The Labour Party leadership election

"I think it was addressed to the OP but could have applied to me."

Replying to this from Lass, Pan, the last but one post before mine. Mistaken, but hardly "post tails".

HTH.

Just caught up with this. Crumbs! some trawling back going on there, for a purpose!
My comment was directed at Amethyst, not Lass, sorry Yonic but you were mistaken.
The question of 'loyalty' was about Amethyst linking to a ToryGraph hatchet job on Labour within hours of it's announcement of leader, and it's overwhelming choice of JC, with a crystal clear authority. Clearly Amethyst doesn't agree with this choice and chooses to summon up a Tory outlet to throw rubbish at the new leader - pretty poor behaviour for a Party member. She states she is resigning from the Party, so that's probs. best all round.

But digging this up from Sunday evening, is slightly feeble? Amethyst responded at the time iirc re reading beyond the D Mirror, but Yonic has posted lots since with no reference to this. But now just sort of catching onto Lass' post tails, for some unexplained reason.

Nah, I think that was at you, Lass!

Agree with your response.

" Whether or not Corbyn will be successful, time will tell, but I heard one berating him earlier because he wasn't planning on trying to change PMQ on day one!"

Yes, they are just desperate to try and trip him up and find mud to sling. Have you seen this BBC interview though? He's onto them and is playing quite well, in my view. Just sticks quietly to his guns and it doesn't half show the media up for the trivial sensationalists they are.

I'm very happy with the way things are shaping up!

I was rather taken by your question Are you actually a genuine Labour Party member, or supporter, as you don't appear to behave like either.

I think it was addressed to the OP but could have applied to me. Corbyn's usp was his lack of loyalty - why should he expect loyalty now?

What is a " genuine Labour party supporter or member"? Like the vast majority of the PLP I disagree with him on various significant issues. He was "principled" when he didn't agree with the party- you might afford the same courtesy to others.

I don't particularly care much about the women issue except Angela Eagle in preference for McDonnell.

I think it was on another thread where I'd suggested a reading of " A Very British Coup" by Chris Mullens, for the poo that will come his way. Seems a good time for it.
Maybe I'm over-identifying with JC a bit, what with being white able-bodied socialist male of a certain age with a chance, bit of an iconoclast who likes to get around by , so perhaps ignoring other bits.
But they don't come along often.

Ah, I thought when Buffy posted Kay, you were saying with "no, not him" that your friend of decades standing wasn't a Mr Kay.

I obviously guessed wrong as to what your post meant.

Meanwhile, back on topic...

I do wish journalists didn't see this as a one up man ship game. Whether or not Corbyn will be successful, time will tell, but I heard one berating him earlier because he wasn't planning on trying to change PMQ on day one!

Riff. Of course. But thanks for the link.

Riffing off Peter Kay? I've missed a note, obv.

So unless any other musical incidentals pop along, as we were?

I don't know what riffing means Yonic ! And PK wasn;t part of it, whatever 'it' was.

As we were...

Pan was riffing on Peter Kay, I think, Buffy.

"Maybe, for me, it's the fact that having women as shadow ministers is still such a wacky idea that it's something that has to be pledged, fought for, picked over. Women should just be there doing jobs, treated as men are, as simply people not as 'women'. But we're not. I think that's what pisses me off the most, that we have to fight still for these basic, basic things. "

Yy to this.

Nope, not him.

yes Buffy, I took your point re 'exceptional' I think?? No, I think your 'standard' may be similar to mine, poss. Of all the liberally blokes I know and have known, I can point to only one, a friend of decades standing. But with Jezza..two!

Train-carriages thing - I thought he was spot on to not make a definitive statement of intent - to consult with those most immediately affected seemed a best way-to-go.

Chancellor? Really not sure. Divisive yes, but who else with the will, chutzpah, 'Balls' (and yes I am being multi-layered there!) authority and experience was on offer? I don't know, but perhaps McDonnell will damn himself sooner rather than later to give JC an opportunity to question his credibility. We do know that this isn't the Cabinet that will be in place come 2020.

I like a man who knows he doesn't know.

I know what you mean and that was part of my reaction at the time too! But, I could have told him that was him handing his own head on a platter to the media who enjoy being feminist when it suits them but not when you're name is Charlotte Proudman by phrasing it how he did. My worry is that he's out of his comfort zone on women's issues but is too proud / principled to let someone else phrase his words for him. I don't know!

Buffy I appreciate your response and I understand the point you make about unconscious bias. But I think you are working on the assumption that people who are negatively affect by unconscious bias don't have the same biases.

Misogyny, racism and homophobia are internalised by everyone not just those who benefit from it. I internalised alot of racism growing up, I assumed that black people were disadvantaged because we were lazy, criminal and lacked impulse control. I bought into the 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps' narrative (I thought we lived in a meritocracy).

I am frustrated by the language used by politicians in regards to representation, its focused on whether or not you have enough women, BME men and women and disabled people rather than the structures which disadvantage them. It feels like we are moving deck chairs in a sinking ship.

Also there is a huge amount to pressure not talk about misogyny and racism. We have more BME mps than ever and no govt offices or appointments devoted to race equality.

www.voice-online.co.uk/article/how-find-race-equality-minister??the-voice-style

See I quite liked the fact that he said he'd consult with women about the train carriages thing, rather than telling us what his manly opinion was.

I like a man who knows he doesn't know.

Totally agree with everything Buffy and Yellow have said whilst also tying myself in over-tired knots about this. I guess I half want to groan, half want to cheer, and half want to defend Corbyn without entirely knowing why.

The cheering. Role modelling - I scrolled down the 'Shadow Cabinet announced' articles today and saw a female face every other picture. Angela Eagle will be standing in the place of the party leader for PMQs. The shadow Minister for Defence is female! (By the way, afaik the first female minister for defence, shadow or actual). How many unreconstructed admirals or wing commanders are sucking their teeth in at that, I wonder?

The groaning. Jeremy Corbyn is not, as Buffy puts it, that exceptional man to truly understand the struggles of women and to take direct steps, to the detriment of himself, towards liberation. I genuinely believe that he is convinced that his choice of cabinet was right for what he wants to do. But I don't think he understands women's issues or feminism and I worry that he's not the type of person to try to claim expertise in an area he doesn't understand or have oddles of experience on. I think as far as women's issues in particular go he'll dance around them the way he did with the train carriages thing (what he actually said, not what the headlines said - i.e. I'll consult with women but not actually make a straight-up statement myself!)

The defending. I think PPs have been right to say that for Corbyn to bring through the economic change he wants - and that change is at the heart of everything else he argues for - then he needs a shadow chancellor who is 100% onside with that. And, as PPs have also said, the austerity that male chancellor-and-party leader pair want to tackle has caused disproportionate harm to women. But... if they somehow manage to bring about a new type of economic policy in this country, thereby disproportionately benefiting women - even if their intention was not to help women in particular - does that make Corbyn's choice of a male over a female chancellor ok?

I don't know! It's very ends vs means and I'm still not sure what I really think. It raises a lot of interesting questions for me personally about the aims of (my?!) feminism. E.g. the question of do we want women to get the roles that men traditionally get -- or do we want to build the status of roles that women traditionally fill? (A wider q. for me than the shadow cabinet, obviously!)

Anyway, I'm going to shut up now because I'm meandering terribly after not enough sleep.

"Exceptional men" Buffy? I'm still with JC on a national scale. He is about a movement, not an ego, as far as I see him.