Immigration and Feminism

(12 Posts)
Dervel Fri 01-Jul-16 16:29:46

I have a question. Broadly speaking I am in favour of immigration, however with a completely unregulated immigration policy a greater percentage of immigrants will be male. It also seems that in populations where men outnumber women things like sex crimes go up.

Given this is it fair to set limits on immigration to ensure populations maintain a rough 50/50 ratio? If it is would it be wise to establish programs to encourage greater female migration from the third world?

Note I'm talking migration and not refugees, the numbers are not quite as colossal as the media report. In addition as a demographic they are more likely to head home once situations stabilise (see Chilean refugees to Germany as an example). Although there too may be a case to make sure women and children are not left behind, as again they have been underrepresented in those making the perilous journeys to the west, but are no less likely to be displaced in the first place?

VestalVirgin Sat 02-Jul-16 10:16:54

I totally agree with you.
Refugees anyway, the politics at the moment are utter bullshit - we just wait until the men arrive, and then let them enter the country because they are oh so poor and in danger ... the women, who are even more in danger, but do not even make the journey, are left to fend for themselves. Great. We should have set a limit for how many refugees of both sexes Germany will take, and then established a safe route for women to travel. (And the rest of the EU should have made a bit more of an effort, but that's a different topic)

And then there's the fact that, even without the war in Syria, there's countries where women's lives are in danger in everyday life, just because they are women.

For immigration, I see absolutely no problem in encouraging women to migrate from third world countries. You probably wouldn't even have to set limits, just make it easier for women to migrate.
The potential problem is that this might exacerbate the problem with male violence in those countries, but considering the high risk of death women in those countries face, and the high birth rates, the impact on the sex ratio of the countries they go to would be probably very significant before it is even noticed in the country they leave.

mamamea Sat 02-Jul-16 13:42:25

"For immigration, I see absolutely no problem in encouraging women to migrate from third world countries"

Except they would bring their misogynist men with them.

VestalVirgin Sat 02-Jul-16 13:56:44

Misogynist men already want to get out of their misogynist third world home countries and to first world countries where they can get better jobs.

I don't think that providing things like safe travel and such for single women would influence male immigration numbers much.

But Dervel's idea was to set limits, anyway.
You quoted the part of my post that agreed with Dervel's idea - it is the sentence after that that's about my assumption that limits may not even be necessary.

LightHouser Sun 03-Jul-16 01:28:55

I don't think this is something to worry about and is unworkable anyway.

With a population of 64.1 million people in the UK, and a net migration of 333,000 per year, even if they were all men it's still not going to significantly shift the balance.

Besides, 54% of the foreign born population of the UK are female: www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migrants-uk-overview

LightHouser Sun 03-Jul-16 01:33:46

(I'm also not getting into all the apparent assumptions made here about both men and immigrants hmm)

PridePrejudiceZombies Sun 03-Jul-16 12:10:48

Your proposal couldn't work OP without significant changes to the current Refugee Family Reunion rules.They allow recognised refugees to bring a preflight spouse to the UK without paying a fee or meeting maintenance and accommodation rules. Minor children also. I don't know what percentage of male refugees then bring in their female spouse via this route, but it's very common.

Dervel Sun 03-Jul-16 12:44:43

I wouldn't dream of seperating families seeking reunification. Besides a husband/wife balance out. I'm just wondering if we're headed to a points based system we can make sure women are represented equally in the intake. I can't see that being massively controversial.

I'm not married to the idea either I just felt it might be fruitful to have a discussion about it. We want to make sure women are represented in government and business. It just struck me as consistent to see them represented in migration too.

Dervel Sun 03-Jul-16 12:47:49

LightHouser thanks for the link it seems women are well represented as it stands. Always good to see solid data.

OlennasWimple Sun 03-Jul-16 12:53:11

I disagree that it's workable, and while I understand the driver, I also think it would have real adverse consequences such as forcing women who didn't want to migrate to travel, along with - in some countries - the use of a valid uk visa as part of the dowry offer, as happened with student visas in the past

PridePrejudiceZombies Sun 03-Jul-16 12:59:55

Your proposals would have to include refugee family reunion to have any hope of achieving balance then, OP. I'm pretty sure a greater percentage of recognised refugees are male than female. I'm less sure what proportion of them bring in a spouse (it is possible to bring in a same sex partner, but as the major refugee producing countries don't allow same sex marriage and also frequently make it very difficult to cohabit outside marriage, it's very rare). And while you say you're talking about migration rather than asylum specifically, since you specifically refer to third world migration you have to include both refugees and their dependants in that.
So basically, what I'm saying is:

a) any attempt to achieve a sex balance for third world migrants would need to take into account refugee family reunion.

b) refugee family reunion is a way in which lots of women who are themselves at risk manage to get to the West in relative safety.

Males then bringing in female family members once they have status isn't the whole story, but it's a part of it and as such one that needs to be acknowledged.

EnthusiasmDisturbed Wed 06-Jul-16 12:20:06

It sounds like a good idea

But many counties have cultures where women simply do not travel alone, it would be inconceivable to many to think a woman would do this without her family or or husband or could manage alone who would protect her. The majority of men travelling are expected to send money home and support the family (as they usually earn more)

With the refugee crises absolutely more women and children should have been helped it was not thought out at all

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now