Baroness Nicholson on twitter

(581 Posts)
Winesalot Fri 01-May-20 23:27:12

I have been lurking on twitter lately and noticed Baroness Nicholson has been very active recently. Amongst her tweets are quite a few gems - letters to Liz Truss, tweets asking for evidence about Stonewall’s involvement CPS guidance just to name two.

This tweet I found very encouraging too.

It is imperative to restore the rights of women.I foresee a single issue, cluster approach;we make a new Women’s Rights movement lasting one year,solely to rescue womanhood from its destruction through today’s legal and social denial of our existence.Emma,BNoW

She has today written to Liz Truss again but this time with her concerns about the gross misinterpretation of the ECHR in the trans toolkits used in schools and recommends that such toolkits are removed from use now. Such support is great news.

I will try to post the letter for those not on twitter.

I look forward to seeing what what happens next.

OP’s posts: |
Winesalot Fri 01-May-20 23:34:03

Copy of her letter to Liz Truss today.

OP’s posts: |
truthisarevolutionaryact Fri 01-May-20 23:54:34

Excellent. It's great that she is calling out these repeated false claims about legislation.
Adult groups repeatedly trying to place children in conflict with their parents need shutting down - not being funded and fawned over by the government and other agencies.

Winesalot Fri 01-May-20 23:56:33

Her thread is really fascinating at the moment. Her interest in what has been happening has been ‘piqued’ .😀

OP’s posts: |
Fallingirl Fri 01-May-20 23:59:50

It is interesting that she talks about “toolkits”; in plural.
It sounds like she is gunning for all of them.

Hopefully she is someone who will be listened to.

Datun Sat 02-May-20 00:01:48

I predict that her interest will ignite in a spectacular conflagration from the reaction she'll get.

Winesalot Sat 02-May-20 00:23:08

She is answering many tweets. People are tweeting her lots of information (she is interested in reading Dr Em’s uncommonmedia series). She is encouraging people to do things like follow up information requests and ask the difficult questions they have put off. She is pointing out the conflicts of interest in inviting in such a strong lobby group without a balancing view.

I am so hopeful that her clear letters, the GEO logo having to be removed and Liz Truss’ announcement might start to dismantle the hold stonewall has gained. It has to be damaging to their reputation to say in the least. What borough, government department or education provider is going to trust them near their guidelines again?

OP’s posts: |
Oldstyle Sat 02-May-20 00:25:14

She's on a roll. And it certainly looks as if Liz Truss is listening AND acting decisively. It's cheering stuff at last...

Lordfrontpaw Sat 02-May-20 00:26:29

The green crayon brigade (or whatever the current equivalent is) is out on twitter, so MPs will be getting tear-sodden missives of woe no doubt.

AnyOldPrion Sat 02-May-20 00:30:41

I predict that her interest will ignite in a spectacular conflagration from the reaction she'll get.

She’s moving the Overton window with her utterly clear, objective statements.

Aesopfable Sat 02-May-20 00:38:29

Was/is she a lawyer? Her letters seem to suggest so.

littlbrowndog Sat 02-May-20 00:41:18

She is fuckinfv awesome

Winesalot Sat 02-May-20 01:06:12

I like her ‘call to arms’ to restore rights. I thought it might a take longer than a year though grin

If I were on twitter, I’d also point her to demand answers as to why the Olympic committee is dilly dallying over male bodied people competing against women.

I could be wrong, but I thought she wrote to the minister about Rory Stewart’s claim recently?

OP’s posts: |
nettie434 Sat 02-May-20 01:13:21

Was/is she a lawyer? Her letters seem to suggest so.

She was an MP for many years Aesopfable, and then an MEP. I have always liked her but until this I had assumed she had retired or was certainly less active politically.

GCAcademic Sat 02-May-20 01:22:00

Her interest in what has been happening has been ‘piqued’ .😀

She’s been aware of these issues for some time. She hosted a WPUK meeting in the House of Lords in 2018 and then facilitated a submission to the GRA consultation from a group of academics opposed to self-ID.

MrsSnippyPants Sat 02-May-20 06:43:51

She also spoke in the Lords (the Lucas debate) about single sex wards in the NHS etc. She isn’t new to the debate by any means but like many of us she has realised exactly how far the tentacles of this ideology have spread and has said ‘enough, this must stop’.

She has access most of us could only dream of, and I think some civil servants are feeling quite relieved that she is unable to corner them in their offices just now.

She has also said she believes ‘full surgery and hormone treatment’ should give some men the status of some sort of honorary womanhood (not her exact words but I can’t see Twitter at the moment) so she isn’t perhaps quite all the way there, but as many people politely pointed out to her, many women were at a similar stage once but quickly realised it was ‘problematic’ and gave themselves a talking to smile.

DickKerrLadies Sat 02-May-20 07:54:00

many women were at a similar stage once but quickly realised it was ‘problematic’ and gave themselves a talking to

And here we are now!

MockersxxxxxxxSocialDistancing Sat 02-May-20 08:15:14

Emma Nicholson was a computer systems analyst before becoming a Conservative MP. She defected to the Libs. She is deaf.

JellyfishandShells Sat 02-May-20 08:24:13

She has a really impressive record on human rights, knows her way around the process of legislation and is absolutely dogged when pursuing a subject. Excellent that she has become involved.

Forgivenandsetfree Sat 02-May-20 08:27:24

@DickKerrLadies and @MrsSnippyPants I'm quite new to all this (but very enthusiastic!) Could you explain to me why the 'honorary womanhood' isn't a good idea?
I agree full woman is a ridiculous notion 'adult female' is a woman full stop in my eyes...

DickKerrLadies Sat 02-May-20 08:35:01

Hi Forgiven

Personally, I don't like the idea that if a male is not deemed sufficiently manly enough by society that we're perfectly happy to put him into the category 'woman', as if women are just non-men. Men have been calling each other girls as insults for generations - run/jump/cry like a girl.

Also, I do not understand what it means to identify as a woman. The only times I have ever felt 'like a woman' in anyway have involved actual biological functions such as pregnancy and breastfeeding. I don't see how any male can become an 'honorary woman' in that way.

Quillink Sat 02-May-20 08:39:32

Forgivenandsetfree (nice username) 'Honorary womanhood' is a bad idea IMO because:

It's sexist. Performing sexist stereotypes does not make a man a woman. It's perfectly fine to be a feminine man.

Blurs boundaries, slippery slope

Womanhood' isn't ours to give away. Some women will never consent to males in female spaces. Their 'no' is a deal-breaker

Sicario Sat 02-May-20 08:45:12

I totally love Baroness N. She is very much invested in the breeching of women's hard-won sex-based rights. She invited women to come and speak to her in the HoL last year about the importance of single-sex wards when Stonewall effectively rewrote NHS guidelines and started "retraining" local heath authorities.

Baroness N has now seen with her own eyes how the law is being misrepresented and she is determined to reassert the ACTUAL LAW. In her endeavours, she is now beginning to realise just how deep this rabbit hole goes.

Sicario Sat 02-May-20 08:48:13

Personally I find it very hard to understand how the likes of Stonewall and Mermaids have not been shut down by the Charity Commission.

The activities of both these charities - and others - is in direct contradiction of Charity Commission rules. Specifically, from their website...

*Complain to the Charity Commission if a charity is, for example:
harming people
involved in illegal activity*

Stonewall, Mermaids et al are directly involved in harming children and deliberately misrepresenting the law.

AnyOldPrion Sat 02-May-20 09:38:54

Blurs boundaries, slippery slope

This. The huge problem with the argument that some men should be legally counted as women, based on how much how much effort they’ve gone to, has been clearly demonstrated in recent years.

The ability to legally change sex was granted officially to alleviate problems relating to other restrictions, such as same-sex marriage and sex differences in retirement ages. Those have since been removed.

I suspect that many women refrained from objecting, largely out of sympathy for a group who claimed deep levels of suffering.

But this sympathetic understanding has been continually abused in recent years. It has allowed activists to argue that women have had male bodies in their spaces for years without problems or objections. It has allowed activists to argue that some men are already women, so stopping other men from being women is a removal of rights.

So when we are faced with people in a privileged position (having the legal right to change sex is not a human right, it’s a special dispensation) who have allowed their privilege to be used over and over as a wedge, the answer has to be to remove that privilege.

There are a few transexuals who have objected to the extremists agenda, but equally there are those such as Burns, Whittle and Morton, who have been central to the campaign to remove women’s rights.

The GRA should be repealed (with a grandfather clause for those who have already made legal changes). Creating the legal fiction that anyone can change sex is not an appropriate response. Trans people should be protected from discrimination, but we cannot do that by continuing with the pretence that anyone can change sex as we have seen the very clear signs of where blurring that line leads.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in