Page 17 | Miriam Cates/National Conservatives conference

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 11:21

@justasking111

Well I haven't a scooby doo who these we are still

@JessS1990 wrote:
I imagine that people who are concerned about women's rights are most likely to vote Labour, given that the Tories have consistently eroded women's rights in their time in government, whereas Labour in power tend to improve rights.

In reply, @RebelliousCow wrote (in part):
Well, we're not "most people'". We see ourselves as leading the way in bringing this issue to public consciousnes and to parliamentary debate ( and with some success).

MyNameIsFine · 19/04/2024 11:27

Oh, it's her again 🙄

JessS1990 · 19/04/2024 11:31

OldCrone · 19/04/2024 09:39

Don't you mean those who disagree with you?

Show quote history

No, if I had meant that, that would be what I would have said.

JessS1990 · 19/04/2024 11:32

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 10:26

Your point is entirely made up.
Rees Mogg is not cancelled and not going to be cancelled. In fact I think he loses the Tories votes by not being cancelled, because he's so out of touch and says such stupid things.

I don't have to engage with your projections of what you think I mean.

If only the people of Grenfell had of had the commonsense that JRM does to leave the building...

Original poster

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 11:48

RebelliousCow · 19/04/2024 10:35

Is "laughing in people's faces" the sort of politics you espouse? Doesn't sound like the sort of society I'd favour myself, quite frankly. Yet you do a lot of of it, with your laughing emojis and general contemptuous tone.

Edited

Show quote history

The post I was replying to was deleted. But the context was that in the 90s ridiculous views got air time and people laughed at them so they were rejected through exposure.
Without that context my post doesn't read as intended.

OP posts:

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 11:49

MyNameIsFine · 19/04/2024 11:27

Oh, it's her again 🙄

Who's that?

Original poster

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 11:51

EdithStourton · 19/04/2024 10:58

Haven't RTFT.
But from what I have read, there seems to be an election coming....

Not quickly enough for me!

OP posts:

Original poster

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 11:53

RebelliousCow · 19/04/2024 10:41

As you suggested of yourself earlier, I don't require lectures on what happened in the 1980's. My father was made redundant and we had to move to the other end of the country for work. He was a shop steward in an engineering union, and Labour voter.........but that was over 40years ago....and yet many are still trying to keep that alive with their 'Still Hate Thatcher' t-shirts and their Tony Blair 'Red Devil Eyes' banners. Still going in about the Iraq war, and hating on Israel.

I live in Liverpool and we still have lots of old style Militant bullies and people who practice intimidatory politics and nurture hatred. Hatred is a toxic dead end, and it breeds intolerance. It positions anyone who disagrees as some kind of evil. I long ago grew tired of all of that.

Edited

Show quote history

You know this is getting on for 30 years ago now? That's a long time to nurse a grudge.

My eldest DS was taught about the "third way" as a historic political movement for A levels. 😂

OP posts:

Original poster

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 11:57

Imnobody4 · 19/04/2024 10:49

Well I didn't realise you demanded the splitting of the feminist board.
Not worked out for you, my heart bleeds.

Centrist listen to every point of view before deciding, and they review in the light of facts and changing circumstances. They are not dictatorial, dogmatic, authoritarian. They do not shout down others or twist their words.

And as for free speech which you keep exercising by coming onto this board to criticise,insult and sneer at; free speech is a cornerstone of a democracy. I support absolutely free speech within the law. That means democratically agreed law not your law.

Getting back to this conference. This is the story of what happened and I thank and respect those responsible.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-natcon-brussels-was-saved-from-censorship/

I also condemn and despise the sniggering of front bench Labour MPs. I will never vote for a party which plays fast and loose with free speech.

https://twitter.com/_MrsBetSlocombe/status/1780288758970994775?t=_edt5zDOSUKqSrCb0JOiPA&s=19

Show quote history

I didn't "demand" anything. I made a polite request, others agreed, MNHQ did it. Sadly it hasn't worked out.

And if you read my earlier posts, this is not about "shutting down free speech" at all. This is about raising awareness of what a particular politician stands for.

I don't know why it's triggered so many posters to the point they have to deny what's actually been said in favour of a completely different discussion.

OP posts:

Original poster

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 12:03

illinivich · 19/04/2024 11:14

Its almost certain that labour will win the next election, so on the face of it, its odd to get worked up about what a few marginalised conservative MPs are doing. Especially on a feminist section of a parenting site.

The problem is Starmer supports trans ideology, and its likely that the new intake of MPs will, too. If labour dont abandon their plan to allow men to have easier access to female passports, the removal of single sex spaces and reduced safeguarding will continue to be disscused here.

I think there are 'GC' people who are GC because its a way to critise the tories, now its looking like being GC means critising a labour government, they arent so keen for the debate to contine here.

So they are trying to make GC discussion difficult by associating it with the far right.

The problem is Starmer supports trans ideology
What does this mean and what is your evidence he supports it?

If you mean "starmer supports the idea that some people want to change gender and should be supported", then he's in line with the majority. If he gets in, I think the protocol is "you lost, get over it".

If you mean "Starmer supports self ID, males in all women's spaces whenever they want and prescription of puberty blockers to children (which is what I call "trans ideology")" then you are talking patent nonsense.

None of that really is relevant to a thread about Miriam Cates' wider political views and affiliations.

OP posts:

Original poster

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 12:07

I think Cates is basically trying to position herself as the UK version of "moms for liberty" and I don't think we need that American Christian Right here. In fact I oppose that in the same way I oppose trans ideology. It's regressive and dangerous to women and children.

https://news.yahoo.com/moms-for-liberty-controversial-school-book-bans-challenges-florida-politics-141208608.html

Who are 'Moms for Liberty' and why is the group so controversial?

Moms for Liberty, a self-styled “grassroots organization” fighting for parental rights, has become a nationwide movement with as many critics as supporters. Its challenges to the educational status quo in local communities, by railing against diversity...

https://news.yahoo.com/moms-for-liberty-controversial-school-book-bans-challenges-florida-politics-141208608.html

OP posts:

MyNameIsFine · 19/04/2024 12:09

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 11:49

Who's that?

Show quote history

The OP was on another board. She's incredibly intolerant, but presents herself as the reasonable one and everybody who disagrees with her even slightly, or even is prepared to talk to another political 'camp', as dangerous and far-right.

Original poster

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 12:11

MyNameIsFine · 19/04/2024 12:09

The OP was on another board. She's incredibly intolerant, but presents herself as the reasonable one and everybody who disagrees with her even slightly, or even is prepared to talk to another political 'camp', as dangerous and far-right.

Show quote history

On another board on MN? I don't post anywhere else apart from MN, never have and very much object to your characterisation.

OP posts:

Imnobody4 · 19/04/2024 12:15

And if you read my earlier posts, this is not about "shutting down free speech" at all. This is about raising awareness of what a particular politician stands for.

And you think women need you to enlighten them about an English politician. - what qualifies you.

You began this thread with your usual flair -
I'm putting this here because I know a lot of GC feminists support Cates - I don't, and this stuff is why. She is awful.
You've gone from expressing an opinion, which is clearly black and white to being the voice revealingthe truth to us ignorant , deluded masses.

And like you I'm entitled to raise issues of concern, and one of them is that you ignore an attack on free speech in order to have go at a politician you don't agree with.

JessS1990 · 19/04/2024 12:20

MyNameIsFine · 19/04/2024 12:09

The OP was on another board. She's incredibly intolerant, but presents herself as the reasonable one and everybody who disagrees with her even slightly, or even is prepared to talk to another political 'camp', as dangerous and far-right.

Show quote history

Is your post reasonable and tolerant?

Imnobody4 · 19/04/2024 12:27

JessS1990 · 19/04/2024 12:20

Is your post reasonable and tolerant?

Show quote history

Yes it pretty much sums it up. Unless you want to go through the should we tolerate intolerance worm hole.

Apollo441 · 19/04/2024 12:28

I am totally at a loss why my post was deleted.
I pointed out that in the 90's a daytime TV program had someone on who did not believe in mixed race marriages. They filled the audience with mixed race couples and were expecting fireworks. What happened is that they laughed at him. He was totally humiliated. I said I think letting idiots like that speak can be helpful in showing that society has moved on. I pointed out that this would not happen today and as such we lose the chance to see these views no longer hold any sway. I prefer to let them speak.

Why the deletion??

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 12:31

@MyNameIsFine

The OP was on another board. She's incredibly intolerant, but presents herself as the reasonable one and everybody who disagrees with her even slightly, or even is prepared to talk to another political 'camp', as dangerous and far-right.

Do you mean another thread? I actually find I agree with much of the OP's views, and many of those that disagree with her (and me) do so in an intolerant, offensive manner. Because we are fewer in number I suppose they feel more confident doing so.

JessS1990 · 19/04/2024 12:33

Imnobody4 · 19/04/2024 12:27

Yes it pretty much sums it up. Unless you want to go through the should we tolerate intolerance worm hole.

Show quote history

I would tolerate intolerance to a greater extent than that. For example I wouldn't shut down Far Right events just because the speakers at them are intolerant. Far better to let them speak and for people to be able to see them for what they are.

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 12:33

@Imnobody4

Yes it pretty much sums it up. Unless you want to go through the should we tolerate intolerance worm hole.

Yes, should we? The board wouldn't exist then, would it?

justasking111 · 19/04/2024 12:36

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 11:21

@justasking111

Well I haven't a scooby doo who these we are still

@JessS1990 wrote:
I imagine that people who are concerned about women's rights are most likely to vote Labour, given that the Tories have consistently eroded women's rights in their time in government, whereas Labour in power tend to improve rights.

In reply, @RebelliousCow wrote (in part):
Well, we're not "most people'". We see ourselves as leading the way in bringing this issue to public consciousnes and to parliamentary debate ( and with some success).

Well that's as clear as mud if it's a response to my query

Datun · 19/04/2024 12:37

AdamRyan · 19/04/2024 12:03

The problem is Starmer supports trans ideology
What does this mean and what is your evidence he supports it?

If you mean "starmer supports the idea that some people want to change gender and should be supported", then he's in line with the majority. If he gets in, I think the protocol is "you lost, get over it".

If you mean "Starmer supports self ID, males in all women's spaces whenever they want and prescription of puberty blockers to children (which is what I call "trans ideology")" then you are talking patent nonsense.

None of that really is relevant to a thread about Miriam Cates' wider political views and affiliations.

Show quote history

https://thecritic.co.uk/a-labour-of-unrequited-love/

Here is Jean hatchet scathingly documenting Labour's treatment of women desperately trying to raise the dangers of trans ideology.

And how, for many, "It will take more than vague apologetic gestures to redeem the Labour Party".

A Labour of unrequited love | Jean Hatchet | The Critic Magazine

For many years now, women have appealed to the Labour Party to try to understand the fundamental clash between women’s rights and the unfair demands of the trans activist movement…

https://thecritic.co.uk/a-labour-of-unrequited-love/

justasking111 · 19/04/2024 12:43

All the veiled allusions, is there an inner circle clique here. Outers being tolerated for the most part.

It's a bit like school perhaps?

MyNameIsFine · 19/04/2024 12:45

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 12:31

@MyNameIsFine

The OP was on another board. She's incredibly intolerant, but presents herself as the reasonable one and everybody who disagrees with her even slightly, or even is prepared to talk to another political 'camp', as dangerous and far-right.

Do you mean another thread? I actually find I agree with much of the OP's views, and many of those that disagree with her (and me) do so in an intolerant, offensive manner. Because we are fewer in number I suppose they feel more confident doing so.

Yes, I meant another thread. Sorry, I used the wrong word.

RebelliousCow · 19/04/2024 12:46

NefertitiV · 19/04/2024 11:12

@RebelliousCow

Well, we're not "most people'". We see ourselves as leading the way in bringing this issue to public consciousnes and to parliamentary debate ( and with some success).

Finally, a clear answer. Thanks for letting us know who you are, although we already knew.

It's not news. This particular sub forum is well estabished and known for just that.

So, why are you here, then...to stir things up a bit?