MPs who believe ‘women have a penis’ will be named and shamed ahead of general election

[fromorbit]

Brilliant plan sure plenty of Mumsnetters will be up for being part of the volunteer army asking questions:

An “army” of volunteers in an apolitical new grassroots campaign is gearing up to meet all MPs and parliamentary candidates at hustings events and on their doorsteps to ask each one the question: “What is a woman?”

Their answers will be video recorded and uploaded individually to a website which is being launched in the coming months.

It will allow voters to find out instantly whether their next MP thinks women must be born female and that binary biological sex cannot be changed, or whether they believe that male-born transgender women are women too.

Sharron Davies MBE, the former Olympic swimmer and feminist campaigner who has been appointed as the campaign’s first ambassador, said it would let voters “know if their MP will stand up for women”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/23/mps-believe-women-penis-named-trans-election-sharron-davies/

We also need a women's issues hustings in every constituency in the election run by people who know what women are. Women Won't Wheesht (WWW) have already run the prototype in Rutherglen [the hustings was reinstated after an attempt to cancel it after they realised banning women's meetings is in fact illegal.]
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4899435-womens-group-hustings-for-rutherglen-hamilton-west-byelection-cancelled

I completely agree, thank you.

I agree

It’s vital and fundamental

Yes. Female has been claimed for a while.

https://news.sky.com/story/trans-cyclist-rachel-mckinnon-defends-her-right-to-race-in-womens-competitions-11838131

"All my medical records say female," she said. "My doctor treats me as a female person, my racing licence says female (2019)

That has now become the norm. It all comes down to that documentation. So any question has to be clear and not able to squirrelly. Or followed up with a clear question. That is why the Stanisland question works. It is direct language and evasive answers are shown very clearly.

Male and female people will continue to exist separately from each other for as long as humans continue to exist, and this will continue to be completely obvious to anyone with eyes and ears.

They just want to stop us from talking about it by taking away all the vocabulary that allows us to do so.

Yep. But will pivot and switch when anyone points it out.

Let's face it, if women (the cunty kind) said 'fine, you can have the words female/woman etc etc. We'll call ourselves BinglyBonglyBoos', no sooner would the words be said, then there'd be a campaign to recognise all 'women' as BinglyBonglyBoos. We'd be told that we're cis BinglyBonglyBoos.

If they're too scared to tell voters they're pro-woman in case they lose their seats, how on earth are any of us to trust that they'll suddenly stand up and vote to protect women's rights in government?

How are we meant to believe they'll stop following the TWAW party line when they're asked to vote on prospective legislation that negatively impacts women?

If that's,at me, ask me and I'll answer.

This is interesting.
So if you are in a constancy that has e.g. Ash Regan, as your candidate, do you:

1. vote for Ash even though the SNP position is self ID and you are increasing the chances of an SNP majority and the ability for the narrative to be "we have a mandate to implement self-ID"
2. not vote for Ash even though she shares your views and has been open, because a vote for Ash increases the chances of the SNP getting a majority?

Oh - just read the question again! Are you implying I'm an MP/potential MP? I am not. I know my limitations and much as I would love to serve the country in that way, I would be shit and not be selected because I'm too honest and wouldn't be able to fudge an answer!

At this point, I'm hoping that the SNP (realising that they are about to dramatically go down in flames at the next elections) admit their outright lie of 'we have a mandate to implement self id' and row back on this shite. They are making themselves an international laughing stock. The penny has to drop at some point. And hopefully, in the same way as Joanna Cherry, a vote for Ash (or any of the dissidents) means a vote for someone within the party to push change and a vote of confidence that voters want change.

In terms of constituencies, I suppose it depends what the choices are. I'd rather set fire to my voting paper than vote for the Lib Dems, Scottish Greens or the Scottish Family Party for example. Even despite the above, the SNP will probably hold onto some seats simply because of the independence aspect and a vote for anyone else in that constituency would essentially be a wasted vote.

I'm like many Scottish voters - politically homeless.

Isn't it really sad that being an honest, outspoken person precludes you from being an MP?

I want people with integrity in the house. I suspect many start that way, but are corrupted on the way.

I'm guessing you'd actually, like me, prefer an honest, trustworthy MP?

Politically homeless here, too. Some individuals are amazing, but the party line is awful. Is there any party at all that gives a shit about women? The cunty kind, not the chicks wiv dicks type.

I thought some of the MPs spoke incredibly well at the WM debate

I don’t know if other countries have held similarly high quality debates on gender v biological sex

Yes I would, and at risk of outing myself, part of the reason I know so much about voters and am jaded is because I've been involved witg a (non politically affiliated) campaign to try to get my dickhead MP removed. Unsuccessfully because most voters don't care what their MP does.

Allison Pearson in the Telegraph (I don't know if she's an approved person) sums it all up (archive link)

https://archive.ph/GmA7K

The ruling class (all political parties) do not care if anyone without money or useful labour lives or dies. They do not care about you. If women want to affect social change they need stop having children and live independently from men. This might not fit the narrative of your dream life - why not go and live in North Korea instead? Or Afghanistan? I'm sure anyone living there would be happy to swap. Change requires sacrifice and not just from someone else.

I think lock down shoes that the government cares about individuals . Homeless people are protected and the vulnerable were looked after

Do you know what happened following the fire in Grenfell? The UK govt identified other tower blocks with the same flammable cladding - and charged the residents for the increased insurance : https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66265233.amp

I don't know her at all, but I do find the paradix clear that she says this The gulf between normal people on this matter and a delusional ruling class is now a chasm. The politics of gender identity has scrambled their brains. Voters deserve to know what side their representative is and then goes on about lib dems and Labour I.e. not the delusional ruling class.

It makes my head spin.

But yes, lots of opportunities for women here to stand themselves as a Stand Up for Women candidates. Sounds like a very interesting idea, will be interesting to see how many candidates and how many votes they get.

The LibDems and Labour are part of the ruling class in the sense that they have MPs in parliament and they are the more delusional section of that class in that their rhetoric and culture has carried on being firmly TWAW for longer than the Tories, plus they have created a hostile environment for their GC members.

Of course they are. And yes to the rest

I would expect that having any candidate sitting in government makes a party ‘part of the ruling class’. They are directly involved in setting policy and law.

Let’s also not forget local governments too. There are plenty of lib dem and labour majority councils. They set local law and policy.

In the UK in particular , the class system is firmly in place.the UK government is almost entirely made up of upper class men - who attended private schools where they learned they were superior and destined to manage the country, because the great unwashed were not capable

After that article I am much clearer about the political motivations of this campaign, as the Telegraph is basically the mouthpiece for the Conservative party.

It's clear that it's a "split the vote" movement to stand candidates in seats the lib dems/Labour are likely to win, in an effort to take their vote share. Very blatantly exploiting the biggest problem centre left voters have, which is lots of voting options so harder to make a majority. That was a problem for the Conservatives too when UKIP were around (hence the referendum) but not any more.

I know plenty of posters on this board are happy with the idea of an ongoing Conservative government and do not wish to get into a fight about that, so I'll just say that as long as voters are clear about the political motivations of this campaign and happy to effectively increase the chances of letting the Tories in by voting for this new party.

All this defending Labour stuff just stops women getting clear answers