Read on Twitter
So, I want to nip something in the bud right now. I've seen it reported that the LD election review is being used to frame Jo as not developing a "vision that is compelling and relevant to ordinary people" but instead appealing to "sectional interests among Lib Dem activists".
We all know what that is code for, right? She looked to minorities too much and not to cis white middle class men who are used to being catered to by politicians. That's what "sectional interests among lib dem activists" means.
So, first things first:
Minorities ARE ordinary people and thus what is compelling and relevant to minorities should not be ignored for the benefit of those who are used to calling the shots. That's the whole damn point of liberalism.
Minorities ARE ordinary people and thus what is compelling and relevant to minorities should not be ignored for the benefit of those who are used to calling the shots. That's the whole damn point of liberalism.
BAME people? They're perfectly ordinary.
Women? As ordinary as it gets.
Disabled folks? Vry ordinary.
And uppitty queers like me?
Can't get more ordinary than me, I've got a Yorkshire accent and everything.
Women? As ordinary as it gets.
Disabled folks? Vry ordinary.
And uppitty queers like me?
Can't get more ordinary than me, I've got a Yorkshire accent and everything.
Next to the idea that she catered to minorities "too much":
Well, it's true that LDCRE got a bit more funding under her. But given that they were a replacement for the dysfunctional and disbanded EMLD I wouldn't read too much into that
Well, it's true that LDCRE got a bit more funding under her. But given that they were a replacement for the dysfunctional and disbanded EMLD I wouldn't read too much into that
The idea that she catered to women too much appears to boil down to the fact that she IS one, which such transparently sexist bullshit I'm not even going to dignify it with much more than a mention.
Disabled folks?
Well, I can't speak for LDDA, but they didn't appear to get any more attention than under other leaders from where I was sitting, and, indeed, I heard complaints in some quarters that there was less.
Well, I can't speak for LDDA, but they didn't appear to get any more attention than under other leaders from where I was sitting, and, indeed, I heard complaints in some quarters that there was less.
So how about us queers?
Well, when someone asked her what party policy was on trans rights she reported it correctly and said she agreed with it.
But she also recruited Phillip Lee, and let half of LGBT+LDs resign rather than not do that.
Well, when someone asked her what party policy was on trans rights she reported it correctly and said she agreed with it.
But she also recruited Phillip Lee, and let half of LGBT+LDs resign rather than not do that.
I don't think ANY of this says she "catered to minorities" too much, and I am extremely angry that when we have 3 cis white men in charge of the party right now (in the shape of our new CEO and our two acting interim co-leaders) that THIS is the take away some people are pushing.
