WPUK meeting in London 20 May with Meghan Murphy, Julie Bindel, Selina Todd

The question was introduced as being from Ms Hatchet and Prof Freedman.

Yes I think everyone knows that. The issue is was this question representative of the majority that were sent in or was it chosen because (1) they are WPUK friends and (2) because WPUK wanted to score a political point.

Unless and until WPUK explain why they chose this as the first question none of us will know - although we may suspect we know the answer.

I really dont have time for these divisions in feminism with the overwhelming dominating patriarchal forces that we face in society.

Meghan Murphy made the point that there are actually very few women who think in terms of being really on the right or really on the left, Many dont see themselves like that at all. We need to be prepared to talk to all women throughout society

Can wait to see Selina Todds speech again -so much to take in but so good. She must be so inspiring to learn from!

Julie is really thrilling to listen to. Occasionally gets carried away but part of the thrill. The references and information she can cite from her long term involvement are fantastic.

All the speakers were great!

I sat beside Francis Wheen so yes he was there, invited by Julie. Delightful well informed person to chat to!

Great evening. So many great people to talk to.

Someone has asked that question on their Facebook page ie was this representative of the majority of questions sent in or WPUK choosing to prioritise it.

The question was introduced as being from Ms Hatchet and Prof Freedman.

I would suggest those using such terms about a grown woman should have a serious think about their own misogyny.

If there was a "Like" button, I would select it, Spartacus!

"Everyone who had a ticket was invited to send in questions."

Someone has asked that question on their facebook page ie was this representative of the majority of questions sent in or WPUK choosing to prioritise it.

As yet I dont think they have answered.

However nine months later she is being described as livid, angry and like a petulant teenager. It makes me sad that Julia is feeling and coming across this way.

Perhaps the impression that is being generated by others is not a reflection of Ms Long at all but is a reflection of how others are making misinterpretations. It may be that those women who make those misinterpretations should take some time and make some effort to get to know Ms Long and her perspective?

After an event last autumn, I had the pleasure of spending a few hours chatting to Julia Long alongside a couple of other women, in a pub. She is a very caring and woman-focused person. She really listens to other women and values their opinions. She seemd to think deeply about what other women say and their experiences. She very much centres women in her thoughts and her activism. She was great company and very smiley.

However nine months later she is being described as livid, angry and like a petulant teenager. It makes me sad that Julia is feeling and coming across this way. I know that many have struggled with the recent divisions.

I wish somehow we could prioritise caring for all women, regardless of the things that divide us.

Further, Hayton professes to be concerned about children and the impact on them of transgender ideology and practice while simultaneously gaslighting / deceiving children by requiring them to refer to Hayton as "Miss" while in Hayton's care via loco parentis in school.

(sorry going to sound like a right gossip but ... )

Apparently the CE of the Women's Resource Centre (WRC) spoke about how hard it is for small women's groups to implement women only services under the EA.

Well - it would be easier for small groups to do this if the "representative" group (ie the WRC) had spoken up about women service providers rights under the EA. But then as an artifical construction of funders to save them the bother of actually consulting with a range of women's groups by saying we talk to WRC so that's enough, it might be thought they dont feel they can speak out.

Can you imagine what a different scenario we would now be in if back in 2004 WRC had taken a public position on women only provision.

Ironically Karen Ingala Smith said the the nia project is seeking legal advice on providing women only services and that they will be producing a paper on this which they are happy to share with other women's groups.

Maybe the WRC funding should go to the nia project!

(PS on another issue, yes some women active in WNTT and LRA are opposed to trans women having a platform, and the TES article has been widely criticised on various facebook group pages.)

Everyone who had a ticket was invited to send in questions.

So, please explain why WPUK chose to deliver that first question, if it was not intended to sow division, given the reaction to the Washington DC activity in January 2019?

Going back a couple of pages, just want to add as I was posting comments someone had said to me, that she thought not just Meghan Murphy but also Maya Forstarter were balanced in the response to the question about working with right wingers.

For her the issue was that she thinks it is a dubious to be on a right wing platform, but gets fed up with (her words) "smug socialitsts virtue signalling each other".

The meeting was an opportunity to reach out to the diversity of women.

(Not sure how any of this fits in with its being said to be the launch of their 2019 aims.)

My deep regret is that WPUK deliberately facilitated division which was entirely avoidable.

Of course they didn't. They invited written questions beforehand because handling questions from the floor is a faff. Everyone who had a ticket was invited to send in questions. It's not surprising the question about alliances came up, and in fact the four women answered it differently. Please don't try and sour what was an absolutely brilliant evening characterised by lots of feminist solidarity and a real sense of togetherness and purpose.

JL was annoyed at the last WPUK I was at in February last year in the same venue. She made a point about GC TIMs not demanding that GC women call them women which was received frostily. Miranda made the same point later and was roundly cheered. I think JL left at that point.

I agree with her it was hypocritical of WPUK to take that position when they have dealt with David Davis (which I agreed with).

Incidentally, that last meeting included questions and comments from the crowd without too much "faff" as have many other meetings I've been to. I also noted (as did a pp) that most of the questions were from people I'd heard of.

I dropped out of active politics long ago because of this type of in-fighting.

She was obviously livid at the question asked about right wingers. And I get that. But she was also angry that someone praised Debbie's piece on the TES, and stood up and looked daggers at Debbie and shouted something like "no way".

The issue here is that, while Hayton professes to be concerned about women's right to sex-segregated safe spaces, Hayton is hypocritical because Hayton uses women's sex-segregated safe spaces when it suits. I have witnessed this behaviour myself. Hayton has a complete disregard for women's boundaries while professing to be concerned about women's ability to impose those boundaries.

Personally I was surprised by Dr Long last night. I saw her speak at the HoC and was extremely impressed by what she had to say, very reasoned and thought-out and not at all "hysterical" (sorry, I know that's a no-no word )

She was obviously livid at the question asked about right wingers. And I get that. But she was also angry that someone praised Debbie's piece on the TES, and stood up and looked daggers at Debbie and shouted something like "no way". The woman next to me said "too right Dr Long - I think he's a creepy guy too". I was a bit surprised and commented that I thought it was a very good piece that Debbie had written. Is Dr Long one of those who doesn't think WPUK should be giving space to the trans women who are being harmed by the TRAs? At a meeting last year a few people publicly said that Debbie and Kristina should not have been allowed to speak from the floor, because they're men, taking the space away from women.

Agreed that WPUK is a staunchly socialist organisation, but hardly surprising given its roots. I think they do a good job of having diverse panels that make the audience think. There's certainly space for them AND FPFW and WNTT and LesbiansOnChairs and any other women's groups who want to meet to talk about the GRA and related issues. I have felt welcomed by all the groups I've encountered and like in all social groups, I don't agree 100% with most of the women I've met. They're all just different!

What books do you recommend by Selina? I do feel terribly uneducated when I hear people like her (and Sheila J) speak

More that she defused the tension a bit with her answer.

Exactly so. Of course having conversations with women from different political positions is relevant. That process does ^not& mean that one is 'working with' that political position.

[My working class neighbours on the council estate where I live are mostly right-leaning Tory voters or non-voters. If, as a left-leaning woman, I avoided talking with them about any issues on the basis of their political positions I would never have chats with them about anything. As it happens, I have made many of them aware of the risks associated with transgender ideology and practice to the point where they no longer ask me about my "Woman: Adult Human Female" apparel and give me a wave when they see me wearing it. ]

I am in this for safeguarding and I’d work with anyone to stop the damage to children that’s occurred as part of this movement.

Safeguarding is as much of a priority as women's rights to me also. I think everybody's individual rights stop where the safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults begins, including "trans rights" and including my rights as a woman.

I would work with anybody on reinstating safeguarding where it's been diluted and improving the protocols we already have. Anybody.

Next stop the first UK Declaration of Sex Based Rights event in Leeds on Saturday.

Come and say "Hallo" AverageAvenger ... I'll see you there!

and other axes besides

Indeed. Other axes involving women include economic / social class: middle / working class; sexuality class: heterosexual / lesbian.

These axes deliver very different perspectives, all of which should be acknowledged and included.

These axes should never be sources for division.

I liked Megan's handling of the Q too - but I don't agree that she deflected it?

Yes deflected isn't necessarily the right word. More that she defused the tension a bit with her answer.

I’m just back up north after a night I’ll remember for a long long time. The turnout, the speeches, the electric atmosphere, the mumsnetters, then a boozy meal with Julie Bindel, more booze in the pub, then one of the funniest cab rides ever as she and her lovely partner had given me a room for the night. This hospitality meant I could afford to go to the event.

Next stop the first UK Declaration of Sex Based Rights event in Leeds on Saturday. We are storming!

There’s not just 1 axis is there? There’s left and right, but also authoritarian and libertarian, and other axis besides

Yes, I think this is important. It's not just a matter of degrees, there are really sets of different ideas that are sometimes shared, or sometimes not. The closest people to your own position might be on the other side of the right/left spectrum, because the line can be constituted in a lot of different ways. Often, it's those people you can gain the most insight from, as well, because you share a lot, but have a slightly different way of thinking or talking about it.

what's not fine is lying about others and their motivations

Very well said, Spartacus.