though, I don't disagree about your claims on the UK govts attacks on trans people, nor am I claiming the LDs have a perfect record on this (we dont). I'm just pointing out that I think this would be an issue whatever the view expressed for LD councillors, given the imagery of a gun
2
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
the Maya Forstater ruling said they were no?
NO! The Forstater ruling established that firing someone without following the party's proper disciplinary process because of their views violates EA10. The views themselves are not special and above scrutiny, you just have to follow the proper disciplinary process first.
The ruling also doesn't say anything special about "gender critical views" at all. It establishes that ANY belief can constitue a "religion or belief" for the purposes of EA10 if it is held in as high esteem as a religious believer holds their religious beliefs.
Also if the Liberal Democrats weren't spineless cowards they'd have appealed that ruling up to the Supreme Court. The idea that SCOTUK would rule that a political party "discriminating" against their members over their political views is somehow not a "proportionate means to a legitimate ends" is frankly laughable.
Someone at the top of the party wanted to give transphobes money, because they agree with them. That's what this is really about.
1
u/theendisloading_uk 3d ago
Not in the slightest. The party got very good legal advice that we would not win that case. Where we to take it to SCOTUK we would have no only lost, but had to pay even MORE money. Gender Critical views are protected under the EA. That's the law whether we like it or not.
We also didn't follow our own processes when removing her, so would have failed on that step anyway.
-1
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 3d ago
No, the "very good legal advice" was that it's cheaper to pay these people off than to have to deal with them. Who cares about civil rights when you can save a bit of money, right?
"Gender critical views" are NOT specifically protected under EA10, see my other comment explaining why.
1
u/theendisloading_uk 3d ago
The very good legal advice told us if we fight this, we will lose. Fighting a doomed case helps no one.
Yes I have read your comment, and I'm sorry, but you are wrong. The judgment explicitly stated that gender critical views pass the Grainger criteria and so would fall under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. This does not mean gender critical views are always protected, i.e Mackereth, but it does mean they will be protected if they avoid harassment or threats.
I'm not saying I agree with it, that's just the law whether we like it or not. If we break it we will end up being taken to court, and losing. Again, and again, and again. All that will do is give them even more money they can use to take legal cases against us and hurt the cause for trans rights.
0
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 3d ago
The judgment explicitly stated that gender critical views pass the Grainger criteria
NO! Such views can pass Grainger and constitute a "religion or belief" for the purposes of EA10 IF THEY ARE HELD IN AS HIGH ESTEEM AS A RELIGIOUS BELIEVER HOLDS THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. This is true of pretty much any belief, but there's nothing special about "gender critical views" here and such views are not protected by EA10 if held casually.
It is entirely false to claim that "gender critical views" are specifically protected by law. They have no more, and no less, protection than any other kind of bigotry. Our community is already in a fight for our survival, I don't need Bootlicking Becky to misrepresent EA10 and defend the Liberal Democrats' explicit participation in transphobia.
1
1
u/aeryntano 3d ago
It is an unfortunate reality that the Government, the courts, and the media, are all anti-trans. Tweets like that, however obviously sarcastic and flippant, will always be taken hyperbolically by them because they seek to discredit us. The more they're able to point to, the more silly flippant nonsense they're able to stoke into controversy, the more people will side with them.
This doesn't mean not being resolutely and firmly on trans peoples side, it just means that our public officials should avoid putting out imagery/statements that will very obviously be used to discredit us. We all know its not serious, but JK will take that picture to her cult, say "they want women to shut up or they'll shoot us" and her cult will froth at the opportunity to let it victimise them even more. (I think one way of combatting this hyperbole is to make light of it, mock them for taking it so seriously, never underestimate how much ground you can gain with people if you can make them laugh)
The game is rigged against us, we must find ways of beating them at it. That means serious top-to-bottom organisation on how to resist the Government's legislative prejudice and how to advance cultural sentiment towards trans people- pictures like the one posted will do neither and only cause more entrenched division which ultimately will do more harm to trans people in the long run.
1
3d ago
The problem I feel is within your text. Us vs Them, is why we will all lose this one
You demonise JK Rowling and call people who agree with what she says “a cult”. Language like that is at the route of the problem in a way, as a lot of discussions are what feel based what semantics and definitions. Thee is a better way than calling each other cultists, transphobes or terfs surely 🤷♂️
1
u/aeryntano 3d ago
You demonise JK Rowling
I don't demonise her, i correctly state what she does and what she has done for years now: which is take things out of context, and quite frankly out of reality, and use hyperbole to discredit trans people and their allies while simultaneously creating a victim narrative for herself and other transphobes.
call people who agree with what she says “a cult”
Her followers believe her every word, they reject scientific reality and embrace pseudo-science, they are unusually and religiously committed to gender critical beliefs, and they launch attacks on trans people and they invoke her name while doing so, what else would you call that if not a cult?
Thee is a better way than calling each other cultists, transphobes or terfs surely
Interesting you pick 3 terms which are all used to describe anti-trans people and yet propose that we stop calling "each other" names... TERF is an acronym: trans-exlusionary radical feminist, the words mean something and they are correctly applied in this case. Transphobic: someone who holds an illogical prejudice against transgender people. Cultists: See above^
If someone is sexist, we call them out for being sexist. If someone is racist, we call them out for being racist. Same for misogynist, homophobic, etc etc. Why must it be different for transphobes?
1
-8
u/DaisyUnchained23 4d ago
Oh look, "the best party on trans rights" are being dicks to trans people again!
13
u/CalF123 4d ago
No councillor should be sending gun images to their opponents in relation to any issue.
-2
u/DaisyUnchained23 4d ago
No one should be trying to take away my civil rights either but here we fucking are.
1
u/LeChevalierMal-Fait The Last Cameroon 3d ago
loony you think having some basic standards of decency in public discourse mean being "dicks to trans people"
quite honest violent trans activists harm your cause and (probably) unreasonably build into public fears of violent trans people in womens spaces / prisons etc
5
u/theendisloading_uk 4d ago
Trans rights do not include the right to send gun threats to people. This guy isn't even trans afaik.
1
-1
u/DaisyUnchained23 4d ago
Transphobes rights do not include the right to constantly abuse trans people and remove their fundamental human rights like access to medical care, yet here we are.
3
u/theendisloading_uk 3d ago
That doesn't change the fact that people don't have the right to send gun threats to people.
1
-2
u/VerbingNoun413 4d ago
Try to keep my membership challenge (impossible)
-6
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
Yeah don't. The Liberal Democrats have been on the wrong side of this for a while now... Greens are the best of a bad bunch. Corbyn-Sultana might turn out okay if they kick out that one Tory they've got for some reason.
7
u/ThwMinto01 Rawlsian Liberal 4d ago
Wait, so you dislike the LibDems for this but also don't oppose Your Party given the statements Adnan Hussain has made ("They're not biologically women, hence trans-women" among other statements)? Or the Greens, given the election of their deputy leader who has said challenging what Adnan Hussain said amounted too pointless purity testing of the left ("︀︀It's no different than some left-wing factions insisting that Greens are not left wing enough in our DNA. It's time to put purity testing to one side and pick an actual side.")
I can understand being suspicious towards the libdems even though I disagree, but I am confused at how you can then conclude the Greens or Your Party are better - every party in England has flaws in this area (only really the Scottish Greens have any room to claim a highground on this issue) and while I think the LDs and Greens are about on par (especially given the election of Zack, who is explicitly pro-LGBTQIA+), I cant see how YP can somehow be seen as positive on this if they don't crack down on Adnan Hussain
-2
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
...did you read my comment? Including the last sentence?
3
u/ThwMinto01 Rawlsian Liberal 4d ago
yes, I was assuming you were referring to the Maya Forstater case as you explained your view twice on that and said you didn't plan on explaining it again (im going to look more deeply into the ruling as what I said was my understanding of it from what I had been told, if I am incorrect in that interpretation then I apologise)
4
u/theendisloading_uk 4d ago
You cannot seriously expect a party to stand by and defend people sending gun threats.
-3
u/TangoJavaTJ No votes for transphobes! 🏳️⚧️ 4d ago
Look Rebecca, I get that you're 22 and basically never leave London but there's a big difference between an actual gun threat and a shitpost. Maybe go touch grass if you can find some? 🤷🏻♀️
0
u/theendisloading_uk 3d ago
I leave London most months actually to go to the West Country. Whether the threat is actual or not doesn't change the fact our elected representatives have to be held to a higher standard than the rest of us.
39
u/Anonymouscoward76 4d ago
People stop posting Telegraph bait challenge