Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Guardian has debate on all-women shortlists

40 replies

hackmum · 08/02/2018 11:04

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/08/self-certified-trans-women-all-women-shortlists-labour

It's crap, as you might suspect. The usual suspects, e.g. Shon Faye.

But do go and comment. Women's voices need to be heard.

OP posts:
UpABitLate · 08/02/2018 13:34

Most of the comments are saying there shouldn't be all women shortlists, candidates should be picked on merit, and if there aren't very many women ones then that must be for sensible reasons like most of them aren't interested and prefer to stay at home with their kids, and not due to discrimination obviously because it doesn't exist.

rowdywoman1 · 08/02/2018 13:31

I agree - this is the first time I have ever seen the Guardian allow gender critical posts - what a shameful history.

coffeecork · 08/02/2018 13:25

The comments are going better than I expected. A few properly gender critical posts are getting through now.

Waddlelikeapenguin · 08/02/2018 12:37

It's like 'cis' confetti on that page Angry

jellyfrizz · 08/02/2018 12:30

Our difference is highlighted and what we share with fellow women is erased

What Shon Faye? What do you share with women that other men don’t?

Original poster
hackmum · 08/02/2018 12:03

And why couldn't they have invited Linda Bellos on? Or Julie Bindel? Or Kiri Tunks? Are they all blacklisted now from the Guardian because they might express a coherent, logically-argued view? (Or as Shon Faye would no doubt put it, a "hateful, transphobic" one?)

OP posts:
Original poster
hackmum · 08/02/2018 12:01

"Plus, getting rather bored with Labour's 'have compassion' as the SINGLE overriding justification for TIMs on AW shortlists."

It's such lazy thinking. If you're going to have all-women shortlists, then the sole criterion for being on the shortlist is that you're a woman - not that you're oppressed, or traumatised, or suicidal. If you don't believe in all-women shortlists, say so. But extending the idea of all-women shortlists to anyone who's had a miserable life is simply sloppy reasoning.

OP posts:
FlyTipper · 08/02/2018 11:42

Not a debate really. Among other things, I object strongly to Susanna Rustin's declaration that single sex-spaces will need justifying case-by-case! Why do they need justifying? Plus, getting rather bored with Labour's 'have compassion' as the SINGLE overriding justification for TIMs on AW shortlists.

UpstartCrow · 08/02/2018 11:39

My comment isnt being posted. It was pretty moderate, but supported The Equality Act and AWS.

CaptainWarbeck · 08/02/2018 11:35

And all the opinions in the piece were very supportive of trans ideology. You'd think if you were having a debate you would include an opposite (in this case gender critical) view.

Comments are a load of bollocks.

Sittinonthefloor · 08/02/2018 11:32

I can't seem to post my comment! I was trying to suggest trans only short lists.

OvaHere · 08/02/2018 11:16

Democracy in action Hmm

Original poster
hackmum · 08/02/2018 11:15

Yup. As far as I can see they're allowing in comments that say there shouldn't be women-only shortlists, but not allowing comments that say transwomen are men, and men shouldn't be on women-only shortlists.

I am so angry with the Guardian. I've read it since the days when Jill Tweedie wrote on the women's pages. It's paper. Now it's just full of misogynistic shit like this.

OP posts:
cista · 08/02/2018 11:12

Comments are being pre-moderated.... Hmm

UpABitLate · 08/02/2018 11:09

4 comments so far, 3 of them say that all women shortlists shouldn't exist anyway.

So, um.