Green Party are at it again

What about transmen eat? Do they come under men or 'non-men'?

I think we don't use the term "non children" because there is only one alternative to children, which is adults. So the term adult would be entirely inclusive and correct.

I think what they're doing is trying to include all people who would not be considered men, without making the statement that the only alternative to men is "women". It's generally accepted that trans women (among other gender non-binary groups) aren't considered as men in this context; would we have them be called women? Or would we have them excluded from the initiative all together?

Perhaps they should have said "women and non-men", which at least would have positively acknowledged women. However I don't think they're calling women non-men, I think they're trying to find a way to describe the group of people that includes (mostly) women but also those who are not generally identified as men however cause offence when they are explicitly called women. I guess they've decided what they all have in common is that they're "not men".

And what is wrong with making the truthful distinction

Do we use the term non children when promoting something that is for adults only. It might be promoted as no children allowed but not non children only are invited to attend

What's the other half?

Yes, you're only seeing half the problem.

Oh I don't know, I'm not as outraged about this as many of you clearly are. I'm not aware of the prior instance though so perhaps I'm only seeing half the problem.

I read it as them saying that males - specifically males - are proportionally dominant in many areas. And that they are hoping to support all people who are not male in accessing such positions. They aren't saying only women presumably because they intend to support women and trans women and those who are "gender fluid" (I believe that's a thing) and any other gender qualification which is not male.

If they said women and transwomen for example they would be liable to be lynched for making the distinction (although not on here). If they just say women but then go on to support transwomen as well they've gone and offended another group by default including trans in something that was purportedly for women. So basically they're damned any which way they play it and have tried to go safe with "non males", and actually they're just saying "if you're not male, we want you!", because male dominance is the problem.

Family tradition: Green Party to Red Army Faction to Bade Meinhoff. none were feminist friendly.
Now we are 'non males' .
Males seem to be learning a lot from apartheid. To become an 'honorary white/male' is to be 'un - othered'
I see where we are going with this.

Wonder when I said "this I'd what the Greens are worrying about" I was referring to their use of language not their commitment to feminism.

The thing is, using the term 'non-men' or 'non-male' has no internal logic. If transwomen are women, then they can just use the word women and that covers them too surely? If they are then concerned about excluding transmen then calling them 'non-men' is hardly going to fix that is it? Imagine if someone called transwomen non-women in an attempt to be 'inclusive' - they'd be crucified!

This hamfisted attempt to point out the domination of straight white men just places them as the only group allowed to have a positive definition - everyone else is 'non' and defined in opposition to them as default.

Non-men. Also non-tree, non-table, non-basketball, non-slipper, non-clock - gah! I don't know what they mean! If only there were a simple word that could enlighten us who they are targetting this at?

Because you only get to worry about one thing at a time? I hate this x is more important so you can't be concerned about y thing.

Twaddle like this loses votes, clearly, and being offended is a genuine issue, as is female participation in politics. It goes without saying that Climate change is first second and third on the list but if we put feminism off until nothing more pressing was on the agenda we would still be without suffrage.
I know it's greedy but I would like a government that reflected the people it represents and a solid green energy agenda and I'd like a solution to the housing crisis, improved ethics in farming, a progressive taxation system leading to a decline in economic inequality, good schools, good heathcare, good social care, better prisons, well funded schools AND I want to be able to call for women's equality and not be grouped with 'non-white males'
AIBU

non male

ffs I didn't choose Green candidate as my second vote for London Mayor because of this twaddle

Fuck off Serb, there's a dear

Trump on his way to the White House promising to make coal a major industry again and this is what the Greens are worrying about? WTAF.

I'm still hoping for more, knid!

Yay! A 3, 4, 17, 18 and 21, and all in such a short post! Thank you, TheAmazingSerb, you are indeed amazing. Those dungarees will be mine! :)

You people? Do you mean women?

Welcome, Serb. What an interesting first post. Why don't you come in and tell us a bit more about yourself?

I'm glad you people don't run any part of this government for grown woment to act that childish over the statement "non males"

This has got to be a wind up.
Stupid doesn't even begin to describe it.
It does sound like newspeak though. Does no one read 1984 anymore?

It reads like something from The Daily Mash!

I thought Caroline Lucss had a phd in feminism?

Depressed doesn't cover it...

Conserveisposh I've no idea, I'm not terribly active, my local branch, the Basingstoke Greens haven't really touched on it, now we're leaving Europe I'm not really sure the Greens outside of major cities have any real point. Im pretty depressed about the politics at the moment.

FFS this event includes International women's rights day.

I think you might want to read
itsallgoingtobefine's post about the upcoming debate on first December. This thread towards the end.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2783139-Trans-media-watch-are-lobbying-mnhq?msgid=65053544#65053544