March 8th Irish referendum on mothers in the home

I believe that reply was in response to the idea that the referendum was on the definition of "woman", not in response to the Treaty of Lisbon comparison.
Regarding Brexit, Ireland is dependent economically on the EU market having an unsustainably small home market, and Brexit hurt many small businesses here and overall I think we're realistic that on balance we're better off within.

To me it means that, BECAUSE this is your role one way or another (women, let's face it, even if you don't have children you may end up as the carer for parents, in-laws etc much more.disproportinayely from your husband) you are recognised for this and further to this, by doing these roles you are honoured by the Irish state for it.

Damn better than having female caring role and it being ignored by the state or worse expected of you because of your sex.

Thwording of the Lisbon treaty was changed due to its rejection first time. It was not an exact rerun.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68484651

This also discussed disability discrimination - can anyone explain how the Care amendment was potentially ableist? It's a side I've not heard before.

Sorry if you don't know what happened in the Treaty of Lisbon referendum, it was run again and "no" miraculously became "yes". Wouldn't hold your breath that this is the last time we have heard of this.

I wouldn't be too sure that Brexit (Eirexit?) would have been shot down. But who's to know, now

In the Treaty of Lisbon the Irish government made them vote again on the same question...sorry if you didn't know that

Anyway, tucked away on the NI page of the BBC:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68484651

Images for prosperity

Behind a paywall but the Irish Independent did an exit poll and asked voters their reasons for voting No. The BBC article linked above really is a disgrace and their journalists should read this and report properly on what happened.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/exit-poll-reveals-anger-behind-no-vote-and-how-supporters-of-political-parties-voted-in-both-referendums/a961278452.html

This comment on Sky from their Irish correspondent has it fairly right. This was not about saying a woman's place is in the home, not is it about defining or redefining the word woman in Irish law.

"This will be held up for many years as an example of how not to run a referendum campaign. Pay no attention to any international clickbait headlines declaring that on International Women's Day, the Irish voted to keep women at home.

This wasn't about the "sexist" language. It was about the government's shambolic approach to the vote.

A reluctance to commit resources. Rejecting recommended replacement language in favour of vague aspirations that convinced no one. Poor messaging. And a perceived arrogance and complacency toward the electorate.

Replacing marriage as the family foundation with "durable relationships", but not defining what on earth a durable relationship was? Ah sure, the courts will sort that one out, the people were told.

Ditching the sexist language, and replacing it with a vague commitment to "strive" to support family carers (who are mostly women)? What does that mean? How do you define "strive" in a legal sense? Do or do not, there is no try, according to Yoda, who definitely would have voted 'no'.

The answers simply didn't come, and history shows the Irish voters are more than happy to shoot down referendums when they don't feel the tangible results to a Yes vote have been explained. Brexit would never have passed with Irish voters. They don't do vague. Better the devil you know. Status quo prevails."

Further down:

https://x.com/leng_cath/status/1766608656009662623?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

I thought it was weird that people are v happy and there's a sign about Mrs Doyle.

As an aside, the bbc have used an image from a father Ted festival to report on this.

You couldn't make it up....

x.com/leng_cath/status/1766592867315634368?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

Is Dún Laoghaire now officially The Wokest Part Of Ireland? 😶 Will there be a massive influx of those who are Special Of Gender?

One of the big Irish language accounts on TwiX is very TWAW Pronouns In Bio but was still unsubtly pushing tá níl the other day: possibly due to the carers’ vote 🤔

(Results are trending away on TwiX which saved me the bother of actually searching for specifics/wider world commentary for myself 😉)

This was not for to keep women in the home it was to ensure people with disabilities would be able to live their lives as equals.

Plenty of people have disabilities and work, raise children.

This referendum was quite demeaning and a lot of disabled people themselves campaigned against the change. They do not to be cared for by the able bodied they have capable of caring for themselves. They deserve their independence as much any able bodied person.

As for the women in the house, there is a major court case due next month, this clause is part of the challenge. Challenge is very weakened m.

I personally like the word mother in the constitution, it is only in there once. Not to mention the reality is women/mothers do in majority of cases the brunt of the care. It is the only time we are recognised. But that is my personal view on it.

@YetAnotherSpartacus
You do realise that voting yes for the changes was also voting against support for the disabled and for carers?

You see the present wording as sexist and many agree (though many also do not).

But replacing sexist language with ableist language isn't a great choice now is it?

The proposed wording was appalling, that's why a lot of people said no.

I have a feeling you don't know as much about the proposed changes as you think you do.

Apparently, the choice we have is between taking the clause out which is effectively the erasure of the concept of 'women' according to some (even though other countries get by just fine without enshrining an outdated and misogynistic interpretation of women in their constitutions) and maintaining the aforesaid misogynistic understanding of sex roles (likely influenced by the RCC), which in the eyes of some has become the appropriate feminist response because it does not allegedly erase women (and because for some modern feminists is all vive la difference and higamous hogamous and women's special place being valorised and all that).

This is what it has come to. Women choosing misogynistic approach (a) over potentially misogynistic approach (b) (although personally, I don't see how the change would have erased women at all).

The duties of men and fathers to provide for the children they create are not mentioned in the Constitution (of course).

Who actually thinks in 2024 that woman's place is in the home?!!!

Hard to see how this is a feminist outcome really. My place is not in the fucking home being some man's skivvy although I was raised by a mother who thought it was. Thank fuck I threw off those shackles in the second wave and thank fuck I don't live in the ROI.

Nothing will happen, business as usual.

They will not take any responsibility or look internally and ask the question. "How did we get it so wrong?"

Happy with the result. Interested to see what happens with government now, if anything.

This video is so moving!

Of course none of them specifically used the words "dim and dopey" and nowhere have I said that anyone used those actual words. They aren't that stupid. If you read my post you'll see that I am saying that I saw with my own eyes this morning several politicians HINT at the NO vote being as a result of the people not understanding what they were being asked to vote on, the only IMPLICATION I can draw from that is that they think people are stupid. I'm not the only person to see this. They swiftly changed tack once they realised a landslide was afoot.

Democracy did indeed win the day, I agree, but against the odds. There were some serious abuses of power by ministers including misrepresenting what is actually stated in the constitution as it stands currently, refusing to correct that misinformation when challenged, the Referendum Commission having no power to force a minister to correct misinformation, abuse of taxpayers money contrary to the judgement in the McKenna case, lying about advice given to the government by the Attorney General. The bigger picture here is that all of these things represent a threat to the democracy you keep mentioning, and a debate needs to be had and safeguards put in place to prevent this ever happening again before we move on from this debacle.

"the dim and dopey electorate needed it spelled out to them in much simpler terms." - I haven't heard any politician saying anything like that about voters.

The go-to arse covering by all the opposition parties which, bar one tiny one, backed Yes/Yes, is 'The dim and dopey government needed to spell their amendments out in much simpler terms'.

I think democracy won the day, by 67.7% and 73.9%☺

I also find it baffling that you express such confidence in Ireland’s “imperfect” democracy because I think this referendum campaign has highlighted a dangerous democratic deficit developing in Irish politics. In particular, we need a serious debate in Ireland about the role of government funded NGO’s in future referenda and electoral campaigns, especially in the context of the judgement in the McKenna case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendum_Commission) and in the context of Minister O’Gorman’s implied threat to the funding of these NGO’s if they didn’t support the government’s position. This is seriously concerning stuff and I hope it’s taken up by some of those who led the NO campaigns.

I'm not a fan of Sinn Féin but if they do have a referendum on these two articles it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, once they got it right. Article 41.2 doesn't say that a woman's place is in the home but it's understandable why so many read it that way. I'd support a rewriting that recognised in more careful wording that care is overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, carried out by women, and strengthened the state's obligations to mothers and other carers. There would have to be concrete practical benefit to justify the expense of another referendum though.

Likewise if family is expanded in the constitution (as well as in law, where it's already the case) to include non-married parents and long-term cohabitees, I'd welcome that.

The Yes campaign had their hands over their ears. But like Marie said, Varadkar, Ryan and others have today said they respect and accept the result.