That 50% of MPs should be women

[Frumpitydoo]

Why aren't they? Why isn't this mandated? I know fewer females go into politics, but having had this brought to my attention through Mumsnet, boy has it riled me.

We just get shat on and shafted from the get go and stand no chance, do we?

And yet Labour has yet to have a female leader, while the Tories have had three. The LibDems, the Greens, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Sinn Feinn and the DUP have all had women leaders. Why hasn't Labour ever managed to do it?

Absolutely.

@ErrolTheDragon the clue is in the name House of "Lords". When in fact they are made of up of man children who need all the support they can get from their wives - egos, washing their socks, 🧦 and taking care of EVERYTHING else while giving the male the credit!! 😿

No “positive discrimination” or quotas or mandates. Ever. Democratically elected. For other fields like employment, entry yo uni etc. - merit.

I completely disagree. It should always be about merit and the best person for the job, same as in employment. I want to be employed because I'm the best, not because I'm a woman.

I think we should have quotas. Sadly, some women disagree because they think this isn't selected on merit. This demonstrates their exclusion from the boys club in my view, thinking processes are fair and non-biased! Other issues are time and cost of campaigning. It's hard with kids.

Can't you see that we are not getting the best person for the job because probability would say that you would get equal number of male and females if it was ?

I used to think proportional representation was a good idea. I still do, in principle, but in Scotland the incompetent SNP is propped up in government by the tiny Scottish Green party, most of whose MSPs appear to be misogynists and/or utter loons. They were not chosen by the electorate directly. They were on the Scottish Greens list of people who would get an MSP job if the party got enough votes across the whole country, and getting onto that list and then ending up high enough on it to get an MSP job all comes down to party politics, i.e. brown nosing, you scratch my back I'll scratch yours, etc etc. Not great for democracy.

Parties do go through a selection process where they choose who will represent them in a constituency. Labour did have all-women shortlists but they had to do away with them as they were considered unlawful. I think the problem now is that female MP's face disproportionate abuse and intimidation which often expends to their families as well so many women are simply choosing to avoid politics. It's very concerning.

No. The best person for the job is important not if they are a man or a woman.

I think men do a better job of being an MP, anyway.

Where we live about 45% of mps are women.

Surely rather than a quota we need to make it morr accessible to become an mp, rather than it being a rich boys club. A quota also won’t impact sexism, we need change at a society level so that women gain more high up positions naturally, fewer barriers, less sexism in the work place, easier access to affordable childcare etc are all needed for changes to start happening.

Whoever is in that role is supposed to represent their constituency- so it could be a middle aged, able-bodied, white, heterosexual man (often is!) but he would need to represent the needs and interests of ALL the people in his constituency.

So no I wouldn’t want 50:50 male:female ratio, because that overlooks the other ways of sectioning the community.

I just want whoever is my MP to serve in everyone’s best interest.

And there we have it / sexism in action - men are better

@ThirtyThrillionThreeTrees "
I think the concept hinders women, suggests that they wouldn't get the role otherwise, and results in incapable women getting roles ahead of men who are better suited to the role."

Are there any examples you know of where this has happened?

Yes.

Is the situation re trolling and real life threats any better where you are?

Can you explain why you think men do it better?

Look at last 4 prime Ministers we have had equal amount of men and women all rubbish.

Women and men politicians can be equally as rubbish as each other.

In the September 2022 Conservative leadership election there were 8 confirmed candidates. Half of those were women. And two of those were non-white. These are the people at the top of the party, not the low-downs, remember.

And the Conservatives achieved that without using rigged shortlists, quotas or positive discrimination. In fact 4 of the final 8 where non-white, and people still like to maintain that the Conservatives have a race problem. This is the party that's given us three female prime ministers and numerous non-white cabinet ministers including the current prime minister.

The evidence suggests that encouraging more people to put themselves forward and then promoting on merit is an effective strategy. So let's do more of that, and stop with the other nonsense.

But if you want 50% of MPs to be women, then you need to define woman. Try getting the parties to agree on that...

Trolling?

I think crime stats are fairly similar to the uk, but things like walking alone at night etc are safer.

I think the issue goes far beyond just a gender split.

In an absolutely ideal scenario, I would love to see parliament split between men/women/race/age but also more people entering politics from a state school environment.

I also think it should be mandated that if you are rising through the ranks to senior cabinet position, you should have a background in the area you represent. E.G. Education secretary should be a qualified teacher, or health/social care secretary should be a social worker/doctor

These people do exist - Emma Lewell-Buck was a social worker. Dan Poulter is still a practicing doctor.

There's too many people who get promoted into areas where they are vastly underqualified and thats how we ended up in this shitting mess.

Trolling?

Online rape and death threats are a particular issue for women MPs here.

Men receive threats too but it's recognised to be worse for women.

I don’t know statistical data for either

My workplace about 7-8 years ago.
They decided we weren't balanced and promoted a lot of women in one go to correct it.

Only 1 was a correct appointment and remains in the position. 4 of them didn't even want the jobs but found it hard to turn down the money.

75% of staff are male so it's going to be that way at the top too. There was never an issue with the women who wanted to progress to higher levels getting there.

It proved to be a disaster and has been rectified since. All promotions are now on merit.

Often this need for gender balance seems to be pushed above what women actually want. If women decide that they don't want certain roles then that's up to them and they shouldn't be criticised for it.

Maybe they don't want to be an MP. Why would they want to now we are at a stage where we have violent mobs targeting their private homes?
Would any of you want to put your families and children at risk?

There's a distinct underrepresentation by people who are scientifically and technically literate, let alone anything like experts. Problem is, good scientists often love doing science and don't want to become politicians. Same in many walks of life.

That's where the anachronistic HoL serves some useful purpose. It'd help if they'd ditch the purely political /mates lordships and appoint more experts, more representatives of various disabled groups etc etc.