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.

Some people are so entitled and manage to get everyone around them to re-arrange everything to their liking.
If only there was a way to distinguish those sort of people from the other sort of people.

US... WE.... so you're a concerted group on Mumsnet who know each other personally in real life. I didn't realise

Oh the irony.

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.
Adam, you can express any view you like on this board. It's just that I don't bother discussing things with you as I find myself sucked into some sort of alternative reality.

KJK is 'far right'; Miriam Cates is 'far right'. The problem is that if you throw the term around too freely, it starts to lose any power. I think I said something like this on an earlier thread.

It reminds me of a thread years ago when someone kept on claiming that a video showed a policeman 'beating' a woman. He clearly wasn't, he was using reasonable force to keep hold of her, but no matter how many times other posters pointed this out, nope, he was 'beating' her.

We just end up going around in circles. And honestly, life is too short and I can't be bothered.

I've met one mumsnetter, once at a feminist talk and twice for a coffee, with a resistance group

I don't even live in the UK any more.

Some people will know each other but the vast majority won't. We are not a concerted group!

I don't think KJK is far right. I think she plays to a far right gallery to boost clicks and gain a further personal reach. I don't think she is motivated by an ideology.

Cates I think is motivated by an ideology and its one I don't like a.k.a American Christian Right.

Both of them do appear to have good links into associations with money to spend on spreading a particular world view.

I honestly fail to see how raising concerns about this is any different to raising concerns about any other kind of "ideological capture".

Do read what rebellious cow said, she's far more active than you, who dipped a toe in the water

You mean she insisted on having a separate board and then comes on here all the time "warning" about this imminent far-right, American-style takeover in a country where the conservatives are predicted to lose the next election by a landslide? So she didn't want the GC derailing the feminism board, but she's happy to come on here, derail, and then pretend it's about free speech? And she calls other people tedious?

Just come across Gilead Watch. There are some pretty interesting themes I there (although no doubt easily written off as Lefties)

https://populationmatters.org/gilead-watch-protect-womens-rights-from-pronatal-politicians/

Yes she said 'many of us'. Not 'all of us'. It's all there if you care to read it.

How would you know who is far more active whatever that is, from one post? What do you even mean 'active'? Is activity just the amount of times people have met up together? Are you jealous some of us have some friends who like to speak to us in real life?

Recently a conference in Belgium was described as Far Right by many newspapers across Europe. A number of Tory MPs attended.
When my MP attended the same group's conference in 2020 he was reprimanded by his party leader for attending a Far Right conference.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks...

Not all of us, of course...but many have been posting ,and name changing, for years - and yes a good few have met or come across each other at one event, conference, group or another, I'm sure.

I now feel rude for having occassionally having intruded on their online group hugs.

I’ve not been on the board that long - couple of years - it’s easy to see there is a community who have been posting for years - they all ‘know’ each other on here ( they have
in jokes, an obsession with tunnocks, fine taste in memes, have built up an archive of receipts and research)

it really doesn’t take much time or attention to work this out - you see the same names, and think that they will be worth reading, you see other names and think nope………...and if you post (goady) nonsense you get your arse handed to you.

HOLD THE FRONT PAGE STOP
PEOPLE ON AN INTERNET FORUM INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER AND MAKE REFERENCES TO THINGS STOP
PEOPLE ON AN INTERNET FORUM REMEMBER THINGS FROM WEEKS MONTHS AND EVEN YEARS AGO END MESSAGE

Oh dear Alison. No need to shout.

I think the point was rebellious made it very clear there is an in group and an out group on the board. And it's not just a "virtual" hang out.

That does somewhat change how people might view the dynamic.

Exactly my point.

I'm pondering whether Gilead Watch is worth a thread on its own. Will do a quick AS to see if anyone has linked it before

You can't help yourself can you? (although no doubt easily written off as Lefties)

populationmatters.org/gilead-watch-protect-womens-rights-from-pronatal-politicians/

Are you really not aware of the backlash against women's rights across the world. Population Matters is quite well known. Equally of concern is the pro surrogacy, prostitution and pornography movement.

Personally I am more worried than at any other time in my life about the position of women and girls. This is a woman's issue not left right.

Eh? Yes I am well aware of the backlash and the erosion of women's reproductive rights, as well as the rise of pro-natalist politics, hence the thread.

The bit I wasn't aware of was that a charity had a project looking at this globally and had produced a report on it. And that the report featured some familiar names (CPAC, Nat Con, Orban etc) as well as a good analysis of why pro natalist policies are a threat to womens rights.

I can leave it on here but it seems like a strong enough issue to justify its own thread. But I can always put it in feminist chat if people on Sex and Gender won't like it for some reason

It isn't shouting. It's how they used to do urgent messages. It was called a 'telegram'. Only very old people who've been around for years would know about it...I did it on purpose because the accusation was that we've been around years.

Honestly, the youngsters of today. You know nothing unless it comes up on your feeds.

At least you didn't quote someone, 'antagonistically' (stop)

😆

I feel like you haven't been following the thread and the posts about "we".

But it wasn't even my spat so I'll stay out of it 😂

This is a bit of an odd posting style. I don't know why you've quoted me and referred to me as "she" throughout.

I didn't "insist on having a separate board" I made a polite request and IIRC it was turned down and didn't happen for quite a while.

And i haven't called anyone tedious. I was finding a circular argument with a particular poster tedious. I'm allowed. If you think I'm attacking anyone use the report button.

You wanted 'them' hived off to another board and then when nobody played with you you decided to go and just slag off any woman who you think 'them' on that board that you specifically wanted might support in any miniscule way and then derail anything you don't like with random bollocks.

Alison I made that thread in 2017 and have posted on here consistently since then. That was 7 years ago. So I have no idea what you are talking about.

It's hardly down to me that another poster decided to make a big thing about the "we".

I also haven't slagged of any posters