Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Thoughts on the Womens' Equality Party? watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Freyjaeve)
    Or I personally dislike him, and certain policies of his. I'm allowed to have my own political opinions thanks.
    Jezza and his cultural marxists won't allow you to have any!
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    I'm surprised you haven't mentioned the grooming gangs in Rotherham, FGM, forced marriages, burqas, etc. You instead prefer to complain about "James Bond slapping a scantily-clad actress on the bottom".

    It's probably so much easier, convenient, and politically correct to blame the white patriarchy for every minute problem a woman can face in her life.
    *sigh* Please read it however many times it takes for the words to sink in. I was talking about embedded examples from popular culture, and FGM doesn't feature much in that. But yes, obviously- for the avoidance of any doubt- these are all caused by entrenched sexism and all terrible things. Mine wasn't an exhaustive list, so please feel free to add to it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Freyjaeve)
    Or I personally dislike him, and certain policies of his. I'm allowed to have my own political opinions thanks.
    I disliked Miliband, I didn't jump ship. A leader doesn't make a party.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Freyjaeve)
    It's called the Women's Equality Party because women are the social group that need the most help in order to become equal. If you're genuinely arguing that men are less privileged you may want to re-think. They aren't just taking votes from Labour as they have an entirely different agenda, I personally left Labour for WEP due to Corbyn being elected leader.
    How exactly do women need the most help out of every possible social group in this country?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bupdeeboowah)
    I just learnt how to multiquote on this forum!

    Using mockery may cement your followers' beliefs, but in may turn off the politically undecided, especially when not done right - it all depends on the context and the audience.

    For example,

    Is not bound to win any of the undecided over to your side, and it instead does the opposite.

    When your audience has no knowledge of a matter then arguing with them would just be talking past them; there is no meaningful discussion happening. Furthermore, the point of political debate is not to only win arguments, but to also win believers - remember, your audience is not only the person to whom you're arguing with, but also those who are watching the debate. So in order to influence their opinions you must bring your knowledge to them, wholly packaged and ready for consumption. Margaret Thatcher was famous for her incessant lectures to her supporters, opposition, and the fence-sitters on the free market and free choice, the evils of socialism, etc., and with that she managed to redefine British politics, pulling it towards the right, where it has stayed for the last thirtysomething years.

    Yes, I know of the distinctions, if you're talking about those as defined by Christina Hoff Somers. Please do not adopt a patronising tone when addressing your audience - it is very off-putting.

    I find your assumptions of where and how I learnt about gender equality to be highly amusing, especially since you have never met me in person, nor asked me about my thoughts before. That is to say, I disagree with your theory that everyone's view of the world is affected by the aforementioned examples of prejudice.

    That aside, I'd like to know a few things:

    1. How you can deconstruct these supposed institutional and cultural barriers and achieve equality for everyone?
    2. Is WEP aiming for equal opportunity or outcome, i.e. does its policies aim for equality or equity?
    3. What is WEP's view on authoritarianism and freedom of speech?

    I'm very sorry to say that I'm not very interested in reading the document OP linked, so I'd like some responses if preferable, and not one which tells me to go read it myself - I have a very, very short attention span (and I'm at work).
    Right. Clearly this is pointless. Is no one else going to do this? *looks around* Fine. Read the document. It's right there. And then, if you have time: go back to work.

    Let it be known that I tried.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Romula)
    Right. Clearly this is pointless. Is no one else going to do this? *looks around* Fine. Read the document. It's right there. And then, if you have time: go back to work.

    Let it be known that I tried.
    Ah, I see that you're taking my advice on mockery very well.

    And also I think it was Margaret Thatcher who said, "I am extraordinarily patient, provided I get my own way in the end."
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I had a brief read of the manifesto. Anyone who thinks quotas are a good idea to help equality is a moron.

    Also was the Equality Party name taken or is this party trying to be a joke?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Freyjaeve)
    Some of you may know, there's a brand new political party aiming for total equality in the UK. They are not only trying to make the country better for women (although that is a key part of it) but also for men, people who are BAME, LGBT and basically everyone!

    Their policies document can be found here, I'm really interested as a founding member to see what you all think.
    If they are for supporting men who are rape victims (biiiig problem) and ending the problem of men doing dangerous jobs and the pay gap under 30 then they would be good but are they just for women?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Romula)
    *sigh* Please read it however many times it takes for the words to sink in. I was talking about embedded examples from popular culture, and FGM doesn't feature much in that. But yes, obviously- for the avoidance of any doubt- these are all caused by entrenched sexism and all terrible things. Mine wasn't an exhaustive list, so please feel free to add to it.
    You have a peculiar sense of priorities.
    Offline

    17
    TheCitizenAct can't wait to see what you have to say about this. :rofl:


    When will people learn equal opportunity will never give equal outcome?
    OP please can you move this party to sub saharan Africa and the middle east please? I think it's more needed there
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Romula)
    Two things straight off: one, mockery is absolutely useful for furthering a political cause; and two, ignorance will not win you any arguments. I mean ignorance in the 'not knowing about something' sense, not with the 'you're a moron' connotations that often accompany its use on TSR. I don't think you are a moron, so we're clear: I just think you're wrong.

    That aside, if you are really unwilling to go and read up about what you're talking about, I will explain: there are two types of feminists, "equity" feminists and "gender" feminists. Most people, men or women, agree with the basic principles of equity feminism- women should have equal rights, equal pay, equal representation in media, etc etc- more or less the contents of the WE's manifesto, in other words. Gender feminists are the extremists- every movement has them- who tend to be trans-exclusionary and all the rest of it. When you say "all feminists hate men", you're thinking of those guys. Please ignore them. We all do.
    The thing is women DO have equal rights and equal pay. (What many submit they do not have is equal responsibilities!)

    Also, some equalities are more equal than others. It seems from other people's comments that the WEP supports quotas. This is equality of outcome, not of opportunity. Women entering the workforce since 1990, or under 40, have exactly equal pay with men and in fact better chances with education. Older women suffered from inequality of opportunity. However, their careers are mature, their CVs inferior: nothing can make it better for them. Therefore to equalise outcome across all women will require privileging younger women over younger men via the use of quotas.

    Anyway, the basic idea of the modern feminist movement is in two basic tenets: no culture can shake off hundreds of thousands of years of entrenched inequality in forty years, or even a hundred, and unsurprisingly we haven't; and someone can hold sexist view without ever explicitly saying or thinking the words 'women are inherently not equal to men'. This is because people don't learn about the world just from things said to them out loud. You learn about women and feminism from James Bond slapping a scantily-clad actress on the bottom and sending her away while the men talk, and everyone on screen acting like this is ok. You learn about women and feminism from your friend calling a girl a '****' because she lost her virginity at 15. You learn about women from only seeing pretty, slim, white women in movies and learning- as indeed, many teenage girls do, agonisingly- that this is the norm. This is what is meant by 'institutional' or 'cultural' prejudice and this is what the WE party is trying to put a stop to, among other things.

    Right. Can you engage with me now?
    What is the WEP's stance on "cultural prejudice" faced by men, which is basically just as bad? How do you respond to the idea that some aspects of gender roles are impossible to change because they are innate rather than socialised: will the WEP attempt to force people to change them regardless?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    You have a peculiar sense of priorities.
    Maybe, but it's not invalid. Feminists are usually middle-class white etc etc. It's OK to want to sort your own house out. Otherwise we would stop all benefits and reduce the minimum wage to £1 a day and say, well if you're so concerned take your concerns to Africa.
    Offline

    2
    I haven't seen its polices, but ngl it seems a little weird to bass a party solely around this ideal.

    Of course equality goes into all fields, but what about things like the deficit and ****? This party wouldn't have its answers.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Maybe, but it's not invalid. Feminists are usually middle-class white etc etc. It's OK to want to sort your own house out. Otherwise we would stop all benefits and reduce the minimum wage to £1 a day and say, well if you're so concerned take your concerns to Africa.
    Rotherham is in the UK.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Read through the first page then gave up due to OP, somewhat unsurprisingly, not actually answering any of the questions asked by other posters (except to poorly defend the choice of the name of the party, and then agree with an ad hom).
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    The pay gap does not exist in terms of a woman being paid less than a man for doing the same job.

    The supposed pay gap is in the overall earnings of every woman vs every man and is due to women making different lifestyle and career choices. Short of forcing women to make choices they don't want to make, you can't artificially change that gap and nor should you aspire to.

    Quotas meanwhile, are discriminatory to men and patronising to women. I also notice there are complaints about too few women in the boardroom, but no such complaints about coal-mining, sanitation and truck-driving.

    The rest of these issues are either already addressed by other parties or non-issues.

    I think very little of this movement.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Rotherham is in the UK.
    Yes but resulted from a foreign culture. The majority in the UK do not hold those views so it is not a particular fight worth focusing on for a feminist party. The mainstream political debate will cover it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Freyjaeve)
    It's called the Women's Equality Party because women are the social group that need the most help in order to become equal. If you're genuinely arguing that men are less privileged you may want to re-think. They aren't just taking votes from Labour as they have an entirely different agenda, I personally left Labour for WEP due to Corbyn being elected leader.
    Because I who grew up in a poor home being a male had it so easy, that my school had take your daughter to work day, and even a fortnight where they got time off school whilst the boys were educated on girls matters, that the same school had female only awards.

    That some local feminists got their boss fired purely as he was male by finding a loophole that he was breaking company policies then outright said "we will never have another male employee ever again" then only hired women means men are more priviledged.

    When I have worked in shops, factories, warehouses where the female employees refuse to do heavy lifting but get paid the same (IMO they should get paid less as they may have same job title but not the same expectations)

    Part of the problem is when women in priviledged countries like the UK like to talk about equality as if it effects them.

    It always reminds me of when I was at uni and this girl complained about how she had it hard for being female and men have it so easy, she literally just spent almost £300 on one pair of jeans and moaned she had £100 for a nights drinking money and mummy and daddy already had a job lined up for her when she left, when I said she was being sexist she went on to say ALL men have it easy even homeless men had it better than her!

    Would this party cover the discrimination in the workplace for men under 35 where women are far more likely to get lower paid jobs or as usual will it just go on about how theres not as many women in high paid roles therefore that means men are being sexist and not that its purely less women are either qualified or apply or are suitable.

    I doubt it as even reading the leaflet it goes on about being equal for women, when it should say equal for EVERYONE.

    When you grew up in a poor area and treated like the dirt on someones show and told you will amount to nothing then you have reason to talk about equality, you are not automatically more disadvantaged for being female.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Aye Beyoncé, Taylor swift and Emma Watson are just overweight and ugly.
    "Average".
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    After reading that piece of propaganda It looks like it was written by a bunch of midde/upper class women who have never experienced the real world.

    A lot of the things it claims are vile and sexist towards men, having a man claim he things how hard women have it due to sexism, having a girl whinge about how her lecturer made a joke about women instead of her growing a backbone, talking about stats about how women are victims of this that and another and not talking about the other side i.e claiming not all rapes are reported, yet not bothering to mention male victims of rape dont report it either.

    It just seems man shaming and thinking every woman that exists is demeaned by men who are all evil and hate women.

    How this disgusting party even exists is beyond me, IMO its almost as bad as UKIP.
 
 
 
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.