AIBU - GREEN party - Zack Polanski

[hollyblueivy]

AIBU to consider voting Green even though I’m gender critical?

I stumbled across a couple of reels where he was interviewed by Carole (surname unknown shouty presenter) and he really kept his cool and spoke very well.

I’ve just gone down a rabbit hole on his instagram page and can see the Greens are surging and I agree with so much of what he says. It’s refreshing and positive and nothing like the doom and gloom and hatred that comes from Reform.

I am tempted to join them. To feel like I’m doing something to try to change and shape a better future in politics.

my concern is that I am gender critical and they are quite the opposite to me in views. Should I put this aside for the greater good?

AIBU to consider voting green despite this difference in gender critical view?

I don’t care about what anyone wears or their hair.
I care about their intelligence and integrity.
You are either missing the point or being disingenuous.

I'm gender critical, OP, and I hate how the left has behaved regarding this issue. However, I don't really understand why people feel that they need to vote on the basis of this one issue alone. There isn't much value in knowing what a woman is, as far as I'm concerned, if you're planning to fuck them over anyway.

My view is that we need sensible people on the left who are prepared to challenge the position on gender. So if you like what the greens are saying, consider joining them, and become a voice for women from within the party.

I do like Polanski. He is an excellent communicator. I do have concerns about some of their policies, though. Yes, the gender issue is one of those, but there are others which also make me feel that they're not really ready for government yet. I guess it's easy to say stuff when you don't actually think you're ever going to have to implement it.

My own vote at the next election will be purely tactical to stop Reform.

You only have to look at what's happened to Scotland to see what happens when the Greens have some access to power.

I used to think they could be a force for good but they have extreme policies in most areas.

lol at thinking that literally the only difference between men and women is their genitalia 🤪

The problem with the Greens are twofold (a) that they spend so much time thinking about their ideal utopia that they don't properly analyse the real-world pragmatic effects that their policies will have because you can't achieve that utopia without going through the territory that's between where we are right now and that joyful land - and policies that might work in a utopia where everyone lives by their idealistic principles will cause terrible effects if implemented here and now in the world we have. Gender is just one example because I can totally accept that in a land of utopian bliss, everyone might be gender fluid and there's no sexism, violence or gender-based discrimination so no need for single-sex facilites but here and now, female people need single-sex facilities and we can't pretend that high-minded utopian principles will magic away the perverts if there are exceptions, nor stop male-bodied people from gaining extra unfair advantages if they are allowed access to opportunities that have been created to address the disadvantages that women have in a culture where sexism is deeply embedded. Likewise with utopian ideals about transport and city infrastructure - I would love to live in a city that is set up to prioritise pedestrians and cyclists but you can't make that happen by legislating to destroy the way the city currently functions, which emerged from and is embedded in a culture of car-dependence.

(b) as with many smaller parties they don't have the critical mass of people needed for there to be sufficient competent, intelligent and experienced people to rise to the top and take on the key roles. So people vote Green because they like what Zack says, and they get a local representative who is at best totally useless, and potentially if they are unlucky a total lunatic with no idea of (or actual interest in) how to do the real job, but is only there to push their favourite impractical hardline policy which may be something environmental but equally could be something else entirely like eg being focused on gender issues.

It's important for utopians to have a voice in the public sphere and I am glad that they are part of the discourse. I agree with a lot of their ideals but that doesn't mean I want them in power. I want the reins held by the mainstream parties but I want those parties to be just enough worried about losing power that they pay attention to what the Greens are saying and put some pragmatic and achievable steps towards Green ideals into their plans in order to retain borderline voters who might otherwise vote green. Unfortunately that's only achieved in a way which means that Reform gets their policies listened to as well.

My view is that we need sensible people on the left who are prepared to challenge the position on gender. So if you like what the greens are saying, consider joining them, and become a voice for women from within the party.
I
How? He banned the actual women stall from
the green party conference as soon as he became leader even though previously agreed they could have one. GC voices both male and female are suspended by the party on a regular basis. He's made it very clear he is not interested in biological reality or obeying the SC judgement and if ppl are that the Green Party is not the party for them. How exactly are women meant to fight against this?

Are you confusing NATO with the UN? What pray, has NATO to do with Israel and Palestine??

This all day long.

You cannot be gender critical and vote green. Nor can you care about the safety of this country and vote for them.

I don't see anything better than the usual tax, spend, then spray and pray. Its pointless unless you also focus on value for money for British tax payers.

Look up how they fcked up Brighton. You’ll find your answer. (It’s YABU to even consider voting for this shower of misogynistic economically illiterate wasters)

Neither Palestine nor Israel are NATO members

I presume that poster has no understanding of what NATO actually is.

Hypnotits Zack? I know there's been an astroturfing campaign to get people talking about him on twitter.

Anyway YABU. Plus the Greens haven't had anywhere near enough interrogation regarding the Challenors which would have destroyed any other political party.

I wouldn’t vote for hypnotits if he paid off my mortgage.

If the idealist drivel that he comes out with was put into, it practice would put the country into anarchy about 3 weeks.

I don’t like him at all. I voted Green in the last election but I won’t do so again, the greens voted with labour council in Sheffield to build on green belt land . As according to them it will protect green belt. He is horrible and vindictive and the hypnotism is a joke.

This is the second thread now regarding ZP and his marvelousness that hasn't quite gone the way the Green Party would like. I have a suspicion they are trying to win over GC voters.

ZP is a loon who would do anything and say anything for fame and fortune. Think he failed to get selected as a Lib Dem MP and flounced off.

What a fucking horrible post this is

I see by the use of the word 'hypnotits' on this thread that this is the right wings media current angle on why we should all not like him. If he keeps gaining popularity they'll need something a bit stronger.

I absolutely wouldn't vote for them. It's not just specific policy issues - sports, toilets, rape crisis centres - that are affected by their stance on women. It is the whole extent of policy. How can they fulfil obligations to consider the effects of any policy on women if they refuse to accept the material reality of women? How can they analyse the gender sex pay gap if they won't ensure sex-based statistics are collected? How can they make fair policies relating to childcare, domestic violence, etc etc etc, if they refuse to acknowledge the reality of sex in shaping social problems and their solutions? How can they take a stance on international issues without a realistic perception of sex? For example, supporting women's economic activity is often a socially and economically constructive way of distributing aid.

And if, in effect, they botch along with boringly material views of what a woman is whenever policy objectives and/or existing stats require it, how can you trust a party that so profoundly fudges its own perception and principles?

Also, how can you trust a party that has eroded its own internal democracy to persecute and misrepresent members who have perfectly legitimate gender critical views?

Also also, the party has traditionally curtailed the role of the leader in order to be more grounded in the collective membership. How does this square with voting for them on the basis of Polanski's personal qualities? How does it square with his populist take on growing the party? Populism typically involves mobilising less-than-informed masses on the basis of a leader's charisma, contrary to the nominally collectivist ethos of the party

Also also also, he was a hypnotist who promised to grow someone's breasts. Nuff said.

He didn't though did he?

This!!! I have voted green in Scotland in the past but now … not a chance as we’ve all seen where their focus was with the small bit of power they had, and it wasn’t pretty.

Neither do I. What I do care about is if they actually believe what they wear or how they’ve done their hair, changes their sex. It’s beyond stupid and so dangerous to women. Anyone going along with this has zero thinking capacity. Not good qualities.

I'm the same. Vegan and really believe in their tax reforms - would love to be able to vote for them but there's no way I can put aside the gender insanity. I don't understand how the greens cant see that alienating women is a bad idea both morally and politically!

I'm going for lib Dems and hope they make a comeback! They seem the best middle ground for my views.

Exactly

The fact that he was a hypnotist really does speak to his discreditable populism, though. I don't want another leader who relies on personal charisma to mesmerise an electorate into supporting him. We are in an era, like the pre-WW2 era in which restless and divided voters are being manipulated into simplistic solutions to complex problems. Populism feels like hypnotism on a grand scale. Not a safe way of doing politics.
Boris Johnson relied on his weird personal magnetism to win the love of Tory party members. Trump does the same. I'd prefer a boring leader who was just the front person for a competent team

I would love to vote Green and have in the past. Unfortunately the sensible ones- like him- are relying on charm and smooth talking to lie their way into power. Totally duplicitous and untrustworthy.

The rest are either fools carried away on a wave of their own kindness, or frankly, depraved. Greens accepted Amy Challenor as a candidate after he was shown to have behaved very improperly concerning his father’s arrest for the torture and sexual abuse of a small child, and have his own rather niche interests. He’s currently partnered with a man who writes erotica based on the abuse of children.

If their kindness/power hunger allows them to exercise such appalling judgement, I can’t imagine them being a decent option in politics.

My biggest hope for this chap would be if the bigger parties see his popularity and and steal his policies.