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.

But why should you have to? Why should your value be measured in how many sprogs you pop out? And what if you can’t get or stay pregnant, can’t find a decent partner, are stuck in a dead end job or have health issues or frankly just don’t want to give up your life you should be punished forever?

I truly despair, this is a waking nightmare!

Estimated spend of £40 million a year on DEI roles in the NHS, possibly the most diverse employer in the country.

Dropping weight carrying requirement for fire fighters to enable the recruitment of more women.

There are plenty more.

Evidence of harmful impact?

Natasha Devon sums it all up pretty well here

I can't get my head around people who want more help with childcare costs getting exercised about people with no children paying more tax which is equal to people with childcare costs paying less tax.....

which is the extra assistance with childcare costs that so many women have been asking for!

Clearly it matters depending on which political party is suggesting it. Not that Reform actually have, not that you'd believe that from reading most of this thread.

A lot of poster's on here want the same thing then have to help raise their grandchildren

A lot posters on here see women's sole focus in life is caring for others, with the odd spa day and permission to get ther nails done

Yes it is depressing

That doesn’t answer the question.

I assume you’re in the UK, though we usually say EDI. The NHS is probably the biggest recruiter of people from different nationalities and communities and has to meet the needs of a nation with different needs. 40m is less than 0.1% of the NGS budget so it’s hard to guess what you consider pointlessly expensive.

What’s wrong with recruiting more women into the fire service, a historically understaffed service? The weight requirement is no doubt necessary for some roles/jobs but most firefighters aren’t single handedly carrying people out of burning buildings anyway.

EDI spending comprises 0.03% of NHS spending, so whether you think it is worthwhile or not cutting it will make absolutely no difference to anything. It's ridiculous to imply that this will save the NHS and make a different to public spending priorities.

Do you agree with the raising the 2 child benefit cap, that only benefits those with children

The proposal, from Matt Goodwin, is to tax people who don't have children more, than those that do have them.
He called it a "negative tax"

He is their chosen candidate for the Denton By-election, i assume Reform have approved his views?

Then there is the practicalities, at what age would these taxes kick in? would the tax encourage people where one partner is infertile, to split and seek someone out who is?
Would there be a industry selling kits to test fertility before marriage? or maybe fertility status would be on a Tinder profile?

There is a growing movement, from the 'right, to treat women like cattle, especially among men.

I don't but we had no such cap for decades and removing the cap doesn't directly punish those who do not have children.

He's made it perfectly clear that he was batting around ideas he read put forward by someone else who's name I can't remember and that was one of many ideas that had been single out for comment and that none of those ideas are Reform policies, but if you only read the frothing on this thread you won't know that.

There is a growing movement, from the 'right, to treat women like cattle, especially among men.

This is true.

The answer to that is not to go wild about an idea, saying Matt Goodwin wants "women barefoot in the kitchen" when he proposed tax breaks for women with children which they couldn't even get unless they were in work!

Why can't people see that there is absolutely no difference in economic terms between giving more benefits to a group of people and that same group of people paying less tax?

Childless people already pay more tax because they don't get it back in child benefit, subsidised nursery etc.

Mumsnet is always asking for more help raising a family, but it seems that help is only welcome if suggested by the right source, which is not a right wing source.

I do, because I don’t believe in punishing children into poverty. However I also don’t believe people should have more children than they can afford as children are a choice- we all make choices and should accept what those choices mean, for example more children generally means lower disposal income whatever your socioeconomic position.
I think you are going to try and say this means I support higher taxes on people who don’t have kids ( I also think you meant to say universal credit rather than child benefit) and if so you are drawing false, unconnected points together. If as a society we decide people, especially children, shouldn’t live in dire poverty ( which I think is the right position to take) then we all pay in and as a higher earner I do pay more taxes than most people- I have done the maths by the way, I generally pay more in tax than my civil servant siblings earn- however this is an entirely different point. This “policy” is a first, blatant step in reducing women to nothing more than child breaking vessels, and making them (even more) second class if they don’t. Anyone who things otherwise is being wilfully blind or wants this to happen ( even some women seem to hate other women). I stick to my first comment, vote for this and put us firmly on the road to Gilead.

@NeverDropYourMooncup
Reform UK will more than likely dismiss women in extreme financial hardship/destitution whilst praising their poster girl Bonnie Blue. God help us if Reform UK secure enough votes to get in. Just when you think it can’t get any worse - well it can and it will. Why would anyone in their right mind want Nigel Farage to be the next Prime Minister? He is a gormless twit that looks like a character from the Simpsons. Too many red flags with Reform UK.

They are only talking about white women.

I did mean to say 2 child, benefit cap as that is what it is called, the government call it that, even though it's misleading.

Maybe that is better, I have added a comma

Pepple are perfectly entitled to draw conclusions from his ‘batting around’ unpalatable ideas that were someone else’s. It’s clear from his writing that he is supportive of these ideas and thinks them worthy of consideration. He repeats them across platforms.

No, they’re not explicitly in Reform policy - but we don’t yet know what is, other than their vague ‘Help British people hwve more children’. That’s not a million miles away from MG’s pontificating. And I think people are perfectly entitled to be alarmed by that too.

We agree on that.

It doesn't entitle people to state without correction that things are currently the official policy of any political party when they aren't.

They also wanted to escape the prison of being married at 22-24 to provide multiple children to a much older man with no rights over her body, no power to choose to not get pregnant, no ability to safely end a pregnancy they didn't want or was going to end in fetal death, severe disability or harm/kill her, because that was the only way to avoid destitution or social disapproval, censure or financial penalties.

It wasn't just to vote. It was to have agency over their own lives, to earn as equals, to have the right not to be beaten, not to be raped, to own their own property, make their own medical and reproductive choices, to exist as valued, independent and sentient humans instead of being controlled by men.

You don’t have to keep your thoughts to yourself I doubt it’s anything I haven’t already heard. It’s strange a decade ago most politicians hated young mums now the birth rates going down they’ve changed their tune.

All the catastrophising happened fifty years ago when they thought the birth rate was too high and were predicting the world to fall into chaos very soon, well that didn’t happen and now they’re claiming it will fall into chaos for the opposite reason.

Just goes to show, live your life and don’t worry about what current ideas are trending

I don’t think anyone has said that though.

I’m interested in whether anyone pointing out that Goodwin isn’t describing Reform policy will share their views on Reform’s actual policy of helping British people have more children.

So because I didn’t meet a suitable partner to have a child with or because I’m unable to have a child due to infertility I should pay extra tax? Wow. I’ve seen it all now.

You don"t deserve to be taxed extra even if you didn't want children at all.
However Reform's manifesto is very bare bones and I can't find any reference to this. I think they are making it up as they go along.