How John McDonnell wooed Mumsnet - James Kirkup

All the same, the signalling that debate is needed is useful.

And this is the positive I took from it.

John understands our concerns, and he knows damn well that TW are not W. He just doesn't care.

We don't need to convince him or anyone that TW are not W. They all know. We only need to show that it is to their personal and political disbenefit to base policy on the belief that they are.

YYY.

If he is gender critical, he can't admit it if he's looking for a leadership bid. It will bring too much bad publicity. Better to sit on the fence until it's safe.

We can't know either way until he makes his leadership bid, it's very much damned if you do damned if you don't. IMO he will continue the fudge or backtrack. Unless he's willing to challenge Momentum and the blue haired anarchists (who are Labour brown shirts) he's unlikely to change his position. He needs Momentum. Wasn't he just saying the other day how we needed to organise a modern day anti-fascist league and take to the streets? I'm very nervous considering how many in anarchist politics see TERFS as literally worse than Hitler

Honestly, I think he gave the best answer he could to the self-Id question.

The fact that he didn't respond with TWAW is promising. It shows that he hasn't drunk the Kool Aid just yet.

If he is gender critical, he can't admit it if he's looking for a leadership bid. It will bring too much bad publicity. Better to sit on the fence until it's safe.

I think he was way off in his interpretation. Most here are not impressed and can see right through the empty promises and "we will talk to both sides" flannel.

I think there may be more to it. Look at the last couple of paragraphs of the article:

And yet here we have John McDonnell, shadow chancellor and field commander of the Corbynite armies, promising to listen to women’s concerns about gender reform and to meet with WPUK. The angry mob’s reaction to that will be fascinating, to say the least.

P.S. Just a thought, but isn’t it a bit odd that John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor, has been willing to discuss the gender issue with Mumsnet but Penny Mordaunt, the Cabinet minister for women and equalities hasn’t managed to do so yet?

He's emphasised John McDonnell's promises and highlighted Penny Mordaunt's reluctance to engage. If he'd minimised what McDonnell said, he wouldn't be able to challenge Mordaunt the same way.

So all these people waiting on what's going to happen so they can bandwagon, are basically waiting to see how successful, committed and persuasive feminists are. They know we are right, but have we got the stomach to see it through? Because if we do, we will certainly win.

Yes I agree on the wind blows thing, and if it wasn't for mumsnetters and Janice Turner the wind would be blowing one way only. There was no one talking about it two years ago and now there is. Who kept that flame burning? Mumsnetters. Now look. There probably wouldn't have been a consultation at all if it wasn't for feminists, and there definitely wouldn't have been this lying promise not to change the Equalities Act.

That webchat sounded like 0% integrity, 100% "We'll see which way the wind blows" to me. Although he may have been under orders.

But if we are going to win in the end we need to be moving this conversation to say that NO child is transgender. They may have 'dysphoria'. But it is not possible to be transgender when transgender means 'born in the wrong body'

Thinking that you are born in the wrong body is a delusion. It is a mental health issue and should be treated as such. Agreeing with someone that they actually are born in the wrong body is colluding with a delusion. It's like agreeing with a skinny anorexic that they are really fat.

These children need to be given psychiatric help to help them to accept their bodies the way they are. Why is a lifetime of medication and brutal surgery seen as preferable to acceptance of the body they were born with?

I also remain unwooed. I thought he answered the questions, whilst actually avoiding the actual questions. BUT, its good that he didn't avoid it totally, like others would have.

Vine does the usual thing of "I'm not saying that some of these cases are not genuine".

But if we are going to win in the end we need to be moving this conversation to say that NO child is transgender. They may have 'dysphoria'. But it is not possible to be transgender when transgender means 'born in the wrong body'

Would just be interesting to know if there is a larger loss of female members for any reason at all.

They lost me. I can't recall exactly when. I didn't vote Labour at the last election but that was because I voted Lib Dem to defeat the SNP candidate.

I resigned my Labour membership and I think it might have been after the second Corbyn win. My reasons are not related to self ID but entirely due to the takeover by Momentum.

Quick question- just out of interest does anybody on here know how many Labour members have been lost since say the last election and how many are women?

My understanding was that Brexit suits the Labour left

I think both Corbyn and McDonnell are at best ambivalent about global trade, and actually quite anti. They see EU membership as linked to that, so Brexit suits their beliefs too.

I think in economic terms they're closer to Trump than they'd like to broadcast

NMS

I believe you're right on the nationalisation point, hence various whipped votes showing that Corbyn and McDonnell want out. Still, they can't afford to see say so to keep the North and Midlands as it would go down badly in London and would be a gift to the SNP in Scotland.

It reminds me on the Leaders debates in the run-up to the 2010 election. The key issue was the cuts that would have to be made following the Crash but, as no politician wanted to talk about them, the debates were reduced to the level of 'I agree with Nick.

My understanding was that Brexit suits the Labour left. First its causing huge harm to the Tories, increasing Labour's chances of being elected. It then allows them to implement policies such as re-nationalisation which otherwise would be contrained by EU Single Market directives.

Politics at the moment seems to be both parties sitting back and hoping the other self destructs first. Not much debate on policies.

As Charlie says, whether it be Brexit or the Trans debate, McDonnell and Labour just look to appease rather than take a side themselves. (Law and Order is a little different - they've been able to blame London's soaring murder rate on austerity and reduced police numbers, which gets them out of awkward discussions of bringing back stop and search etc).

This is in keeping with how the Hard Left operate historically - hammer the government for never doing enough while give as little detail as possible about your own alternative plans.

Also, I think that both McDonnell and Corbyn see purging the party as a higher priority than actually winning a GE.

John understands our concerns, and he knows damn well that TW are not W. He just doesn't care.

We don't need to convince him or anyone that TW are not W. They all know. We only need to show that it is to their personal and political disbenefit to base policy on the belief that they are.

Also I would say that signalling that you want debate is purely a conscious effort to quiet the arguement. It’s just reflective listening, we’re all supposed to think John understands.
I know I sound bitter. It’s because I’m bitter.

James, I'm going to break with my usual tradition here (because normally I love your stuff), but I think this was a bit on the weak side

I think he was way off in his interpretation. Most here are not impressed and can see right through the empty promises and "we will talk to both sides" flannel.

Oddly JMcD acknowledging the need for debate, may embolden the Tories and right of centre media. Hitherto, though their natural instincts have been to question the "woke", getting it so very wrong on gay issues has left them nervous on this.

An election platform that says essentially "You may not like us much but look at the alternative" will have some traction, so this becomes a useful issue. A reverse. Previously TM did not seem to want to open up a gap between them and the Labour position. Now JMcD seems to want to narrow the gap between Labour and an emerging Tory poisition. No doubt his analysts can see a credibility collapse in the LibDems and Greens, which they want to avoid.

Fair play to Vine, she is sticking her neck out and I admire that.
I am watching and waiting to see who will come out first- I want to see who is going to own up to their gender critical perspective first.

I have had a small dalliance with thinking about supporting the women’s equality party but frankly if a political party of women can allow themselves to sucked into the TRA narrative then that’s just rediculous. What other absolute madness would they go along with to get support? Being a women’s party not in favour of women- get a grip-It entails going against instinct.
I will also not forget the lack of support Bowlofbabekfish.
I won’t trust Labour ever again and won’t vote for them unless they take action.
They need to reinstate women only shortlist’s containing actual biological women only. Stop the pretence. We all see through it.
When it come to the next election I will be voting for the gender critical party- whoever that is. ( save UKIP- I’m not mental.)

Yes I agree it's useful. Conversations aren't had about this 'behind the scenes' on anything except TWAW terms, and that includes at the Equalities Office. TWAW is the presumption behind every conversation, never questioned. Like, some people will disagree but it will be utterly taboo to vocalise this. For a brief moment, a few people will have to have conversations about whether or not the tone is changing and public questioning and debate will be allowed. So at least for a tiny window, wider chat is permitted behind the scenes and some people will be allowed to express the view and get points acriss in favour of debate.

I don't think think anything will change right now, but every long walk starts with one step forward.

The current position and orthodoxy can be read by watching how the Beeb treats it

This is so true. Right wing voters think the BBC has a left wing bias. Left wing voters think the BBC has a right wing bias. But the truth is that it represents establishment consensus.