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.

On Reddit webchats, people can vote questions up/ down, which makes it clear just how many people want which questions answered. It would be nice to have something similar here? Then we could drink to 2-3 questions, but still highlight the momentum behind the questions?

GeordieTerf

That's a good idea.

Deleting questions about safeguarding children has such a bad look. The more I think about this situation the worse it gets.

Agree

Baby can you remember your question? I'll add it to the list

I'm looking for answers too.

I would like to see Jess Phillips (and other candidates) pinned down on this and I'm appalled that MN are censoring questions, especially from Tinsel and others who have direct experience of an issue that Phillips has raised herself.

I could be wrong, but I've just read through the webchat and saw some questions which I thought from this thread had been deleted. Have there been some restitutions?

I'd say it's highly unlikely that she isn't reading this thread. She knows how important this is.

Reaching out to you Jess. There are too many of us to ignore. We are being censored and silenced on so many platforms, even this one

Please add my name to the list for the myriad of reasons so eloquently mentioned above.

I spoiled my ballot in Dec for this reason alone and to see women silenced and censored for raising legitimate concerns is unbelievably chilling

I spoiled my ballot too, red. It was my only option. I wanted to vote for a left wing party but will not give my vote to any party which simply parrots TWAW and refuses to engage with the issue or listen to women's voices.

Please add me to the list, Stealth. I would have asked about safeguarding, were it permitted.

Where do we live? China? 'You may ask any question you like so long as it is pre-approved'.

As several PP have said, if you suppress debate, things go wrong. I'd extend that to say that if you only allow one side of debate airtime, things will go even more badly awry. If JP can be interviewed by Pink News, why can't she answer questions on the same topic here? Is it because questions asked by a bunch of women evil harpies just don't count?

Count me in, Stealth

It’s so incredibly frustrating that no one who is opposed to a GC position is willing to give robust answers to all our concerns. Surely someone as intelligent, eloquent and frankly bolshy as Jess Phillips must have thought all this through, concluded we are all in the wrong and we have nothing to worry about so why can’t she tells us her reasoning?

Add my name too.

I sometimes wish I was blissfully ignorant

I would. I would like to ask if Jess thinks it is OK that a female police officer should be forced to search a male bodied individual who declares he is a woman, when she strongly suggests he is saying that just to be intimately searched by a woman?

If she thinks this should not be allowed, does she therefore agree that self-id has problems?

*Hi Jess,

Do you think politicians hoping to be elected to the highest positions in the land (pm, leader of the opposition, home secretary, etc) should be able to handle any questions that the public might wish to put to them? Or do you think it is better that they are only asked questions that they have agreed to answer? Would you have preferred Mumsnet to have left this webchat uncensored or are you pleased they have censored it on your behalf?*

Expect it will be deleted (both as I've already asked a question, and because i expect that this will be seen as 'straying') but i wanted to put it in nevertheless.

Please add my name.

I joined the Labour Party after the election and will base my vote largely on which of the candidates is willing to protect women's rights. I had high hopes for Jess Philips but that interview with Juno Dawson has given me pause.

Surely someone as intelligent, eloquent and frankly bolshy as Jess Phillips must have thought all this through, concluded we are all in the wrong and we have nothing to worry about so why can’t she tells us her reasoning?

This is what I find so hard to understand about the refusal to answer questions. If we're wrong, explain to us why we're wrong. If she can't do that, how can she be so sure that we are wrong?

I would ask her why she thought Jo Swinson lost her seat.

Add my name to the list too. Women and children’s safety matters, Jess.

Add my name too, please.

Please add my name.

It is bizarre for MNHQ to insert themselves between an MP and voters like this to manipulate the impression given of what their very broad user base cares about.

Add me too please. I am terrified by the threats of violence seen daily.

I noticed a deleted comment on the webchat a little earlier, it hadn't been evaporated like the rest. I wonder why that was allowed to stay as a deletion?

I also notice that this has not been in the 'trending now' box at all any time I have looked since yesterday which is interesting as it was at the top of the chats for a lot of yesterday.

I ALSO notice that after being deleted on the webchat it was removed from my 'threads I'm on'.

Interesting.

I have a feeling that MN decided that FWR was not a fit board for 'Trending' some time ago.