MNHQ here: webchat with MPs Jess Phillips and Flick Drummond

[BojanaMumsnet]

Hello,

We’re pleased to announce a webchat with Jess Phillips MP and Flick Drummond MP, co-chairs of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Women and Work, on Monday 23 January at 2pm.

Monday sees the release of the APPG’s first annual report, which explores the broad theme of ‘women returners.’ It has considered ‘a range of diverse issues which impact on the ability of women to return to the workplace, particularly after taking maternity leave or fulfilling caring responsibilities.’

Jess Phillips is the Labour MP for Birmingham Yardley. Before this, Jess spent five years working for Women’s Aid, and served on Birmingham City Council, where she was appointed Birmingham’s first ever Victims’ Champion. Since being elected to Parliament in 2015, Jess has served on the Women and Equalities Select Committee and the Backbench Business Committee. Last year she authored a guest post on Mumsnet in support of the Reclaim the Internet campaign.

Flick Drummond is the Conservative MP for Portsmouth South. Prior to her election in 2015, she worked as an insurance broker, Ofsted lay school inspector and was a member of the TA Intelligence Corps. Flick now sits on the Women and Equalities Select Committee, where her work has included contributing to the Gender Pay Gap inquiry, in which she called for more flexible working conditions to be offered at the start of employment. Flick cites her own experience of re-entering the jobs market after raising her children as important in giving her a first-hand account of the unique difficulties that women face in the workplace.

So if you'd like to talk to Jess and Flick about women and employment, returning to work, their experience of being women MPs (or just plain MPs), sounding off on Twitter or anything else that takes your fancy, do please join us on Monday. As always, please do keep in mind our webchat guidelines - one question each (follow-ups if there’s time) and please be polite!

Thanks
MNHQ

Today was the first day I heard back from them. Maybe they thought I needed an extra couple of days to cool off

I've had to actually get on with talking to rl people these past few days. Very weird I can go back to being a recluse in rl again now.

RL? What's that then?

Welcome back.

Thanks I'm off to cause trouble elsewhere now

(I am joking MNHQ)

I do not see the point of having MPs here is MNHQ is going to vet questions by booting users. I read the questions of two of the banned individuals and they were perfectly reasonable questions.

Females are in a crisis at the moment in countries like the UK where using the word "women" is unclear. It should be perfectly acceptable that MNHQ allow questions that focus on the definition of women since today any male can identify as a woman. What you call "collective barracking" might actually be our voices in dissent of the ongoing brainwashing of women who are being obliged to call males "women" least they be punished.

If MNHQ is going to boot off users who ask perfectly reasonable questions to politicians, then this amounts to intervening quite unethically in public debate. These politicians are perfectly able to answer or pass on the questions. It strikes me as highly unethical that MNHQ effectively censor users, acting as intermediary between MPs and the public.

I think this link's relevant here, since we're discussing MPs, although it doesn't include either Jess or Flick. My MP sent it to me yesterday.

Transcript of recent debate on transgender equality

Caroline Flint asked one question about how women's rights would be protected and was instantly shouted down. Maria Miller cited gender-neutral toilets on planes as a reason why gender-neutral toilets in general should not be a problem for women.

fiiiiiish

I've been looking for you every day.

So glad you're back !!!

EmpressOfTheSpartacusOceans

FFS. Toilets on an aeroplane only allow one person at a time. And they open onto a plane full of people. All sitting right there.

Does anyone know whether it is only your local MP who has any sort of obligation to you? If you write to an MP in another constituency, is there any protocol that means they can't address your issues?

you write to an MP in another constituency, is there any protocol that means they can't address your issues?

They will usually refer you back to your own MP.

Thanks Datun I have been well and truly reprimanded and have done my time on the naughty step

I'm just watching Ellen (don't judge me) and they are talking about transgender children, suicide rates and gender confirmation surgery, it shouldn't be called gender reassignment apparently. That's a new one on me

I think perhaps in future MN should supply the questions. It's not a really a webchat if they don't want the women who are active on the site to ask them is it?

Actually, there's no real point in having webchats at all is there? Just ask the MP or whoever to do a Q&A themselves - if you take MN out of the equation, it would just cut out the middle(wo)man. And the MPs would get to talk about what they want to talk about.

This thread is embarrassing.

I was just reading the cervical screening one. That seemed a bit heated too - some might say hijacked by people with an anti-screening agenda.

Piglet is right, because there's a strict Parliamentary Convention that states MPs can only deal with their own Constituents

piglet and holly

So if your local MP is a dick you're stuffed.

We've had a petition on here, loads of us have written to our MPs, we've addressed questions in real time to two MPs from different political parties.

No-one, not one person has actually addressed the issue.

I guess you're stuffed yes unless they're willing to raise it with another MP on your behalf if they know that MP is active on the issue, but I'm not sure if that is even allowed tbh. Have you tried anyone in the Lords apparently they usually answer out of courtesy even though they're not obligated like MPs

holly

Actually, my MP did pass my correspondence to Caroline Dinedage. Who wrote back, via my MP, with a long photo copied list of advice on how to be inclusive and the statement that the existence of AGP was controversial.

I'm in the middle of a letter providing links to dispute that assertion. But as another poster said you are so mindful of giving answers to pre-empt further daft questions, it gets very involved, which, in the interests of expediency, I'm trying to avoid!

I'm still trying to work out why there doesn't seem to be a balanced debate. Is it fear, bloody-mindedness, naivete, idealism or a determination to go with the popular vote, however uninformed that is?

Is it popular though? It's so hard to know. I think ordinary people are getting more and more perplexed, worried and pissed off. Look at the comments below any tabloid trans story.
Certainly whenever I speak to RL friends they immediately see the problems. Only one RL friend has reacted like a TA, just repeating the phrase "they're being their true self" or somesuch.

I think it's fear personally.

When you're aware of what's going on and the tactics the trans movement uses, it's easy to assume that reasonable questions (like Caroline Flint's) will be shouted down, and it's shameful that our Parliament is one of those environments. But I think in the real world most people share our view to varying degrees, but also our fear. I like to think critical views are growing, and fear is shrinking.

Oh shit.

I've just reread that transcript in more detail and Caroline Dineage says: "We will, from now on, manage anyone received into services run by the National Offender Management Service in the gender with which they identify rather than the sex assigned to them at birth."
Sounds like Ian Huntley could walk into a women's prison any time he wanted.

Fuck!

Sorry for bumping this but I have just read through it having forgot about the whole thing and tbh I agree that the members who were banned (I can only see 4 on this thread..not sure who the other 3 were so I speak of only the ones I can see) did not deserve it at all. especially fish. This woman is going through a tough time with her child who is directly affected by the 'work' of transactivists. I also feel that the trans questions were entirely relevant given they are/will affect actual women in the workplace, along with statistics and such. I fully expect the pay gap and so on to lessen in the coming years, not because women are being treat equally but because more men come out as trans. I did not see the questions as haranguing at all..noone was repeating the same question over and over or anything, all questions were well thought out and most directly connected to women in the workplace also.

From the link that Empress posted about the debate - My hon. Friend is making a very strong speech. He, like me, is wearing a World AIDS Day ribbon. On the global context for trans people, is he aware of the challenges for trans people who have HIV? Men who have sex with men are 19 times more likely than others to have HIV, but trans women are 49 times more likely to have HIV. Special attention needs to be paid to the provision of HIV services globally for the trans community.

This is some scary shit, and is surely what people concerned with transgender rights should be focusing on rather than taking away the rights of females?! The transcript also mentions a few times the lack of medical help available to transgender patients, which is also a disgrace. Yes, we should fight for equal opportunity for transgender people to have access to healthcare, housing, human rights etc. But this does not mean we should play along with the notion that biological sex is irrelevant or not even a real thing.

All in all I thank Jess and Flick for coming on here and I applaud Jess for her work in womens rights, it truly is an impressive track record. I do feel though, that this issue needs to be spoken about now as the whole movement will set womens rights back years and everyone seems to support this. I truly hope someone has the balls (sorry) to speak about the issue soon.