AIBU to question criticism of a female MP’s outfit in maiden speech?

[Browningpers]

Spectator article asking whether Hannah Spencer’s outfit detracted from her maiden speech. Seen similar elsewhere too.

I can’t ever recall the same being asked of a male politician.

Article by a woman too.

AIBU?

"But I am the misogynistic one, because I see where it will lead us beyond the quirky scalloped waistcoat that you find so endearing."

There is a type of person so rigid in their thinking that they believe only they can see the truth and that everyone who disagrees with them is a 'useful idiot'.

Why do those people never consider the limitations of their own blinkers?

I’m old enough and cynical enough to recognise Islamophobia and transphobia when I see it, despite an ineffectual attempt to pass it off as feminism. Doubtless another barrage of sneering condescension will follow.

"her being a useful idiot, who seems extremely childish and immature in both attire and speech"

This is not feminism. This is the language of the real stooges of the patriarchy.
Andrew Tate could have written this.

Undoubtedly. After all us old feminists are clearly feminising wrong and need lecturing.

Good sunny morning to you all, first and foremost.

It’s a pleasure to see you all out of the woods for yet another round of handmaiding for the Green patriarchy. Doesn’t scream insecure at all.

Anyone of you ready to proffer another solid argument like women s priorities matter less and should wait their turn, men know best, we are so much for the environment we don’t even talk about it, and dressing like a child is the kind of right women should fight for?

These were yesterday’s best takes, but I suspect the intellectual level is going to drop even lower (and the bar was not high), the bad names and the outrage are out, because it’s all you have really.

Yep, more sneering.

Utterly predictable.

Interesting that this is all they've got. No response to my list of government policies that are benefiting women. Almost as if they don't actually care about women, only about their own loathing for Muslims and trans people.

Surely not?

Very brave the ganging up of all against one btw.

I am having a conversation with someone who isn't you. No ganging.

🙄

You seem confused. You haven’t ‘explained’ anything about the intellectual grounding of my ‘positions’, since the only position I’ve posited is that talking about someone’s clothes rather than what they say is facile. You disagree with that? Fill your boots, but quite why you’re bringing trans people and Muslims into it I have no idea.

You also seem a little hysterical. Blocking you isn’t restricting your freedom of speech, it’s making a choice not to listen to you. I think it’s amusing that you’re so pleased with your opinions you want to foist them on people, but even the most earnest troll gets boring after a while. A block button just saves time.

I don't agree with the Green party on everything. I'm a traditional left winger who finds some of their stances veer into an extreme liberalism that are at odds with the greater good. However had I been a voter in G&D I'd have voted for HS simply to keep Reform out. That would be service enough in the fight against the patriarchy (and against racism and wealth inequality) to enable me to come to terms with the areas I find troublesome.

And, that for the others frothing at the back, is called an opinion. Independent thinking, logic, arguments, facts, context.

I disagree, but I respect your point of view and appreciate your contribution, it was getting dire.

I think that any ideology, political or religious belief that does not centre women and where women don’t have at least equal say is a byproduct of the patriarchy (that means all of them). Agenda, priorities, power and decision making will stay skewed towards the males, and they will tell you they do it for the good of the neutral « everyone », that your turn will come soon, and that you are so important and valued, but can you do the self-sacrificing groundwork, bring the tea and stay discreetly in the background? Thank you, good girl, that’s a woman to their taste, you ll get a subcommittee and a pat on the back on March 8 if you behave.

As for sexism, we have 3 types atm.

The old fashioned one, stay in your kitchen and let the men take control of your reproductive rights.

The new age one, where women are erased because of the gender nonsense. You ll have the right to abort but you ll have to let the men in.

The religious conservative one, which controls and restricts women s freedom and subjugated them to men in the name of god.

I think the 1st one is the least worse, Nigel doesn’t give a fuck about women, and he would sell our rights if he could benefit from it. But he is no ideologue, if it helps him, he ll help women. The 2 other ones are based on principles and inherently against women, they are way more dangerous for women.

PS. I don’t endorse Nigel or would vote for him but it seems some of you really need very broad strokes.

I share @5128gap 's opinion. I just choose not to resort to cheap gibes about what people are wearing in order to make my point.

Farage is in the pockets of the US right with their Project 2025. If you think he'll protect women from anything, you're deeply naive.

One and three are two sides of the same coin.

We do know what an opinion is. Most of us manage to express them without sneering and insulting people with different ones @inkognitha. You should try it, MN is all the better for it.

And calling women you disagree with misogynist straight off the bat on a women’s forum, can’t you think you can do better too? Dish it and take it and all that.

And I started with many arguments before it went down to mockery, but reasoning went straight over your heads. When ppl try to argue that you don’t talk about the environment because you care too much about the environment (among some of the inane things I have read here), you chuckle and you stop taking it seriously. Aw, bless.

I wish you all a great weekend. And don’t believe in the Greens, they don’t care about women beyond the votes and the grunt work they can do for their rise to power: the gay boobs growing hypnotist, and the radical Islamist who supports the Iranian regime, which has oppressed women for 50y. Don’t handmaiden for them.

Have your last snide in peace if you want, I won’t be back, busy day

Your reasoning was disagreed with. If you can't handle that, maybe avoid Mumsnet.

His name’s not even Boris. THAT’s how much of a con artist he is.

It's probably not healthy to spend time thinking how people end up like this poster.

Mm. I'm not sure. But I'm leaning towards behaviour motivated by self interest being more dangerous than that motivated by principles. Behaviour rooted in principles can be fluid as the person receives new perspectives and influences. For example (most?) Christians have moved to a more liberal implantation of their faith (gay marriage, female priests) while still retaining the overarching principles of that faith. Which is also the case for followers of other religions.
Similarly, with secular value based behaviour, environmental concerns, economic issues, if we are sincere in our principle, we might change our behaviour in light of evidence that there is a better way to achieve our aim.
In contrast, if we are motivated by self interest, we will ignore anything that doesn't suit us personally. The wider impact will not even be a consideration.
I suppose I'm saying, I'd rather try and influence someone who's motivation was to do what they saw as the principled thing than one who would be deaf to anything thay didn't serve their personal interests.

Thinking critically and independently is healthy and good for the mind, you should try it sometime, you sound bitter.

You said you wouldn't be back.