Gorton & Denton by-election thread

[fromorbit]

This dramatic byelection to be held on Thursday 26 February 2026 is looking likely to have a confrontation over sex and gender with the Conservative's just announced candidate Charlotte Cadden being a trustee for Sex Matters. Another factor is with a large Muslim population in the area the group Muslim Vote has endorsed the Green candidate despite one of their aims to be remove teaching about LGBT issues from schools when religious parents object. Obviously in conflict with Green policy.

Candidates

• Angeliki Stogia will be the Labour candidate in this year's election. Ms Stogia moved to the UK from Greece in the 1990s and has served as a councillor in Whalley Range since 2004.
• Reform UK have selected GB News presenter Matt Goodwin as their candidate. He studied at the University of Salford and went on to have a career as a commentator and academic.
• The Liberal Democrats have selected local campaigner Jackie Pearcey as their candidate. She lives in the constituency and previously won 2,600 votes at the 2017 elections.
• The Green Party have put forward Hannah Spencer to stand for them at the by-election. She is a plumber by trade she is from Bolton and has lived in Greater Manchester all her life, and is based in Hale where she is a councilor. She doesn't believe biology is important in deciding gender.
• The Conservative Party have chosen former detective chief inspector Charlotte Cadden as their candidate. She served for 30 years in GMP and London's Met.
• The Re-join EU Party have announced that Joseph O'Meachair will be their candidate. He is a member of the party's executive committee and lives in the North West.

Sebastian Moore (Social Democratic Party)
The Social Democratic Party announced on Friday 30 January that the current SDP North West Chair Sebastian Moore will be running as their candidate in the by-election.

Nicholas Brendan Buckley Advance UK

He is a British charity worker and political figure who previously represented Reform UK.

Dan Clarke is the Libertarian Party candidate

Sir Oink A-Lot
Sir Oink A-Lot is The Official Monster Raving Loony Party candidate

https://whocanivotefor.co.uk/elections/parl.gorton-and-denton.by.2026-02-26/gorton-and-denton/

The just announced Conservative candidate has serious form:
Former detective chief inspector Charlotte Cadden is a lesbian served for 30 years as a Police Officer, both for Greater Manchester Police and the Metropolitan Police - Charlotte is a trustee of the charity Sex Matters, a member of the LGB Alliance Business Forum. She coordinates the Women’s Rights Network in Greater Manchester, In 2023, she set up the national Police SEEN.

Galloway's Worker's Party have now decided not to stand. They may have attracted a bunch of Muslim votes which will now go elsewhere.

Any hustings are going to be rather interesting.

Hi everyone, yes it's me. Despite my idea not to post further, it's hard not to respond to the last few pages. Please take my comments at face value.
First of all, I haven't been "bullied off" MN. Others here can argue as to that, but from my PoV, I'm not perceiving any bullying.
I have some idea why women would view male presence on MN as non negotiable. For parallel reasons to why I'm GC, and view TiM in women's spaces as unacceptable, a power play.
I absolutely feel no bad blood, I understand the strong emotions here, and it's for this reason I'm pulling out of posting.
Tbh, many more women post similar opinions to mine in way better ways, I'm not sure my absence is any loss.
So, I'm aware that forceful views from males look like mansplaining, guilty as charged, and yes, I regret telling women not to vote SNP over their policy of forcing protection of TiM prisoners in women's jails.
My strong suggestion for women not to engage further with the TiM on the Brighton school thread was not to control women, just an idea not to give that guy fuel for his fire. But I get it looked like a male in control mode.
However, the OT of the Brighton thread is a male, has pretty much agreed with me. Yet he hasn't received the flak I have.
The only poster I consider unfair is the one scathing about my reveal of possible ADHD and the fact I feel I can sense the same in politicians, which can exaggerate my reaction to them. This isn't a declaration of being special, even if that poster has decided it is anyway and wants to slate me. It's a free country.
May I ask one Q?
Why is the OT of the Brighton School thread not criticised for being a male on a feminist board? If it's because his comms style is more acceptable to feminists, then surely I should be offered a "second chance" to modulate the way I write.
But if the objection to me is purely because I'm male on here, why does he get a free pass?
I'm not looking to point score, I appreciate those women who've argued for my inclusion, and I totally get why others see my inclusion as inherently disruptive to what they feel should be a male-free space.
Even if I decided to brazen it out, tell these women to bog off, I'd feel weird writing any posts. I'm a therapist and conciliatory by nature, just as I've been peaked by seeing TiMs in women's sex based spaces, then I can see why feminists would feel peaked by any man in their main forum space, and their needs come first.
I can't genuinely write freely if I feel recipients who might even agree with my views still are made uncomfortable by the author of them.
So, for the first time in my life, I'm going to self censor and exit an interestbof mine, for the common good. I'm normally too stubborn to do something like that. I'm surprising even myself, lol.
Too bad plenty of TiMs on here, and in society generally will have the diametric opposite attitude.
I'm a little melancholy about this, I guess I have a better insight into the difference between the sexes, but harbour no grudges or ill will. Still very interested in everything that everyone has to say on here.

I'd say more unwittingly complicit, than collaborator.

I saw waggons being circled in haste to protect a man, who was perfectly capable of defending himself, while no-one even tried to engage fruitfully with the women complaining. You saw a pile on. Our views differ.

tell these women to bog off

Interesting approach.

You need to quote me accurately if you're going to selectively quote me.
"Even if I decided to..."
I see you've zeroed in on this and had nothing to say about anything else I've written.
You're pretty much telling me to bog off from MN, but I guess that's ok.

Passive aggressive huffs don't work on me.

Why is the OT of the Brighton School thread not criticised for being a male on a feminist board?

Have you read his threads, right back to the start?
Hint: it's not because of his comms style

The objection to me being here, by those who object to me being here, is that I'm male and FWR should by definition be a board just for women.
I'm a male. So is he.

I can't speak for those women. I think FWR should be women-centred. As you know, I do not necessarily think that means that no men should post here

Yep.

Thanks for the insight and for getting this thread back on track.

I'd followed the thread from the beginning and posted early on but have been scrolling past all the recent squabbles about who is allowed to post and was on the point of deleting/unwatching the thread.

I'm a member of the Green Party but hate the direction that it's taken and which is being given greater impetus by the election of Zack Polanski as leader. I'm really interested in the outcome of the by-election and hope that there are going to be more on topic posts, especially from posters with local knowledge (of the constituency and of how campaigning is being received locally).

squabbles

@cariadlet i'm not here for the squabbles either

I would really like for someone to tell me why they support the Greens and how you see the drug policy playing out in real life.

I'm absolutely not here to have an argument. So if you or anyone else who supports them is happy to answer the question, I would be interested to hear about it. I'm literally not going to say anything except to thank you for your time- just looking for insight into this increased support for them.

Thank you.

@EmeraldRoulette I do sometimes wonder myself why I'm in the Green Party!

I've been a member for several years. I joined because I believe that we're in the middle of a climate emergency and nature emergency and the Greens seemed to be the only party taking this seriously.

There are other policies that I hate because I find them incredibly stupid and think would cause real life harm if they became law. Most of these are concerned with sex and gender and women's rights eg transwomen are women, surrogacy is absolutely ok (I don't think there's a specific policy in favour but there is implicit support in the fertility section of the health policy) and sex work is work.

There are many very long standing members who are committed environmentalists and I hope that some of the newer members also fall into this category; unfortunately, it seems that many put the environment low on their list of priorities.

I stay in the Green Party to support those good members who speak up against policies that harm women and have managed to avoid being suspended or expelled. It does seem at times like being in an abusive relationship but I'm ever the optimist and hope that one day the Green Party will go back to being an ecological party rather than one that's increasingly dominated by the bizarre pairing of trans "rights" activists and Islamists.

@cariadlet thank you for your reply.

I actually think their policy on defence/security is the least harmful. Which is an absolutely crazy place to be. They are usually the pie in the sky "wouldn't it be nice if we all got along" unreality brigade. But Polanski sort of saw the writing on the wall about NATO sooner (prob because of a natural bias then any gift of foresight) and I think they are right about Palantir and the need to reduce our reliance on American defence in general. Ironically it's the mainstream parties who are struggling to catch up with reality and seem stuck in the world of "wouldn't it be nice if..." than the real one...

There are other policies I really don't like (trans policy) and I hate having to chose between caring about big existential threats (environment, security) and stuff that can have a significant impact on the lives and safety of large numbers of women/girls as individuals.
All the parties seem away with the fairies in their own special unique ways. Sigh.

If I lived in Gorton and Denton, I'd like to vote for a candidate who's anti greyhound racing, but I'm afraid my GC views would prevent me from doing so. Why would I vote for a party that wouldn't welcome me as a member or respect my evidence based, legally recognised views?

I'm also amazed that the Greens are still debating whether to ban greyhound racing. I was arguing for supporting a ban 15 years ago, and other members were more for welfare tweaks. Have they really not progressed over those years? Even Dogs Trust is now calling for a ban.

The Scottish government just banned it.

There are no greyhound racing tracks in Scotland, though, so it was an entirely empty and pointless exercise.

Wrt 'squabbling': talking about feminism on the feminism board is pretty much the point.

I assume they have based their approach on the Portuguese model? They
decriminalized the personal possession of all illicit drugs in 2001, while maintaining criminal penalties for trafficking and cultivation. The core principle is treating drug use as a health issue rather than a criminal one.

it's resulted in portugal having amongst the lowest drug use and lowest drug deaths in Europe

Of course talking about feminism on the feminist board is essential and whether it's ok for men to post on the feminist board and if so what kind of boundaries should decent men impose on themselves are perfectly valid topics for debate.

I'd prefer for anyone wanting to talk about that to set up a specific thread to discuss it rather than pursuing a discussion on other threads which make it hard to find posts about the original topic. I acknowledge that that's my personal point of view with which some other posters will agree and with which others will disagree.

I'm not going to apologise for my use of the word "squabble" because, as someone who wasn't involved and was trying to read the posts about the by election, that's very much how it felt, especially when some posts were personalised.

squabble
/ˈskwɒbl/

noun
plural noun: squabbles
a noisy quarrel about something trivial.

See, that approach makes sense to me. It's not like legalising drugs because drugs are fun. I don't think legal should always = to be celebrated. The main issue I have with the legalise prostitution arguments is however much they start being about harm reduction they always wind up being about "celebrating sex workers/sex work" and a total disconnect from the grim realities.

Legalising drugs in Glasgow has causeda fair amount of grim reality for locals. They're talking about legalising crack, now.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jv41zl4elo