I'm sorry, but I don't really see this as a gendergap issue - I see it as a pretty pure content dispute. And as an administrator, I would be closing this discussion in favour of removing the parameter. Indeed, the political parties for which this parameter might possibly be useful (Labour and Co-operative) do not use it at all. Your own description does not suggest this political party has a non-partisan affiliation (which does appear to be a contradiction in terms - if a group is non-partisan, it should not logically have any affiliation with any political party), it suggests that it will affiliate with any group or individual which shares its values.
I'm sorry to disagree with you, but I have to wonder if perhaps you are operating under a definition of "non-partisan" that is at variance with most other definitions of non-partisan - including the definition and description in the Wikipedia article to which the term is currently linked in the "affiliation" parameter.