@PronounssheRa
Fair enough, but then why continue to post the same questions again and again if you know the conversation wont go anywhere
I don't want to answer for others because I didn't ask the question. But I suspect 2 reasons. The first, Stella and Caroline claimed to want to talk about barriers facing women in politics, so it was important to establish what they meant by women. Words and definitions are important. Secondly I suspect it was asked repeatedly because women are angry, and wanted to make it clear that this was a major stumbling block to discussing the issue. If only one person raised it it would be dismissed as a fringe issue that no one cares about, if a lot of people raise the same issue its harder to ignore
One of the barriers i have faced is precisely because Ive been told it was a niche issue that no one carried about so the Councillor concerned wouldnt support me, take it further. Indeed i was told they were too busy to give it any time because they were more interested in brexit and their own personal issues. This was a man.
I have written messages to demonstrate this.
There seems to be a pattern of lots of women being told its not important. After a while, of hearing the same thing from lots of different people, even though there's an increasing amount of evidence of issues - the Tavistock, prisons, womens sport, employment issues, independent research, academic freedom, bullying, women thrown out of political parties etc and how its affecting many things at a low level but its having a collective negative effect on women which is actually quite significant.
Women who are concerned about this tend to be women who have become political engaged because of the injustice.
They are really good people for political groups as a result because they have gone away, thought about it, come back with examples. They are diligent and dogged.
But time and again are told by gatekeepers its not important. Its not important because others are making that decision and aren't bothering to look at whats happening because they've already decided on the outcome before the consultation process started because they decided who was allowed at the consultation to begin with!
Its only because enough women have said 'you fucking what' that theyve been forced to reconsider that. If it was fringe why would they have had to do this? If it was fringe and no one was really that bothered, how come there's been a backlash from all these non existent people who don't care about the issue?
You get jaded by it after a while.
Constantly being told its not important and no one else cares by gatekeepers just highlights the underlying issue at play.
For the law to work it has to have clearly defined terms. This isn't something restricted to gender identity. You go and look at any law as written by Parliament (available at legislation.gov.uk) and you will see that the process of law is to define terms to avoid confusion and legal challenge. As it stands under law sex and gender are separately defined (indeed there is a case against the Scottish government ongoing at which one of the lawyers involved has pointed out that you csnt just decide to conflate sex and gender because you feel like it, you have to define it in law - the outcome could be significant as a result).
If we are talking about politicians asking about how do they improve things then the law as it stands and questions about how its not necessarily being used as it stands to the detriment of women are important. If politicians are redefining things because they have an opinion on what the law is rather than what the law actually is, thats an abuse of power and that matters.
If this itself is creating barriers (which Natalie Bird can tell you ALL about) to politics and you have serving MPs telling women not to join their party if they don't believe transwomen are women then that might be a barrier. If you have people telling you, you can campaign for things but not that issue thats a barrier, if you have people saying they can't speak out because they risk they will lose their jobs, even though they know professionally its ethically wrong (nhs staff saying they have to gaslight women asking for female only staff or cant tell women if there are males on a ward even if they know they have reason to believe they pose a threat) so cant take part in politics at a low level etc etc.
The definition really does matter. Its not for Creasy and Nokes to have an opinion on what the law is. Its up to them to uphold the actual law or definitely explicitly express how the law needs changing and write a new law. Which the public can have full sight of and debate.
Because thats how the law should work.
The very problem here is because people are taking the law into their own hands here, redefining it, and then enforcing non-law through fear and 'education'. This is where harassment and abuse is enabled and isn't being properly challenged and dealt with appropriately.
The law has to be fair for it to be respected. It has to have public consensus. Is there a public consensus that you can change sex? No. Is ther a public consensus that if you say your name is Sarah you are a women even if you have a penis? Without the need to legally go through any steps. No. Has this been scrutinised properly by Parliament. No.
These are politicians. What is their fucking goddam job for christ sake?
Not to mention how much of this starts with the undemocratic power in the party system which does not have checks and balances and has zero transparency and accountability.
And then they have the gall to TELL the public that these are the accepted and known barriers to public service to women and tough shit if your face don't fit that and your experiences are unimportant because they are 'niche' and no one else is having the same problem because we say so.
Good fucking grief!
Why is trust in politics at an all time low?
Because politicans think they can ignore the law when it suits them and come up with reasons by their opinion is that their party wasnt a party or this man wasnt actually a man but was a women because they say so.
Hello. Anyone home.
This isn't JUST about women's rights when it comes down to it. Its about contempt of the public and corruption where you go off and ask your mates rather than doing a proper consultation or approvals system.
Its everywhere.