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.

Yes. I agree with you.

we're finding it increasingly hard to tempt politicians onto Mumsnet because of fears they'll simply be harangued about this single issue and shouted at for not providing the desired response
Well why is that? A massive woman centred site keeps asking about women's rights and that's off-putting? Is that not a clue that there's something afoot?
If they don't want to address that we can form our opinion accordingly. Especially when they have worked with women suffering at the hands of men.

Yes, I agree too.

It is something that Jess has been involved with in the W&E committee, Private Members bills as well as the consultation, the Labour Party has been heavily supporting and she has just done a video on Pink News, yet it is undiscussable.

Another voice in agreement. It makes me feel very uneasy that the questions are being policed - it’s not as if they’re rude or aggressive. Why shouldn’t MPs doing web chats be aware of the full extent of our concerns?

"Harangued" is an unpleasant word to use IMO.

Also agree
If MPs are happy to throw women under a bus they should have the guts to say it.
Single sex spaces are safer for women - adult human males are the danger regardless of how they dress or imagine themselves.

Some poor choices of words there from MNHQ. Particularly “harrangued” and “shouted at”.

To address their concern about balance / number of posts it’d be easy for MNHQ to group Qs about single sex facilities and services (or indeed any other topic with lots of Qs asked) together in a MNHQ post stating that they’d had X posts on it.

With respect to (private?) “representations” from other Mumsnet users that these Qs “put them off engaging with webchats”, since when have the views of people who DON’T post - or threaten not to - been more important than those who do?

Suspect the third reason is the key one for MNHQ: politicians don’t want to deal with these Qs, especially if lots of posters asking about these issues make time to join the chat at the allotted time. Presumably MNHQ could moderate, remove posts breaching guidelines etc.

Politicians avoiding webchats on MN would be a shame for MNHQ but would NOT mean “no one will get to ask any of these important questions to our policy makers”. That’s a big stretch.

Oh god, have I woken up in China ?
Missed this thread yesterday and will try and do the web chat ( not done one before) do you just dial in as such, anyway
Yes count me in too,
I did not vote Labour, but, government needs a strong. Sensible Opposition, we dont have this with Labour in such a shambles.
Yes Jess needs to answer the questions put.
Does she have her own MN account, does she independently come on here and read our concerns
Perhaps Ive woken up in Gilead instead

I’ve just reported my question about the WPUK meeting and asked if MNHQ can replace it with Tinsel’s question.

I don’t know if they will but it seemed worth a try.

Thank you empress very kind

we're finding it increasingly hard to tempt politicians onto Mumsnet because of fears they'll simply be harangued about this single issue and shouted at for not providing the desired response

Oh I'm so sorry MNHQ that I misunderstood. I now understand that politicians are on Mumsnet to raise their profile and yours, and not to engage with challenging questions from the electorate.

Ironic that in her pink news interview, juno dawson said questions were allowed but not concerns - and now we are not even allowed questions.

Women, know your place.

"Harangued" and "shouted at" are words that are designed to make us look like unreasonable, hysterical harpies.

Shut up Women.

Thanks for starting this thread, Stealth. I feel the same.

I'll pop over to the thread to see if anyone has asked the GRA Consultation question yet. All my other questions have already been asked. MNHQ I feel really despondent that you are censoring the depth of our concerns on this massive issue.

So a Penis News interview where Jess can get 'harangued' about the subject is ok but women's questions on here are being deleted? Yeah that sounds fair....

‘Harangued’ and ‘shouted at’?

Are you kidding MNHQ? Why not go the whole way and cal us nags or maybe feminazis.

First off they work for us. It’s their job to listen to us

Secondly nobody is shouting. Or haranguing. Although we’d be entitled to, this being a free country after all. We are typing words on a website and not using any offensive or violent language which is more than can be said for those who promote the TRA agenda. We are repeatedly trying to get a sensible discussion on a matter of vital importance going and this is apparently not allowed.

Thirdly you are actively whitewashing us and deceiving the participants by deleting posts.

Fourthly women have been raped and abused as a result of this agenda. Children are being mutilated. This is of crucial importance to women specifically. If Mumsnet will not allow full discussion of it with our elected representatives on this site then we will know what you actually think of the women who provide your content.

I have said on another thread that the webchats don’t work terribly well. But that’s for you to resolve with thought and attention - not by silencing women.

Shame on you.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Exactly - silly mummies asking silly biscuit questions means a jolly article in the more right wing press and is quite humanising. Silly mummies asking actual questions? Bad mummies!

Mine is about social care - will women who have 24 hour personal care at home from someone who lives with them for up to 2 weeks at a time be able to specify woman and receive care from a biological woman. How will these women be safeguarded under self id?

Also - why should women trust any ideological movement whose only argument is shut up women?

And that’s not shouting.

We were accused of ‘barracking’ last time iirc.

I thought I was repeating a question that a politician was refusing to answer.

@HumphreyCobblers

The problem there is that you are not an older man such as andrew neill or jeremy paxman. When they do it, fair game. When you do it, shrewish.

Stealth I've asked why the public consultation to proposed changes to the GRA hasn't been reported on yet.

Pencils I cut and pasted parts of your question and edited it slightly to avoid deletion. Hope you don't mind.

hooray, quite.

I've just seen that thank you! As someone who responded at the time I'd love to see how my views made a difference. The fact the consultation hasn't reports makes me think maybe my views, along with many who responded, weren't what was wanted. But I'm sure that won't turn out to be the case :)

I share your concerns. It is really important that political candidates lay out their stall on these issues which women are concerned about or women (51% of the population I believe?) won't vote for them. And this is primarily a website frequented by women... I would have hoped MNHQ would want the same thing.. but that message about not wanting a single-issue chat was extraordinarily dismissive .

Trying to bury our concerns about self-ID and the new definition of 'women' in a lot of other questions/topics to mask it came to mind.

Oh FFS.

Do I need to have a massive rant about the pillars of democracy and accountability, which I thought that HQ understood because of Justin's understanding of free speech and journalism?

Honestly?

I've been banging on about this for three years and the creep away from the public having a voice to authoritarianism.

Can we have a list of the high level issues? I identified
self ID and 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
the importance of teaching biological facts in schools

Clearly I haven't got them all as other have popped up - can we maintain and refine a list of the high level issues for the record?