WEP asking me to join(19 Posts)
I had some correspondence with WEP after the WPUK London meeting. I said I'd consider joining if they changed their stance on Self ID.
I've had a response basically saying that the current policy was crowd sourced and voted on by a majority of the members. This is clearly a difficult area and they have more work to do etc etc. They hope I'll join so I'll can get involved and vote on policy.
On the one hand - they would say that wouldn't they? OTOH, they have a point. If their membership doesn't include people who disagree with current policy then policy changes won't be voted through. Am in two minds as to what to do. Would welcome views.
The problem parties have with members forming policy, is that you can't control who comprises the membership!
WEP was meant to be a movement that is concerned with women's equality - the leadership and committees or officers (or whatever their structure is), should be capable of setting policy that reflects that and furthers their aims. If they are incapable of identifying policy needs through a feminist lens, they perhaps can't be an effective force in politics.
The men in maternity wards overnight was a pretty rubbish early policy. As was their support of Tara Hudson, moving to a women's prison. I'd like to see a women's liberation party, really.
Well, they had quite a lot of women who disagreed with their current policy and they lost them.
I would not join a party that does not support women.
Listen to this podcast with Heather Brunskell Evans to hear they treat their members. No one supported her, not even privately.
And another reason I do not trust WEP www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/27/feminist-zealots-mp-philip-davies-shipley
Love Sandi Toksvig though.
Is Sandi really involved in it these days? When it was formed she said at the end of her run on The News Quiz that she was leaving to commit to politics, but her broadcasting career is now busier than ever, and I haven't seen her much associated with WEP lately.
Hmm. Still in two minds. Lots of people have suggested we should set up a new women's party but WEP is already there, organised, recognised etc. The temptation to be part of changing it for the better is strong. But totally take your points on board.
It's too late imo.
Once a womens party has let men into it it has already lost and has no point
I think if they changed their policy on this I'd join. I am a single issue voter now and I won't vote Labour while JC is at the helm. So I think you should suck it and see OP.
But I am in a minority of one on this thread!
Yes, I listened to the same podcast as LabourLostMe. They completely chucked Heather B-E under a bus. Really poor treatment. As has been said before, they had one bloody job and they can't do it. If they can't even stand up on what constitutes an actual female, I simply can't be bothered to listen to anything else from them. Plus, where has the vocal support been on merely questioning self-ID? Allowing women to meet and discuss it, nothing else?
I hope women leave and transwomen join and take over - maybe a TW leader.
As a PP said, they had lots of gender critical women, and they flung them under a bus.
They are a defunct product. I don't think I can forgive them for putting men ahead of women's safety.
Woke Penis Feminism™ is not any kind of feminism I can support.
Two schools of thought: join and try to change the policy or refuse to join as a protest and hope that brings them to their knees.
I really thought when Sophie Walker shared a platform with HBE that the former would get the police changed. That has not happened.
Trouble is, they have enrolled TIMS and any attempt to change will result in indignation, then transtrums, then suicide threats. You know, the same old same old.
WEP should never have let willy-women join. Men will ALWAYS dick-tate the agenda, the rules and the ideology. Keep them out!
*I hope women leave and transwomen join and take over - maybe a TW leader.
That would be brilliant. We can then set up a real Woman’s party.
A crying shame that they wasted such a magnificent opportunity. Imagine how many members they would have have had if they’d only done their job properly.
I agree it's too late now. Once the transactivists move in, they have a death grip.
For some reason, we had a WEP canvasser recently. I told her I wouldn't vote for them because of self-ID and I specifically mentioned H B-E's treatment as something I regarded as totally unacceptable. I doubt if it will do any good but I did say how much I regretted not being able to vote for them, as I can't vote for Labour in its current condition.
There's as much chance of anyone other than Labour winning in our constituency as Shergar winning this year's Grand National, however.
how much does it cost to set up your own political party?
I’m an active WEP member. If there are others out there who do want to work on this policy, DM me.
As for ‘allowing’ men, TIMs, transwomen to join - we’re a party for equality, of course everyone is welcome as a member. I’m not sure it would even be legal to restrict membership of a political party on the basis of sex.
Canvassing is for local elections in May btw. Please do mention this issue to any WEP canvassing you come across (and other parties too, obviously, I’m guessing you’ll be spoiling your vote). The more feedback from more sources then the better those of us within the party can argue for policy change.
My own ward I have a choice of Labour, Conservative or Green in May, and I think I’ll have to spoil my vote with a message about self-ID.
As for ‘allowing’ men, TIMs, transwomen to join - we’re a party for equality, of course everyone is welcome as a member.
There is our answer.
Already a TIM has driven one of your best assets and most educated and intelligent spokeswomen out of the party. And the party is only two years old.
If you let men in anywhere, they take over. Every.Single.Time.
Putting them in a wig and daubing them with lipstick changes NOTHING.
Cwenthryf how many TIMs will you allow into the party? Onto the executive? Leading women, speaking for (and over) women, making policy?
Because unless you are happy for the party to be entirely run by them and indeed for all the members to be TIMs then you aren't being fully inclusive.
It reminds me of the other week when that radio show host women asked Lily Madigan if he would be happy if ALL five "women" on an all woman shortlist were men. He replied: "VERY HAPPY".
Because that is the logical conclusion of believing a man in a dress is a woman.
Join the discussion
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.