US Election results

Yeah, I just want to expand this a bit.

I don't know where the idea that Republicans all want to enforce arbitrary damaging gender roles on women has come from, but it's bullshit.

I can't imagine anyone saying something like this has actually spent any time talking to American women who vote Republican.

They think women have the right to private women's spaces.

They think women have the right to safety.

They think women have the right to say no to getting undressed with male people.

Beyond that, they think women have the right to an education, jobs, to vote, own property, wear pants....

Ah, OK. Thank you for clarifying.

I hadn't come across "project 2025" and this issue being a part of that.

I still doubt they'll do anything at a federal level but yes, it shows that those that believe it will haven't plucked it out of thin air.

I think that with this we have to look back at the way abortion has been treated mainly by the courts, rather than proper legislation.

America never went through the proper work of coming to some kind of socially accepted compromise around abortion. Which is to say, where most people could live with the laws even though they might not totally reflect their views.

In the US, I could have pictured this kind of social discussion coming up with something like many of the European models, probably with some variety in different states.

Instead it was put to the courts and a fairly extreme approach was mandated. Which is just not a way to deal with serious questions with a lot of complex moral elements. These really aren't things that the law can address in a significant way, nor is it meant to - it doesn't have the capacity to think about such things. So of course that resulted in social discord.

I think part of that is the fear of prosecution that means people like doctors aren't making medical decisions with their best judgement. Literally no one thinks these are good outcomes, even the most conservative of Catholic theologians would believe they make sense as a way to practice medicine.

But it's not about good practice, it's about liability. And liability centered approaches are really really shitty no matter whether it's medicine, education, etc

So to repeat I do not think that the Republican position on trans issues is anything to do with feminism or women's rights. It is about traditional values, women's roles etc..

What do you mean by the 'Republican position on trans issues'?

What is your opinion of the campaigning done by women like Riley Gaines? Do you think she supports women's rights or is she just to be dismissed as a Republican who supports traditional values?

What makes you think that the right for women to have single sex sports and spaces is something only valued by feminists? You don't have to be a feminist to not want men in women's changing rooms. In this respect the Republican position on trans issues is exactly the same as the feminist one.

I find it strange that people talk about Women voting one way or another, and feel the same about the supposed Black or Hispanic vote.
In each of those groups, people's experiences are totally different. Why try to create pigeon holes when they are essentially meaningless.
I consider myself a gc feminist, but none of the women of my acquaintance feel the same way as I do because, yes, we are all different.

How patronising! Issues around Sex and Gender can be discussed in any way people choose. There is no one right way.

You're doing it again...trying to suggest you understand women's issues more than others. And that your framing device for discussing women's issues is the inevitable or natural one. The whole idea of women as a an "oppressed class" is just so dated and hackneyed. Banging on about 'the patriarchy' actually turrns lots of women off - and is part of the reason that Kamala just didn't do it for most people.

I was talking about the patriarchy when I was 16 years old and setting up a women's group at my college, but at 59, with three adult children and now a granddaughter and after a life time of varied experiences......I've moved on from that now. Men, as a group, are not my oppressors. Though I do recognise there is such a thing as a female stand-point and perspective, and that it has dignity, worth and value; and I think many Republican voters do too.

How can you subliminally suggest that family and motherhood are not women's issues? Most women are mothers, and most will at some point be in a long term partnership or marriage. They are very much women's issues.Personally, think you are painting far too broad brush strokes and stereotyping what you consider to be a Republican voter, or what motivates them.

What has Trump got to do with the Tories running out of steam several years ago?

@mrshoho Sorry if all of the above sounded patronising! I am sue you are doing a good job already. But the bit about the dad trying to make light of the situation and the storming of was so familiar!

Trump and Covid are blips compared to Brexit.

Can you point to a government that is not corrupt?

This is Putinspeak. "They are all the same. They are all liars. It's everyone for themselves. It doesn't matter who you vote for, one party or the other, it's all the same. What good are elections? What good is this so called democracy if you can't get a job? I will give you a job. People only understand strength. I can protect you. Remember the good old days? I can give you that sense of pride again". It's the way disillusioned Russians used to speak after the fall of the Soviet Union. And then Putin came along. You know the rest.

@mrshoho I think that being online makes all of this so much worse. Its completely immersive and can drive adults a bit potty, so the effect on young people is even worse (I know 19 is technically adult but its still very young).
If it helps though - its not that new for teenagers to engage with politics in a much more emotional way than adults do. I can remember being a teenager at the time of the Iraq war and being viscerally upset by the feeling that it was going to happen and it was going to be a complete disaster. Thinking that you know for certain that a decision is going to have terrible outcomes but being completely powerless to stop it is a horrible feeling. Like Cassandra. Yes, you can go on marches etc but they didn't make a difference which just increases the feeling of powerlessness. Its a combination I think of being in a heightened emotional state as a teenager and having comparatively little power/choices in your daily life (because teenager) that makes it so bad.

The thing about the Iraq war was it was a complete disaster so technically I was right. But 15 year old me was generally anti-war so I don't think it was that I was actually good at predicting the future. What can maybe help her is finding her ways in which she can have power/autonomy (not just political protests, also hobbies etc) and encouraging any activities that make her think about something other than the state of the world. And the circles of control thing where you draw a small circle of things you have complete control over, a larger circle around it of things you have some control over, and a larger circle round that filled with things you have no control over at all. And put down all the things that worry you in different parts of the circle. Its cheesy, but the act of physically writing it out genuinely helps. Or you talk to her about things that worried you as a teenager and whether you were right/wrong.

😔

Unfortunately this is the reality of a lot of the summary headlines and spreading of fear. It reminds me of Georgia Tennant telling children via Twitter that she's there to listen etc because there is so much hate around.

Sadly online communities will whip themselves up (some of which is undoubtedly orchestrated) to believe that the world is against them.

I hope you were able to cut through the panic layer.

ASD children and young adults are so vulnerable to believing this damaging messaging. So far I've been able to stay one step ahead of my (ASD) daughter on that front, partly to do with her age and partly the sheer luck of having found this forum to help me get my head around gender identity stuff so that I can tap in to her critical thinking. As far as I'm aware, she's not in online forums.... yet. I'm hoping that there will continue to be an awakening on the impact of gender identity belief before she gets dragged in to these things. She's 15 now so that's not a given.

I tried to speak to her late last night telling her that her and her friends should take things a day at a time and not to listen to the rumours. Omg it's hard work!

This sounds like a good approach. Hopefully she is open to seeing that it's not as simple as "Trump is evil and wants to harm people".

If he gets gender ideology out of schools and men out of women's sports and single sex facilities I'm good with that.

i know someone who voted for Trump - and your descrption doesn't fit her at all. She's a native New Yorker, but moved back to the U.S about 12 years ago, after 30 years of living in England and Scotland. She's now living Florida in Bradenton - in the village of the arts.

She really didn't take kindly to the covid lockdown and all of the moralising about the vaccinations; the attempts to shame people. She's always been very meticulous in her approach to her body and her health.....and she didn't enjoy being told what she should and shouldn't do to it. She liked the way Ron De Santis handled the lockdown in Florida. She's become very anti establishment.

She liked Vivek Ramiswarmy? ( spelling?) and she also liked Robert Kennedy, and if he hadn't stood down she'd have voted for him. She really dislikes the moralising of the 'progressive Left' and she wants to stick two fingers up to it.
She was married to a Lefty in Britain, but she's never associated with that sort of political certainty herself. Her parents originally came to the U.S from Cuba - and like many immigrants from such regimes she not too keen on them.

You don’t think what?

If you mean the U.K. is not an outlier can you name a comparable country that solely relies on the equivalent policy to ‘smash the gangs’?

Even on-line it is possible to execute your self in a reasoned manner without having to resort to personal invective. Unfortunately many seem unable. This hostility is also observed in 'real life' too. I've been at meeting and events with other women and have been confronted with raging, screaming trans activists. Really toxic stuff!

I can make such judgements because that is my experience of having been around the Left for a long time. So many Left activists seem permanently angry people who seem to need hate figures to re-assure themselves of their righteousness.

Starmer might think that, I don't.

Re Starmer's plan no suggestion he 'dreamed it up', as it's already happening, but he's the the only one solely relying on it.

That's the outlier part

@biscuitandcake

You asked for an example for Italy I gave you two

There are others

@EasternStandard
Do you really believe Starmer can work outside UK jurisdiction to arrest and stop people profiting from this? Why? No. I don't really believe that. That's why I specifically said it would require working with the EU. The EU already has Europol to work on cross border issues. The UK is no longer part of that, that's why it would require the UK asking to cooperate with the EU on this issue. It might well be that the EU just decides it doesn't want to cooperate/focus on these gangs. But that would be short sighted - criminal networks can smuggle people, drugs, weapons etc. Ignoring them and letting them grow is a bad idea. I know in the Netherlands at least there is a genuine public desire and a stated desire by politicians to do more about cross border criminal gangs. Its not just the UK thinking about this at the moment. There are examples of cross border approaches working and examples of cross border approaches not working. But shrugging and saying "what can we do" isn't a good plan. And cooperating with other countries to address crime that crosses borders is not some crazy new idea Starmer dreamed up.

If other countries have experts trying to tackle the problem why is no one else solely using the same approach? I wasn't saying the UK should use solely that approach. I listed 3 other things they could be doing. Conversely, the fact that other countries are using other approaches doesn't mean they wouldn't want to cooperate on the gangs issue. Its not either; or.

You said that the UK needed a "hardline" approach but the only example of a hardline approach, Italy's, was one you said we probably wouldn't want to do in the UK anyway. So again, we are back to "take immigration seriously" on repeat.

Kevin Saunders is the former chief not current but anyone can only work with the policy in place. Putting in 'smash the gangs' is like giving someone a teaspoon to stop a tide.

There has been more current criticism too on this policy from current border security placement

Do you really believe Starmer can work outside UK jurisdiction to arrest and stop people profiting from this? Why?

If other countries have experts trying to tackle the problem why is no one else solely using the same approach?

I would also argue that the immigration chief hasn't been doing a great job so far, or we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place. He might be correct, but it doesn't automatically follow (other experts e.g. in organised crime, Europol might have other angles).

You said that other countries were taking a hardline approach so the UK had to do the same or it would be an "outlier". Your example of a hardline approach was something only Italy was doing that didn't apply to other European countries. So then don't know what the hardline approach other EU countries are taking that will leave the UK as an outlier is, or why being an outlier in that situation would be an untenable position.