In wanting Mumsnet to help Judi Dench and Joanna Lumley

[GiantBranch]

Last week, Israel banned 37 international aid organisations from operating in the strip, including Oxfam, Save the Children and Medicine Sans Frontieres (MSF). MSF delivers one in three of Gaza’s babies, and experts warn that immediate action must be taken to prevent a catastrophe.

It has prompted more than 100 leading members of the arts, including Dames Judi Dench, Imelda Staunton, Joanna Lumley, Sienna Miller, Suranne Jones and singer Paloma Faith, to sign a letter urging popular online platform Mumsnet to join them in demanding urgent government action ensuring maternity care is accessible in Gaza.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gaza-israel-baby-birth-judi-dench-letter-b2896981.html

Either you are being disingenuous or you don’t understand the nuance of the letter. Which is it?

I very much think this.

I do think western activism on Gaza has probably hardened the Israeli position quite a lot and been VERY counterproductive. Activists also generally don't seem to understand the cultural context or Hamas as a group (and Hamas don't hide their opinions so I can only assume wilful ignorance).

And many UK activists don't seem to have a problem with making Jewish people in this country feel unsafe (including children), which I find highly unpleasant. I have experienced this directly.

I do have actual evidence as to why I think this and a reasoned argument, however I have absolutely no influence on Middle Eastern politics so I'm not going to outline it as I think it's ultimately pointless. Even if all MNetters agreed with me it wouldn't change a thing. We have enough problems for women and children here to deal with. It's a distraction and I think it's far more likely ill-thought through activism in this area will do more harm than good given the political climate.

I think that western activism on these issues, particularly when coupled with the same people holding particular other stances that always seem to be linked, illustrates well the idea of the victim hierarchy. In their view, anyone who holds certain minority characteristics, regardless of their actions, behaviours or beliefs, is less privileged, so therefore should be supported. There is no nuance beyond this. And it is generally self-serving for the activists in the sense they feel they are negating their own perceived privilege (e.g. self-imposed guilt) by ‘being vocal for others.’

Any complexity such as criminal behaviour on the part of those they see as the victims is completely forgiven under this model.

I am not sure I am understanding are you suggesting pregnant Palestinians are criminals or did I totally misread your post?and not worthy of support ??

So the point is to get HQ behind the campaign? I'll ask again then, why are they writing a public letter and why are they adding their names as celebrity as if to add some weight?

You totally misread my post, yeah.

Great. I agree.

The situation in Gaza is bad. Indescribably terrible.
AND
The celebrities made a serious error in publishing an open letter to Justine. Tactically ineffective and also making themselves look like bullies by doing it publicly.

To discuss the second is not to diminish the importance of the first.

This instance is political because the letter writers are asking Justine/Mumsnet to put pressure on UK politicians to talk/pressure Israeli politicians to change their actions/policies in their own country.

A non-partisan humanitarian response is to give monetary or physical support to e.g. Jamaica in response to recent hurricane while making no mention of how Jamaica is governed.

Why is there so much focus on Gaza, and so little on the Yazidi women and the women in Afghanistan?

OK, for fear of being sucked back into this thread. A non-political way of providing real support is to donate to a charity like MSF / Doctors without borders. Which the signatories of this letter, who probably earn a lot more than the average MN user, could easily do rather than wasting time on lecturing silly (lower class) mummies.

MSF appear to be very much still active in providing frontline healthcare in both Gaza and Afghanistan (and neighbouring Pakistan where many Afghan refugees have fled).

Afghanistan | Our Work & How to Help | Doctors Without Border

Edited to add: Although actually - sigh - they seem to be refusing to demonstrate their workers aren't Hamas operatives in Gaza and / or the Israelis are unwilling to meet with them to discuss reasonable evidence that won't put their workers at risk. Depending on the source. Either (both?) could be true. I can't possible judge.

Still probably a good organisation to donate to. Other frontline organisations exist. I'd always recommend due diligence. Google is your friend.

unfortunately the issue at hand is that Israel unlike Afghanistan is prohibiting MSF from continuing to do the very valuable work (assisting at 1 out of three births) which it has until now been doing.
The point of the campaign is to be put pressure on the Uk government to in turn put pressure on Israel to reverse it’s decision and allow well respected humanitarian organisations continue their efforts

Well as we have exhaustively discussed the second can we maybe focus on the campaign

Well, there's been one Yazidi slave woman rescued from a Gazan jihadist already, and she'd had children in her forced marriage. Not beyond the realms of possibility there are more.

But you're right, part of activism like this is explaining why you think resources should be focused on one issue in one particular way.

Am sure humanitarian organisations like MSF could help these women if they have access and there are any more

Hopefully they'll comply with the request to provide lists of their employees in Gaza then. I wonder why the signatories to the letter aren't trying to persuade them to do that?

I'm sorry but the MSF blurb on this sounds quite political to me. Which generally they're not, but they use the term 'genocide' against Israel which is very politically loaded and fail to note that Hamas' explicit policy is genocide of the Jews.

I fail to see why demonstrating their staff aren't Hamas terrorists is a difficult ask. However I don't have time to research the details and I can't -and more generally UK women can't - judge the truth of any of their statements or the IDF / Israeli statements we're just not in positions to do so.

It's not our problem to solve.

I have donated to MSF in the past and I would do so again if I won the lottery however these days I mostly donate to UK causes as there is tremendous need here too including people struggling to access healthcare for their children and receiving shit maternity care.

Most humanitarian organisations have used the term genocide, not really interested in debating whether what is happening is or is not a genocide, fruitless. The reality is there are pregnant women in a dire situation who are at risk of vey bad outcomes and need care

If MSF wants to keep helping pregnant women in Gaza, they can.

They are not kicked out by Israel, they simply refuse to abide to rules and prefer to stop working in Gaza. It's their sole choice.

If you only care about pregnant women dying, why aren't you incensed that MSF is actually giving up on these women.

If they cared about women this much, they d stay.

Again it has been discussed why organisations are uncomfortable complying with Israel’s conditions one of which is agreeing not to criticise or testify against Israel in the ICC/ICJ why include that stipulation?

If they re doctors, they should care first about providing medical care, the potential legal ramifications way way down the line should come a solid second, don't you think?

They also have concerns for the safety of their staff given the unprecedented amount of aid workers who have been killed in Gaza, that is why the are uncomfortable handing over lists of aid workers to a state which has killed their workers

Yet they've still not been willing to provide employee lists at all, to the best of my knowledge. If the charities wanted to pressure Israel, they'd be more effective if they complied with the clearly reasonable part and made it only about the ICC/ICJ.

I wonder how many of her illustrious co-signatories supported Amanda Abbington when she was getting a right kicking from the TRAs around the time of her Strictly appearances. She’d said and done nothing wrong. The activist extremists went after her career and her sanity. She found sympathy on MN FWR. But where else? <resounding silence>

The TRAs are after Martin Freeman now, her ExH for (a) supporting free speech, and (b) being connected to her. Fortunately a High Court ruling is now in force around these matters, hopefully being made permanent today.

I cynically have wondered overnight if that’s why this lot are really poking at Justine - her connection to Ian Katz. Hope not. But something’s off here.

Sorry but no connection to the issue at hand