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

Yes I don’t trust the use of the word anymore

I’ve noticed this with TRAs on here

Not really, no. But I don't have any confidence in Labour to deliver anything either.

Except perhaps constitutionally significant legislation which would have the effect of erasing the concept of the female sex from our laws altogether, and I have no clue how we would even begin to go about reversing that once it was done.

Just not true:
LABOUR said today it welcomes government plans to review the Equality Act, potentially defining sex explicitly as “biological sex.” “Clarification is a good thing,” the party said, adding it would wait on specific proposals

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/labour-welcomes-government-review-equality-act-over-defining-sex-biological&ved=2ahUKEwjS-737_MyBAxWJiFwKHaS-A7YQFnoECBoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3dcnN4pIumgkIr0wwn72ns

They have said they won't support "undermining the protections in the EA". I wholeheartedly agree with that, as I said upthread.

So you are voting on a policy they haven't set out, but might do? And on the basis your gut feeling is Labour are incapable of delivering, vs. the proven facts of the dishonesty and corruption of the current Government?

I'd prefer to gamble that Labour can deliver on their stated policies (especially the ones around violence to women) than stick with the current shower of shit.

And that doesn't make me a Labour bot. Highly recommend watch Laura Kuennsberg's documentary as a recap of what a vote for the current Government means.

I use the phrase "current Government" because I have no fundamental issue with the conservatives, just this bunch of lying incompetents.

That word "potentially" is doing an awful lot of heavy lifting, isn't it?

To put it bluntly, Adam, if someone tells me a woman can have a penis I can't trust a single bloody word they say and I certainly don't want them running the country.

Even their policies around violence against women aren't actually worth the paper they're written on if they refuse to acknowledge what a woman actually is.

Stella Creasy's proposal to make misogyny a hate crime was a case in point. The actual proposal would have made it possible to prosecute a woman for misogyny against trans women for saying that a trans woman is a man, and I think it's highly likely that this is what it would have been used for.

They're just hopelessly compromised on this issue, and unless they come right out into the sunlight, hold their hands up and say, "WE WERE WRONG" I don't think it's going to be enough for me.

I am no fan of the Tories but sometimes I think better the devil you know, and maybe this is one of those times.

So Labour could be hoping that the review "clarifies" that TWAW.

When they talk about "undermining the protections in the EA" it might be the PC of gender reassignment which they don't want to be undermined (which at the moment seems to be interpreted as males having the right to do as they please as long as they declare that they are "transwomen").

There has been backlash since that statement with calls to defend the Eq A

LGBT+ Labour has called on its members to lobby the Labour leadership to defend the Equality Act “word for word” amid reports that the government is considering changing the definition of sex within the Act to refer specifically to “biological sex”.

Since then the statement has used we will defend it

‘I’m delighted we are defending the Equality Act, when the Tories are proposing to strip trans people of their protections under the Act’

I’ve heard defend the Act especially when Dodds did her thing. Which means not making changes

Why do you have any confidence in them to deliver anything at all?

I dont, but I have even less confidence in labour or lib dem or green party or womens equality party to deliver anything that looks faintly like women will rescue our single sex spaces.

And yet again, starmer said adult female
Female what? Bears, otters, snakes?
And what is his definition of female in adult human form?

He also keeps saying safe spaces, what does that look like to him?
Single sex?
Only the men he approves of being allowed to enter?
Some other definition?

As a pp said, he is being stupid and has no idea how this stuff affects women, then he is too stupid to run the country, or he is scared by the people in his own party, then we dont want a scared man running the country. I can just imagine the shitstorm coming when a scared/thick as mince man leads the country.
You and I think the conservatives have done a terrible job, how bad will it get with labour in?

Yes, either they think women are really fucking stupid, or they still haven't learned how to do electoral arithmetic.

Either way, it's a no from me.

Perhaps someone told them that elections are won by the blue rinse brigade and they completely misunderstood what that means.

I’m not prepared to gamble on Labour on any of these issues. They are so incredibly woolly on so many topics. I think they’re biding their time until the GE hoping to not say anything that could put anyone off. Then post GE they are going to go Biden on us. I’m frankly terrified.

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.

Personally I don't care about the motivations, it is just as useful for those that believe TWAW to know what MPs/Party align with their beliefs, as it is for those that believe the opposite

"Potentially" in that sentence is referring to the Government plans, not Labour's position.

It's bizarre that even after all these discussions people are still working on the assumption that we think letting the Tories back in is a scarier prospect than letting Labour in.

Have we not been clear enough?

OK. So many of you don't believe Labour when they say woman = adult female (personally I think "human" is redundant in that sentence as legislation incorporating the word "woman" only applies to humans, but appreciate maybe some people think Starmer is going to start calling cows, hinnys and hens "women")
So then what answer do you want labour/lib dem MPs to give to the question "what is a woman"?
It sounds very much like there is no reassuring answer from those parties, so then this campaign is going to tell you nothing that will change your minds.

Which was my point from the outset, that this campaign does nothing useful.

Not really. I still want to hear what MPs will say

I would need to hear them specify that it means an adult whose biological sex was observed to be female at birth, and that trans women are biological males who would prefer to be referred to as though they are women.

I would also like to hear an acknowledgement that they have got this very wrong, and an apology for Rosie Duffield and LWD.

I think its very clear that many posters here think the exact opposite of what you've written - that the Conservatives are a much less scary position for women. But this isn't a hive mind and not all GC people agree.
I'm GC but not at all happy with a campaign that increases the chances of a Tory government, because my assessment is that on the whole Conservative policies hurt women. You disagree. You are entitled to do so but it is not democratic, free speech or fair to suggest that women who share my opinion are bots/CCHQ plants to make labour look bad/Labour politicians/TRAs or similar.

On a thread about a particular campaign, don't be surprised when people disagree with you.

That's quite complex and labour specific.

Posters upthread said a simple record of who thinks "woman = adult human female" and who thinks "twaw" would suffice but it sounds like not.

For a start, there are far too many Labour MPs who do not know what a woman is, even if Starmer and Dodds are trying to appease. (I agree with a PP that Starmer in particular talks about safe spaces, not single sex spaces).

And secondly, there are a great many of us with Labour led local councils seeing them actively promote gender identity ideology whether through their Equality Policies and training providers or through funding dodgy organisations to indoctrinate children.

I do not trust Labour on this issue one iota.

Why does the campaign increase chances for Conservatives if you also say in a pp it’s not a left / right issue?

When Keir Starmer says he supports Rosie Duffield and condemns people like Russell Lloyd Moyle for his misogynistic behaviour, I might believe that he's on the side of women.

At the moment he appears to be either stupid or spineless.

I think I would trust that a Tory who says adult human female actually means female whereas a Labour MP saying it needs further clarification.

*What do you think the Conservatives are going to do, besides state the entirely banal fact that woman = adult human female?

Why do you have any confidence in them to deliver anything at all?*

The thing is a lot of people don't have confidence that they will deliver anything but they don't trust Labour not to fuck things up monumentally for women by erasing them from legislation (after all if the definition of woman or even, absurdly, female now includes men it becomes irrelevant.)

So on this matter it's not about who will make things better, it is about who is least likely to make things a hell of lot worse.

And if, as a result, Labour don't win the election/win by the landslide they seem to think they are going to get, it might make them take their head out of their arses and think on this one instead of shooing away the irritating little women that they don't believe are important enough to listen to

Oh and I would also like MPs who have said particularly egregious things about people who don't believe in magic gender woo to apologise for them. So David Lammy can apologise for calling women who need single sex spaces "dinosaurs who hoard rights".