History in the making! Watch Parliament Live at 2.30pm!

[Sunkisses]

According to @SexMattersOrg on Twitter the Govt have backed down on the MOMA (Maternity) Bill and will now use the word 'mother' not 'person' in the legislation!

Women did this! We are winning!

Tune in live here at 2.30pm to see history in the making: www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/3ca1efa2-16a5-489d-a5a0-5d929bff81f6

I am the same as Apollo

I complained on that site before but I don’t know how it is monitered

Woman's Hour has just started with a rundown of the programme. There's a couple of book plugs, talk about sending and receiving flowers, mention about boys' toys, but unfortunately it seems they don't have any time to talk about the House of Lords yesterday. First off, sperm donors.

It’s a Home Office page so one for the Home Secretary. I might write to the Lords Minster as well
www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office
Scroll down for Ministers.

nauticant must be all about those wonderful lady sperm producers then..

It is so depressing all this time has been wasted to debate something so abundantly clear and relating to common sense

In real life, how many people do you know who actually agree with this erasure of women?

The BBC has utterly lost its way

From the James Kirkup article:

If that sounds mundane and even a bit boring, that’s the point. Political debate, no matter how important the issue or how high the passions, shouldn’t be entertainment and certainly not a bloodsport. It should be a careful and deliberative discussion of complex things and their nuances. That is what members of the House of Lords did this week when talking about women, language and gender. And that is a victory — a victory for the political process — that is worth celebrating.

I have emailed my thanks to the supportive members of the HoL listed earlier by ConservativesForWomen and have received a few lovely replies already. This has made me even happier than I was before!

I feel listened to, for once.

The BBC is no longer fit for purpose.

I have always paid the license fee, even though we don’t actually watch television anymore at all, because I can’t be bothered with the hassle of harrassment from their enforcers. But I’m no longer willing to pay for it. I will not be renewing my license for the property I maintain this year, nor going forwards, and I expect that DH will not want to renew his in our home together either.

The most important thing about this is that we now know that any future legislation in this area - whether it is inappropriate gender neutral language, or reforming the GRA to allow self identification, will have a tough time getting through the Lords unchanged. It will be debated there. No debate is over.

Any future government that wants to bring in self id, or change the equality act on this, or whatever, will have to contend with that. The cat's out the bag.

It's brilliant.

I was surprised that Cashman did not attend, or Featherstone, or Ruth Hunt. I was surprised that there was such a small opposition to these amendments in general. But we all know that #NoDebate means 'I can't debate because I have no logical arguments' so perhaps that's why they all stayed away.

Spot on. Imagine standing up in the HoL and saying women who give birth don't have a right to be called women or mothers, because that's somehow inclusive of the tiny minority of people who chose to give birth, despite not believing they're of the female sex. Won't wash with the majority and they know it, and the real reason is even harder to defend. Far better to manipulate the situation behind the scenes so changes are enshrined in legislation before anyone has a chance to object. Far better also to allow a lesbian peer to slander a woman who works tirelessly, at great personal cost, on behalf of women and girls, in the hope that all everyone hears is alt-right and bigotry, rather than any useful contribution to the debate.

Exactly this. We see them.

So Women's hour didn't even mention it?
Why am I surprised? That's a pretty blatant example of BBC capture isn't it.

A quote from my reply from Lord Lucas -

“It’s much harder to repercuss us”

Yay!

@Xoxoxoxoxoxox

So Women's hour didn't even mention it? Why am I surprised? That's a pretty blatant example of BBC capture isn't it.

Is it pre-recorded?

I had two more lovely replies today from Lord / Baroness

So good all this

Op you did a great thing starting this thread

Has the guardian said anything yet?

@merrymouse

From the James Kirkup article:

If that sounds mundane and even a bit boring, that’s the point. Political debate, no matter how important the issue or how high the passions, shouldn’t be entertainment and certainly not a bloodsport. It should be a careful and deliberative discussion of complex things and their nuances. That is what members of the House of Lords did this week when talking about women, language and gender. And that is a victory — a victory for the political process — that is worth celebrating.

Spot on. Huge thanks to James (who is a self-confessed FWR fan ) for all his brilliant articles which have undoubtedly opened many people's eyes.

I am just so relieved to know that there are all these people in HoL who understand the issues and won't be cowered by inane hysterical/testerical insults about 'alt-right'.

Is it pre-recorded?

No it is daily broadcast radio the same as all the other radio shows. Some pre recorded bits apparently but generally live.

Sadly Emma Barnett seems to be more of a fan of men than women’s rights and the general BBC are totally captured. I’ve complained several times about them making completely false statements about the law (to the detriment of women obvs).

I think the format of the Today Programme and Woman's Hour make it difficult to cover what James Kirkup describes as "a careful and deliberative discussion of complex things and their nuances."

The normal way to cover this would be to phone around and get a couple of members of the HoL to have a 5 minute argument on live radio, but that doesn't help anyone.

They should make it a main feature hopefully they’re on the case

The Woman's Hour schedule will be worked out some time in advance I'd imagine, so I'm sure* they'll cover this in one of next week's programmes.

(*not sure at all, but hoping to be proved wrong.)

Cashman is deplorable. He gives off this immense sense of wounded martyrdom on twitter and makes out he's doing exhausting battle with the female forces of bigotry and evil, accepting all the gushing thanks for his courage from people in his twitter bubble, but when he had a chance to actually speak up and put his views forward he was nowhere to be seen. I'm going to assume this is because he knows that he had no actual argument to articulate, and nothing but vague, unsubstantiated accusations of 'hate'. I'm definitely open to hearing his explanation for his absence though.

Sadly Emma Barnett seems to be more of a fan of men than women’s rights and the general BBC are totally captured.

I think EB has received far more than her fair share of abuse for various reasons, and she has been better than others at covering this issue.

For those who have contacted Lord Winston, what email address have you contacted him on please?

Parliament email or imperial college?

I missed this yesterday so I'm going to watch it on "catch up" now, keeping my pen handy to make note of who I will be sending thank you cards and emails.

Shocked but not surprised that Women's Hour have not deigned to cover this today (and I'm truly fed up with the ever present feeling of resigned disappointment with the BBC).

I haven't been around for ages - the walking on eggshells of language you have to do here is just too much for me. But had to come in and add a cheer for our scrutinising House! Thanks to all peers who spoke up for women and who have clearly been paying a lot of attention to what women are saying. THANK YOU.

Also, the clear language they used. MNHQ - please take note.