Ensuring the momentum continues and things change

[Changemusthappen]

Does everyone agree that one of the key questions to come out of the current debate around the safety of women, sexual harassment etc is what happens next and what can be done in the short and long term to tackle this.

Short term - can be put in place/motion immediately:

• continued and increased awareness of the harassment and threats that women and girls receive on a daily basis. There have been many phone ins on the radio this week and newspaper articles, these need to continue/be revisited regularly
• immediate zero tolerance in schools regarding sexual harassment of girls and inclusion of this in PSHE (it may be already). Additionally the emphasis that it is 'everyone's responsibility' to call out this behaviour.
• more police presence on the streets, trains, tubes
• Immediate government action to stop self id and repeal/reform the GRA
• Protection of all women's single sex spaces including toilets, prisons, sport etc
• detailed logging and followup of every report to the police of harassment, sexual assault, threatening behaviour
• increased cctv on tubes and trains

Long term

• a complete review within the police force regarding how sexual abuse/harrasment, threats etc are logged and dealt with
• Better planning around facilities, street lighting etc to improve safety

Obviously this is just a starter but I am interested in other's views. I am planning to write to my MP about this, it is important it is kept in the public eye.

@mnhq for shame deleting Barracker’s post

I’d appreciate if you can specify exactly what broke the talk guidelines please

PS: not going to apologise for criticising people who think ingesting synthetic hormones turns them into a different, gentler person. These people exist and can be found on reddit and various other fora.

Women of childbearing age have plenty of experience with hormonal contraceptives - not a silver bullet by any means, comes with severe side effects and not to be romanticised.

I saved that post too. Well, took a photo of it. Such a shame such a thoughtful eloquent post should be deleted. Shameful.

Oh no that is such a shame. There was nothing offensive in it. FB deleted a women’s running group yesterday 33,000 members. A member posted a photo that FB deemed abusive. There was nothing on show.

I have just seen Barrackers posts was deleted - why? There were no personal attacks just factual statements?

I made sure to archive it - I love Barracker's work, so didn't want something that good to potentially vanish, but didn't really think it would be hit. Will have to reread it to try to spot the trigger.

Guess I can't link it, but paste the URL for page 2 of this thread into archive.is. At least I did something useful yesterday.

"MNHQ - Barrackers post was extremely powerful and no-one on this thread can see what was wrong with it. Please could you give us an idea of which bit 'broke the guidelines' or was it all of it?

@MNHQ - Barrackers post was extremely powerful and no-one on this thread can see what was wrong with it. Please could you give us an idea of which bit 'broke the guidelines' or was it all of it?

I think Barracker's post would make the basis of a good article if any journos wanted to pick it up: 'The Things you're not Allowed to Say on Mumsnet'

It was political speech, and it was censored. I understand the dilemma MN is in, and I understand that sometimes compromises are necessary in politics. Because what we’re all doing here is deeply political.

Reading through the post, which I archived at once, I am struck by how modest its actual demands are: new laws to protect female people on the basis of their sex, and the freedom to accurately name the reality of sex. NOT a call for revolution or overthrowing the government. NO advocacy of violence. NOT a call for radical redistribution of wealth or property. Just an assertion of female boundaries.

Compare this to some of the demands of radical TRAs (e.g. free all trans prisoners, regardless of how serious their crimes), the fact that they have no problems getting them published and then tell me again that women are not oppressed as a group.

I watched ‘Lorena’ on prime the other day and I just sat and cried. Why? Because that case was 27 years ago and NOTHING has changed!!! I had tears of anger, tears of acceptance and remembering what I’ve been through myself
Our education system NEEDS to update the sex education part of the curriculum to include healthy respectful relationships, understanding & discussing emotions, consent, understanding what is harassment. This needs to be discussed by parents to children and absolutely zero tolerance within schools when children present with abusive behaviours (name calling, teasing)
To those pp trying to derail this thread I say no. A man who transitioned in his 40s does not know what a woman fears, how she feels looking down a dark alley, what she thinks standing at a bar feeling a strange hand slide around her waist. You do not know!

daca
It was political speech, and it was censored
But the Brexit board slags off politicians and policies of all hues day in day out, year in, year out
with hardly any deletions

It is a bit alarming when we've reached a stage where women asserting boundaries has become transphobic.

Because that states plainly: women having rights is now a threat too severe and wrong to be allowed to talk about.

Which kind of makes complete tosh out of any remaining attempts to claim that there is no conflict between trans politics and women having rights. Apparently the both cannot exist together: and for women to suggest that their rights should remain is an intolerable repression of others.

Journalists and MPs please take note and discuss accordingly, because as a woman I'm not signing up to this. I don't think a society in which women cannot have rights or even talk about having rights is a good place for 51% of the population to be.

[quote Changemusthappen]@MNHQ - Barrackers post was extremely powerful and no-one on this thread can see what was wrong with it. Please could you give us an idea of which bit 'broke the guidelines' or was it all of it?[/quote]
I think you've answered your own question. It was too powerful.

I have just re read Barracker's post on twitter and I can't see which bit breaks the guidelines?

ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ

Not 'welcoming' or conducive to 'civil debate' I suppose. But this was supposed to be a feminist action thread, and it only turned into something else because a couple of posters decided it must.

Just read barrackers post, awesome as always

No idea why it would be deleted, though it did seem to be full of those pesky facts people don’t seem to be keen on

Well, anyhow, it’s out there now, people from various countries are sharing on twitter. If I know anything about words and their power, Barracker’s post will have a significant impact. Every movement needs its propagandist (I mean this as a compliment), this is key for mobilisation.

@Daca

Well, anyhow, it’s out there now, people from various countries are sharing on twitter. If I know anything about words and their power, Barracker’s post will have a significant impact. Every movement needs its propagandist (I mean this as a compliment), this is key for mobilisation.

Quite - the fact that it's been deleted here just means it will be shared far and wide.

It reminds me of that bit in Harry Potter where Harry does an interview about Voldemort's return, and Dolores Umbridge forbids anyone to read it - thereby ensuring that the whole school reads it

@334bu

If some people want to remove the right of women to single sex spaces when they know that this will increase the potential for violence against women, let them be honest and own it. Male people know that males of all gender identities present the same risks as the statistics clearly show. So given this , let them be honest, tell women their needs don't matter, tell women that they don't count. Own it!

Pleeeease. Lets stop the ridiculous misquoting of the Karolinska study. Its worse than 'the Lisbon Treaty' and Brexit.

Just hopped over to Twitter to see what got deleted. I'm with you Barracker, 100%. The flag analogy is excellent.

Thanks for the link to Barracker's post. I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.

And thanks for your excellent clear sighted truth-speaking, Barracker. (I hope you're still with us).

The thing is that Mumsnet comments can be reported, but the voices of hundreds of thousands of women can't be silenced. We aren't going anywhere. We can be booted off Twitter, and every other shitty social media site. Doesn't matter.

Still here. Still female. Still talking.

Pleeeease. Lets stop the ridiculous misquoting of the Karolinska study. Its worse than 'the Lisbon Treaty' and Brexit

Don't need to quote above research when MOJ statistics of convicted transwomen offenders are there for all to see. Surely Robin you are not going to pretend that transwomen' s patterns of criminality reflect those of women? What were the statistics again .... 72 transwomen sex offenders against 124 women sex offenders. 72 out of perhaps 540,000 ( if transwomen 2% if male population) against 124 out of 27,000000. Sure they're just the same.

334bu those figures are only transwomen without a GRC - offences by those with a GRC will be counted amongst the 124 women sex offences...