Labour is betraying women

Everyone i know who lives alone is female. I'm sure there must be so many more older women living alone than men, simply due to lifespan

My fear is that Labour don't seem to understand they are herding the population like sheep towards this exact outcome.

Who does Labour even serve now? No one knows. They handed the Tory press an own goal with the WFA thing and then Keir put the cherry on top with the free clothes and specs. He doesn't seem to have grasped that he needs hearts and minds to get time to bring in policy. He also doesn't seem to get that people are emotion driven. It literally doesn't matter if he improves the economy unless people FEEL better. And women are 51% of the population and we are being shafted at every turn. We're not blind - and even the wilfully blind have to wake up eventually!

If a policy disproportionately affects one sex there's probably grounds for a challenge. Its indirect discrimination;

''Indirect discrimination is when a working practice, policy or rule is the same for everyone but has a worse effect on someone because of a 'protected characteristic'.''

https://www.acas.org.uk/discrimination-and-the-law/indirect-discrimination

Not just single mothers.

It will be elderly women living alone due to difference in life expectancy.

This tax rise will be effectively indirect discrimination because it will disproportionately affects women.

The men in this narrative have fucked off and left the kids or are dead so this isn't a tax that affects them.

I wonder if there is a good case for a legal challenge should they go down this route.

I could wish the left would spend less time reproachfully scolding people for not appreciating that it's not just total shit, this is M&S style LABOUR SHIT, and find a few socialist values, sanity and basic common sense quick. And do something.

They are busy driving the electorate right where they wail about them going.

I'm happy Labour are in. In five years we'll probably have Nigel Farage as PM, so I'm making the most of this interlude.

If this doesn't change then yes, it will inevitably be that the electorate will get pissed off enough to go for anyone with a bit of oomph and a plan, and the capacity to do anything at all. Germany's voters responded similarly in 1929.

I very much fear that is what we are sleepwalking into - not just here in the UK, of course.

Yes I think that was Plaid Cymru @Anastomosisrex

Grim. It reminds me of a post on another thread about how some mad gender thing was pushed through for a party because the only people who turned up to hear it and get involved were a group of 20 organised GI activists.

This is the problem. That politics has increasingly become a closed box of nutjobs that only lets in other nutjobs and defends their territory and control from any inroad of sanity or contact with reality. Until we have enough people outside of that box willing and able to give up the time and be in these places and break into these ivory tower cabals, its just going to go on getting madder and madder.

The question needs to be: what is stopping the average person going into politics? (Obvious in many cases: time, money, a life, a real job, no desire to go and argue all day with people with very odd perspectives and no morals) Who is stopping the talent and sanity rising into positions of power? And what do we do to change this?

I kept hoping as we got to an election where hardly any of the electorate wanted any of the parties on offer or their policies, those parties would split and the constrained new blood inside would create new parties with sanity. It didn't happen. Either there is no new blood and these parties really are now dead zombies walking, or the cabals are so well defended that no one but yesmen are getting in there, or the apathy/shallowness is reaching call the crash cart stages. Which would explain obsessions with ticket sales, vague noises, and stamping on women and the elderly instead of addressing actual issues.

If this doesn't change then yes, it will inevitably be that the electorate will get pissed off enough to go for anyone with a bit of oomph and a plan, and the capacity to do anything at all. Germany's voters responded similarly in 1929.

It's better to have your first hand perspective!

Surely the days when Conference (as it used to known) was, if it ever was, a policy-deciding event, have long gone, and these days party conferences (all parties) are no more than a PR operation. So nothing that will frighten the horses. It's cynical, but that's how it is. All that said, obviously, the pressure has to be kept on the govt somehow.

My spirits were so low going into this election knowing how fucked we were going to be when Labour got in. They haven't done a single thing to offset that yet (bar Wes as Health Secretary for having some courage to continue protecting children as started by the Tories).

I feel completely politically homeless and watching Labour drive ever more people towards Reform is like watching a slow motion car crash.

How devastating. What a slap in the face from Labour.

I have to ask, why don't all these incredible women leave and form a genuinely socialist/left wing, feminist party? It's been over 100 years of being sidelined and vilified by your supposed colleagues with the occasional sop thrown to you. Sorry if this is a naive or silly question, I just can't see what point there is in you staying.

Ah, @Ereshkigalangcleg you posted during the half hour it took me to get my post together!

I've got several friends attending both the conferences this weekend (the women's as well as the party conference) and already they're mighty pissed off with what they're seeing.

The Women's Branch of my Labour CLP (terms outnumber the woke brigade by 10-1) put a motion to conference (being held in Liverpool this weekend) regarding strengthening the Equality Act 2010 to protect women's single-sex spaces, sports etc. We were only one of several CLPs to submit similar motions. The motion was carefully worded by women who have done these things many times before and know the rulebook and the ropes. Every word was run past people in the know before the motion was submitted. It was rejected for the use of a single word which, according to the selection committee, created a category or procedural issue (there were two different people who gave two different explanations for the rejection).

Here's a really good article from Labour List on how Labour has suppressed women's concerns because they're too difficult to handle:
https://labourlist.org/2024/09/labour-conference-women-two-child-cap-trans-winter-fuel/
There are photos of me holding a Labour Has A Woman Problem banner at various events over the last five years. I'm still holding it.

https://labourlist.org/2024/09/labour-conference-women-two-child-cap-trans-winter-fuel/

No motions on trans rights
Meanwhile one Equality Act motion that will not make the cut was a Glasgow Cathart submission which called for the party to “commit to a tightening of the definition of ‘women’ in the Equality Act to mean biological women only”, and to oppose any reform of gender recognition across the UK or Scotland.
Another unsuccessful motion from North Shropshire CLP had Labour to “acknowledge the principle of women’s sex-based rights and clarify ‘sex’ in law means ‘biological sex’.”
A further motion by Manchester Central CLP had urged the party to stick to a manifesto pledge on reforming gender recognition law, deliver a trans-inclusive ban on conversion therapy and make hate crime motivated by sexual orientation and transgender identity aggravated offences.

I am afraid you are right. Labour is misogynistic in outlook (witness treatment of Abbott and Duffield). They are not going to back-track on transrights (aka as trans privilege, MRA).0

It's the main Labour Party subreddit, but from what I've noticed a lot of people just avoid these mad trans threads so it's always the same dull group of misogynistic men commenting.

Someone half arsedly sticks up for her, then decides that the rest of the UN don't agree with her so anything she says is worthless and they "support the UN".

The horror when they realise who Reem is

They are.

Totally well adjusted. They're a scary bunch, aren't they?

I believe they clarified that they would implement Cass in full, although I haven't got a link to that effect.

But as for protecting single sex spaces - that, from what I have seen, depends entirely on which definition of 'sex' you're using. They've been all over the place. I'm a big fan of LWD so, if they're going along with this then that's very disappointing.