Emergency female cabinet proposed by the greens Watch

Miriam29
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#41
Report 1 week ago
#41
(Original post by Wired_1800)
The correct term, I think, should be egalitarianism.
I agree to some extent, but egalitarianism doesn’t specifically focus on gender. Feminism arose due to the unfair position held by men in society, and it’s important to recognise those roots. Maybe another term specifically focussed on gender could be coined?
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#42
Report 1 week ago
#42
(Original post by Miriam29)
I agree to some extent, but egalitarianism doesn’t specifically focus on gender. Feminism arose due to the unfair position held by men in society, and it’s important to recognise those roots. Maybe another term specifically focussed on gender could be coined?
Men are not a homogenous group with regards to occupying “unfair positions”. Also men occupied positions across many fields. However, the feminism appear to target either the leadership positions or jobs that have best outcomes like finance, law, consulting and politics. We don't focus on the “dirty” jobs where men are overrepresented like the trades, mines, construction etc.

Also, women are not a homogenous groups either. Despite not being overly represented, white women are more represented than their fellow women from ethnic backgrounds. We don't hear about the injustices in those stats.

My final point is that feminists are using old problems to destroy new generations. Young men are not the reason nor the cause of the injustices but they are dumped to fall into the hands of violence, drugs, crimes, unemployment and idleness. When feminists attack the patriarchy, they refuse to acknowledge that young white and black working class boys are among the most disadvantaged and in the cycle of poverty to prison and back to poverty.

That is why I believe in egalitarianism, bringing everyone up and not focusing on one gender, race or religion.
1
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#43
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#43
(Original post by Miriam29)
I agree to some extent, but egalitarianism doesn’t specifically focus on gender. Feminism arose due to the unfair position held by men in society, and it’s important to recognise those roots. Maybe another term specifically focussed on gender could be coined?
I will not call myself a feminist but only because of the modern association to the word to neoliberal identify poltics obcessed people who don't believe in equality they believe in creating a disadvantage for one to advantage another. Unfortunately nowadays some feminists seem to want female superiority not equality.

I'm saying this to you because you seem a level headed person. Equality of choices is a great thing and should be encouraged, equality of outcome is an awful thing which needs to be scrapped.

Egalitarianism is effectively equality, why does it bother you it does not specifically focus on gender? Shouldn't we be wanting to look forwards rarther than backwards? We would not hold historic actions of parents in children, why should a man be put down for what happened before he was born?

Lgbt, women, men are not born what they are to be politicised, why are feminists scared of treating people as people?
1
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#44
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#44
(Original post by Wired_1800)
Men are not a homogenous group with regards to occupying “unfair positions”. Also men occupied positions across many fields. However, the feminism appear to target either the leadership positions or jobs that have best outcomes like finance, law, consulting and politics. We don't focus on the “dirty” jobs where men are overrepresented like the trades, mines, construction etc.

Also, women are not a homogenous groups either. Despite not being overly represented, white women are more represented than their fellow women from ethnic backgrounds. We don't hear about the injustices in those stats.

My final point is that feminists are using old problems to destroy new generations. Young men are not the reason nor the cause of the injustices but they are dumped to fall into the hands of violence, drugs, crimes, unemployment and idleness. When feminists attack the patriarchy, they refuse to acknowledge that young white and black working class boys are among the most disadvantaged and in the cycle of poverty to prison and back to poverty.

That is why I believe in egalitarianism, bringing everyone up and not focusing on one gender, race or religion.
Brilliantly put, I think we was writing that at the same time I do believe you have put it better than me though.
1
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#45
Report 1 week ago
#45
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Brilliantly put, I think we was writing that at the same time I do believe you have put it better than me though.
I agree. Feminists love to say that feminism is about equality but that is what egalitarianism is defined as, so what is the point to focus on one gender.
0
reply
Miriam29
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#46
Report 1 week ago
#46
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
I will not call myself a feminist but only because of the modern association to the word to neoliberal identify poltics obcessed people who don't believe in equality they believe in creating a disadvantage for one to advantage another. Unfortunately nowadays some feminists seem to want female superiority not equality.

I'm saying this to you because you seem a level headed person. Equality of choices is a great thing and should be encouraged, equality of outcome is an awful thing which needs to be scrapped.

Egalitarianism is effectively equality, why does it bother you it does not specifically focus on gender? Shouldn't we be wanting to look forwards rarther than backwards? We would not hold historic actions of parents in children, why should a man be put down for what happened before he was born?

Lgbt, women, men are not born what they are to be politicised, why are feminists scared of treating people as people?
I understand what you mean, though I don’t personally see feminism as putting men down inherently. However I do recognise the issues associated with the movement and support egalitarianism, but specialised movements are usually more effective in delivering an end goal hence the specific gender one.
0
reply
cow2000
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#47
Report 1 week ago
#47
(Original post by SlS66)
Pure and blatant sexism. If a man said this there would be outcry.
I guess the whole point is that women do not make up the majority of parliament- it was around 32% of the commons were female in 2017 (I know this has risen). I’m definitley not condoning what she has done as I believe it’s a bad political move, but I just had to mention that if men were to do the same there would be a large outcry because men already dominate parliament and some would see it as a move to isolate female politicians I guess?
I mean not that an emergency male parliament or men meeting in a parliament without women is a new thing they’ve been happening for hundreds of years!!
But yes to a degree I get what you are saying and that was a very bad move on her part
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#48
Report 1 week ago
#48
(Original post by cow2000)
I guess the whole point is that women do not make up the majority of parliament- it was around 32% of the commons were female in 2017 (I know this has risen). I’m definitley not condoning what she has done as I believe it’s a bad political move, but I just had to mention that if men were to do the same there would be a large outcry because men already dominate parliament and some would see it as a move to isolate female politicians I guess?
I mean not that an emergency male parliament or men meeting in a parliament without women is a new thing they’ve been happening for hundreds of years!!
But yes to a degree I get what you are saying and that was a very bad move on her part
You are bringing up “hundreds of years” to kind of justify her action.
0
reply
SlS66
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#49
Report 1 week ago
#49
(Original post by cow2000)
I guess the whole point is that women do not make up the majority of parliament- it was around 32% of the commons were female in 2017 (I know this has risen). I’m definitley not condoning what she has done as I believe it’s a bad political move, but I just had to mention that if men were to do the same there would be a large outcry because men already dominate parliament and some would see it as a move to isolate female politicians I guess?
I mean not that an emergency male parliament or men meeting in a parliament without women is a new thing they’ve been happening for hundreds of years!!
But yes to a degree I get what you are saying and that was a very bad move on her part
Her comments concern me. Feminism has undermined by attudues like this. Thinking of the me too movemnet here. It soon bypassed the cause for equality and became a witchunt. She's wants female domination, not equal opportunities. We've had Thatcher and May. Burma's Anne San Su ki has an appalling human rights record . With the exception of Jacinda Arden, female leaders have divided their country. Which is why we should award on merit, not sex. In terms if sex, Boris's cabinet sees females in top positions and is split almost 50/50.
Yet Lucas disregards this, confirming to me her support for women and women only.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#50
Report 1 week ago
#50
(Original post by SlS66)
Her comments concern me. Feminism has undermined by attudues like this. Thinking of the me too movemnet here. It soon bypassed the cause for equality and became a witchunt. She's wants female domination, not equal opportunities. We've had Thatcher and May. Burma's Anne San Su ki has an appalling human rights record . With the exception of Jacinda Arden, female leaders have divided their country. Which is why we should award on merit, not sex. In terms if sex, Boris's cabinet sees females in top positions and is split almost 50/50.
Yet Lucas disregards this, confirming to me her support for women and women only.
To me, Lucas is an example of the aggressive feminist who would stop at nothing to destroy men. She hides under the cloak of being a woman to avoid harsh criticisms.

Her comments were not only sexist but racist. She claimed that she invited women who were either at the helm of the Parties or Deputies, but then she invited Yvette Cooper but not Diana Abbott even though Ms Abbott is Shadow Home Secretary.

I think women should reject this evil takeover of their gender, else they could be in the middle of hate shrouded as equality.
2
reply
SlS66
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#51
Report 1 week ago
#51
(Original post by Wired_1800)
To me, Lucas is an example of the aggressive feminist who would stop at nothing to destroy men. She hides under the cloak of being a woman to avoid harsh criticisms.

Her comments were not only sexist but racist. She claimed that she invited women who were either at the helm of the Parties or Deputies, but then she invited Yvette Cooper but not Diana Abbott even though Ms Abbott is Shadow Home Secretary.

I think women should reject this evil takeover of their gender, else they could be in the middle of hate shrouded as equality.
Agreed. What I can't understand is why the Green party aren't holding her to account. It's disgraceful. Well said.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#52
Report 1 week ago
#52
(Original post by SlS66)
Agreed. What I can't understand is why the Green party aren't holding her to account. It's disgraceful. Well said.
It is typical hypocrisy. It happens in every party. If it was Labour or the Tories, they would do the same and look the other way.
0
reply
cow2000
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#53
Report 1 week ago
#53
(Original post by SlS66)
Her comments concern me. Feminism has undermined by attudues like this. Thinking of the me too movemnet here. It soon bypassed the cause for equality and became a witchunt. She's wants female domination, not equal opportunities. We've had Thatcher and May. Burma's Anne San Su ki has an appalling human rights record . With the exception of Jacinda Arden, female leaders have divided their country. Which is why we should award on merit, not sex. In terms if sex, Boris's cabinet sees females in top positions and is split almost 50/50.
Yet Lucas disregards this, confirming to me her support for women and women only
No I agree it should be awarded by merit- there is no point hiring someone because they tick all the politically correct boxes, it should be because they are good at their job. Also pointing out the mistakes that women have made is fair because all leaders mess up at some point, but you can’t neglect the fact that men in power have messed up as well. I think you are missing the point of what I’m trying to say. Women have faced many struggles politically speaking (as well as many others) and I think it is important to empower women but maybe not to the extent of Lucas ideas. Also I’m guessing you’re male from the ‘me too’ comment. There’s no point arguing with you on that because we would never agree, but anyway I’ve just smashed my a levels so I’m going to celebrate now, life’s too short to be arguing!
(Also to make it clear I am not justifying Caroline Lucas, never will and never have done)
Last edited by cow2000; 1 week ago
0
reply
SlS66
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#54
Report 1 week ago
#54
(Original post by cow2000)
No I agree it should be awarded by merit- there is no point hiring someone because they tick all the politically correct boxes, it should be because they are good at their job. Also pointing out the mistakes that women have made is fair because all leaders mess up at some point, but you can’t neglect the fact that men in power have messed up as well. I think you are missing the point of what I’m trying to say. Women have faced many struggles politically speaking (as well as many others) and I think it is important to empower women but maybe not to the extent of Lucas ideas. Also I’m guessing you’re male from the ‘me too’ comment. There’s no point arguing with you on that because we would never agree, but anyway I’ve just smashed my a levels so I’m going to celebrate now, life’s too short to be arguing!
(Also to make it clear I am not justifying Caroline Lucas, never will and never have done)
I'm a lady who believes in equality, not the mockery thats been made of feminism.
Congratulations on your A levels, that's brill😀 I've recently graduated with a 2.1 so back to post grad now..bracing myself!! Enjoy
Last edited by SlS66; 1 week ago
0
reply
cow2000
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#55
Report 1 week ago
#55
(Original post by SlS66)
I'm a lady who believes in equality, not the mockery thats been made of feminism.
Congratulations on your A levels, that's brill😀 I've recently graduated with a 2.1 so back to post grad now..bracing myself!! Enjoy
Ah fair enough, that’s the thing with discussions I guess everyone has different opinions and that is what makes politics/debating interesting! And thanks so much, congrats on the 2:1 that amazing x
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts

All the exam results help you need

1,914

people online now

225,530

students helped last year
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?

Hopeful (214)
12.6%
Excited (156)
9.18%
Worried (305)
17.95%
Terrified (378)
22.25%
Meh (163)
9.59%
Confused (37)
2.18%
Putting on a brave face (233)
13.71%
Impatient (213)
12.54%

Watched Threads

View All