50:50 Parliament Campaign to Encourage Women in Politics now have TWO Transwomen on the Panel

[gardenbird48]

I saw 50:50 women tweet to Sue Pascoe Chair of the Conservative Women’s Organisation some time ago on their #askhertostand, but then I couldn’t find the tweet and thought maybe they’d realised their mistake (can you guess?) and deleted it.

However, how wrong I was! There are now two people that have extremely limited ‘lived experience’ as a female (Sue was a married father and successful businessman and Master to Foxhounds until a few years ago). The other person has said hi on here recently.

I don’t mean to be rude but surely the whole point of encouraging women to stand for Parliament is to help overcome the barriers women face in entering politics. Any barriers that trans people face are rather different. It is also interesting that on a panel of three for their ‘Encouraging LGBT+ Women to Stand’ campaign, there us only one person with actual lived experience of being a woman (I am hoping that Mandu Reid of the WEP was born female at least...??)

Robin, I'm also very interested in your response to Barracker's post, timed I believe at 11.24.55.
I hope you'll let us know you've read it.

@RobinMoiraWhite

I have found this a really interesting thread.

Presumably I have some small standing to comment as the thread was started to comment negatively on my invitation to speak at the 50:50 event. I, and those who invited me to speak believe that I have something useful to contribute, many here do not. I am not a believer in 'no platforming' except in very extreme circumstances. My working life involves civilsed discussion of sometimes very difficult topics in a public venue, so there may be an element of 'horses for courses.'

But for some the debate on this thread is now answering a question not asked in that I am not, and have never claimed to be 'speaking for women' defined, presumably as women who hold negative views against me. That's never been my position. Anyone who has heard me speak (when speaking personally) will know that I speak from my experience, and sometimes contrast that with the experiences of others.

Professionally, I am there to speak for those I represent, and in my legal career that has included, for example, a number of cases in which women struggled to bring a legal claim because of the absence of a 'harassment' protection in discrimination legislation until it was amended in. At much the same time I was part of the long road to have PTSD recognised as a disability under the relevant legislation. I dont consider myself disabled.

On a personal level, I believe that, unless their object is harm to other citizens, all citizens have a right to live in peace and comfort, AND my view is that that is most likely to be achieved by working together, rather than stamping down other folks. That might not be your view, and you are entitled to that view. It mystifies me, however, how you are to build the consensus that will lead to positive change from that approach.

Sure, I dont have the life experiences of those who have lived lives differently from mine, but I like to think I can read across from my life experiences to the difficulties experienced by others, and speak up FOR and WITH them when it is necessary or important to do so.

You define when you represent us and when you pretend you aren't whilst occupying a role that would otherwise be filled by a woman?

Have i got that right?

Just so i can clarify if we are being gaslight or not.

On a personal level, I believe that, unless their object is harm to other citizens, all citizens have a right to live in peace and comfort, AND my view is that that is most likely to be achieved by working together, rather than stamping down other folks.

I think most of the women here would probably agree that all citizens have a right to live in peace and comfort AND that working together rather than stamping down other is theoretically a good thing.

The difficulty comes when those who are doing the stamping down are the ones who have always done the stamping down, but who are now trying to portray themselves as the stamped upon.

It's utterly dishonest.

The difficulty comes when those who are doing the stamping down are the ones who have always done the stamping down, but who are now trying to portray themselves as the stamped upon.

It's utterly dishonest.

This ☝️ 100%

Sure, I dont have the life experiences of those who have lived lives differently from mine, but I like to think I can read across from my life experiences to the difficulties experienced by others, and speak up FOR and WITH them when it is necessary or important to do so

If that was the case you wouldn't need to be here trying to argue your point. Nobody here would wish for you to stop speaking up for women and girls; but It should be very apparent, by now, to anyone with any sensitivity , awareness and compassion for the experience of girls and women, with all of the ramifications and nuances, that the best way to do that is to show solidarity and stop trying to force one's way in.

I can show solidarity with gay men, for example, or for people from other ethnic backgrounds; and I can speak up for them, whilst acknowledging they are different to me, and require, in certain instances, their own provisions,

Barracker says it all - if that post is deleted, it's disgraceful. I would also like to see it answered

ironically, a man who identified as a woman in the wrong way was expelled by the Labour Party.... (link below)

• Anna Lee was the first queer, trans, disabled, lesbian person to run for NUS UK Women's Officer in 2016. (not successful but given quite a lot of national press in support of the bid)

• Sophie Cook - aimed to be the first transgender Labour MP (stood against Joanna Cherry at one point) celebrated by 100 Pioneering Women of Sussex blog

ref. the previous entry on the list Dan Orr attempted to rebrand International Women's Day as International Womxn's Day but got rather a sharp reaction to that.

btw, thanks for your comments @RowanMumsnet and for letting the thread stand, just so you know all the people mentioned are out in the public eye as transgender.

inews.co.uk/news/politics/labour-self-identification-transgender-woman-david-lewis-womens-officer-157447

have never claimed to be 'speaking for women' defined, presumably as women who hold negative views against me

It's not about whether women hold negative views - or any views - about you! It's about whether a male bodied person can actually understand, on a very deep level, the issues that impact on women.

I wonder if Joanna Cherry will be the LGBT SNP representation they confirm? LOL. I doubt it. They're only interested in ones who have the same views as them.

Sure, I dont have the life experiences of those who have lived lives differently from mine, but I like to think I can read across from my life experiences to the difficulties experienced by others, and speak up FOR and WITH them when it is necessary or important to do so

You can certainly speak up FOR women but unfortunately you can't speak WITH women as you do not have their lived experience of being a member of the female sex class.

100 years ago people said women didn't need political office because our husbands or male relatives could represent our interests

And now we don't need it because transwomen can represent our interests

plus ça change

I object to having to pretend that trans women and women are the same. Unless of course it is a trans position then women are different
Nothing about this improves womens lives. Our needs are not the same. Only it it accepted that women are a distinct group can our needs be met and that includes who represents us

Having thought about it, while representation from women who have lived as women since birth is necessary, I can see transwomen being uniquely placed to contribute to a discussion on female rights.

I mean, if you were born male and experienced male privilege first hand, surely it makes you most able to see where the gap is between what men think and what women actually live?

Or if you changed your gender identity at a young age, you must have experience of the changing room/toilet dramas at school and have some perspective to offer there.

Transwomen typically don't take maternity leave. But you know what, as a woman without kids, I don't either. It doesn't mean I can't empathise with female working rights - I get viewed with suspicion due to having a womb. And for many transwomen, if no one can tell they were born a different gender, they'll get viewed the same way too - judged at face value as a potential liability.

I would agree with @RobinMoiraWhite that she has something to offer.

What I couldn't tell you is whether a 50:50 cap should be adjusted for trans people and if so, what should happen to that ratio. I don't think it's right that 100% of the men making up the male 50% were male from birth and 100% of the women making up the female 50% were female from birth, but I also don't know how to fairly adjust that quota.

I don't really like quotas. In an ideal world, the best person for the job would just get the job. Positive discrimination to me is still discrimination. However, I can appreciate what is trying to be achieved here with a blanket 50% female target.

100 years ago people said women didn't need political office because our husbands or male relatives could represent our interests
And now we don't need it because transwomen can represent our interests

its unbelievable.

I've mostly skimmed this thread and it's pretty depressing.
I can't believe that in 2021 we're actually having to argue that natal women should have equal representation at a 50:50 event.
I just typed out a whole section of my experience of being discriminated against because of my sex but deleted, because why should I?
Women are entitled to female representation in Parliament. It's not a favour or a nice-to-have.
I fully support all vulnerable groups having representation. I think its incredibly important and turning up and claiming to speak for a group who have very different experiences to you, even as they object and demand their own voice, isn't representation of that group. It's just the same old talking over I-know-whats-good-for-you-even-if-you-dont that women have always had to deal with.
Claim representation on your own behalf. Don't take ours

Robin, you say "all citizens have a right to live in peace and comfort, AND my view is that that is most likely to be achieved by working together, rather than stamping down other folks."

I entirely agree.

"Sure, I dont have the life experiences of those who have lived lives differently from mine, but I like to think I can read across from my life experiences to the difficulties experienced by others, and speak up FOR and WITH them when it is necessary or important to do so"

You may like to think that, but instead of speaking with us, you are speaking instead of us.

@HerewardTheWoke

100 years ago people said women didn't need political office because our husbands or male relatives could represent our interests

And now we don't need it because transwomen can represent our interests

plus ça change

No change then

My first deletions, one for thanking Michelle for her post that said so well how I feel. I’ve posted here for a few years and have name changed a few times. Women forcefully saying “you don’t speak for me” are deleted. How ironic.

I have found this a really interesting thread.

Haven't we all.

Transwomen typically don't take maternity leave. But you know what, as a woman without kids, I don't either. It doesn't mean I can't empathise with female working rights

Being a women without kids didn't stop me not being informed by my immediate superior of an internal promotion while a younger less experienced colleague was encouraged to apply. Wonder why ? Not my incompetency as when I did find out and it went for interview guess who got the job? No transwomen face such discrimination on their potential reproductive roles

You may like to think that, but instead of speaking with us, you are speaking instead of us

indeed and given how long Robin has been reading and posting here, Ive never seen them shift their position once. Its not about listening to women and taking their genuine concerns on board, it's about telling us why we're wrong whilst speaking instead of us