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.

Yet people bash the current government. Yes it’s not great but it’s the less of all evils, and at this pace Reform will win with a landslide. So happy I’m an immigrant with an EU passport and am free to fuck back off to my own country.

They'll be banning abortion very quickly on the orders of the Republicans in the USA. Farage has already started talking about it. He's in the oaybif sine if these right wing extremist groups.The original life extremists are setting up across Europe.

Where are these young women supposed to find young men who are willing and financially able to start families at a young age? One of Reform's key policies is to worsen the already precarious nature of work to benefit the rich , enable hire and fire at will, ban working from home etc.

Their interest is not in supporting family life , it's all in the interests of countering their imaginary 'great replacement' theory.

It’s not racist to suggest that those who live in any country should not be priced out of having children. I do know people who are being forced to move to various other countries- great if they genuinely would prefer to live there, but they have been priced out of starting families here. That is wrong anywhere.

@Marmalademorning Yes I agree, and the ignorance and callousness of the Boomer generation in particular frequently angers me. I'm an elder Millennial who's been on a fairly decent salary for the past few years (surpassing most job opportunities in my area), but despite that, I can only afford to buy the most dump-like, financial traps in one of the cheapest places in the U.K.

I see these middle class English people complaining on Facebook about how ungrateful we (working class Welsh people) are, and that we should simply accept living in squalor (like they did apparently). They are totally out of touch and have absolutely no idea how much is costs to renovate a house these days. By the looks of the conversations I see, these people will be voting reform.

Depending on where you're from, this might just postpone the problem for you. Pretty much all EU countries are under the same ideological attack.

People voting for Reform are voting for hate of all kinds ..the anti 'abortion' we don't save the mother, US crowd are already here and funding campaigns.

Reform policies are for the super rich who will buy their own healthcare and other services which will be destroyed.

They aren't hiding this, its not like Brexit where the excuse was a £350 million pound lie about the NHS.

Voting for Reform is an "I am sexist, gullible racist, pro billionaire" vote ...for those who enjoy destruction...in this case our last shreds of a decent society.

Billionaires are almost literal vampires (and going by the darker corners of the infamous 'files', 'almost' feels understated).

Thanks for posting that and it does shed some light. Basically all I see there, though, are discussions about possible ways of dealing with some societal problems, and if you seriously think Goodwin is saying ''X must happen and will definitely be Reform policy' you're misreading it.

One possibility is women who have more than 2 children not paying income tax, iirc. Goodwin is not suggesting childless women pay more tax.

I agree with you. I don’t think anyone would disagree. But I think how we tackle the fact lots of women can’t afford to have any children, or not have children until their late 30s is the crux of the problem.

I don't know why people get wound up by Reform. Anything they say now is for the birds.

the only time to take anything Reform candidates seriously is when we are in an election campaigning phase and they state their actual manifesto pledges. Until then everything they come out with is unfunded, unquantifiable, inane ramblings of idiots.

and let's see Nigel Farage step forward as the democratically elected Prime Minister. You won't see him for dust, the minute the election date is announced, if not before. He'll hot foot it over to the US to hang out his orange buddy, before you can say misogynistic bigot.

They must be ...wealth doesnt exist in a vacuum it's drawn from somewhere...either property or people whose labour is being exploited.

That raith Jim Radcliffe isn't magically rich he took the work of his employees as a huge gift to himself...whilst those workers were no doubt subsidised by us all via UC, child benefit etc...

As a plastics, chemical company owner it is likely there are a quantified number of environmental, life mortality effects of his wealth generation that have never been costed...but which weigh on us as a society. Sharing (Socialism) for some things EVERY time

Yes, but being complacent is exactly what landed us the Brexshit debacle.

The next free for all is AI tech. Surprise surprise, Reform has a very laidback stance on the subject.
If we vote for them, we will become a digital dominion of big tech billionaires.
Sovereignty my arse.

Women are holding back for good reason. They are more aware that if the relationship goes wrong that they will most likely be the ones left holding the baby. They will not be supported enough by the work/school world and not only are more likely to be struggling, they will be blamed for that that struggle. Single moms rights are not where they should be and dad's are not followed up on paying maintenance. If women have good security in place if things go wrong or abusive men are pulled up more, then we can talk about having kids younger. But until then...

Nope.
I v much doubt that Nige supports SAHMs (note you say SAHMs not SAHPs). No party is likely to actively encourage women to be less economically active when we have an increasingly aged and ill population.

Yup. Nige is excellent at stirring up trouble, you could say excellent in opposition even but he isn't at all interested in doing any actual work. I would be gobsmacked if he ever stuck around to be PM if his party were voted in.

The backers are interested in wreaking chaos, not actually for the UK to do better in any way.
They're disaster capitalists. They don't care.

I'd suggest that dedication to your children/your wish to feel really, really special and important for having a functional uterus is not best served by voting for a party who are hoping to coerce financially (and socially) your daughter, all fresh and plump faced with oestrogen, flat stomached and firm breasted, into incubating a 45 year old man's sperm in 12 years' time.

Or is it that you have sons? So you'd be perfectly happy for them to be unable to get a wife until you're 70 because that's the point at which they are finally a possible marriage/decent financial prospect compared to earlier in their lives when they are vastly outearned by older men?

This is about them being pissed off that girls in their teens and early twenties won't fuck them. And because they won't fuck them, they want them punished and coerced into seeing it as their only option.

It makes sense to have family-friendly tax policies.

But the main way to support an aging population is to get the people we have here already, especially young people, into work, contributing and paying taxes. That way, everybody wins.

Those are Reform policies BTW, although my preference is to support people into work rather than just taking away their benefits, which is perhaps what Reform are planning.

I think as many posters have highlighted it is about the underlying values behind the statements. The idea that women need men to advise them on their reproductive choices is to me inappropriate. I fundamentaly believe that women should decide when and if they have children.

Women's education strongly influences fertility rates. I am very concerned about the comments made about women's participation in HE.
There are comments from a Reform spokesperson at the end of one of the articles posted. They have not distanced themselves from these views. If Reform wanted to, they could have. They have not.

Yes because life for women will be appreciably better under Reform- their voters thrilled at the possibility of living in an era where men could grope you in the workplace and it was dismissed as a misjudgment at the very best, a woman being overly sensitive and hysterical at worst. Women's rights are an anathema to Reform let's hope Reform voters have their, 'Damascene conversion', and not inflict these men on the rest of us!

"But don’t they also want to keep the 2 child UC limit and lower minimum wage? The combination of ideas seem a bit contradictory"

Reform have no coherent policies. They make it up as they go along.

"One possibility is women who have more than 2 children not paying income tax, iirc. "

Rewarding women for having lots of children. I recall another 1930s regime that did that.

mmm, can you back up your musings with actual references tho?

Well my view is that there are too many people in the world already and we don't need to encourage people to have more than two kids each (well one child each - two per couple).

I said this on another thread but all Reform is worried about is that there are too many brown babies and not enough white babies. Eugh.