MN Webchat survey

[Angryresister]

I am sure I saw that there was one yesterday advertised on the Webchat page and was all set to fill it in but it seems to have disappeared. Anyone able to locate it? Or has anyone filled it in?

I haven’t found a link to it. But I do feel the current rules on Webchat questions aren’t really working. I really don’t understand why asking direct questions about the clash of rights between XY people identifying as women, and women, is so taboo. I also don’t understand why certain questions are zapped when no questions on a particular topic have been answered. Someone suggested maybe voting for the most pertinent question, that might be an idea.

I thought running a thread here and then voting for the one or two questions on women/girls' rights that HQ might allow. If not active constructing between several questions using the best of each to ensure that what goes up on the chat are the best ones from the topic.

For the more conscientious politicians with researchers that thread in itself may then be of interest.

Great idea MOTR

Sorry that should read *I thought it was a great idea running a thread here -

was not my idea! It was suggested on a thread the other day and looked to me the best way forward. Sorry, trying to do several things at once and failing to stay coherent.

Yes, good idea, Michelle.

• or, whomever the idea should be attributed to!

Quite. Own up. What brilliant person came up with that one and do they want to organise it for the next webchat?

(And are they a Regan funded nun??)

You need to move fast then as the Emily Thornberry one is up, and the block on GC questions may have already happened

Way too late for this one, but that would be a fairer way to do it. If only a couple of questions are allowed on this topic then they need to be the best and most representative questions as opposed to just whoever manages to get one up on the thread first. Which is why some kind person asked HQ to remove their question so Tinsel's could be heard.

That was Empress

Really good idea.

The implication that womens rights is something that needs to not be focussed on on mumsnet depresses me somewhat, I have to say. Also the making out that this is not a huge issue, with many many threads too..is shite. A question about safeguarding kids, would come under 'gender stuff', but so would asking about womens refuges. Totally different topics, but both 'the same' apparently, and something that can now get you banned for asking! Its..odd.

This is our community, we should be able to ask the questions we feel are most important.

Yes, Batshite. It's feminism as a whole that has been reduced to one question, and it has to be one that won't upset any applecarts.

Women, know your place.

Having just read Thornberry's car crash: the limiting of questions (and the clear atmosphere and scolding around it that the only people even mentioning this ugly subject of female rights is an ugly group of people who behave badly and must be strongly contained, which must be fully picked up on by the gender extremist lobby and the politician in question) - what in fact happens is that the politician completely dodges the questions and goes unchallenged, and skips off into the sunset with their I Fucked Over Female Rights On MN t shirt in hand.

The only remaining thing is that the evidence is right there that they're a complete twit, who couldn't give a toss about female people for all their virtuous warbling about abortions and safe women's topics. (Or at least safe topics so long as there's a wall of protection around them from anyone pointing out the massive flaws in their thinking because they're removing what 'woman' and 'female' actually means.)

If Thornberry or Starmer had to actually sit in a room and debate this with people pointing out the issues and flaws in what they say, I hold no hope at all that they'd be able to do it. And someone that lacking and that afraid of debate should not be in any position of power.

I don’t bother participating in MN webchats - there’s no point, when anything important or relevant to women is censored. (I’m glad some of you managed to screenshot the evidence, to publicise on Twitter.)
And even if it wasn’t, the chance of getting an honest answer out of a politician (as opposed to a bland sound bite) is bugger all.
As a Tory, I don’t personally care who ends up leading the Labour party. But we do need an effective Opposition, in a healthy democracy, and preferably one that recognises women’s rights. There’s no chance at all of that, judging by the current crop of candidates.

'What do you think about men being put in womens prisons, and potentially sexually assaulting women (statistics...)?'
'Transwomen are vulnerable in mens prisons!!!'
'But what about women?'
'Trans rights are human rights'

Depressing. Said on the other thread, caring about the rights of women appears to be becoming a taboo subject. Theres always been resistance obviously, but this is different. And even MN seem to be complicit in it this time, which is really depressing..

The assault on womens rights comes from many angles, and one or two questions simply does not cover it. Mind, more would just elicit more answers that don't actually answer but make it out that we must think of the poor men, fuck women. I want a webchat with someone who actually cares about women. I thought that was Jess Philips tbh, but her answer about refuges was dire. Again all 'trans people are no risk'. Noone says trans people are a risk because they are trans, however, transwomen are no less of a risk than other male people, and its widely acknowledged that male people are statistically a danger to females.