Heads up - webchat with Jeremy Corbyn Monday 19th Sept @ 2pm.

[JustineMumsnet]

Hello,

We’re pleased to announce a webchat with the leader of the Labour Party (and candidate in the current leadership election) Jeremy Corbyn MP on Monday 19 September at 2pm.

Jeremy has been MP for Islington North since 1983, and before 2015 was best known as a rebellious backbencher and chair of the Stop the War coalition. His leadership of Labour over the past year has inspired enthusiastic support as well as attracting sustained criticism. Among other things, he’s taken a new crowd-sourced approach to Prime Minister’s Questions, opposed military intervention in Syria and proposed the renationalisation of the railways.

His last webchat on Mumsnet (alongside fellow leadership candidate in 2015, Liz Kendall) featured lively discussions about socialism, electability and the provenance of Jeremy’s vests (Holloway Road market, since you ask).

Please do join the chat on Monday at 2, or if you can’t make it, leave a question here in advance. If you know people who you think would like to ask Jeremy a question, do please share the link around on social media too.

(If you’re interested in our webchat with the other Labour leadership candidate Owen Smith, take a look here .)

As always, please do keep in mind our webchat guidelines - one question each, follow-ups if there’s time and above all, keep it civil [taps nose like that geezer Shaw Taylor in Police 5] (Horribly showing my age there).

sorry - that was to voyage of dad, not lion (in case it's not clear).

user. That would have been a good question. It is terrible that the Labour Party is fighting within its ranks and it may collapse.

I heard someone being interviewed the other day who was saying that a strong opposition is just as important to the Tory party in government. The argument was that the right wing will descend into internal arguments without a common enemy.

Yep.

TBH, he sounded like a bot. There was no character or personality at all in his answers.

None of the political parties are going to grasp the transgender thorn though are they. They'll get pelters whatever they say. It's disappointing but I can't blame Corbyn for the current situation with trans v womens rights.

I agree with this, however someone with some form of power, at some stage, has to stand up and say they disagree with the current tripe..don't they? Please fucking tell me someone will dare take the step at some stage as I do not want to be known as a 'not man' nor be seen as nothing more than a womb on legs :(

It may seem like political suicide, but I honestly think most people (including men) think the current transagenda is just bullshit. The self-identification stuff I mean. The only issue is how it is made out to be 'progressive' to believe the fairytale. Noone likes to be told they are not progressive...but the house of cards HAS to fall at some stage surely...

That's hardly an answer on the Nordic model of sex work.

If saying a penis isn't female is political suicide, I'd like that whole debate to be fully public.

No, I can't see the bit where he explains his opinion of the Nordic model either.

Once again I would like to know how OS (or indeed Theresa May) would answer these questions?

I put Theresa as one of the people I would like a webchat with on the survey form. I actually think she may be a bit more blunt with her answers and actually clarify her views on stuff instead of waffling a lot and actually saying very little.

ThroughTheOtherSide - you said that: "The anti Semitism issue has been answered many times on TV and online and he has been clear on that too. In fact the Jewish community has backed him on this issue. A quick search on Google will show anyone who is not sure. "

On the contrary, a quick search on google will show that you are talking absolute rot. Far from "the Jewish community backing" Corbyn, on the contrary, as it stands a quite astonishingly low 8% of British Jews currently say they could vote for Corbyn (and this from a community that has historically been left-wing).

The Jewish Socialist group you quote is tiny, self-selecting and entirely unrepresentative of British Jews.

I was disappointed but not even vaguely surprised that he avoided responding to any of the many questions on anti-Semitism. Jews, like women, are not a priority for his basically white, male blokey version of socialism.

I would like to say thank you though to the many women who posted on prostitution and transgender issues. I found it a huge relief to discover that other women actually had those views: I had become used to left-wing spaces where questioning norms on transgender or legalising prostitution was just not socially acceptable. I learnt a lot today reading the posts above - though not from Corbyn, mind you. It would be good to think he learnt something too, though I'm rather less sure on that one.

Some marvellous textbook mansplaining from our new friend Jake there.

I think he did answer the prostitution question in a round about sort of way. I think he is saying the German model is 'no less than all women deserve'. In other words men can buy and sell women's bodies with no risk and no consequence but prostituted women should not be actually chained to the wall denied access to the public services enjoyed by non prostituted women and men.
He's basically standing up in front of an audience of women and saying that our humanity is less important than the free market and men's access to sex. If he agreed with the Nordic model he would have said. Not saying it tells me everything I need to know.

Agreed. MNHQ - please could you hold these web chats after work or at weekends when we all have the chance to comment. Lots of mums work during the day.

The prostitution question wasn't answered though really was it. If its about harm reduction...real life examples of polar opposite 'laws' show us that the Nordic model = harm reduction. His answer seems to veer more towards Germany's example...which is the opposite of harm reduction for women (but great for brothel owners and pimps)

Jeremy Corbyn is obviously an old fashioned lefty man. And like old fashioned lefty men, he doesn't care about women's rights, but thinks he is non sexist and can't understand the criticism that comes his way.

Interesting that his longest answer was addressed to a member of Momentum. I'm not a labour supporter but I was saddened that Angela Eagle was sidelined and I think she would have stood a better chance of appealing to Labour Party members than Owen Smith.

The prostitution question wasn't answered though really was it. If its about harm reduction...real life examples of polar opposite 'laws' show us that the Nordic model = harm reduction. His answer seems to veer more towards Germany's example...which is the opposite of harm reduction for women (but great for brothel owners and pimps)

I'd forgotton about the 'harm reduction'. Probably because 'legalised selling of women's bodies in a way that isn't harmful' is a bit of an oxymoron so I didn't quite compute that he'd said it. It's nonsensical.

Angela Eagle is far more experienced and would have been far better. But she was subject to lots of misogynistic abuse from Corbyn supporters, including a brick through her constituency window.

If Jake's intention was to 'get a rise' it worked.

He sounded exactly like a mansplaining little twat.

He has to go now, but we should all re-read his dribble and the link? ODFOD

I'm glad Angela Eagle didn't get this far. Her voice is like nails on a blackboard to me.

Webchats used to happen because people wanted to engage with Mumsnet. (Even if they did very often underestimate us).

This one was the equivalent of a chat show where people only come on because they have something to sell.

Really poor.

MNHQ - you really do need to collate the questions that have been posted before the chat starts, so that you can point out the key/most important themes - you know, the things that we would like to talk about.

jakepepper
Perhaps a better analogy would be to consider why we don't respect and legalise the autonomy of people in poverty who would like to, say, sell their own kidney to help them out of desperate financial need.
Nobody would condemn a person desperate enough to do this. You wouldn't punish a person for removing their own kidney. You would however condemn the evil fucker who decided it was his prerogative to purchase a bodily organ from someone he deemed less human than himself. You would condemn the middle man who set up the organ supply route and facilitated the transaction, taking his cut obviously.
And you would legally prevent a market in the purchase of body parts as an inhuman and uncivilised endeavour designed to exploit the vulnerable for the benefit of the privileged.
Because to allow that market unchecked would result in the exploitation and misery of an entire group of oppressed people.

Nobody is seeking to prevent women from having sex with any man they wish. Their bodily autonomy is intact. We are seeking to prevent men from purchasing women's bodies where those women would never consent otherwise. We are seeking to prevent harm to the many, even if a tiny, tiny few might choose this for themselves.

Preventing the purchaser.

I was far from impressed with JC before this webchat and he.has said nothing to improve my opinion. There were some very good questions asked which he ignored. I imagine this has lost him supporters.