Who else would really appreciate a polite discussion of gender issues and the concerns of women at the jess Philips webchat on Monday?

[StealthPolarBear]

I posted on the webchat thread:
Since the questions have already been asked I am not allowed to repeat similar but I want on record that self ID, its potential abuse, protection of vulnerable young people from those who promote transition which can sometimes include puberty blockers, the protection of natal women's rights and the importance of teaching biological facts in schools are big concerns to me.

MNHQ have said they don't want any more comments or questions about gender issues on the Web chat thread which I can understand. However what I do want to make clear is the number of people who may share some or all of my concerns. Otherwise any questions about gender issues are of an equal weight to all others and in fact others, which can be repeated in a different form, may seem to gain more weight.

Happy to share my workings with anyone who wants to check :)

Stealth make that at least 134, as there are posters on other threads who have said they want to be allowed to ask these questions, but they haven't posted here. I posted a link to this thread on the spousal veto thread and the Jess Phillips thread on FWR in case people didn't know about this thread, but I'm fairly sure not all of them have posted on here (I haven't done a complete analysis of names on all threads though).

Isn't haranguing a good description of what happens every day in the House of Commons?

If Jess Phillips is such a shrinking violet that she can't cope with a few polite questions from women on a webchat, how would she ever cope with PMQs in the job she aspires to, or a good grilling on the Today programme?

The first comment of about half the posters - really clear

Great work Stealth.

Thank you :)

I posted a question asking for Jess’s views on freedom of speech, with regard to censorship and deletion on MN. I got deleted and threatened with being blocked! Ironic, much?

Stealth make that at least 134

There's also lots of women who would've agreed who've been banned from here too for wrongspeak (you know, talking about the reality of their lived experience and having the audacity to have opinions and/or believe in scientifically verifiable facts mainly as far as I can tell)

And you know that for every woman who has posted on this issue there will be others, reading, lurking, agreeing, but not quite confident enough to actually hit Post Message.

I keep trying to word this more eloquently (and without making it sound like I believe in a hive mind), but apologies, I am just too tired:

This is the first webchat I really considered joining, purely because of JP'S background. How many others, on and off MN, will have had a similar interest, only to see the edited result and think, "oh, not that big a deal after all"?

Politician heavily involved in women's issues + Apparently asked very little by (primarily) women about current women's issues

Women have no problem with politician's stance on current women's issues

So there is a massive under-representation of concerns, validating "no debate" (and all with which it is associated), because, um, it looks like there isn't one...

That is very poorly expressed and oversimplified, but Stealth, I hope you can make sense of it! And please count me in.

I want it discussed & I'm very concerned that MNHQ is deleting or discouraging questions that are legitimate. Many questions on the same topic highlights strength of feeling around this matter. If Jess want Mumsnet's reach & clout to help with her campaign she should have the gumption to answer these questions.

I'm concerned, however, I wouldn't be surprised if Jess Philips has already refused to discuss the subject of self-ID.

Stealth

Great idea. I too am interested in hearing her answers to all questions on your list so far. There are multiple effects of the current ideology to be discussed. Making a list of the main issues is a great way to start. Thank you for pulling it together.

This is sampling bias isn't it

I'm as gender critical as they come, and I would definitely like JP, and many other politicians, to answer the important GC questions.

At the same time, I like Mumsnet web-chats, and I don't want them to become blacklisted by politicians. For that reason, I think it may be best to just have a few questions on that issue.

How can politicians claim to be in touch with voters if they won't engage with a group who are talking about their own rights and safeguarding?

We are not allowed to put forward questions relating to an issue that has a profound and fundamental effect on women's rights because??

Is Jess Philips an elected MP whose job it is to represent the views of the people in parliament not allowed to see that there is another view to the one outside twitter?

Or is she being shielded because she might be exposed to wrong think?

Please add my name in support

WRT the web chat and MNHQ policing it in so draconian a way, I am disappointed but not surprised. I was surprised and happy that Jess Philips was going to do a webchat - especially as it would be obvious the majority of the questions would be around women’s rights.

I’m particularly disappointed that the Pink News interview with Juno Dawson states quite clearly they ‘focused on topics of interest to LGBTQ+ community’ but a parenting site dominated by women can’t focus on issues to do with safeguarding children and women’s sex-based rights.

I hope it goes well and Jess engages fully.

Hey StealthPolarBear please count me in #wematter

Cheers for your work on this.

At the same time, I like Mumsnet web-chats, and I don't want them to become blacklisted by politicians.

We should be allowed to ask questions about controversial policies that they are proposing. They should know that we are asking those questions, and be given a chance to answer them. If there are too many questions to answer in the allotted time, they can choose which ones to answer, but at least we will know that it's their choice not to answer those questions. Not answering a question also supplies information about the person who chooses not to give an answer.

I don't think it should be up to MNHQ to remove any politely worded questions. People who are our representatives in parliament should be able to see which issues are of most interest to the people who post on this site.

With this sort of censorship we'll end up with webchats just being about favourite biscuits and other inconsequential chat. It might be entertaining, but their role as our elected representatives should be to answer the hard questions that the electorate are asking.

If they are proposing controversial policies that they can't defend, they should consider that perhaps it is the policies that need to change. They shouldn't be refusing to engage with the people who think they've got it wrong.

I think a lot of women ( myself included) are very afraid of getting banned because they receive, and need, a lot of support on other boards here such as bereavement and relationships. It is really shameful that a site like MN would deliberately coerce and control women like this.

Just adding my voice. I ad many others refused to vote for labour as women have been betrayed and our right removed. I would have been interested to hear if any of the candidates know what our concerns are or care. Getting rid of difficult to answer questions is not going to help get the party beck in.

Another voice here wanting the subject discussed. So sick of the 'nothing to worry about, you're being dramatic' attitude towards women, many who are genuinely worried about how this affects our children especially.

From James Kirkup

"If Mumsnet can stand up for free speech, why can’t MPs?

Extracts:

Does Roberts agree with the gender critical feminists? Does she back the transgender rights advocates? I have no idea, because she hasn’t said what she thinks. She’s just said it’s important that people have the space to debate an important issue freely and without fear.

Long before Mumsnet or the internet even existed, we created a place where people’s views could be heard and discussed, where opinions could be aired and compared. We even employed a group of people to ensure that such opinions would be raised and considered. The place is called Parliament and the people are called MPs. As a result of writing about this issue here over the last few months, I have come to know that quite a few of those MPs, from all parties, think that the sorts of questions the Mumsnetters are asking about gender are quite reasonable and should be answered. But precious few of those MPs will say so in public.

Justine Roberts has shown she has the balls to stand up for free speech and sensible political debate. The time is coming for MPs to show some courage and do the same."

www.google.com/amp/s/blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/if-mumsnet-can-stand-up-for-free-speech-why-cant-mps/amp/

It seems as though everyone involved wants to talk about this.

So yes, add me to the list. As the saying goes - puuullll.

No one who is too openly GC will win the leadership

They would if only they would all come to their senses, remember that the job is not supposed to be Leader of the Perpetual Opposition and all come out as strongly GC.

Another vote here for your proposal Stealth.

Thank you for collating all the questions too - handy list for attending hustings and other opportunities for raising with candidates and organisations with votes