Miriam Cates/National Conservatives conference

[AdamRyan]

Miriam Cates was due to speak at the NatCon conference in Brussels tomorrow, on the topic of "Save The Children!"
The conference has been shut down because the Mayor will not tolerate the far right.

Here is a tweet to GB news discussing why the conference was shut down:

https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1780239986861744280?s=19&t=hHgjMANzaGdj92-GTys1ig

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.

I've no idea, it's historical, of it's time. Perhaps there's a BBC employee on here who objected.

Ask MN HQ they do reinstate

No to debate I would think

@RebelliousCow

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?

Ah, I read your answer a bit differently. Never mind.

I'm here because - I like the content? Is there admission criteria?

Rather hyperbolic. When one lives on a small island , as we do, one tends to magnify every single thing that happens, and assume that nowhere else is suffering its own crisis and/or issues. But, post covid we see the landcsape in Europe fracturing as individual nations struggle with their own specific issues - usually that arise from their own unique history and national characteristics.

Nowhere has been immune from price rises, cost of living issues, energy supply and so on. Lots of countries are struggling with immigration/asylum issues; farmers are in revolt in many places; and now, even Germany, which for a long time has epitomised success in many areas is going through its own turmoil. But comparative to many countries in the world - which have dictatorships, military dictatorships, governed by fundamentalist religious fanatics, failed states ( such as South Africa with its railways, port, national airline, electricity and postal services totally collapsed - and unable to pay people) - it is not really that bad.

Adam you wanted separate feminism boards to avoid GC discussions. I didn't agree but respected the decision. I have posted a few threads on the Feminism but never on GC issues.

Having found that board hasn't worked you on the other hand come on here to post antagonisticlly. You got a board so you didn't have to listen us, then you come on here and insist we listen to you.

Don't ever tell me what I can or cannot discuss on a thread you've started. I've seen you regularly derail other people's threads.

What do you want to debate?

I'm not a nursing a grudge ( what would I be nursing a grudge about, anyway?)...as I said I've moved on..though some people are still banging on the same old drum. The same one they were banging in the late 1970s and early 80's. A bit like those people who don't listen to any new music - they naturally gravitate to the hits of the 1980's or whatever was popular in their youth.

Allowing people to change sex identity documents then claim they are just changing or expressing gender identity, is trans ideology.

Maybe you dont understand this, but someone with the background of starmer should. He either knows what he is doing, and therefore supports trans ideology or he is clueless after all this time and all this discussion.

Agreed! And furthermore, "most people" don't really have a clue what gender ideology actually entails, nor its consequences, let alone " agree with it" - but they are gradually finding out.

That is why this board exists

No thats not why I wanted a separate board.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/2864237-Please-could-we-have-a-trans-issues-sub-board-in-feminism?page=1

Here's my thread. Username being- a character in one of my favourite books

I wanted a separate board so people could still discuss other feminism without it getting lost and dropping off the board due to the volume of trans threads.

And I'm not here to "post antagonistically". Or at least, if I am then so are posters posting the threads about things like the Jean Hatchet article.

It is very odd on one hand posters want to post about free speech/censorship/read a wide range of sources. And on the other they want posters to shut up and go away if they don't share the majority view.

OK. That is your definition. Under that definition the majority of political parties and the British electorate support "trans ideology". Even Miriam Cates, as she remains in a party that isn't intending to repeal the GRA.

It does seem odd, though, that you should persist on a board you didn't like in the first instance. Having instigated this one being hived off into a very particular corner, you continue to post on it - whilst being antagonistic to the general 'tone' and purpose of the thread. Most people don't see this as a discussion forum as such, but as a place of solidarity, information, resource and report.

There is a terrible danger of using broad definitions...

Yes I get it. Sex and Gender is just for the ideologically pure.
It's still a public board though so if I want to post here and I'm not breaking guidelines, I can.

Noy yet......progress is slow on this issue.......but GC feminists and others have so far managed to get the government to block Self ID;block Scottish GRA reform; to instigate the Cass Review; to issue new guidance to schools re pronouns and social transitioning. We've forced the debate in parliament. Highlighted the issue of men in women's sports. Got journalists engaged.

I think we've done quite well; and yes I use the word 'We' - because most of us have been associating with Resisiter Groups, doing 'actions', attending conferences, making complaints to the BBC and Media, lobbying our MPs, doing community outreach work, writing letters,educating ourselves etc for many years now.

Have you done anything similar, or with as much commitment, yourself, i wonder?

😂love the assumption that you know all the "we", know who definitely is and isnt involved and can confidently take credit for all the grass roots activism yourself.

As well as being widely politically read, able to identify other parents shortcomings and protecting the UKs religious culture. I don't know how you find the time tbh.

Anyway, not going to engage with you further. Its getting pretty tedious.

Miriam is now on a more blatant anti LGBT agenda, also supported by the telegraph

https://www.gbnews.com/news/tory-mp-miriam-cates-disturbed-children-lgbt

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/17/scottish-primary-schools-appoint-children-lgbt-champions/

Would love to know the source of this story and how close the reporting is to the reality on the ground. I can't see any version of the world where teachers are actually asking 4 year old if they are gay. This is just the run up to s28 mark 2.

Many of us have met each other, yes...and certainly been at some of the same events and so on. Many of us "find the time" for the reason this issue is of fundamental importance to us. When people act with solidarity and commitment - which is what this board has been about - you can achieve real things.

You spend far more time on here than most from what I can see, though I'm not at all convinced anything constructive has come out of that time.

This is where your guilt by association rationale breaks down, doesn't it?

If cates supports trans ideology because she is in the Conservative party, then how can she also be far right, she'd just be centre right? Unless you believe the Conservative party is far right?

Clues in the thread title 🙄

You have started with a straw man.

I don't have a "guilt by association" rationale.

I can infer Miriam Cates' political stance from the thing she says and does. Things she says chime strongly with a global movement to get mothers involved in far right activities on the basis of "safeguarding" (e.g. moms for liberty, linked upthread). She is also anti-abortion and appears increasingly anti homosexuality, both things I think are anti-feminist positions.

She spends her time talking at far right conferences. In this case going so far as to be "smuggled in".

From that I can deduce Miriam Cates is far right.

Nothing about "guilt by association" at all

When Nigel Farage is advising the NHS on healthcare for my dd, or advising the government on who can identify as someone admitted to a female prison, then I'll be worried (Although even he would do a better job than Stonewall!)

I'm well beyond primary education but knew two of the parent governors, hand picked by god knows who. They're both lovely gentle people, one male one female.

They admitted in all their time there they had never questioned the status quo driven by the head teacher and the vicar.

Personally I ignored them as a parent because if you argued you were told to push off to another school.

Some parents vainly appealed to the education authority who in every case backed the head.

It was a waste of time to try changing things.

So I can see how a USA mothers group would spring up.

Why is Nigel Farage more of a worry than Cates/Braverman?
The Conservatives have basically said he's welcome to join, then he'd be doing more than "advising on" policy, he'd be creating it. Assuming they win.

To be honest looks like there is a fighting chance of Reform being the official opposition, cos no-one wants to vote Tory. Yes, that is a worry I agree.