So how did the party of women do?

[Hugesunflower]

How many votes did they get in the areas they stood? BBC isn’t giving a breakdown of results.

How many voted do you have to get to reclaim your deposit?

@CassieMaddox ... a question that is bugging me. You may choose to tell me to mind my own business.

I seem to recall that you talked some time ago about having a trans-identified stepchild? It was when you posted under previous name. Apologies if I have incorrectly recalled this, but if that is the position that you are in I can understand why descriptions of affirmation of family members is tantamount to abuse is a red flag to you. Knowing a mother of a trans young adult myself (a dear friend) I imagine she would be horrified also. This is part of the leaflet and campaigning around POW that I am uncomfortable with. I think its ill-advised to affirm, but can totally understand that it seemed the lesser of bad options - especially if it happened at a time when the mantra was 'better a trans child than a dead one'.

No, I don't have a trans child or stepchild. I have 2 that would identify themselves as LGB.

The "transitioning children is abuse" line is the reason I couldn't support PoW. Even worse when it became "profound abuse". I find it extremely judgemental.

I'm always surprised to hear any woman arguing that it's not abusive to tell children it's possible to change sex and that puberty blockers and brutal surgery will fix their flawed bodies.
Seems very divorced from understanding child development and the right of children to develop to maturity free from adult ideological interference 🙁

Again, straw man, trying to divert and put words in my mouth. I think it is wrong to blanket label people "abusers" when you have no idea about them or their circumstances. It is counterproductive and turns people off any reasonable point being made. I've discussed this ad nauseum on these threads so don't want to go into it again. But while PoW are using that strategy I can't support them. I think a lot of people feel the same, hence their low number of votes.

I think the thing is @CassieMaddox is that you’re posting on this thread in bad faith.

I remember you from countless other threads and while we have some common ground, some of your beliefs don’t align with what many other GC women believe, nor what the PoW believe. For example, your belief that it’s ok to socially transition kids and that trans conversion therapy should be banned (even though that means ONLY gender affirming therapy will be legal).

You’ve been extremely critical of KJK and PoW on every thread I’ve seen so I don’t think you’re here to give a fair and balanced view. I don’t think there’s anything she could have said or done that would make you post anything positive. I’m not telling where you can and can’t post but it would be like me going onto a post about Reform. I know my comments would be biased and subjective so rushing in to point out that I think they’re shitbags wouldn’t really be the most helpful. It wouldn’t be a thread for me.

This thread isn’t about ass pats for KJK. It’s interesting to see a cross section of objective analysis. But if you loathe the woman and are just using this thread to espouse that view, it’s not really contributing to the conversation.

KJK says:
No woman has a penis
No man has a vagina
There's no such thing as "non binary"
"Transitioning" children is abuse

You said On contact with the real world, its obvious that she's pretty niche.

I think most people would agree with her statements, particularly the first two. You were implying that thinking that women don't have penises is 'niche'. It's not.

@CassieMaddox

From what you've said and from the patterns of behaviour I can see, it's more about you getting digs in at KJK, in a space where she can't reply, because you're still salty about an argument that you had with her on the internets, almost a decade ago.

When you read that back in black and white, it's well, it's not great is it?

Lots of posters and readers enjoy @CassieMaddox contributions on this board and find the constant suggestions she should stop posting simply because you don't agree to actually be a nothing contribution to the conversation. Scroll past or disagree but stop policing which opinions are not allowed. Or stop saying this board his isn't a hive mind/echo chamber 🙄

You seem to have misunderstood why POW exists and why they stood at the election. Their low number of votes is because they are single-issue protest party. They don't expect to get elected, or even keep their deposit. That's not the point of standing. The point is to raise awareness.

Most people, even if they support their aims, wouldn't vote for them if they thought it was more important to support a mainstream party which had a chance of being elected.

I feel that its a complicated decision when its your own child. Ideally no transitioning would be happening without thorough exploration of the options, and particularly the other factors that may be driving this (trauma, neurodiversity, bullying, body dismorphia,internalised homophobia, etc) but there seem to be many parents who followed what appeared to be the best advice at the time, or who wanted to show support of a vulnerable child and - given the other problems in that child's life - this was a case of severing contact or helping them to navigate transition. Neither being good options. Some may have been encouraging their child (or young adult) to take things slowly while hoping for a change of heart. It feels cruel to call this profound abuse. Its not an option that the parent chose. (Yes, in some cases it clearly is a choice which was enabled by the parent and would not have happened without their say and that is profound abuse). Maybe this is too nuanced a distinction for a political pamphlet. But on this one instance I see @CassieMaddox 's point.

Agreed.

I'm not sure why you and @Whatever1964 seem to think it's surprising to people that you "enjoy" Cassie's posts, such as they are. Of course you do.

It really riles you up when you don't just have a bunch of people saying "exaaaactly 🤪" to eachother on a thread doesn't it.

I agree that this is a nightmare for parents with adults of bad faith promoting parental alienation, lying about changing sex and minimising the awful impact of social transitioning, puberty blockers and surgery. Like many women on here, I consider myself fortunate that my children avoided all this and have huge empathy for parents.
However, post Cass, I now have zero respect for adults in positions of trust (medics, politicians, educators, academics, journalists etc) who fail to read and understand Cass, fail to understand the impact of social contagion, the experimental nature of all this and fail to care about the dangerous impact of these practices on mentally vulnerable children. We're now way past "be kind" and well into adults adopting a wilful ignorance of what's being done to young gay and lesbian children - gay conversion therapy in real life.

No I wasn't. The totality of the four statements is niche. Its an old political trick to align statements of the bleeding obvious with more controversial statements to try to increase agreement for the more controversial things.

"There's no such thing as non-binary" is nonsense, because there patently is. Lots of people identify as non-binary regardless of one's personal view on the matter.

"Transitioning children is abuse" is inflammatory and likely to be offensive to parents of trans children and professionals working with trans children.

It helps to not straw man people.

Thats your opinion. Not much point me arguing the toss.

I think its bad faith to misrepresent people.

So for example "For example, your belief that it’s ok to socially transition kids" is complete misrepresentation. I think its OK for a 17 year old to decide for themselves to socially transition,I think its ridiculous to describe a parent who respects that choice as "an abuser"

"Your belief....that trans conversion therapy should be banned" In the UK, I think and therapy to treat transgender people not provided by an accredited professional should be banned, yes. I don't see any conflict with the GC position and I think posters claiming that means only GC affirming therapy will be legal are mistaken.

From my position the cult of personality around KJK is fascinating. I joined the thread to support another poster who was getting a kicking,because I agree with them that KJK/PoW have done more harm than good.

Of course you can disagree but calling me "bad faith" because I have a different opinion to you is not really on.

I think the range of posters taking part, the variety of experiences and perspectives is really helpful.

It’s not helpful to have a dogmatic poster slapping people down relentlessly. I really don’t think that’s the usual style here but there are a couple of posters springing readily to mind whose posting style is dogmatic, aggressive and hostile and they just won’t stop!

I’m reluctant to challenge it because it’s tone policing, but it does derail the exploration of a subject into variations of-
KJK’s A LIABILITY AND A MASSIVE EGOMANIAC AND ANYONE WHO THINKS OTHERWISE IS A NAZI BIGOT!

It’s tiresome. Allow plurality- not everyone will agree and that’s fine.

From what you've said I think you are a huge fan and can't see why anyone else wouldn't be 😂
I didn't have an argument with her. She was regularly getting deleted off the boards when she was here and she said one of the few transphobic things I've seen. I never argued with her. But don't let the truth get in the way of a good story 😂

Thank you.

I think @CassieMaddox ’s contributions are fantastic. I admire her tenacity in the face of constant gaslighting and straw manning etc etc. I often wonder who she is in real life as I’d like to buy her a drink

Oh and crazy mad point on this board. I’ve no idea whether I agree with @CassieMaddox on every point. I doubt if i do. But I like her thought provoking way of approaching things. I find the dogmatic sloganeering here really depressing

@MrsOvertonsWindow re your comments:
'However, post Cass, I now have zero respect for adults in positions of trust (medics, politicians, educators, academics, journalists etc) who fail to read and understand Cass, fail to understand the impact of social contagion, the experimental nature of all this and fail to care about the dangerous impact of these practices on mentally vulnerable children. We're now way past "be kind" and well into adults adopting a wilful ignorance of what's being done to young gay and lesbian children - gay conversion therapy in real life.'

Yes, I think that pressure should be put on those that are experts or present as such and who don't follow Cass - all of it. The fact that its the most vulnerable children who get caught in what at this stage and going forward is a web of deceit is inexcusable. Cass Review drew a firm line - pre-Cass you might have said that you were just following WPATH or other best practice. This is not a credible excuse anymore. Agree this is wilful ignorance and in some cases its actually intentional abuse of a particularly cruel type. Not 'be kind' at all.

I'm not really debating whether your opinions on other related subjects are right/valid/correct because that's not what this thread was about - I was only mentioning them because they'd be in contrast to what the PoW would stand for.

The point I was trying to make is that I know I couldn't be fair and unbiased on a thread about someone I deeply dislike. I sincerely doubt that you could be fair and unbiased about PoW as you seem to have a deep dislike of KJK.

So the example I used was Reform. If there was a thread titled "how did Reform do in the election?" I know I couldn't post on there in good faith. There is absolutely nothing that would persuade me to write a fair and balanced post about Farage and co because I think they're complete shitbags. I'm delighted they only got 5 seats, and in my mind that's 5 seats too many. However, Reform voters/members may well be having a debate right now about whether that looks like success for them, and what they've done well/done badly. I know I couldn't be part of that conversation and be fair with my comments.

So that was my comment re "bad faith".

It seems to me that posters who don't like KJK - and that's not only you Cassie - are using this thread as a way of crowing over what they perceive as failure. And I think that's a bit shitty tbh.

There are some excellent points made here from PP who think that KJK could have approached things differently or don't agree with her approach. This isn't just about bigging her up - there's room for all opinions. I'm really interested to hear from intelligent women who can provide different opinions about how things could be moved forward, or how more progress could be achieved. I just think some are using this as a point-scoring exercise to slag off KJK. And because they don't like KJK they won't acknowledge anything positive about the PoW and that's a shame.

I think that people who join the conversation should at least be fair. If you absolutely detest KJK and can't bring yourself to acknowledge the aspects which are positive, then you're not posting in good faith. And that seems to be the case for some on this thread - it's just an opportunity to be a bit of an arse.

Also worth mentioning, I'm not a KJK fangirl. I agree sometimes she could sometimes approach things better and I don't agree with all her views. But I am appreciative of the fact that she's helped to drag this subject into the public arena, and I'm appreciative of the fact that she continues to be willing to fight for women's rights.

OK..well its up to me where and what I post. In a democracy debate is important, I'm not going to stay quiet if I think my perspective might be useful. I absolutely loathe and detest Farage - and absolutely will post on Reform threads with my points about why Farage is bad news and the evidence for that.

I'm passionate about women's rights, and I don't think KJK is doing us any favours. Worse, I think the reception some posters get for asking questions on here is driving people away. It's the definition of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Your response to me posting that I'm "bad faith" and misrepresenting me as some kind of TRA is par for the course on here. In my opinion that approach is stopping healthy debate.