Emily Thornberry MP web chat

[midclegs]

Sorry for my fairly lame question to Emily for the webchat tomorrow. Hope you managed to get in better questions?

Sadly these webchats have become dull and stifled. Sign of the times that only sanitised questions and highly moderated interaction is permitted. The MP's continue in their self perpetuating policy bubble.
I won't be voting Labour again in a long time I suspect.
Think I'll be giving the webchats a swerve too.

HerFemaleness that's the heart of it. No space for nuance or doubt or questions. Which is why we are in the state we are in.

More than ever we need to phrase our allotted question to Nandy in terms of "do you agree females should have the right to single sex spaces as per the Equality Act, yes or no?

We keep giving them clever "trick" questions they can evade or twist.

We need one that is totally unambiguous in what is being discussed.

More than ever we need to phrase our allotted question to Nandy in terms of "do you agree females should have the right to single sex spaces as per the Equality Act, yes or no?

You'd think they would provide a yes or no answer, wouldn't you? But I bet it wouldn't.

We know that answer.

It's yes, but anyone can be any sex they like.

Cowards.

They see themselves as some sort of priestly class who need to save the country from sin. They're going to push on with this because in their eyes they are our intellectual betters and they know best.

Nail on the head.

Yes, though it seems they think it is as much moral betters as intellectual betters.

Emily's utter disdain for any female wishing to even mention female needs instead of wholly centering and rushing to sympathise with male needs was very obvious.

With a few random chants of 'must listen to voters' which she promptly then belied by ignoring voters in real time.

It's yes, but anyone can be any sex they like.

True, but at least that sort of answer makes sense to Joe Blow on the street who has not even heard of this issue.

Saying "Inclusion is lovely and we should all be nice"

vs

"Anyone can choose what sex to be"

elicits different responses.

They see themselves as some sort of priestly class who need to save the country from sin. They're going to push on with this because in their eyes they are our intellectual betters and they know best.

You'd think in this case that they'd be falling over themselves to explain exactly how we are wrong and help to educate us. Refusing to answer questions doesn't help their argument that they are in the right and we're a bunch of ignorant bigots.

I'm sure they're all aware of what happened to Jo Swinson when she actually tried to explain her point of view and they know they'd look just as idiotic. When is one of them actually going to show some backbone and speak some sense?

They're not going to show some backbone and it's depressing. I'd guess that most of them got into politics to make a difference and that (for the women) partly that was motivated by being female in a patriarchal society. But, now power is more important than principle. But Emily thinks that a second referendum would have saved Labour rather than sunk it so she is completely out of touch with the electorate, doesn't understand why Labour lost and thinks she can chide or embarrass us into being 'nicer'. ffs the suffragettes must be spinning in their graves.

If someone is going to try and convince us they are a supporter of women's rights, I would just like to know their definition of "woman". It is after all central to what they are saying, one simple question and I see no need to avoid the question being asked or answered.

Without this basic question being answered, any talk of all women shortlists or prisons or fucking dinner ladies, is pointless.

They know what a woman is when they're taking rights away from them.

I'm so sad that the response to a trans woman being in a female prison was only considering the safety and sense of worth of the trans woman and not even acknowledging the safety and sense of worth of the other 99+% of prisoners.

Sometimes I feel I'm living in a parallel universe that praises kindness to everyone but women.

Generations of women (and indeed some men) have fought for us and yet the bottom line is people who identify as males or people who are biologically male always take priority.

I am kind. I love people. I love community. I love love. I am bisexual. I understand the struggles of the LGBT community - I am part of it. I still have the right to have my boundaries, safety and sense of worth acknowledged and respected.

I have been told I am transphobic because despite being bisexual I would not be with a trans person romantically. I've been told that because I find both men and women attractive it doesn't make sense I don't find trans women and trans men attractive.

How dare people dictate my sexuality. I would not find a morbidly obese person attractive. Yet I would be kind to them, could love them in other ways, respect and empathise with their struggles, defend them from bullies and hatefulness. I am allowed to not want to fuck someone without being called transphobic.

I fear my anger is turning to sadness. To hopelessness. Where is the kindness for me... I do not deserve it apparently.

They sure do, Stealth

Transwomen don't want to share with the other males, "fine!" says everyone - schools, hospitals, refuges, prisons, gyms, centerparcs...they can use women's facilities.

Women don't want to share with anyone born male, or with male anatomy - "shut up you transphobes!" Or "transpeople are the most vulnerable people on earth, and have suffered much much discrimination, and anyway they ARE women, and what are you afraid of? It's a lady penis."

"Why are you scared of males anyway?" "Women do it too" "If men want to rape you, they will find a way" "I see no threat to women" "You're just a bigot" "Get with the times!" - have I missed any?

The more I think about Emily comparing the current assault on women's rights to her being mean to a dinner-lady- the angrier I get. That was probably the most patronising webchat I've read on here (and I remember the WEP let's borrow you for photo ops ones).

Wasn't MN once known for how tough th webchats are? Yet these days, they are sanitized down as the politicians apparently will not come on if there are going to be hard questions. I do understand trying to make sure other questions are asked, yet I still don't understand the logic behind apparently many users not wanting to ask questions simply because a lot of questions have been asked on a topic they dont care about..if that happened to me, it would make me want to post mine more! There is a happy medium, between there being hundreds of questions on gender, and everything being expected to be broke into two..which are the first two which happen to be posted on a thread too. I don't think the balance is being struck anywhere near right tbh. The topic is so multifaceted, and can be came at from multiple angles..and many many feminists think that its the largest threat to womens rights that there is today, so of course feminists will ask about it, even moreso when politicians actively avoid answering these questions because its a controversial topic. Surely a better 'compromise' would be deleting questions that actually are doubles, or very very similar. Eg. Someone asks about men in womens refuges. Someone else asks about men in womens prisons. Those are pretty similar so..could be deemed duplicate really to thin out the gender stuff. But saying that a question about the amount of young girls transitioning, and female hospital wards are 'the same' is just..silly.

Either way, I cannot honestly see any labour politician ever answering any of the questions properly tbh. Party lines have been drawn, and its been decided that mens wants come way about womens needs. How shocking...

Tories seem marginally better, but not by much. Something has to give, soon. And shame on any politician for totally avoiding questions on the promised inquiry into the amount of kids referred for gender issues. That should be priority for anyone.

Mind I have to say, even with the removing duplicates thing, I do not think bans should be dished out for posting dupes. Mainly as the few times I have been on webchats, I have not gone back through the enrite thread to see whats been asked. So I could ask something similar simply through not knowing whats been asked prior. I know RTFT is best etiquette, but I still don't do it sometimes, and don't really think that should be a bannable offense..

Possibly the answer may be to boycott webchats, so all that is left is gentle wittering about biscuits.

MN's model relies on women showing up providing content.

But it isn't I'm afraid. Because then they'd have the mn 'seal of approval'.

It's tempting to boycott them ... or post our questions on Twitter at the same time and use a webchat hashtag. But all MN will do is put up their own questions and comments - like they did on the Emily one anyway.And no-one (who isn't a MNer) will realise what has happened. At least by participating, everyone gets to see which questions get full answers, which get a pat on the head and which get ignored. Viewing freedom of speech as something that only impacts transpeople's feelings is pretty ignorant tbh.

Its is appalling that our concerns are being shut down by MNHQ. The fact that this issue is the one that mumsnet mums are concerned about should make any decent politician want to discuss it. The fact they wont speaks volumes - they are not decent and not fit for purpose, they are corrupt and self serving, preying to the alter of the lobbyists with money.

we're finding it increasingly hard to tempt politicians onto Mumsnet because of fears they'll simply be harangued about this single issue and shouted at for not providing the desired response - which ultimately means no one will get to ask any of these important questions to our policy makers

Can you imagine if say a forum for people from the BAME community were told that questions for a web chat with a politician should not have everyone asking about institutional racism?

In that MPs are meant to represent their constituences, how is it thought appropriate to tell one part of that community that there concerns are off putting to MPs.

What better indication that MPs are running away from the issue and are trying to get MNHQ to help them avoid it.

So much for democratic accountability.

I was never mean to any dinner ladies, so can I keep my rights please?

Mumsnet can censor comment and remove anything that the visitor can’t answer, but unless the politicians actually listen to voters, they will get a nasty surprise on polling day.
Labour are not listening. They are all so convinced of being The Righteous, that they can’t conceive of being wrong on gender and the damage it is wreaking on women and children.
What has happened with these webchats ? Surely the WHOLE POINT of them is to talk to a wide range of women and answer their questions ? If you can’t do that, you really don’t deserve to be PM.
Is this a sea change at HQ, or a refusal of the politicians to answer Qs on gender ? Either way not a good look, on a website for women.