Tory donor's alleged Diane Abbott remarks were racist, says Kemi Badenoch

[IwantToRetire]

Ms Badenoch becomes the most senior minister to call the alleged comments racist - going further than the official government response.
Downing Street have called Mr Hester's alleged comments "unacceptable" but without specifying why.

Asked repeatedly if Rishi Sunak would describe the words as racist, the prime minister's spokeswoman said she would not get into "further characterisation".

In a social media post, Ms Badenoch, who also serves as the equalities minister, said: "Hester's 2019 comments, as reported, were racist.

"I welcome his apology. Abbott and I disagree on a lot. But the idea of linking criticism of her, to being a black woman is appalling.

"It's never acceptable to conflate someone's views with the colour of their skin."

Earlier, health minister Maria Caulfield told the BBC she considered the comments to be racist and that she would not accept a donation from Mr Hester "if he made those comments".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68548389

Who would turn down ten million let alone return it after your have spent it? Not of course saying that anyone has allowed the amount of money their response to the alleged comments.

Yes - I've wondered about that too. 🤷‍♀️

*someone should be shot for doing something

They should be shot for selling drinks at that price!*

I think that’s a clear example of when it is informal and jokey. It’s clearly hyperbole because the “punishment” is comedically ridiculous for the “crime” and not something that actually happens, it’s something said in passing and not personally targeted.

The dividing line between that and more serious incitement to violence etc is not clear cut and there’s a very big grey area, and his remarks were seemingly overheard not deliberately published. But I do think it’s much more serious calling for a public figure to be shot, especially an MP - everyone knows who they are, and they actually do get attacked and murdered - and especially if you talk about hating them and their race and sex in the same breath.

I guess lots of people say things like that in their own front room at home and it never gets made public. But it it does become public then it’s harmful.

The love Kemi gets on these boards is baffling. Yes she is GC, but that isn’t reason enough to support her for leadership or support the Tories overall. Look at her voting records. Look at the party’s record. I genuinely wonder if someone on her team posts these pro Kemi messages trying to get MN supporters.

it’s massively uplifting and reassuring to see an intelligent, powerful woman in the public eye stand up for women’s sex-based rights among a sea of denial, sophistry and emperors-new-clothes-ing. When you can see the insane harms of gender ideology being played out and you have to hide your views to keep your job, or your child is being sucked in, or you can’t go to your gym any more or whatever - someone at the heart of government stands up and does something about it. Of course as a lifelong lefty I don’t share all her views, but I hugely appreciate her - as well as others like Rosie Duffield and Miriam Cates, Neale Hanvey etc.

On top of that TRAs are always offensively comparing trans women to black women and making out it’s only “white feminists” who are GC - so although that’s obviously bollocks anyway, I appreciate Badenoch for kicking that one to the kerb as well.

And as has been said a million times - Labour could run with this open goal any time they wanted. It’s not left-wing GC feminists’ fault they won’t and we have to look to the Tories for evidence-based policy.

I'm appreciating the additional information about Hester. He doesn't sound like a nice man.

I still think I shouldn't need to get that additional contextual information from Mumsnet (wonderful and brilliant researchers though you all are) rather than the news media. There should be some degree of journalistic integrity.

'Hester has a reputation on (cite sources) for creating a bullying workplace culture' for example. It doesn't prove the leaked comments are true but it definitely makes it less likely it's completely made up.

I still think there isn't enough scrutiny about why we're suddenly talking about this 5 years after it allegedly happened. So wrong on so many levels. The person reporting this does not come out of this well at all.

I agree - if the alleged comments are true as reported (which has definitely not been proven) then the person reporting now should have reported to police or someone in authority at the time. MPs have been killed. It was not a jokey comment.

The person who reported obviously doesn't give two figs about Diane Abbott, nor does the Labour Party from the sound of it. She's the one I have sympathy for in this situation. I hope the police do look into all this as a matter of urgency.

@pronounsbundlebundle I'm not sure why you think the police would look into it? I don't see any criminal offence. He expressed an opinion in a private meeting - people are allowed to do this no matter how despicable the opinion is. Incitement would require him to have expressed it to an audience that a reasonable person would have cause to think would act on the incitement. He didn't - he expressed it to a bunch of his own eye-rolling employees who just were no doubt itching to get away from the nutter.

He's a scumbag in a position of power (making huge donations to the ruling party while receiving enormous contracts in return) and it's absolutely in the public interest that he, and the corruption in the ruling party, be exposed, regardless of whether any actual criminal acts have been committed.

I would like to think there isn't a real threat of violence, but quite honestly with the Government going on about extremism and and potential threats, for some people it is almost like encouragement.

I can see what you mean.

Though the colloquial phrase so and so should be shot [for something the speaker objects to], might not signify serous intent in private circumstances, given Diane Abbott’s public position, her race, her sex, and dangerous extremists among the public, saying this is not only personally cruel to her, but actually dangerous.

I recall Labour MP John McDonnell suggesting that Esther McVey MP " should be lynched ". McVey was the subject of lots of misogynist abuse.

making huge donations to the ruling party while receiving enormous contracts in return

I have a vague memory of that happening in another country a few years back ...

Imagine having to be a member of the Tory party to get a contract.

Lots and lots of Tory Bots on here.

Yeah, that sounds really plausible... 🙄

Watching Dianne get up, again and again, about 30 times- to ask to speak in PM question time yesterday, and being ignored, was truly shocking. And totally inexcusable from the Speaker. Anyone from the labour bench, or indeed, any side, who was given the right to speak, should have ditched what they had to say and ask for Dianne to speak instead. Talk about 'institutional racism and misoginy' at its worst.

Couldn't agree more. And she's been very measured amd dignified in her responses in the Guardian for example. Much more than I would have been. The whole PMQS was a shitshow. I gather Starmer won't even answer her re the whip. Not even a 'no'. Pathetic.

All these comments show that the posters cant even be bothered to read the thread. They just do a knee jerk reaction, Tory women should be silenced.

So for those too lazy to read, nobody loves KB, what they respect is that a woman in public is prepared to stand up for women's sex based rights.

And if more women on the left were doing the same then they too would be quoted on FWR.

So quite honestly the quite frankly idiotic responses which sound more like 6th form schoolboys who think they are terribly radical actual just indicate posters who think they are so superior then dont even have to read a thread but can make some devestately clever (not) remark and those who are silly enough to think that feminist forum about women's sex based rights should reflect on comments made in public about women's sex based rights.

Unlike the intolerant incels of the left that this chronically uniformed comments must be made to ingratiate themselves with, who never ever speak up for women's sex based rights.

If you really cared about the issue you would be starting threads showing just how committed the left is to preserving women's sex based rights.

But somehow these threads never appear. Now why would that be.

So keep on making your kneejerk purity politics comments, because far from making any one think they shouldn't quote other women, just amplifies the complete failure of the left.

If there are any bots on here it is the craven handmaids of the left who are unable to engage in discuss and think finger pointing is a massive win for "their side".

IwantToRetire · Today 12:44

All these comments show that the posters cant even be bothered to read the thread. They just do a knee jerk reaction, Tory women should be silenced. So for those too lazy to read, nobody loves KB, what they respect is that a woman in public is prepared to stand up for women's sex based rights.

Very nicely encapsulated.

What a load of bilge. "Women on the left" who stand up for womens sex based rights get a hard time for being GC light. Lots of threads being "so disappointed" in them.

See Janice Turner, Jane Clare Jones, Karen Ingala Smith for recent examples.

Meanwhile Kemi gets lauded for making a mealy mouthed statement on racism, that includes "forgiving" a conservative donor for being racist, and endlessly "mulling" things without actually taking action.

The difference between how left wing and right wing politicians are treated on here really is stark.

Interestingly there doesn't seem to be much interest at all in the potential for harm to GC women of Michael Gove's anti-extremism statement, despite condemnation from Miriam Cates. Which is weird.

I am supportive of KB and any other politician or person in the public eye who defends sex-based rights and the protection of children from GI. Left or right, woman or man. I have not slagged off or been "disappointed in" anyone so am I allowed to appreciate KB?

Interestingly there doesn't seem to be much interest at all in the potential for harm to GC women of Michael Gove's anti-extremism statement, despite condemnation from Miriam Cates. Which is weird.

I'm not too bothered about this because in general the views of GC people line up with the views of many medics, lawyers, proven case law and studies being done around the world, as well as being defendable by logical argument. If there were any GC persons or groups who dis actually advocate for trans people to be persecuted or exterminated, then they would be extremist / terror groups and should be treated as such. But thinking sex exists, sex categories matter and protext women from harm in certain situations, and children can't consent to PBs or "gender-adffirming" surgery and that these things bring irreversible harms, is all a matter of documented fact. Transactivists may try to use such a law against GC people but I don't think they would succeed.

Interestingly there doesn't seem to be much interest at all in the potential for harm to GC women of Michael Gove's anti-extremism statement, despite condemnation from Miriam Cates

Another usual whatabouterry post from a usual suspect.

Some of us waited to hear what Gove was going to say.

Seems to me that turns out to be, no surprise, the usual hardly veiled islamaphobia of the Tory party.

Its not whataboutery to challenge (with evidence) your claim that left v right are treated equally on here when that's patently untrue

Plus, just say I was to start a thread about what Labour are planning. Would I:

1. get a proper debate about it and good faith engagement? Or
2. get a response including things like "knee jerk purity politics", "intolerant incel of the left" and "craven handmaid's of the left" (to use your own language).

🤔

I did start a neutral thread about Gove and it was pretty much tumbleweed

Also, why would I bother when there's nearly always an ongoing thread about Labour's position on sex based rights that I could hop on instead?

It's almost like you want an echo chamber

This always comes up as a weak and baseless attack.

Plus plenty support Labour, maybe they are ‘Labour Bots’

I like this extended version ;

It’s so ridiculous that it’s all posters have

I know I shouldn't respond but I have had a shit day so ...

Its not whataboutery to challenge (with evidence) your claim that left v right are treated equally on here when that's patently untrue

You seem to live in a parallel universe. I have never said that. I am not claiming I am the clearest writer ever, but now you are just making things up so you can go on whinging.

How could you possibly twist my saying that (and this is a fact) public statements about sex based rights by women politicians are more likely to be made by Tory women.

What do you want posters to do. Make up pretend articles that have appeared in the Guardian.

You undermine your credibility by just desperately making another unsubstantiated statement.

But as you seem to be struggling with this you could at least have made the obvious arguement that of course more Tory women are being given a platform because more news papers are Tory supporters.

Its not hard to see that is part of the issue.

But of course that just raises the real reality, that (Morning Star being a noble exception) not left or liberal paper would give any gender critical woman a platform.

By the way I dont even believe these comments are in good faith, I suspect it is just to turn yet another thread on FWR into some identical non subject specific intermidable post about nothing whatsoever. Almost as though someone is trying to destroy the reputation of FWR as being full of well informed posters gladly shoring information and analysis about wome's sex based rights.

Just to say that Diane Abbott on twitter has confirmed that this is what was said!

OK. I interpreted the below as suggesting right wing should be shut down:
All these comments show that the posters cant even be bothered to read the thread. They just do a knee jerk reaction, Tory women should be silenced.

Unlike the intolerant incels of the left that this chronically uniformed comments must be made to ingratiate themselves with, who never ever speak up for women's sex based rights.

I'm not the person talking about "knee jerk purity politics", "intolerant incels", "craven handmaid's" etc.

I don't think womens right should be a left/right issue. Posters like you are making it that with your left v. Right posting and derogatory language about the "other side".

If you want to think that's "bad faith", up to you.