Suella Braverman a disgrace to humanity

There’s always someone who thinks the same in reverse. Idk why people ramp up rhetoric so much.

How very tribal. I've watched the green party being cuckooed by antisemites and the general concensus has been, leave the party and start a new one, don't fight back. The extremists represent a very small minority but somehow the huge numbers of party members are helpless to resist them. That's the power of activism vs pacifism. It's what started the labour party, but it's not what the labour party is now.
39% turnout at the Holborn by-election. Hope it's a true reflection of what that constituency desires, because if they didn't vote they can't moan.
Now if a vote with a large turnout was ignored or overturned by parliament, you might wonder if your voice was actually being listened to by those elected to represent you, but that would never happen here, we're a democracy.

You are contradicting yourself though.

I dug up the article I read in the summer on this matter. Here you go, as it presents the different sides.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3626n0lgj3o

Anyway, this is one person’s perspective but based on a poll:
“Katwala says that around 90% of people believe that if you are born in England, identify as English and are brought up in England then you are seen as English.
In the wake of the row over English identity, the group More in Common polled people in March 2025 on attitudes to this subject. The poll suggested that 74% of English people believe that someone can be English regardless of their skin colour or ethnic background.”

No, I am not.

People can describe their own ethnicity any way they want. Freedom and all that.

We collect ethnicity data in order to support resource allocation, because there are some links between ethnicity and risk factors for health conditions. Healthcare and all that.

The bridge is personal responsibility to describe one's ethnicity in such a way that is supports resource allocation for the benefit of oneself and others whilst also reconciling that to one's own perceptions. Common sense and all that.

I hope you don't think I support the Greens. 🤣

There's nothing tribal about holding the opinion that Reform are a bunch of incompetent xenophobic corrupt opportunist grifters. It's just an opinion.

And there is also the Census every 10 years which adapts to changes after consultation with relevant groups. And people are again encouraged to be subjective and can express their own feelings if they think they aren’t in any of the listed categories. That is how we do it here.

You would think that Reform have worked out by now that the general unease about impending WW3 and global challenges means most people prefer an outside enemy not internal fake ones. Maybe they need to redefine their bogeyman.

It’s interesting how for years now we have been asked to define our ethnicity on HR forms, and the “ progressive” narrative has been to endlessly divide people based on skin colour and culture, but when people do state exactly what they consider themselves to be it’s a “disgrace”.
Either ethnicity exists, and is important data used to classify people, or it ain’t.
You can’t have it both ways.

Can't help thinking the court case going on today should give all of pause for thought about using hyperbolic, dehumanising language about politicians, especially online.

We shouldn't be using that kind of language about anyone. And yet it's all over the internet.

And on our streets every saturday...

And in a section of the press every single day, if you want to go there...

Agree. It's awful. I'd hope at least on Mumsnet there's a chance users will understand the consequences for women.

The op’s line? Didn’t you agree in an earlier post.

@ScribblingPixieagree

Agreeing with the posts that followed my first, several above.

Having just read back my posts on here, I don't think I did. However, just in case I wasn't clear, this is where I stand

SB can identify her ethnicity any way she wants.
So can everyone else.
There are valid reasons for gathering ethnicity data in terms of managing a country's resources.
Making policy based on skin colour and whether someone belongs in a country to a sufficient degree is dangerous and divisive.
SB is an opportunist who only moved to Reform because she felt it would be advantageous to her.
Reform are grifting, incompetent and xenophobic, and utterly unfit to govern.
Nobody should use stereotyping, dehumanizing and degrading language anywhere to describe an entire group of people of a certain ethnic, religious or geographic origin.

I mean here where you say she is.

And I stand by that. Choosing to join Reform says something about who you are as a human being. Their only virtue is that they are less awful than Restore and that bar is so low an ant couldn't get under it. That is my opinion.

But I disagreed with OP that SB's statement's about ethnicity are what make her a disgrace. It's the Reform thing.

That doesn’t work with this then.

I think describing someone as a disgrace (note: an individual) based on things they have done is not dehumanising. On the other hand, saying things like 'men of fighting age coming here to rape' - yep, that's dehumanising.

I am also of the opinion that the way you are picking on me is really not in the spirit.

Nobody should use stereotyping, dehumanizing and degrading language anywhere to describe an entire group of people of a certain ethnic, religious or geographic origin.

Oh I couldn’t agree more. 🤔

This stands true, although it seems to apply only in some cases so on it goes. People will lob it back online at those who don’t see it applies to them.

I haven’t seen the question time with suella but there’s a lot of confusion on here.

English ethnicity does exist. A relative of mine did his dna and it was not only 100% English, but pinpointed very specifically his area of the UK to c. 50 miles. They are home birds so we wondered whether that was genetic too!

and I don’t disagree with this. Being ‘English’ is different to being ‘ethnically English’.