Webchat with Sophie Walker, leader of the Women's Equality Party and London Mayor candidate, Tuesday 19 April at noon

[BojanaMumsnet]

Hello

We’re pleased to welcome Sophie Walker, leader of the Women’s Equality Party, ahead of the London Mayoral elections, on Tuesday 19 April at 12 noon.

The Women’s Equality Party was set up in 2015 “to unite people of all genders, diverse ages, backgrounds, ethnicities, beliefs and experiences in the shared determination to see women enjoy the same rights and opportunities as men so that all can flourish.”

Sophie was elected leader of the Women's Equality Party in July 2015, and in January 2016 was voted to represent the party in the London Mayoral election. She says she is campaigning for “work that works, affordable housing, equal caregiving, equal enterprise, transport that works, affordable housing and an end to violence against women and girls.”

She worked as an international news agency journalist for nearly twenty years and is an ambassador for the National Autistic Society, campaigning for better support and understanding of autism, particularly in women and girls.

Please do join us on Tuesday at 12 noon if you can, or post a question for Sophie here in advance. And, as ever, please do remember our webchat guidelines and do be polite.

The London mayoral election will be held on 5 May and you’ll need to register to vote by 18 April, today. (Keep your eyes peeled for more mayoral candidate webchats in the next few weeks.)

Thanks
MNHQ

Vicious

I am old-fashioned enough to believe in not taking quotes out of context. As a previous poster said, De Beauvoir would be turning in her grave to see her meaning twisted like that. I wonder if Sophie has actually read The Second Sex.

Hairy, absolutely brilliant poem.

You are quite brilliant, Hairy.

And I suspect de Beauvoir would have some choice words about Ms Walker's misappropriation of her work which would make our viciousness pale in comparison

Anseladams
Goldsmith is the parasite we need to avoid. I'd vote Sadiq khan as least-worst option anyday.

I had wondered what you were on about upthread! Glad it's clear now.

HairyLittleCarrot is a genius and should start their own party!

I'm going to vote Sadiq Khan, I think.

No idea who to put for my second vote though, might have to leave it blank.

Oh Sophie...

"I had wondered what you were on about upthread! Glad it's clear now."
I was drawing connections where there are none .

I'm not in the slightest bit old-fashioned - I believe in the radical and fairly recent notion that women are people, and have the right to name their own oppression.

It's the pomo, third-wave, homophobic, sexist, liberal lot who are amazingly conservative, with their "women should put their needs and wants last, and if you think you are gay you are probably not, just mistaken in your gender identity" philosophies.

I don't really want to defend her because I don't agree with her on anything she said here but...

The WEP are taking the same stance on trans as women's aid, rape crisis and every main political party.

Do we stop funding/supporting WA and RC?

As for voting, there isn't an alternative who does define 'woman' as an adult female with 2 X chromosomes.

So what do we not vote at all?

I think the difference, Lightbulb, is that we expect better from our friends than our enemies. The whole selling-point of the WEP is that they are on the side of women, and it's better that we know earlier than later that this isn't really the case.

I think one of the many things that have led to the current situation is that the leading lights of the WEP seem to have come into politics from quite a comfortable position. It's easy for them to contemplate people with male bodies in prisons, domestic violence shelters, and so on because they can't imagine ever going to prison themselves, or to a shelter, and they have no idea at all of the histories and the lives of the women that do go there. (Middle-class women, like every other class of women, are subject to domestic violence but financially more likely to be able to escape without needing to go to a shelter.) And on the maternity ward thing: their male partners are lovely chaps, can't imagine anyone else objecting to their presence, and the nannies are at home looking after their other kids, so it's perfectly natural they would want them in the ward with them overnight. And this isn't even a criticism: of course people will draw on their own experiences which shape their politics and the way they view the world - we all do that. And I actively want middle-class women with skills and confidence and platforms to engage in politics and champion rights for all women! But it's a failure of political vision if they can't imagine that life isn't always like that for other women.

Do what the trans activists did and join various political parties.

I am helping with the local elections and brought up the Green party issue of "non men" it ended up in the bar creating a very long debate and many councillor lefties being open mouthed on the trans issues.

I'm mostly a lurker though have posted a bit recently. I would not vote for WEP, though did like her answer on education in schools. I agree with just about all points made by the Mumsnetters and would like to think them for articulating points which concern me, so well. Particularly with regards to the men on maternity wards issue. I have always had my partner with me afterwards as I had a private room, but I would not want to inflict him on other woman, nor would he want to do so. I certainly would not want the fact that I am privileged enough to be able to exercise some choice to ever impact on another human, especially another woman. I define 'woman' in the same way as the majority of the posters on this thread.

Also, Lightbulb, I'm just going to C&P what Manatee said earlier too:

"I really think that all the WEP would need to say is 'yes, we can see that self-identification could be abused to create routes for predatory men to claim 'trans' status and thus gain opportunities to harm women. We fully support the right of both trans women and biological women to be free from abuse and will consult on how these needs can be addressed.' "

Just an acknowledgement that there could potentially be instances in which 'trans' rights may conflict with women's right. But then that would be acknowledging that transwomen ≠ women I guess. Which brings us back to the whole 'becoming' women thing

My point is why are we not demanding the same stance from women's aid and rape crisis?

They both have a 'self identifying' definition of 'women'.

Afaik when WEP was set up the trans lobby targeted it and used their power to force them into this stance.

I don't think a lot of their members/candidates actually believe in the self identifying model but if they say that in public they will get death threats.

So I'm not going to vilify any woman who is forced through fear to make public statements which are contrary to their privately held views.

And what is the alternative? Don't vote at all? No one here has answered that question.

I think it was a car crash too. Evasive, meaningless platitudes.

I propose that we should set up our own political party. There are some people on this thread that I would rather vote for.

Do we seriously think that standing up and saying "Women and the trans community are different and deserve bespoke solutions to the specific issues each face, while acknowledging the common ground they share by working in partnership where appropriate and refusing to collude in the oppression of the trans community or of any other marginalised group." is going to lead to death threats??

And if so, so what? Women get threats of violence and sexual assault just for speaking up about anything. It was always so and why we need a political party to represent the interests of women because the current status quo does not.

We need to stand up and be defiant in the face of this oppression.

I also don't believe there is a trans lobby that is dangerous and out to take the rights of women. I do believe some of the current proposals of self identification will allow some abusive men to perpetuate abuse and would like to see safe guards in place to mitigate that risk to the point of it being obsolete.

"any woman who is forced through fear to make public statements which are contrary to their privately held views"

Anyone too scared of backlash to make public statements should not be a politician.

My point is why are we not demanding the same stance from women's aid and rape crisis?

Because rape crisis and women's aid are not the problem, here. They are tiny groups of underpaid, overworked women, doing one of the most stressful jobs possible, under constant threat of all kinds of things (violence, funding cuts, goodness knows what) and they did not choose this situation - they had it forced on them. They are not running for public office - they are working under very difficult conditions to support other women. I think rape crisis et al need our support in retaining whatever scraps of rights they have in supporting other women, not vilification. Some extreme trans activists have been targetting crisis centres and refuges, and I will never ever go down that route.

So I'm not going to vilify any woman who is forced through fear to make public statements which are contrary to their privately held views.

The politicians I have most admired have been the ones where their private views and their public ones are the same. They are the ones I want to vote for. I completely understand any woman in any situation who keeps quiet on these issues, but if you say one thing in public and another in private, then ask for my vote, then while I won't vilify you, I will also not vote for you.

I have no idea what the private views of anyone in the WEP is, though. I can only go on what they say in public.

Perhaps the next leader of the WEP will be a trans woman - in fact it seems quite likely.
And, looking at transgender women in the news at the moment, they will be much feistier and louder then the present one!
Oh, well, perhaps that's how it will go - we will get equal rights and space because our loud angry transwomen will shout louder for it and for some obvious inexplicable'reason people will listen to them

Oh crap StKildasNun, you're probably right. The NUS nearly had a transwoman as the women's officer, so this is perhaps likely in a few years' time.

I don't like what she said any more than everyone else on this thread.

But are you saying any of the other party leaders or mayoral candidates are any different on the trans issue?

The whole political establishment is pro trans.

I don't see how boycotting WEP on this issue in favour of other parties who are just as bad helps anyone.