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?

Are we holding up the Hungarian government as an example of the sort we want?

Of course I do not sure what I've said that would make you think differently⁸

I cannot be arsed to discuss this with someone who has no interest in any form of debate or sharing of opinions.

You said this:

To me, saying the birth rate is a crisis, that spending so much time and money on education is stopping women from "knowing when to pause" to have babies, and saying that no fault divorce and family breakdown is causing societal breakdown, suggests that she has a very traditional view of gender roles and thinks given the choice, women want to stay home and have babies.

With no acknowledgement that given the choice, some women might want to stay at home with their children.

But I don't think she does have this "traditional view of gender roles". If she did, surely she would stay home with her 3 children rather than working as an MP (and the the other jobs she did before that).

I guess we have the luxury of being able to do that in the West - because we have probably come as far as we can in implementing equality.

Strongly disagree with this. Women still do the bulk of caring with the consequent hit on earnings. Women are more likely to live in poverty. Government policy repeatedly disproportionately impacts women negatively. Rape and sexual assault is effectively decriminalised. We don't have bodily autonomy and we are having to fight to have the language to even talk about ourselves. Womens illnesses are underdiagnosed and diagnostic criteria and treatments are based on male presentations, so women are more likely to die from heart attacks. 1 in 4 women are subject of domestic violence; many women are repeatedly stalked then killed because the authorities don't believe them when they say their life is at risk. Men claim women consented to being murdered, even though it literally says in law that you can't consent to harm. That law only applies to men, women of course live being choked by a stranger so hard they die. It's a kink.

And this is only the UK, don't get me started on women in other countries and what they have to live with.

If you think that we've gone as far as we can go in implementing equality then I despair to be honest.

I really dislike Miriam Cates - she is part of a government with policies which affect lots of women, including women with children, especially badly. She uses a lot of feminist language to express her views which I don't find are really that feminist. She is behind proposed changes in sex education which she and other government ministers claim are about women's rights, but actually, a lot of the real emphasis is about very reactionary conservative "family values". Lots of whipped up outrage about the content of lessons. I think there does need to be a curriculum for PHSE which equips kids at all ages to deal with problems - eg dodgy adults and their rights from a young age, understanding what is happening to their bodies at puberty (and realising that for example, girls whose periods start when they're in year 5/6 at primary school can't wait until year 7 to learn about them or have access to appropriate information).

I have different views about trans issues from many women posted on these threads - I don't like some of the nasty language and hostility on either side. I think it's important that everyone understands the bodies they're born with and for example, what's normal for a female or male body leading up to and during puberty. Addressing body shaming, offering safety and knowledge for all while also not denying gay/lesbian students, students questioning their sexuality and identity, or who really aren't sure, space to learn what everything means, dealing with bullying.

All that said, I think the investigation may be about something else entirely - Miriam Cates' business interests and those of her husband and other connections. It's not just the making a profit out of a foodbanks app (the first thing I learned about her). Her South Yorkshire constituency has a "levelling up" project in the form Towns Fund receiving government money, on which Cates works closely with a local developer - both seem to have various family members etc with a lot of potential conflicts of interest. Questions have been asked about this for the last few years but maybe there are new revelations.

I'm not saying that they are an example of my ideal government, no. Although that doesn't mean I disagree with everything they do.

However, if, like Cates, you are interested in increasing the fertility rate, Hungary is a good example of a country trying to do just that.

It is now spending 5% of it's GDP on pro-natalist policies to try and increase the fertility rate (for context the education budget in the UK is about 4.2% of GDP). It is also a socially conservative government which puts a lot of emphasis on the traditional family model as a basis for society, and e.g. has a constitutional ban on same-sex adoption. It strictly controls and limits inward migration.

The point I'm making is that although the fertility rate has increased substantially, it is still considerably lower than replacement and has only reached a similar level to the UK, but from a lower base.

So if we're concerned about the fertility rate, I'm questioning whether the evidence supports the kind of ideas Miriam Cates puts forward as a solution.

Most of what you are saying is 'standard' feminist stuff ( I don't mean to be dismissive btw). I think the issue is that there are sexed based differences for the reason that there are two sexes, and in spite of legislation and education general differences do remain, and will most likely always remain, as the Danish studies suggest.

Women carry pregnancies and give birth; and this most often triggers intense maternal feeling - the sort of feeling which tends to translate into taking on certain types of responsibility; or of being tuned in and aware in ways that even the most loving father is not. So even in countries with free or affordable early years childcare it is still the woman that takes the bulk of responsibility, and feels the conflict more intensely.

Men, in general, are also subject to social stereotyping based on their biological and physical assets/make-up. And yes, male pattern violence is definitely a thing; certainly in less educated and tougher environments. It is men, by and large, that are sent off to die in war, or who are seen as expendable in a way that 'women and children' are not. Men tend to do the more dangerous and physically demanding jobs; swaying around in the wind whilst hundreds of feet up in a crane, or climbing on to a roof to install a TV aerial; drilling tarmac on a busy road in the freezing cold. This is not to suggest male roles are more valuable but they are often different because of physical differences.

The legal case brought about in Birmingham whereby women in 'women's jobs' were paid less than men in 'male jobs' on a simlar pay grade was a worthwhile action - that highlighted how much women's work can be under-valued. As 'feminist' surely we don't want to add to that under-valuing?

I suggest some people seem to be looking to some kind of utopian/dystopian future where there are no longer any real differences between men and women other than the obviously sexed bodily parts. Where the words 'male' and 'female', 'man' or woman' are effectively meaningless. Where being female or a woman is just a condition anyone can identify into or out of.

Personally think this is naive though very much tied in to transhumanist ambitions and visions - whereby women will only be 'free' when babies can be gestated outside of the womb, or one in which no young educated woman has a child at all - lest she become 'oppressed'.

Yes it is basic feminism. That's why I was surprised you think we've gone as far as we can in 'the west' in terms of equality.
After babyhood/breastfeeding, I don't think there is that much difference in terms of parenting between men and women and I think what differences there are, are largely driven by socialisation.
For me, the biggest social change will come when men are expected and supported to be more involved in caring work and domestic tasks.

Great post

@elkiedee great post.

I also think that tactic of hiding a traditional conservative intention within feminist or progressive language is well used by the current administration.

Totally agree.

I do think there are general differences which are not rooted entirely in socialisation. I've had two sons and a daughter, and now a granddaughter - and there have been noticeable, though sometimes subtle differences. For one, I think girls do look to form more pair bonding types of relationship than boys: realtionships which tend to be focused on nurturing or empathy - even as they fall out with each other and get very upset.

I never went in for the 'blue' and 'pink' business, nor enforced any obvious sex based choices in toys or in activities - yet my eldest son still gravitated towards large machines such as tractors ( we lived in rural Scotland at the time) and other vehicles, in a way my daughter definitely didn't.

My granddaughter is definitely not a 'girly' girl. She likes gaming and science, is sporty, prefers the boys T-shirts in the shop to the 'girls' - but is still quite into soft, cuddly toys which she carries around with her ( age 8) - and as a small child she liked to gather things and put them into bags and baskets ( I perceived it as a sort of cosy, nurturing activity).She also played football - but stopped playing with the boys in the payground because there were just too rough, in a way that the girls were not, and she was getting bruises.

I've also taught - and in general find boys to be more 'simple' than girls; less emotionally complex; more straightforward.

You might say all of this is down to subtle socialisation - but I think not, certainly not entirely. We are not separate from our bodies, from our DNA, genetic make up etc. why would human beings be differnt from the vast majority of other creatures/mammals in not displaying definite sex based characteristics and behaviours?

Males are definitely more driven by the pursuit of sex; males tend to be fetishists and flashers, Peeping Toms and heavy breathers in ways that women never will be.Plus, look at the gay male scene - it revolves around casual sex and objectification in a way that the lesbian scene just doesn't. Full on testosterone, un-moderated by the presence of females. and even males who 'transition' to women still display male pattern drives and behaviours which belie their female identification.

So you are suggesting that 'feminism' is purely ideological and aligned with the Left? Rather than a movement that seeks to highlight and raise women's voices and issues and give them equal attention and value?

Miriam has been elected. She is part of our democracy, as is It is how democracy works. As is Lloyd Russell-Moyle.

I don't know that much about either and, say, have no idea of either's views on monetary and fiscal policy. It may be that on this subject my views are closer to Russell-Moyles. I am pretty sure I will agree with either on some policy but not on other.

I personally appreciate Coates' position on the differences between sex and gender. These may stem from a socially conservative Christian position, rather than a radfem one, but so be it. Given how fundamental the belief in a difference between the sexes has been throughout the ages, it is to be expected that people from a variety of cultures, religions, backgrounds and experiences will share her views.

Her views on female participation in the workforce? I'm with RebelliousCow here. Life is complicated, and the older you get the more experience you have and the more you realise it is often about compromise than principle. My career disappeared as I was sandwiched between the needs of elderly parents and teenage children. It happens. Equally a friend, because of joint financial commitments, has had to revive her city career as her husband with MS and needs to step back. Even if I don't agree with everything I am glad she is raising a real life issue.

I equally expect that she is closer to the views of many in the UK (and elsewhere in Europe) than some of the posters here on immigration. Thing is. If you don't allow a diversity of voices, the people whose voice has been silenced may seek out more radical spokespeople. We need those to the right of centre within our democracy to have a voice, so we can listen, understand voter concerns, debate, and hopefully achieve a policy that reflects a majority view even if it does not please everyone. And if we don't like what she is saying we vote her out. (And if she is genuinely up to something wrong, and despite my concerns that she might be another example of GC women being disproportionately punished - she is being investigated and will be found out.)

Equally I am glad Cates is raising concerns about schools. Agree or disagree, but at least have the debate. The fact a Tory MP is raising it is almost inevitable. Look what is happening to Duffield. I know a Labour candidate who is GC, but admits would never women's issues publicly. At the end of the day, and perhaps like other current Labour MPs, her career is worth more than the rights and safeguarding of women.

DEMOCRCY IS FASH

Yes. To discuss what she says in her speeches is what democracy is all about. I think there seems to be some dissent as to what feminism is and isn't on this thread.

There are differences of opinion within the same movement and then there are ideas which are directly antithetical to feminism.

Saying you are a conservative Christian and therefore don't agree with abortion is absolutely fine, trying to posture that as a feminist view is simply not.

Not saying there is no room for nuance and discussion about the consequences/reality of things, but bodily autonomy and the right to choose is a fundamental pillar of feminism, whether an individual personally agrees with abortion or not. It's okay to say that some of the positions you hold are not feminist. It's not necessary to try and skew the principles of feminism to include antifeminist views.

But that is the case, and it's not supposed to be an insult "to the right", left leaning politics involve social progression. Right wing politics have strong links to conservativism.

It is an inherently progressive concept as is any social activism. It's okay to hold left leaning views!

Errr.

Many trade union members will be very socially conservative. As are some from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Perhaps part of Labours struggles is the failure to recognise that people who lean to the left in terms of fiscal/monetary policy might, indeed often are, socially conservative.

I agree with @AdamRyan 's posts.

Also, there are an awful lot of assumptions and generalisations made in your posts.

Lots of things we take as facts of life can be challenged if we question stereotypes and "common sense" ideas, and look into them objectively and scientifically. For example, did you know that scientific study shows us that parts of womens' brains develop specifically in order to watch out for dangers to keep babies from harm, but, if men take on the role of primary care giver to children, their brains do the same thing?

And to be clear, I don't believe that men and women are the same. I just don't believe that we are incapable of doing each other's roles, and that these "roles" have been assigned by patriarchal societies, and not set in a time or place where women were considered equally valued as human beings.

I don’t really see a link to my ability to work and current gov, in fact it has gone up. Increased childcare hours, support for SE over Covid, increased wfh - although the latter is more a side effect of the pandemic

I’ve had a long time doing pick ups and noticed a much better split between fathers and mothers over those years.

Loads more men at pick up these days

Which reminds me Scotland suffered more from closed nurseries during the pandemic

That hit women harder.

She is spot on, student debt is crippling, the amount students have to borrow is huge, then there is post grad study costs too.

This of course affects everything going forward, inc family and time with children.

However, its her party that trebled tuition fees, charges super hi interest rates inc when BoE rates at 1%, student loans at 4% and has not increased thresholds, in fact has lowered them.

Its just another example of Tory MPs talking as if they have only just got into Government.

Who knows why she is being investigated? but these things don't happen on a whim, the evidence of wrong doing will be strong, so its pathetic people are suggesting witch hunt etc, they sound like the very worst Trump supporters.

so its pathetic people are suggesting witch hunt etc, they sound like the very worst Trump supporters.

Does that also apply to those who are concerned about the Labour Party investigation into Duffield?

Also since when did name-calling become an acceptable form of debate? You must agree with me otherwise I will call you a Trump supporter or a transphobe, or a Nazi. It is tedious.