cross-posted from: https://quokk.au/c/unitedkingdom/p/1159289/greens-suspends-trans-woman-due-to-running-for-a-woman-s-space-on-party-council

https://bsky.app/profile/leftiestats.bsky.social/post/3muwxjieu7k2j

Sorry only news sources reporting this is the Daily Mail and Telegraph, not worth linking to their thoughts on trans women.

Of note is that Eleanora was elected to the spot and backed by 'Greens for Palestine' . 2 Weeks later she is out on transphobic grounds and seems to have her suspension leaked to the Daily Mail potentially by someone in the Greens.

Xitter conversation between Greens Party Council and Eleanora
image

image

image

Greens Party Council member Kai Taylor has put the Greens party into disrepute.

all 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

“accompanying media interest”

Ahh, there it is. Classic “progressives” that are trans inclusive until the second there’s a modicum of pressure.

Wild that just a couple people can just override the rest of the party’s votes like that.

Lol could you imagine if there were delegates who could do that for national elections?

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    This must be Europe, where the Greens are Nazis instead of hippies.

    Yikes.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    The left in general is quite fragmented. There's several topics we care about, and not everyone that identifies as left-wing cares of agrees with all of them. That's why you have lots of people that fight for the climate while being anti-vegan, gay activists that are anti trans, pro-immigration zionists, etc. It's dangerous to assume that "the left" is one monolith.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 79 comments in c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk view that post
    [–] 68 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Zack Polanski just stood on stage at Pride in London and said trans women are women so I will be interested to see his actions on this.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Probably silence like what he is with the anti-Zionists who were purged despite his big talk on Israel.

    Polanski is proving to be a bit of a figure head.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    Polanski is proving to be a bit of a figure head.

    Well yes, that's part of a leader's role.

    Actually leading is another part, but can you blame him for going "I'm not touching that minefield yet."?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Okay... but this person was elected, right...? Does the GPC feel that the people who did the electing were somehow misled?

    This just seems like a real self-mutilation in all respects. The GPC have pissed off everyone that there is to piss off.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    There are several other trans members on the GPC... she didn't get suspended for being trans, she got suspended for breaking party rules on conduct by committee members.

    This is from the (trans) member whose bluesky post is elsewhere in the thread (Kat Bristow) taken from the reddit post I linked

    "TheKatBristow

    There's other trans women currently on GPC, including the other co-chair of LGBTIQA+ Greens, and no action has been taken against any other trans person on GPC.

    So we can safely assume that Eleonora's suspension is unrelated to her being trans."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago*

    It's still sort of ridiculous that they've suspended her and haven't put out a statement as to why. The really should be no scenario under which you can suspend someone without an explanation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 1 month ago

    So we can safely assume that Eleonora’s suspension is unrelated to her being trans.”

    Or we can assume they don't have any support/angles to go after other trans women yet. It seems pretty evident that strong elements of transphobia are at play in this decision via Kai Taylor's involvement.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago*

    You can't safely assume this and I don't know why you would. There is even discrimination amongst trans people. It could be an issue of passing not passing or a million other things. We definitely need more information.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    I will strongly disagree with this statement, as there's a serious allegation against GPC, and no legal justification has been published by the authorities.

    If there's a legal reason with backing evidence, there's no reason not to share why she was dismissed, and public has every right to know this decision, that's exactly why we have the transparency laws.

    Your statement is no different than an assumption where an immigrant claiming they were not discriminated in Germany yet, therefore there's no discrimination against other immigrants.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    FFS.

    How is even the green party transphobic now? I'm actually shocked

    Not only is it incredibly disappointing to find out, it's absolutely going to massacre their support. Most of the TERFs are comfortably voting for the right wing parties, they are never in a million years voting for the greens.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    That's nothing new.

    Scottish Greens suspend ties with Green Party of England and Wales

    The formal association between the parties was suspended over concerns of transphobia

    Members stated that office-bearers of the Green Party of England and Wales had engaged in “transphobic rhetoric and conduct”, and claimed that the independence of the Scottish Greens had been ignored.

    They also underlined the importance of protecting the rights of transgender people to gender affirming healthcare.

    https://news.stv.tv/politics/scottish-greens-suspend-ties-with-green-party-of-england-and-wales

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 29 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    "the party sent me link to a suicide hotline"

    That is the most caring / not-caring bullshit I think I have ever seen. I hope everyone who decided this regrets this the rest of their shit lives. Time to clean up the green!

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago

    Can't we have one nice thing politically. fuck sake

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    This fits into "NotTheOnion" because what the fuck? It sounds like something Reform would do. is this real?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    No it's not real, it's being misrepresented. Eleanora is suspended for reasons nothing to do with her being trans. She's a toxic piece of work who also happens to be trans, and is trying to make that into the reason.

    There are a number of transwomen in various positions in the party, including posts to be filled by women only.

    She was suspended for the comments she made about Iran which were blatantly anti-semitic (anti-zionist is fine, but she well and truly crossed the line).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    She may well be toxic but if that was the main reason she's being removed, they should be up front about it. And not have a very terf seeming man involved in removing her.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    She was suspended (she hasnt yet been removed) because of a media post, not because she is toxic. I explicitly state that two lines below my opinion about her toxicity. Separate items.

    Are you deliberately misreading or just seeing what you expect to see ?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    I think my unwillingness to accept the party explanation is down to 2 factors:

    1. If the problem was bullying, or specific social media posts, or anything reasonable, that should be a perfect defense against transphobia. Unless the posts reveal protected information, there is no reason to hide behind process. The media is already reporting on it, so make this about the content not the candidate.

    2. Unless he's had some dramatic change of heart, Kai is clearly a transphobe or sympathizer at best. If he's running the suspension process, that's one great reason to be skeptical of anything he says.

    I am willing to believe the candidate was difficult but edge cases are where we decide who we are as a society.

    edit: I did see you mention antisemitic posts indirectly, but that's not what I see from the official communication and that is what I was reacting to. I still haven't seen the actual offensive posts in question.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 1 month ago (20 children)
  • [–] [S] 46 points 1 month ago (12 children)

    Please take a look at Kai Taylor, the Greens Party Council member in these discussions.

    image

    He is abusing the definition of transphobia to claim Gender Critical ideology is not transphobia. GC also known as TERF is 100% transphobia.

    That's not enough?

    image

    He is endorsed by MumsNet, one of the most prominent TERF hubs and trans hate communities.

    Oh and don't forget

    image

    Who are Green Women's Declaration? They're the group of transphobes who the Good Law Project is currently defending the Greens party from as of a week ago because they were denied an application to hold a stall at th e Green conference in 2025 because it was felt they made trans members unsafe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -27 points 1 month ago (11 children)

    Gender "critics" aren't the same as TERFs, almost none of them are radical feminists. They're liberal feminists at best, and most of them aren't any kind of feminist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 54 points 1 month ago (10 children)

    TERFs aren’t feminist either.

    Gender Critical is simply the term TERFs use to refer to themselves, even JK Rowling calls herself a GC. It’s the “Pro-Life” to the “Pro-Choice” of abortion, a soft sounding name to help with public perception.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    I think you misunderstand me: Radical Feminism is the belief that patriarchal modes of government are responsible for women's oppression and must be overthrown through revolution. It doesn't inherently exclude trans people, but some radical feminists do, leading to them being labelled TERFs, with non-transphobic radical feminists still just being called radical feminists. Regardless of whether you want to count them among feminists, a prerequisite of being a Trans Exclusive Radical Feminist is that you are a Radical Feminist of some form first.
    JK Rowling, Graham Lineham, and the vast majority of the GC crowd are not radicals. They do not believe there is anything wrong with our current modes of government. They do not believe in revolution. They are not Radicals Feminists, so can't be Trans Exclusive Radical Feminists. They are just bog standard transphobes. GC is the term transphobes use to refer to themselves, it's not limited to TERFs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    This isn't the 80s, the language has evolved. TERF is a catch-all for the 'biological sex' crowd these days.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    No it hasn't, you just want to legitimise their abhorrent views as feminist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Yes a trans woman wants to have terfs seen as feminists, bravo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    If you don't want to legitimise them why have you spent the entire conversation calling them feminists instead of transphobes?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (4 children)

    I have not?

    And the user before me said they’re not feminist either. You are literally the only one arguing that they are actually feminists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    How can I be arguing they're feminists when I keep saying they're not TERFs? You're the one absolutely insistent that they're radical feminists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    You are saying that TERF stands for blah blah blah feninists. That's how you're saying that TERFs are feminists.

    Maybe that's what the term meant to someone in the 80s but it isn't what it means any more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I think it's more that you people refuse to read theory and instead absorb a vibes based idea of feminism from social media before parroting the language with no understanding of its meaning. It still means trans exclusionary radical feminist, you just kept using it without ever learning that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    I think your mistake is trying to hold into a narrow academic definition of a word that means something else in common parlance.

    Kind of like when soil scientist get annoyed when someone calls it "dirt".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Can someone summarise this? I don't visit corposhit media sites.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 month ago*

    “I don’t think it’s because she’s trans, I was discriminated for the same wording as her but I actually think it’s because she’s not nice as she was a bully to me when I worked with her once and she didn’t listen to others ideas and she praised the deaths of Zionists”

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    "I don't think it's because she's trans. I've faced the discrimination she's claiming, but in the years since we've taken the party back and it's generally very pro trans, including other trans people sitting in gendered seats aligning with their genders. Instead it's likely about her hostile behaviors and some statements she's made"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

    thank you!

    e: also thank you to @sourgumgum@lemmy.world for downvoting my "thank you" comment despite the fact that I gave no indication one way or the other what my opinion on the bsky shart was!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Uh it’s more the way you request someone else do the dirty work of summarizing the ‘corposhit’ websites you don’t want to visit.

    This isn’t a chat bot. Install whatever blockers you prefer or use reader mode on mobile. It’s not hard.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] -4 points 1 month ago*

    Well you only replied to one explanation and ignored the other, so it does look like you had an opinion

    Also complaining about downvotes?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 1 month ago (14 children)

    I can't believe anyone believes what the right wing media write about a left wing party, but be that as it may, Eleanora wasn't suspended because she was trans, she was suspended because she made comments on social media likely to bring the Greens into disrepute while holding an official post (ordinary members can say what they like, representatives of the party can't). The party is investigating those comments to see what disciplinary action should be taken and her role is suspended while that happens.

    The comments in question were blatantly anti-semitic (as opposed to anti-zionist which I have no problem with) in my opinion, and I doubt she'll be allowed to retain the post. I'm sure everyone on here understand the difference ? The Daily Mail certainly doesn't though.

    This reddit thread has more details from Greens party members

    https://www.reddit.com/r/UKGreens/comments/1w7g74w/stats_4_lefties_suspended_according_to_the_daily/

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    This reddit thread has more details from Greens party members

    No it doesn't? Is there any particular comment you're talking about here? Because I see nothing that indicates that she said anything antisemitic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    Once again, precisely zero hard evidence

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Zero hard evidence on either side, though. She says she was suspended due to transphobia but provides no evidence that this was the case. There are plenty of Green trans councillors that haven't been suspended, so what's going on?

    I would not be inclined to pick sides here until the truth actually comes out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (6 children)

    What evidence are you looking for ? I've stated the Greens have made no formal statement on it - because that's the process when someone is suspended and their conduct is being reviewed - unlike the Mail I don't just make shit up to make the readers happy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)
  • [+] -6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Comments like this are exactly the kind of bullshit populists use to ruin any chance of nuanced interesting conversation.

    “I’m here to attack and share nothing back. I’m angry, and everyone else can do the work of proving me wrong.”

    It’s the classic low-effort provocation, followed by moving the goalposts when someone actually engages.

    Sorry. Not meaning to insult you personally (although god knows it'd cheer me up a little if I have pissed you off)

    Maybe try engaging in the discussion instead of using 4 word posts to "call people out".

    There’s a chance there's some nuance out there. Who knows, try more and you might bump into it.

    Or just keep firing off four-word replies and outsourcing the interesting part to everyone else. Whatevs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago

    Fucking hell. I need TERF Island to burn already. Fuck this transphobic piece of shit party.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    not much of a quorum with just 13 of 36

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    If she did not get suspended due to being trans but yet now doing this in an attempt to damage the reputation of the Green party, then she is an incredibly selfish person. This, especially considering the UK is literally fighting against a looming Trump style fascism.

    But at this point it seems not possible to understand whether if she was or not and we have to wait for the Green party to release some evidence regarding this or exonerate her and investigate other people who got her suspended.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    why do you immediately assume that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    Not immediately, after seeing the announcement from Greens LGBTQIA+ and that learning there are trans women in roles reserved for women in Greens and seeing some other comments from trans members of Green. Infact initially when I first read it my opinion was much more towards believing her.

    In any case none of the above proves this didn't happen due to transphobia. There could still be a group of people in Greens who are transphobic and acted on their own initiative and lied about her behaviour to get her suspended. Still does not mean she was suspended because of a party policy against trans woman in woman only roles. It means there are lying transphobic pieces of shit in the party that needs to be rooted out.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Dunno what's responsible, but I couldn't open this directly - nothing happened, presumably due to the tinyurl link. Put it through my URL cleaner app and wound up at the following address after a few redirects:

    https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc3P4qztIM239PhfrKn4tgFj-q2yQ590m8HilqlE7LJUVnPIw/viewform?usp=send_form

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Oh good, google, nothing wrong with their support for the green party and they'd never mess with politics(!)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Whilst I'm a trans ally, I am a little sceptical on this one. I'm going to wait for the official response from the Green Party on this one before judging. So far we have seen no proof of any of this.

    The lady in question is a bit of a bit of an inflammatory individual from the little I've seen from her socials.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago* (2 children)

    The discussion above implies that there may not be a party response due to "confidentiality" which seems odd when the party has defamed someone. I'd expect the ejectee would waive confidentiality.

    Is there a politician that isn't inflammatory to someone?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    Defamation requires some degree of lying to damage someones reputation, so this is not defamation.

    Technically they suspended them for being elected and for the subsequent media interest, per their own words. Both of those things factually occurred. “Brought the party into disrepute” is a flimsy enough statement that it could hold as being a true belief regardless of circumstances, its not something that can be factually identified as a lie.

    There is much that could be said about how fucked up what they’ve done is, but its also not defamation

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Yeah, seeing more info, I've got my doubts about her story, especially considering another trans member of the party is calling bs

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago

    I’ve got my doubts on that other trans women when she provides nothing beyond an anecdotal unrelated story and the person involved in kicking her out is extremely transphobic and backed by other transphobes.

  • source
  • parent
  • @TRAHR Who is bringing the Green Party into disrepute here?

  • source
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago

    Green is the color of sickness

  • source
  • 6 comments in c/transgender@lemmy.blahaj.zone view that post
    [–] 27 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Damn dropped the suicide hotline in the suspension email!? That went from fucked up and cold, to just inexcusable and brutal. Wow

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)
  • Trans people can be transphobic. Remember, the only requirement to be trans is to say you're trans. You can't assume anything about anyone's life experience simply because they self-identify as trans. It's completely possible to be a literal TERF and identify as trans. It would be gatekeeping to tell a TERF they can't be trans. It's possible to strongly identify with your birth sex, desire to participate in activities and spaces reserved for your birth sex, and view it inappropriate for people of the opposite birth sex to be allowed in the spaces of your birth sex, and still be trans. We put no filter on actions, lived experiences, or beliefs to be trans.

    We don't gatekeep trans identities. But the corollary is that you can't imagine the classic trans narrative and assume that applies to everyone. Someone can still be trans if they do none of the traditional "trans stuff." You can have zero intention of getting on HRT or other medical stuff, have zero desire to alter your appearance and how you move about the world. It's possible to live a life completely indistinguishable from a cis person and still count as trans. We've chosen this definition because we don't want to push anyone away.

    But the consequence of this is that the trans community has no shared experiences. Someone can self-identify as trans, and then live in a way that puts them at zero risk for discrimination or mistreatment. Someone can self-identify as trans while having zero shared material needs with the broader trans community.

    You cannot assume anything about the way a person lives simply because they use the word "trans" to identify themselves. You cannot assume they've shared the same struggles as you have. You cannot assume they've been subject to discrimination like you have. It's perfectly valid to be trans while living a life completely indistinguishable in every material way from a cis person. It's probably best we keep this expansive definition of transness, as it's hard to write requirements in place without shutting people out.

    But the corollary of no gate keeping is just that - no gatekeeping. Someone could have had absolutely none of the experiences that most trans people experience and still count as trans. The downside of there being no requirements to being trans is that in turn we have no shared experiences. As such, the fact that a person who self-identifies as trans is the one saying something is irrelevant. You can't assume anything about their lived experience.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Why are you pushing a 'believing the daily mail' angle, this is not the Daily Mail and I specifically did not include them in the original story. This is the direct words of the trans woman affected by this.

    Also the person on the board who oversaw her removal is supported by transphobic groups and has promoted transphobic talking points.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Do you have more sources of this story?

  • source