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...??)

Confidence is a preference.

I am quite amazed that someone can be so totally convinced they can in turn convince people that they are what they believe they are simply by force of conviction. Wishful thinking and believing that scientific facts can be reinterpreted to suit you personally will not actually change reality.

It must be very frustrating for someone to know that their carefully curated version of themselves will always be interpreted very differently by others. And that people cannot be controlled no matter how hard you try.

Women saying no must be the most frustrating thing.

I'm sure a judge recently said that no one has the right to be offended

Unless I am very much mistaken, the judge said that no one has the right NOT to be offended.

And Jaz's post was a load of nonsense.

That TERFs are, by and large, racist and perfectly onboard with the idea of enforcing laws that would disproportionately affect PoC is no surprise.

Did they elaborate on this assertion? Because I can think of ways their ideological agenda disproportionately affects PoC in a negative way? And there are an awful lot of TRAs who make racist comparisons between males and black women, as if they are the same thing and a subset of males have as much right to call themselves women?

@AlfonsoTheTerrible

London GP who came back as a woman and wrote about how validating it is to perform intimate examinations on women who had refused them as a man

Two thoughts: (1) that is horrifying and that person has no business practicing medicine and (2) if this really happened - and is not just some man's fantasy - then it shows that the NHS is not listening to women.

Here you go. My bold.

"Patients who knew me from before were very happy for me. I didn’t receive any hostility. We live in a multi-ethnic society; a lot of our female patients wear long, very modest clothes. After I transitioned they allowed me to examine them. For me that was such a big acceptance. For new patients, either they didn’t know or they didn’t care."

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/sep/11/meet-the-trans-key-workers-treating-teaching-and-serving-the-uk

It'll be all the people, Wine, so many people.

So little time, so many disappointing women to re-educate

Aren’t mummies supposed to be nicer than this?

you’ll be simply astonished to hear that it’s not very complimentary about mumsnet

The book im reading has just mentioned mumsnet and i don’t think it was a compliment

Crikey, I'm positively breaking out the bulk bought amber solar with all this sunlight streaming down.

Big thanks to our visitors.

@RufustheSniggeringReindeer

you’ll be simply astonished to hear that it’s not very complimentary about mumsnet

The book im reading has just mentioned mumsnet and i don’t think it was a compliment

Don’t know about you, Rufus, but I usually find if someone is saying something shitty about mumsnet, it’s kind of a code for saying something shitty about women. “Oooh, they’re so silly and gossipy on their website, what do they do, talk about weaning and nappies and incontinence all day?” Or alternatively they think it’s somewhere women pick up dangerous ideas among the recipes*

*this bit is true, of course

Or alternatively they think it’s somewhere women pick up dangerous ideas among the recipes

this bit is true, of course

It is indeed!!!

I think you mean dangerous recipes Sophocles - I've never got over some of the Weetabix suggestions...

Jaz

^Frightening to see how mired some posters are in the idea they get to define who another person is—who that other person must be, despite that person clearly saying who they are—even though the reality is that's not your right or power to do so.^

Yet you seem very comfortable to think you can redefine what a woman is. Being a woman is a human being with a female body. Thats it. Thats all we share with other women. Yet you think you can redefine the word woman to mean anyone with an unverifiable inner feeling, a concept for which there is no scientific underpinning. You can believe it if you wish. You cannot, however, force others to believe.

Funnily enough it was about a child swearing and the mum getting arsey about it

This has got to be one of the most swearyist places on the planet

Or is it sweariest.....gonna hedge my bets and spell it both ways

Jaz, thanks for your response, but that was a load of bullshit. So there are biological differences between humans but it is so complicated and there are so many different variations between humans, it is absolutely impossible to classify them in any groups and anyway, it hurts women if they are classified as women....

See, the best way to deny women suffere discrimination because of sexism is to deny there is such a thing as biological sex classes. So if a woman is discriminated against it is never because of their sex, but of their unique physical characteristics. Try argue that in court when your contract isn't renewed when you are pregnant....

@AlfonsoTheTerrible

London GP who came back as a woman and wrote about how validating it is to perform intimate examinations on women who had refused them as a man

Two thoughts: (1) that is horrifying and that person has no business practicing medicine and (2) if this really happened - and is not just some man's fantasy - then it shows that the NHS is not listening to women.

If I remember rightly I think the BMA now allows any GP to self identify on their list so a patient can request a female doctor but turn up and be faced with a non female. I’m not sure that’s very ethical. Maybe there’ll be a court case?