WOMAN'S HOUR TODAY!

PS - no one's sex is assigned at birth. Basic biology. Primary school biology.

What are the tough circumstances men who cross dress are living in? Eddie Izzard for example or Grayson Perry?

And how are trans people living their lives under tough circumstances. Give me strength. Their "issues" have been given more oxygen than anything else.

Imagine if disabled people had been given the same publicity. FFS!!

A balanced view on this issue is so refreshing to read. Thank you.

We need more of this kind of discussion. About the conditions under which women make the decisions we make. About the real, practical implications these involve. About the fact that society is still set up primarily to benefit the interests of men, and to level the playing field. About stripping away the assumption that particular tasks are the domain of a particular gender.

Threads full of people taking personal affront because another woman has taken a different lifestyle decision to their own are a treadmill to nowhere.

Men don't have a hang-up about other men's divisions of paid and domestic labour in this way, and there's a very good reason for that.

But to quote you, this is something "they seem to believe".

I have just checked their manifesto and it's not there.

@Aussieland - the question wasn't about Trans rights. It was about the definition of a woman.

It's a bit like asking about the flight to Paris to be given information about the boat trip to Spain.

Plus, we're not stupid. Something the politicians should remember.

Maybe because so many people (including most of this forum) are OBSESSED with talking about trans women and which toilets they use and insist on flooding interviews with questions about them.

And then blaming politicians for talking about them. MAYBE they should be allowed to focus on the bigger issues like child poverty, domestic violence, education, health, Tory MPs sexually assaulting people and then it might be a bit clearer. If all you ask about is trans rights then that’s what they will have to talk about. Take a look in the mirror. Trans women (and men) are trying to live their life under tough circumstances and it seems many people just want to punish them even more.

Also you do realise if you want people to use the toilets associated with sex they were assigned at birth you are going to have bearded men wandering into the women’s toilets and vulnerable women being faced with the men’s toilets.

Fair. And that was me who said it. It's the 'women SHOULD have more children ' that made me say it though - it does raise the trope.

I agree on the policies that need to be addressed.

But I do see women rejecting even the notion that supporting mothers to be with their children for longer should be discussed.
The barefoot and pregnant trope gets trotted out immediately.

I make this point all the time. Reform will not get into government in this parliament so you can vote for them secure in the knowledge they won't get to do what they want.

The purpose of small parties in our FPTP voting system is to influence the debate. The larger parties will be watching the electorate's reaction to Reform and they will amend their approach accordingly.

We have already moved Labour away from self-id through the reaction to the SNP's policies. Voting Reform to send the same message is entirely logical, if nauseating.

Yes Sahm or part time is a privilege for wealthy women.

I'd like a party that supported more women who want to to do that instead of only giving support if you leave your baby in daycare.

No one is supporting that yet I don't think, but I'm glad Reform are at least recognising women and babies as important.

I don't think those choices raise the anger of feminists.

I think the lack of support and how vulnerable women are left if they make that choice is what fruatrates feminists.

Women working part time and taking a hit on pension and future earning prospects. Women also taking on the majority of caring responsibilities and housework as well as working part time. Women losing their jobs or promotion because their partners can't or won't take time off for ill children because their job is the full-time one they rely on. It all leaves women vulnerable and that's hard to see. We need better protection for women on all fronts for this to be a true choice for families.

Stop Thementering the country, make the women Ushave loads more babies. The jingoistic solution throughout time."

How do you think Reform are going to make you have babies? 🤣🤣

Are you worried about their policy of forced impregnation?
Or their policy of banning women from the workplace?

Or just terrified because they think more babies would be a good thing?

Your hyperbole is quite ridiculous and it's the reason people are moving to Reform.

Because you seek to police my ridiculous views. @GC5. If you don’t want to be called an arse then you should refrain from calling people ridiculous. HTH.
Ongoing whataboutery I see. Why am I not surprised. Who do you think performed well in the opening discussion?

Agree with this.

Reform only seem to be looking at when kids are under 4 and front loading child benefits for women to stay at home in that age range.

After that, they want people off benefits and in jobs. 2 strike rule for job offers, within 4 months, or benefits withdrawn. This isn't going to help women make a choice between jobs they don't enjoy or that are severely underpaid and undervalued. It's going to force them into those jobs or lose benefits.

I agree that there are plenty of women who would rather stay at home with their kids. Its why the SAHM is a feature amongst high earning couples. Its also why so many mothers work part-time if they can.

Absolutely it's 'feminism' for women with fulfilling careers who are financially secure.

That's not most women.

It's just the women on Women's Hour, the women who listen to it, and posters on here.

Most women want children.
Most women want to raise them with the father.
Most women want to spend more time with their young children then they can financially afford to do.

(All of which is good for the children too btw in case anyone cares about them and not just women.)

I'm not sure why supporting those women raises such anger with feminists.

Many women do want to stay longer with their young children and feel forced out to work.

It's presumed by the Tories and Labour and seemingly many feminists that women back to work as soon as possible is what women want.
I don't think that's true for many women.

And I'm not sure being dependent on the state instead of a man is working out that well for many women.

There is a issue with falling birth rates which is going to impact us all soon.

You can argue it's not a problem because you'll just increase immigration to fill in the gaps. But I'm not sure that's the progressive compassionate position you think it is!

And even if that's your plan that's very different from the unmanaged levels of immigration we have now.

All of these are reasonable positions you are free to disagree with, but they're not the misogynist/ racist/ fascist/ other insult that suggests a bad thing you imply.

They're normal rational debatable views.

That's why people are going to vote Reform they're sick of being slandered for reasonable normal views.

Absolutely this. They absolutely do prefer ideology over evidence and safeguarding.

The class bias is quite obvious.

Lots of women have shitty jobs and would much rather be at home doing the work of raising their children, rather than underpaying someone in a nursery to do it. The current situation takes that choice away from those women.

I know plenty of people who do not have 'career' based jobs who were forced back into jobs they hated and had to put their babies into nursery when they would have rather received the state funding themselves to stay home.

It's always from the point of view of women with meaningful careers - not everyone has that for a variety of reasons and would like the choice to focus on their children in the pre-school years not be forced to do jobs they don't particularly enjoy.

There are lots and lots of jobs in our society that are essential and really just aren't that fulfilling, usually underpaid. The women who speak on woman's hour always entirely ignore working class women.

No, those two go hand in hand, and have done for centuries.

It’s not about too many people, it’s about too many of the wrong people (Them) and not enough of the right people (Us).

Stop Them entering the country, make the women of Us have loads more babies. The jingoistic solution throughout time.

Didn’t the Catholic Church hold a view for centuries that it was a woman’s duty to have more Catholics?

Yes they really have so little self awareness over their hypocrisy. I really question the intelligence level of these women. Their lack of critical thinking is something to behold.

So strange that they are so bothered by immigration and the population, yet encourage having more children. Having children is a financially risky decision and leaves women much more vulnerable.

Oh my Goddddd a women's health group. What the fuck is that? Define it! This woman is driving me up the wall.

Wait, the SNP candidate thinks endometriosis is a women's health issue. TRANSPHOBE!!!!!!! Our biology is NOT relevant!