Newsnight now

[bellabelly]

Emily Maitliss grilling Sarah Wollaston (LD) about gender self-id. Good!

The elephants in the room are all these violent men who prey on women and those who don’t present as stereotypically masculine. All the males we are trying to get away from apparently.

Men who are apparently being left unchallenged to continue being violent as infinitum.

It’s been said before but should we be opening women’s spaces to short men? Feminine men? Gay men? Men under 9 stone in weight? Long haired men?

How many types of uncomfortable men should we accommodate before someone asks the other men to stop being unpleasant to them?

I mean it just makes me rage that women’s rights can be assumed dispensable!
Because nobody in power will actually tell entitled predatory violent men to pack it the fuck in!

"A tiny number will exploit this to be violent towards women. We need a separate route for them"

Does Sarah include men with transvestic fetishism in that 'tiny' number?

Should women and girls tolerate being used as props by men who engage in paraphilic behaviour in women's spaces?

There already is a separate route Sarah, it's the one labelled 'men'.

You might want to show Emily Maitlis the basic respect of spelling her name correctly, Arethereanyusernamesletatall.

Sarah Wollaston used to be that rare thing - a competent and likeable Tory. Now she's in the Lib Dems she seems to be floundering. I dare say she hasn't bought into their ludicrous self-ID policy but is obliged to defend it out of party loyalty. Of course it's possible she isn't familiar with the debate and therefore hasn't understood it - though how someone whose life is immersed in politics could have missed the debate is beyond me.

You might want to show me the basic respect of reading the thread, seeing someone's already pointed that out (politely) and I acknowledged and corrected it, thatdamnwoman

Why the snark, FFS?

What's fascinating about this is that the official LibDem messaging about this is clearly never admit that women actually exist as a distinct category. They're not even allowed to say that.

Just watched it. Emily was fab, you could tell she wanted to say more. I was hoping she'd ask Sarah to define woman.

Sarah looked very uncomfortable and like she didn't really believe what she was saying.

They did conflate sex and gender and that adds to the obfuscation of the real implications of self ID.

Would love to hear what Pip Whitford has to say about this gender assigned at birth bollocks.

What's fascinating about this is that the official LibDem messaging about this is clearly never admit that women actually exist as a distinct category. They're not even allowed to say that.

It's amazing. They practically wince if you say the word 'women' to them. How did this happen?

Sarah Wollaston was invited on Woman's Hour to talk about the impacts of manifesto policies on women, and she just couldn't bring herself to talk about women in the context of self ID. I find that very worrying, to put it mildly.
See also LD policy on spousal consent. They call it 'veto' and have made it all about the trans and completely ignored the principle of giving equal consideration to the non-trans spouse.
Sarah Wollaston has got on board with this nonsense so quickly and enthusiastically that I wonder if she might have been the surprising Tory genderist James Kirkup alluded to?

Sarah Wollaston should not be allowed anywhere near the policies for rape crisis centres because she is completely incapable of prioritising women.

Wollaston put on a fake 'soft, caring and reasonable' voice for this interview that made me grind my teeth.

is how she usually talks.

Kudos to Maitliss for really pushing for the discussion to be woman-centred.

Wollaston will be an interesting one to watch in the election.

Totnes, it seems, has been Conservative since almost the beginning of time itself - so will their allegiance be to Wollaston, or the Conservatives?

I don't even understand a lot of what Sarah is saying

a different room in a shelter? How does that help?!

Totnes, it seems, has been Conservative since almost the beginning of time itself - so will their allegiance be to Wollaston, or the Conservatives?

It was marginally Leave so I would imagine the Conservatives will walk it.

Because you've gone to the trouble of googling how to contact her but not paid her the fundamental respect of checking you've got her name right. Don't know about you but when someone contacts me to say well done or they appreciate me, it undermines the whole thing if they get my name wrong!

@thatdamnwoman

The OP has been pulled up for that already and has corrected her mistake. Even apologised but wondered why the need for snark about it. I agree with her. The address details were appreciated though.

thatdamnwoman I'd just like to quietly point out that you have mis-spelled arethereanyusernamesleftatall

I misspelt my own name. Have to live with. Sometimes I misspell

It’s hard for me to rember when going between google and then my iPad takes on my misspelling as correct

Such is life

Bloody hell she doesnt get it

You are either fir self ID or against. If you say that anyone behaving appropriately wont be allowed in or deciding that someone isnt actually attempting to transition then surely thats exchanging one set if hoops for another?

Self ID means you accept anyone and everyone who utters the words or you dont. And that includes dodgy peope

Because I read down the thread, saw the mistake and posted to point out the problem.

Do I have to read to the end of every thread, no matter how long it is, before responding to something on the first page in case someone else on page 4 has spotted the same thing? In that case I'd probably need to give up MN completely or give up work!

Thank you for pointing out my mistake, Campervan. I apologise for that.

I have been thinking about this and wondering whether Rape Crisis should be asked for a comment.

Part of me doesn't want to put them on the spot when so many other funded women service providers are deliberately not commenting on the trans issue.

But on the other hand someone who has been identified as a Patron of Rape Crisis has made comments about how women who have been raped should behave / react should a trans / self id woman be in the same space they have sought for support after being subjected to an act of male violence.

Shouldn't they at least clarify what the actual practice is?

All too often "Patrons" and famous supporters of causes have very little knowledge of the actual policy and practice of an organisation.

But what an illustration of how women still have no power or status that none of the main women's organisation who say they represent women service providers, ie Women's Aid, Rape Crisis, Women's Resource Centre, dont feel able to take a public stand on behalf of women's sex based rights.

Or worse still they dont think its an issue.

thatdamnwoman it's not that you pointed it out, that I took issue with (the same for other posters I suspect) but your unecessary level of snark.

New posters to FWR often say they find us intimidating. Snarking at other women for simple mistakes (the same mistake as you yourself made, which is gloriously ironic, don't you think?) really isn't going to help on that score, is it?

I've been here 11 years now and am not going to get put off by a bit of snark - but I name change all the time so you couldn't possibly know that. What if I was new to FWR and tentatively posting something I felt wasn't controversial?

This isn't AIBU. We're not here for entertainment. There's a war on women and we need all hands on deck. Please let's treat each other with kindness and respect, at least, hey?

Anyway, so are you going to join me in writing to thank Emily Maitliss for focussing on Self ID on Newsnight?

Maitlis