To be so happy at so many women in the cabinet

[Standupcitizen]

Anyone else absolutely thrilled to see women represented equally in the cabinet for the first time ever?

22 appointments. 11 women, 11 men. It seems completely deliberate. Previously the highest % of females in the cabinet was something like 38%. First female chancellor in history as well.

I feel elated that for the first time in my life, we have equality of the sexes in government.

Whatever you think of starmer, the labour party or of the women in question, this is absolutely huge to me, i feel ridiculously emotional about it. I think as a woman who has been dismissed, talked over, belittled, discriminated against and overlooked for promotion in favour of men in the workplace - if the government can do it, then other companies have no excuse.

Only 1 person from my year went to Oxbridge

None from my school have ever made it to Oxbridge. That's not because they lack talent, I'm a consultant oncologist, others have also gone down the medical career route. We've also had lawyers, accountants, entrepreneurs and a couple MSPs. Yet none of us were accepted into Oxbridge because we weren't prepared, or, in my case, I already knew that I'd not get in and if I did I'd be way out of my depth socially so went to a pretty damn good red brick instead.

You did the same a couple of posts ago with Thatcher, May and Truss. Because you don't like their politics. Which is why it's not enough to view everything purely through the lens of female representation. You can have full female participation in politics and many will still turn out to be shite for women.

Apparently, he's under the impression that hormones and/or surgery can result in a born male acquiring a cervix somehow.
I suspect he doesn't know what a cervix is if he believes this.

Then why can't he SAY it?

He has. He said he agreed with Blair.

This. This is what I mean. Its a bloody disgrace that he decided to say he agrees with Blair, rather than Rosie or JKR. But lets keep our eyes on the prize which is sensible policy.

We have seen the sensible policy of appointing people to ministerial positions who know the area they are set to be in charge of, as opposed to appointing whoever shouts the loudest, in order to try and cling onto power a bit longer.

Absolutely. And it looks like, for e.g. Wes understands the Cass Review so I'm cautiously optimistic.

I am more optimistic after 2 days of Labour government than I expected to be, so far the planning has proved to be very good.

I think the election result has demonstrated that this is of limited importance to most of the electorate. As far as I'm concerned I wanted a grown up approach and moves towards a more decent, compassionate society in general. I think Starmer appointed a competent cabinet and will address the important issues facing the country.

Exactly. I think Sunak was forced to have Braverman in his cabinet to get the MPs votes for election, and she's ample evidence that being a woman doesn't necessarily mean that you're fit for office. Fortunately Starmer will be supported by loads of talented politicians and many of those are women.

Most of the country is white and able bodied.

Anyway, the OP is clearly talking about the percentage of female representation.

but between 82% (eng and wales) to 96.5% (northern ireland) are white.
if you go for a UK average of about 86% (given NI and Scotland have smaller populations), then 86% of 22 people is approximately 19.

My understanding is that 3 of the cabinet members are not white (David Lammy, Shabana Mahmood, Lisa Nandy), which in itself would be a near to perfect (purely statistically speaking) representation, although I don't know all of their backgrounds, it may be that others of them identify as mixed race/heritage other than Nandy, which would actually make it over-representative.

London isn't the UK.

Do you find that insisting on what someone says about a subject actually works?

Keir Starmer can make his own decisions. He doesn’t have to say anything that you like. Insisting on who he refers to is frankly batshit.

Yes. Performance as opposed to performative politics. Let’s see how they do, but already a sea change.

If you like performative politics then Reform are available. All mouth and no trousers.

There are countless hidden disabilities, we can't possibly know its not representative.

Thats not what this is about, and its not batshit. Many many Labour women, especially Lesbians, women who have suffered dv, women who have worked with traumatised teens & women with great expertise like Karen Ingala Smith & Joan Smith, all good Labour women, have been trying to talk to Keir & others in the senior levels of the party for years. They have not 'insisted' they have asked for a conversation.They have been at best cold shouldered, they have lost jobs & been vilified & bullied & had no support. Blair says what everyone knows to be true & Keir refers to him as if none of this had ever happened. I am not 'insisting' on anything.

Out of 650? Incredibly unlikely.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Why would I know their private medical information?

But given that there's over 10.5 million in the country (and that's of those who declare it so likely much higher) the figure of 5 out of 650 simply doesn't add up does it.

It's not possible to say its not representative because we have no clue what disabilities they may have.

You are giving the impression, possibly unintentionally, that whatever he said you would disapprove.

Oh yes, when backed into a corner, he deigns to half heartedly agree with TB instead of admitting (as he was asked) that Rosie Duffield was right and that he should fucking well apologise to her for allowing her to be threatened and treated like shit for saying the same damn thing!

This.

I don't agree with the way Duffield was treated. Starmer has evidently changed his mind and has since agreed with Duffield. He said she was right. I was answering someone who said he didn't know what a woman is. He's been clear that he does.