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...??)

What gets me is if we had a mens rights activist come here and they'd said exactly the same MN would act differently.

Magic cloak.

I can’t decide if this My view is that we all need to listen to each other to understand how we can make progress together is funnier or the amount of time spent trawling FWR threads in hope of being able to teach us a lesson we so richly deserve

That’s a NO from me my daughters & my Mother

The 'we need to make progress together' is also to me rather reminiscent of posts on the relationships board where a woman says she wants to end the relationship and dp says no, they need to work together to make it work. Which oddly always largely involves doing what the dp says and wants.

I think we're past the point of mediation working now, there's too much water under the bridge, female women have had too much experience of the realities. Clean break time. Separate but equal provision in law, no more forced teaming that is to the advantage of one group at the expense of the other.

It’s kind of the key question, isn’t it, tellmewhen?

I’ve spent a lot of the last seven or so years thinking about this issue, I’ve listened to, debated with and read the thoughts of numerous trans identified people over that time. I most definitely haven’t had my eyes shut and my hands over my ears, and I fully understand the position they’re coming from (in as much as anyone can understand such an incoherent, constantly changing set of ideas). So by Robins lights, this means I’m qualified to comment.

In that set of ideas is also the concept that “lived experience is everything, your perception is always valid and no one can tell you that you experience is wrong”. So one must never presume to comment over someone else’s lived experience.

But that last bit never applies when it’s women’s experiences with transwomen commenting on them. It’s completely hypocritical. We really can’t say this enough.

I hate so much about this thread but I do very much love the sisterhood and solidarity. ❤️💪

@Winesalot

I wonder if there are any pics of Bergdorf’s tweet that

‘said the suffragettes were “white supremacists who were fighting for WHITE women’s rights” ‘

From www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/munroe-bergdorf-labour-lgbt-party-loreal-model-trans-resign-corbyn-edited-a8241746.html

Because yes, Bergdorf is a great feminist apparently. And complains when they get called out on their comments. Whoodathunkit ? People being accountable for the shit they say?

Asked to show why they should represent women when they say it? Who would have thought that women would be incensed at having their experience declared not legitimate for interpretation in regards to a law meant to protect us...

Screenshot.

So. I want to get this right. Women who complain that males representing their interest on boards, committees, panels... or anywhere are supposed to accept this without comment.

Yet, purity now dictates even an actor must be fully (and life long) representative of the character they play?

Things I am sure my trans colleagues in science never experienced (whatever difficulties they may have had to struggle with):

Being told in school that science wasn't for them because they were girls.

Having the school careers teacher tell them they'd be suited to a career in nursing (but not medicine).

Having to fight their way into university to read physical sciences against a backdrop of admissions tutors who openly told their male students "I have to take a woman every three years or so to keep the equal ops people quiet."

Being told by the university careers service that teaching would be a good use of my degree, but not doing a PhD because you couldn't combine that with marriage and children.

As an early career academic getting dumped with (1) taking the minutes; (2) all the caring jobs round personal tutor work; (3) all the "women's issues" jobs (of course with no actual power to effect genuine change).

Having to bring an equal pay claim because long pay scales and maternity leave plus performance related pay pretty much inevitably leads to sex-based pay inequality.

that last bit never applies when it’s women

Work through all the many, many rules that have been issued to female women. How many of them are reciprocal values that work both ways, and are modelled by those demanding them? How often does the walk being walked match the talk being talked?

Thanks Sunset. And recently too I see.

@Gibbonsgibbonsgibbons

I can’t decide if this My view is that we all need to listen to each other to understand how we can make progress together is funnier or the amount of time spent trawling FWR threads in hope of being able to teach us a lesson we so richly deserve

That’s a NO from me my daughters & my Mother

‘No Debate’ is failing for you so now you think we need to listen to each other?

As pp have said. You don’t speak for me.

I am uncomfortable with ‘Encouraging LGBT+ Women to Stand’ because it lumps two disparate groups together.

Women are a biological class. LGBT+ includes men, who can claim membership of any of those categories due to 'identity', thus reducing women to a minority within a minority.

I can't think of any notable instances in which the LBGT+ category is occupied by a lesbian or a bi-woman - all of the positions are occupied by TW. But am happy to be shown to be wrong.

You also popped in to the webchat with the minister on MN, which I noticed since someone who cared about women in general might have thought with their own personal and very privileged direct access to government ear, that the right thing to do might have been to let some ordinary women be heard.

I'd forgotten about that.

Nothing about women of course. The only message was apparently safeguarding shouldn't apply to law-'abiding trans individuals' 🤣

My post upthread was deleted for quoting another deleted post, which I only quoted as saw @mnhq had already modified it so assumed it was safe.

Would that count as a strike, does anyone know?

Am I the only one who thinks that this “we have to listen and work together to make this work” sounds a bit ominous?

When you listen to it without thinking, it seems reasonable, but then you realise that someone has appropriated the lived experience of women and taken a place which was reserved for one of these born women.

And that the outcome of the “working together” will be to see to which extent women’s’ rights will be comprised? There is never an “if”?

I would be all for “listen and working together” as long as it was recognised that there was a conflict of interests and that this person (or others like them) did not purport to be me or speak for me.

@MichelleofzeResistance

that last bit never applies when it’s women

Work through all the many, many rules that have been issued to female women. How many of them are reciprocal values that work both ways, and are modelled by those demanding them? How often does the walk being walked match the talk being talked?

I’m going to hazard a guess at “pretty much never”.

The thing about democracy is that it is the principle that people get to choose who they feel represents them.

@teawamutu

My post upthread was deleted for quoting another deleted post, which I only quoted as saw *@mnhq* had already modified it so assumed it was safe.

Would that count as a strike, does anyone know?

They normally email you if you get a strike.

Am I the only one who thinks that this “we have to listen and work together to make this work” sounds a bit ominous?

I read it as "You must listen to me and be nice and kind about what I tell you I feel, and roll over and capitulate completely, and in return I will tell you what you feel, and tell other people (mostly men in power) on your behalf (because I have appropriated your place and am now placed to talk and be listened to) what you feel and experience, so they can listen and act in my best interests."

I don't for an instant think there's any "listening to each other" involved in this position.

Why do women need to 'listen' to people who aren't women about what women need? Or work with them? At all?

No thanks.

It’s a NO from me robin

It’s a NO from my daughter my sister my nieces my mother my grandmother

It’s a NO

As a woman, what has impacted on my work - a brief precis :

period pain, pregnancy, miscarriage, birth, breastfeeding,

sexual harassment, sexism, childcare.

How many of these things will a transwoman face? How will they empathise with the actual physical day to day reality of being a woman, and all of the real issues that entails? Perhaps they can empathise, or are impacted by some specific issues regarding clothing or homophobia or some kind of sexism. But the issues that have the largest impact on women are not experienced by someone born male.

After the 50:50 event where Sal Brinton of the Lib Dem’s said they’d be happy with a parliament that was 50% men and 50% TW and no one disagrees

Ah, but what if the question was: would they be happy with a parliament that was 50% women and 50% transmen?

I bet there would be some backpedaling then.

And that the outcome of the “working together” will be to see to which extent women’s’ rights will be comprised? There is never an “if”?

Nailed it. I'd very, very happily work with trans people to help them secure the facilities and provision they need. But that's never what's being asked for.

So as a cis woman, I can apply to represent TW on panels, paid posts as a rep, etc, and if I'm rejected, presumably I can complain about being subjected to anti-cis bigotry and hate?