Miriam Cates under investigation

[Arealnumber]

Why has Miriam Cates suddenly gone under investigation? The comments in The Times are usually highly supportive of the MPs that speak out against Gender Ideology but they're properly railing against her. What has been her downfall?

I was one of the people who asked for the boards to be split, because in my opinion there was little feminism being discussed on here, and lots of debate about trans ideology.
Unfortunately noone uses the other board , so it hasn't really worked. I miss being able to discuss broader feminist topics with other feminists.

That's why some of us didn’t want the boards to be split. Most of the time I forget the other board is there. When there was a single board I'd see all the other feminist issues here.

She is no friend of women with her "educate women less so they stay home and have babies"

She* *didn't actually say that though, did she?

The wording of why she’s under investigation seemed to me very similar to the very recent case of a Tory MP who has been found guilty of advertising his openness to accepting bribes. Obviously we have no way at all of knowing what is being investigated in this case, but it does sound as though it could be pretty serious.

I think you’d have to be a very long way down a conspiracy theory mindset to imagine this has anything to do with her views on gender ideology, particularly as she’s in line with her own party’s position on that issue.

I also think that if the only issue you intend to vote on at the next election is gender ideology, you must live an extraordinarily comfortable and privileged life. Have you not noticed the state of utter collapse in every single government run or government funded service?? It wasn’t like that when Labour was in charge, this used to be a functioning first world country.

I think you’d have to be a very long way down a conspiracy theory mindset to imagine this has anything to do with her views on gender ideology, particularly as she’s in line with her own party’s position on that issue.

Do the Tories have a position on this? There are plenty of them who are on board with gender ideology, like Caroline Nokes, Maria Miller, and of course Jamie Wallis (first 'trans' MP).

How are you anticipating Labour will fund the changes you think there will be?

the article seems to be quite clear that it’s a Covid partying issue.

Although, at this point, I’m starting to wonder if there was anyone involved in the Conservative Party who wasn’t taking the piss during lockdown.

No! I can also see the 'chat' forum too, now. I think maybe it is because this board seems to have become quite divergent in terms of content in more recent weeks. 🤔

Posters have continually tried to hive off the sex and gender discussion as a way to attempt silencing

That approach can get in the bin. Result today with school guidance.

Thanks to all the women who kept speaking up despite attacks

Yes, this was exactly what we all said would happen. But some people insisted, so now they have their special board to discuss all those things on while the rest of us have this board. So everyone should be happy.

I still post all feminist topics on here, fwiw, because as far as I'm concerned all feminism is about 'sex and gender', there isn't anything that isn't.

All power to HQ: they listened to the voices saying there were hundreds of poor women thwarted in their desperate longing to discuss feminism issues they were passionate about, without having to step around grotty females focused on nasty things like female access, equality and child safeguarding.

Funnily enough once they had the board to themselves with no one saying anything anywhere that they didn't want to have to see, they turned out to not have much to say. But they can no longer complain.

• Am of course being consciously disingenuous here, as naice women are required to do.

How bizarre to think that feminism isn't significantly impacted by gender identity discussions so needed to be hived off. That speaks to me of a group of people with their own personal definition of feminism that they believe should be adopted by everyone else.

Well. They still complain.

We still get threads being shunted left right and centre to suit other people's opinion of what is feminism and what is not worthy of discussion with the wider forum.

There’s a lot of people who are really keen to keep women silent on this

Tough. We got somewhere today too. No thanks to the stop talking about it lot

Well, not using expensive RAF helicopters to get to every meeting outside central London would be a start?

Not demanding MPs fly home early at public expense from events all over the world (including the climate conference) merely to take part in one HoC vote, because dinosaurs like Rees Mogg vetoed the use of normal modern technology such as remote working?

Or perhaps, by not throwing public money at corrupt cronies like Michelle Mone, or by following the advice of Lord Agnew (who resigned in disgust when rishi decided to simply write off covid fraud losses rather than go to the trouble of recovering OUR money from criminal fraudsters).

The way this lot have royally fucked up absolutely everything is so extreme that it is clear that any one of us could do a heck of a lot better, merely by turning up and doing a normal job.

I think you have to be living in some kind of gilded bubble if you seriously think nobody else could do a better job…

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates

I mean, yes I am paraphrasing this
Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction....Cates said the rise of university attendance also played a role: “Many graduates are saddled with debt, and so are unable to afford to buy a house and start a family.“Spending so much time and money on education also makes it much more difficult, particularly for women, to decide when is a good time to pause and have children.”

That isn’t quite the same as your summary of what she said though.

It’s an argument against the level of debt students must incur to get an education (which may influence women’s decisions not to have children in the 20s). Not an argument that women should stay at home and not bother their silly little heads with this education nonsense.

i actually have no idea whether I agree with her proposed solution to the problem. But you have mischaracterised her problem definition.

I don’t live in Wales for a start. And Labour are not proving much there.

Yes it’s about debt. I see a few posters misconstrue this quite a lot

It couldn’t be clearer that it’s about women’s careers being disproportionately impacted by parental responsibility, and their debt burden.

Women can’t afford to have children while they bear a disproportionate responsibility for them.

On woman’s hour yesterday a childless woman was campaigning against the impact of childcare responsibilities on those without children who have to cover for their colleagues. I noticed that again, the responsibility of DC is carried mainly by women AND THAT WOMEN ARE Also DISPROPORTIONATELY having to cover for them! Double whammy!!
(sorry for shouting).

But Labour have said they won't spend big to arrest decline in the NHS etc, bit like before when they promised to stick to Tory spending limits. Because, ironically, Labour are scared of what the Daily Mail/Telegraph would say. So the idea that Labour are waiting on their white charger to save the day, if only some selfish Karens wouldn't put people off voting for them by banging on about trans issues, seems to me a bit wide of the mark, to say the least. In fact, I'd say, more generally, that the outright cowardice shown by Labour with its obfuscation on gender issues doesn't fill the average voter with confidence that they'll have the courage and drive to work on the many problems the country faces.

The Quentin Letts take is worth some consideration. He is a sketch writer who has already suggested GC sympathies.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12878845/Miriam-Cates-accused-besmirching-body-thats-byword-cupidity-dimness-hypocrisy.html

I don’t know a lot about Cates’ politics but suspect we agree on some things but certainly not everything. Such is the way of the world. If we want a diverse parliament who reflect the views of a diversity of voters, we accept her as much as we accept Lloyd Russell-Moyle. We give them a voice, because their voters did, we expect them to be respectful of other views, because this is what democracy is about.

What democracy should not be about is using the process as punishment. We see this with Rosie Duffield. We saw it early on when the first MP to raise his head above the parapet on GC issues (David TC Davies) attracted all sorts of complaints. We see it in the legal system. Caroline Farrow, who again is a social conservative Christian, facing years of police investigation and no real protection, effectively punished by the process.

I don’t know, but I worry that Letts is right and that Cates is being picked on. I note that Russell-Moylefaced no real sanction following what appeared to be intimidatory behaviour in Parliament.

Interesting also that this thread is quickly populated by posters jumping in effectively to say Cates is an evil Tory bigot. I am not a fan of my MP. I won’t vote for them next time round, and I appreciate long term posters who are also her constituents giving their take. However we do need MPs who will stand up on women’s issues. Cates is doing so. For that I am grateful.

I can't bear to read Quentin Letts. Loathsome man.

Each to their own. Though in this case I fear he might be right.

The word is that Miriam Cates suspension is “related to financial irregularities connected to foreign governments.”

twitter.com/jdpoc/status/1737095791091605695?t=bT2n6vdIil1Y4YZX3b9pQA&s=19