to think it's disgraceful that Labour MPs are condoning gender segregation?

[OTheHugeManatee]

I thought Labour were supposed to be against discrimination. But I'm hearing multiple reports of Labour MPs attending gender segregated rallies around the Olham by-election and uttering not a peep about it.

AIBU to think it's disgraceful that once again women's right to equality is being quietly set aside for other political priorities? And by the party that makes the most noise about equality, no less?

Fucking hypocrites

It's interesting how many MN posters things keeping the guide movement female only is wonderful because it allows girls to attend who might otherwise not be allowed to participate.

The same doesn't seem to apply to something that makes it possible for women to attend something who might otherwise not be allowed to participate.

Oh goodness sake I get super irritated with this argument about being conditioned wr are all a product of our environment whether we admit it or not.

How that is exactly how I feel I would prefer to sit with other women if not possible I will sit with men. This is as a result of knowing friends who have had guys bother them when out and about and I would rather avoid putting myself in that situation (though doubt I would be bothered nowadays by men lol)

Soup am.not being funny but I didn't really get that could you explain please

Soup can you imagine it may be different posters?

Any enforced segregation It is an issue in a public meeting to promote civic life.

If people wish to sex segregate in private they are allowed to of course.

Using public loos and being an inpatient are also essentially private albeit within a public building.

I don't agree with segregation.

The idea that you effect change with a slow handclap, enforced movement of people and patronising lectures to adults that their moral beliefs are equivalent to children giggling about cooties is baffling.

I stand by my point that, at the point that a meeting is being held at which this type of meeting will be chosen or enforced is way too late to be trying to win your argument. Refusing to participate simply disenfranchises the women. The sort of actions advocated on this thread will result in them dismissing you as a rude cunt. Either way, you don't effect change. All you possibly achieve is diminishing those women's political voice. And then you effectively blame them by saying that you were only doing it because sex discrimination isn't acceptable.

The governor issue has been presented as equivalent. It clearly isn't. Because there is the opportunity to talk, calmly and respectfully, to those concerned about changing things going forward. What is being suggested here is equivalent to Ofsted storming into the meeting and saying that , unless the woman comes in to the room immediately, they won't inspect the school and will give it a failing rating. It places the responsibility on the woman of changing a larger patriarchal issue. And that, to me, is profoundly anti feminist.

I would imagine the segregation was done by the attendees themselves. There are two women sitting on the men's side, but they are white women.

It saddens me that this is the norm for muslims, but doubt that it can be laid at Labour's door.

Erm soupdragon I've never said anything about the guide movement

Drastic all your examples assume a woman is attending accompanied by a man. I don't want to be chaperoned
Yes sorry, OK, how am I being courteous to a stranger who happens to be male by sitting apart from him, or he me.

Its just in 39 years and having attended many meetings, in many place and many types, I have never given a single thought to the sex of who I am sat next too.
Not a single thought and all meetings where mixed.

I think howabout has a point though drastic - segregation by sex is, in a way, more inclusive of single people than the way a group of white secular/Christian adults would sit a meeting. They would mostly come in couples and sit next to their spouse. If you attend as a singleton you could easily end up sitting alone and feeling a little conspicuous. It shouldn't matter, but for a nervous person it easily could. I can imagine how it could feel nicer and cosier to be sat with the rest of your own gender.

What I find frustrating about this thread is that creating a situation where the women could attend the meeting and sit in the same room and hear the same speech is the outcome that is most likely in the long run to allow women to take more prominent role.

If people come from a culture when gender segregation is the norm then telling them off for doing it won't change anything. The change will be driven by women having a voice.

purple

I totally disagree. They would mostly come in couples and sit next to their spouse

bonkers

I have been to countless meetings of all types alone it simply wouldn't occur to me what the sex of the person sat next to was.

Libraries I agree wholeheartedly that by the time you're in a situation where a sitting MP is forced to make a choice between addressing and implicitly condoning a gender-segregated political, or potentially losing important votes in a crucial and hotly contested by-election, things have gone way too far to be undone by a bit of polite reasoning or even by taking a stand and refusing to address a meeting where such patriarchal norms are clearly taken for granted.

However I disagree with Exit that these depressing, sexist norms can't be laid at Labour's door. It's not wholly Labour's fault - there's an entire post-structuralist philosophical canon out there making things worse - but their policies have encouraged exactly the kind of ghettoisation and fragmentation of social norms that results in this kind of ugly paradox.

If people come from a culture when gender segregation is the norm then telling them off for doing it won't change anything

You dont have to tell them off.

Turning a blind eye and caryring on as normal is also not going to change anything.

I think sections of our community live in isolation and it would be a great thing at a public meeting to address the fact the women were apart from the men,and say - this is not how we organise ourselves here.

Manatee - My point isn't about winning votes. I get that the candidate has to think about that. But my point wasn't.

My point was that you don't change things by shaming people in public.

I was trying to be kind to the Labour party. I think there is a bit of shit storm going on in Oldham West .

Not something I have ever tried before.

Because there is the opportunity to talk, calmly and respectfully, to those concerned about changing things going forward

Ah I see.

I didn/t realise that this group were being spoken too, and that going forward Labour would not be able to address a segregated meeting...thats good to hear.

You must have been to different meetings from me then drastic - I've been to meetings where 90% of people have come in couples and sit next to their spouse. There was one organisation I had attended with my ex and dropped out of when we split up because I felt awkward attending on my own. I know I could have kept going, but probably should have, but I did feel awkward being there without a partner when everyone else was in a couple.

I didn/t realise that this group were being spoken too, and that going forward Labour would not be able to address a segregated meeting...thats good to hear.

Sorry, why are you making up things I didn't say?

I see Purple, yes vastly different types of meetings over the years. and in particular school meetings where one part of the couple has to baby sit.

TBH I am struggling to think of a meeting I went to with DH.

Drastic
If you went to another country and people pointed out to you that the values you have grown up with are not how you should be doing things how would you react?

The drive for change has to come from the communities themselves. Women developing a political voice is part of that process. If some politician stands up and tells them that we do things differently etc. then it is more likely that the community will feel attacked and close ranks than make a change.

What are you actually trying to achieve?

And, what the hell use do you think it would serve to say you wouldn't address a segregated meeting again?

All you would get would be a supposedly non segregated meeting where women from communities who hold these views would feel they couldn't attend.

So, you'd get a worse sort of segregated meeting. One where supposedly anyone could sit anywhere, but in fact you just had men (and women not part of that community).

Political participation is TOO IMPORTANT to hold women over a barrel and tell them that, until they change their communities and the moral values they are expected to uphold, they will not be allowed to participate.

How is it "segregation" assuming the people attending the meeting freely chose which seats to sit in?

You might disagree with islamic attitudes to women (I know I do) but unless numbered seats were sold, all the people in that room had the right to sit where they wished.

If you went to another country and people pointed out to you that the values you have grown up with are not how you should be doing things how would you react?

I'd shrug my shoulders and do my best to fit in. In fact I have done exactly that, when living abroad. How would you react?