To wonder how labour can still say they are the progressive, liberal party of equal rights?

[latetothefisting]

After this www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/05/uks-four-great-offices-of-state-may-soon-not-feature-a-white-man-for-first-time

Caveat: I have never voted Tory, am not impressed with Truss as PM and am sure that very few people consider Priti Patel as an ethnic minority success story.

But labour still seem to harp on the old bandwagon that they are the socially progressive party, open to everyone, focus on equal rights, non racist, non sexist etc. Yet they have still never elected a woman leader, despite us making up more than 50% of the population.(I know there were 2 acting female leaders before anyone jumps in). I'm 32 years old and despite not admiring any of them personally I can appreciate that 3 out of the 8 people who have been prime minister since I've been born are women. Yet they've all been bloody Conservative.

Pretty much all the other parties have had multiple female leaders too, for good or bad.

AIBU to think labour need to get their flipping act together and start practicing what they preach?

The problem is that Labour, like the left in general, patronize women and minorities. They do tokenism and pretend to care. There are competent and useless people among all ethnicities and both genders. Patronizing a group and telling them how marginalized they are and playing identity politics attracts the stupid subset from that group.

This is why Labour generally attract ethnic minority candidates and MPs that are below the bar. Diane Abbott and David Lammy are there examples of this.

Same with women. The female MPs in the Labour Party really lower the bar for female leaders a whole. They come across as whingeing, shrieking stereotypes of women that all of us women want to distance ourselves from. Stella ‘I’m the first woman ever to give birth’ Creasy, Lisa Nandy, and Angela ‘oi scum’ Rayner. They’re beyond atrocious and an embarrassment.

Women and minorities with ambition and competence would there choose a party that doesn’t patronise them, where they get ahead on merit, are not told that they are victims or just reduced to their ethnicity or gender. And the Tories seem to be doing better on this front.

That's not true. Nandy.

Angela Rayner was asked about this on R4 this morning and she gave it some flannel about focusing on getting into power, not the gender of the leader.

Tbh all I could think was "thank Christ you're not PM because you're thick as mince" - and I'm a feminist.

Brexiteers must be absolutely thrilled with the new cabinet. How ironic.😂😂😂

Nice. Truss isn't exactly Einstein is she?

Honestly, even mince that is days old and starting to go off shows more gravitas and skill than Rayner.

Oh so that’s your theory for why they seem to be more equitable? Try harder.

Not sure if missed it, but Brexit is done. Get over it.

No, Truss is mad as a box of frogs. But Angela Rayner still seems better equipped to win a bar brawl than an election.

I grew up in a council house and escaped poverty thanks to grammar school (Tory policy) and a full grant (nobody's policy any more). I am not still wanging on about it age 40. And I don't see any merit in being uneducated - people who make it a talking point (a la Rayner) and just boorish and ridiculous.

This is a bit of a random argument -since 2015 Conservative party have had 3 leaders, 4 as of yesterday. Labour have had 3 in the same space of time, lib dems 4, green party at least 3 (with overlap and duplicates....) so all about the same rate of turnover?

@sst1234 you're right, I am being unfair to mince there!

I think its a question well worth debating and I say that as someone who has never voted Tory and does sometimes vote Labour.

I couldn’t care less. This seems to be the latest last ditch wedge that Tory HQ seems to be using in a last ditch attempt to discredit Labour. In the context of the state the Tories have left the county in over the last 12 years I find it a bit embarrassing to be honest.

Best person for the job is fair enough, although rarely the case, but the optics of apparently a woman or black, asian person never being the best person for the job since 1979 is a bit unlikely.....

Fwiw it's not necessarily a feminism thing, I'd be having the same thoughts if Rishi had won, just from a pure numbers game women (of all races) are a majority group in the country compared to non white people so just from a purely statistical point of view its odder that they've never elected a female leader than never electing a black/Asian/mixed race one.

I certaintly don't think the tories are some bastion of feminism, like I said all the other political parties have had female leaders too apart from Labour.

Look at the policies of the Conservative party - if you think they are in favour of equality you need another think.

@sst1234 so you don't think there is a difference between electing an opposition leader and parachuting in a woman midway through a man's general election mandate?

This seems to be the latest last ditch wedge that Tory HQ seems to be using in a last ditch attempt to discredit Labour.

They've decided to not pick any white men for the top four jobs in order to make Labour look bad?

That doesn't really make sense, but I can't see any other way to interpret your statement.

But as I said above, turnover is very different when you are the ruling party and able to install whoever you want into number 10. The other parties have elected leaders based on who will go into a GE. There is still a pretty poor track record for female leaders in general elections in this country.

I want to clarify, I think Labour SHOULD elect a female leader. I think they are playing the same game with diminishing returns and expecting it to work. I just also see why they might want to take what is a 'safer' option considering the position they are in.

I have been seeing all the Tory bashing posts of Facebook by my friends, most of us can name so many Tory Mp's yet Labour is never mentioned, if the Tory's are so bad then how come the Labour Party are not scoring goals left right and center. They are so uncombative it is shocking.

In my neck of the woods is an issue Labour Party members and supporters are discussing, nothing to do with Tories.

🥱

I completely agree. I desperately want to see a Labour party I can vote for but they just don't seem to be capable of governing. Much as I didn't care much for New Labour, they at least had a bit of nous, purpose and organisation about them. The current Labour administration gives the distinct air of being so wrapped up in ideology that they wouldn't know how to govern effectively. The Tories don't need to discredit Labour; they do it very effectively themselves particularly every time Angela Rayner opens her mouth. I just don't trust them to get things right, or at least less wrong than the Tories, so I don't vote for them. I don't vote Tory either, I generally just spoil my ballot.

Funny how the Tories have another new leader & yet the Right Wing keep harping on about Labour I'm not right wing at all and yet I harp on about Labour because I'm so bloody disappointed in them.

"if the Tories are so bad then how come the Labour Party are not scoring goals left right and centre*

To me, that's testament as to how ineffectual the current Labour leadership are. We've had the unending shit show of Brexit and its effects on exports, holiday makers and labour shortages. We've had Covid and Partygate. We've had Boris Johnson as a Prime Minister, for goodness sake. Labour haven't been able to make anything of any of that other than wring their hands from the sidelines, when they should be wiping the floor with them in the polls.