Reform wants women barefoot and pregnant

[Sweetiedarling7]

Reform candidate Matt Goodwin wants women to have children early in life and introduce extra taxes as punishment for anyone who chooses not to have children.

Misogyny in plain sight.

How long till they ban abortion too?

Women voting Reform may want to consider if they are turkeys voting for christmas.

They are not speaking up for women, far from it.
What policies have Reform put forward to make life easier for young women or young families. Nige was very recently criticising lazy people who work at home. Do you think that was a family friendly policy?

This with bells on.

Reform want loads of white middle class babies. Because they are racist scum

Marriage certificates in the USA are state documents (like driver's licences), not federal (like a passport) and it is up to individual states whether to accept a marriage certificate for the purpose of proving indentity to vote. Not all states do and the Act's language about what documentation will be sifficient is ambigious.

Ironcially, many female republican voters, especially older women will get caught up in this as well.

You say you wish you’d gone for it in your 20s… then why didn’t you? Maybe you didn’t want children at that time or children weren’t on your mind? I had my first child at 21 because I wanted a child and to become a mum. Becoming a mum shouldn’t be done early because it’s expected or seen as better timing it should be done when we are ready. Some people want children early some want them later in life but the main thing is people decide when is best for them

I saw that and didn't like it.

At the same time, you could say that women voting for Greens, Labour, Lib Dems, Plaid or SNP are also turkeys voting for Christmas, given their stance on single sex spaces, and the fact that politicians who are actual feminists are hounded & bullied in those parties if they refuse to kowtow to the trans cult.

Who would you have listened to?
I don't think I would have paid any attention to the government telling me this at 21/22.
Did your DH wants kids and you delayed it?

I was in my 30s and did feel better about it as I did somewhat have my life sorted (is it ever really sorted?) but I would have missed a lot of education and life experience if I had had kids at, say, 22.

How do you know people are ‘regretting’ having children later? I know lots of older parents who are pleased they lived their lives the way they chose when younger and are now more mature and financially stable.

There are a million young people out of work, most of whom will never work. Statistically most of them will have had young parents. Are we supposed to be glad about that?

Surely the answer is more family friendly social policy - eg childcare - and also investment in education so that those who can or want to have children can take care of them and enjoy their own lives, while the whole of society benefits from those children too.

I didnt go for it earlier because my whole life id had the message that 20s was too young to have kids, establish a career first, plenty of time later, two is plenty anyway, its irresponsible to have them too young or youll regret it if you have them before you have "lived your life" first, etc etc. The fact that people are so outraged that someone dares say actually, consider having your kids younger, kinda proves my point.

Reform can fuck off, we are educated adult women with agency, not breeding stock. There is so much of this contradicting rhetoric about how we must have children, but also that it is thankless and gruelling plus the delightful bonus of the virtual certainty that our bodies will be wrecked. What if we don't want our bodies and vaginas wrecked full stop?

.

He can put as much pressure as wants but that still wouldn’t have magically made me meet my partner at 23! Thank god I didn’t have kids with my then boyfriend 😬

By the way where’s the link to show that he really did say this?

I don't have a problem in the slightest with contributing and have done so to the best of my ability (I'm out of childbearing age now anyway), but I do have a problem with rhetoric and policies which make certain groups of people feel like second-class citizens of lesser value and importance.

The fact that people are so outraged that someone dares say actually, consider having your kids younger, kinda proves my point.

What people do you mean? Family, friends? I had my children young and no one commented on it and certainly weren’t outraged by it

Genuinely, who do you suggest I vote for then? I believe firmly that my time has been best spent out of the workforce caring for my own two children over the past 7 years. I read all the political manifestos, nobody mentions SAHPs. The press derides them for being ‘economically inactive’, ignoring entirely their vast contributions to their children, elderly family members and to their wider communities through extensive volunteering.

I can’t find anybody who speaks for my values of children, husband, wider family and local community first? Can you?

Im not saying id have listened to any one in particular. Just that it would have been good to hear the view that, actually, there can be massive advantages to having kids younger and its not a bad thing to want four or five kids. Just someone saying be open to the possibility, where the message I was constantly given from media etc was how bad it is to have kids too young. We didnt even consider having kids before our 30s as it just wasn't the done thing so it wasn't wither holding the other back. It just seemed inconceivable to consider it at, say, 25. Literally not a single one of our friends had kids before 30s. Mostly mid 30s.

So where this is going is about creating a massive reduction of standard of living for the working class. The ideal model is for each woman to have 2 children before the age of 24, stay at home looking after them until they reach compulsory school age and then do school hours work, meanwhile being supported by the children's father who is on minimum wage work. Minimum wage can't go up, so the only way to achieve this is for the new norm to be this 4 person nuclear family living in one bedroom in an HMO sharing a bathroom and kitchen with 3 other similar families. Once the mother has started that school-hours work they might be able to rent a 1-bed flat instead, and a few years later once youngest is ok to be in wraparound care from 8am to 6pm maybe she'll go full time so they can aspire to a 2 bed flat.

So do look out for manifesto policies about removing red tape to solve the housing crisis, and a revamp of "overcrowding" definitions. Also policies that will make it more difficult for women to leave unhappy relationships.

Never forget that the real beneficiaries of UC top ups and Housing Benefits are the minimum wage employers and Buy to Let Landlords. Reform will be happy to demonise benefit claimants but any rules changes will be focused on getting more tax payer money diverted into these pots, not less.

I did have kids fairly young- at 28- but as I am brown, I am sure my kids are not the kind Reform want.
In hindsight, would have had my kids a couple of years later.

Genuinely, who do you suggest I vote for then? I believe firmly that my time has been best spent out of the workforce caring for my own two children over the past 7 years. I read all the political manifestos, nobody mentions SAHPs. The press derides them for being ‘economically inactive’, ignoring entirely their vast contributions to their children, elderly family members and to their wider communities through extensive volunteering.

I can’t find anybody who speaks for my values of children, husband, wider family and local community first? Can you?

These taxes won’t happen. Stupid idea. Women without children pay taxes already that pay for other people’s children’s education, healthcare, childcare, child benefit etc. As a childless woman I do not begrudge that of course as children are the future. But women without children usually cost society less as they don’t need maternity or postnatal care, no maternity leave etc.

Many women without children may be so due to infertility or circumstance too. It may be because they can’t afford them. Why punish women, we are damned if we do and damned if we don’t.

@FuckRealityBringMeABook I work in the substantiality sector, so I know something about this.

Whilst well meaning, people who advocate for degrowth in terms of the population are really uneducated people living in cuckoo-land, who often advocate for depopulation, partly because they want to justify their own choices to be child-free (I'm childess btw, and an atheist).

The population growth across Western European countries in particular is pretty stagnant or declining. That's the population growth of countries and people who apparently care the most about ecological and human rights issues.

Instead, what we'll be seeing in the next few decades is the massive population increases in countries that do not have as a good track record when it comes to the environment or human rights.

Therefore, degrowth in population in the U.K will almost do absolutely fuck-all to help the environment because our decrease will be dwarfed by the growth of other counties, and if they don't do anything drastic to change the way their industries operate or how their population live (which would likely involve quite draconian, unpleasant measures), then the planet will suffer more.

What we are looking at currently in the U.K in the next few decades is an increasingly religious, Right Wing future because those are the people who are having more children. There's a possibility that other factors will mitigate that trend, but otherwise it's a case of mathematics.

Has Nigel explained how they are going to fund that?

You mean he wants incentives for having family's, future tax payers like a lot of countries. Not really radical.

I mean people on this thread. Some seem so outraged that someone has advocated people consider having children younger and having more of them.

This stupid comment and Farage’s anti working from home agenda are enough to stop me voting Reform, let alone everything else.

You should vote for whoever feels repentants your views.

However I would stress to you that Farage and his party do not care about ‘the family’ or ‘not separating mothers from their children’. They care about low personal taxation and reducing immigration. Therefore, the only way to pay for the ever increasing cost of the elderly is to increase the UK born population. They are doing this via a carrot (lifting the 2 child benefit cap) and stick (taxing women who chose not to have children more) approach. Just so you are sure when you vote why they want more British children to be born.

I think a lot of "the views" posters like yourself are talking about is just women's experiences. When women had access to reliable contraception and rights outside the home, they made a choice individually but en masse to have smaller more manageable families, having witnessed their mother's etc have large 4+ children families where they didn't have the access to prevent pregnancy or social pressures made having a family the done thing. It's not that it's bad to have 4-5 kids if that's what you really want, but for the majority of women that's going to have downsides which have influenced people's opinions not to do that having seen their mum or grandmother and their restricted freedom to do anything else outside of caring for a large family.