AIBU to think women voting Reform are voting against themselves?

[Peaceandquietandacuppa]

AIBU to think that any woman voting for Reform is like a Turkey voting for Christmas?

the latest debacle - Rob Kenyon refusing to simply apologise for commenting on a disgusting post about Carol Vorderman’s areshole where he said “we’re all thinking the same thing”.

He was given the chance and chose instead to say “ I didn’t write the post” and “it was a long time ago”

Reform support him and say women are clutching their pearls at “mild tweets”. We all know from the many many threads on MN. That women face abuse every day and are most at danger from men they know. These men walk among us every day without us knowing. And if they feel so empowered to publically like a tweet saying they would love to lick a woman’s a*sehole or that women have abortions so they can “shag around” we all know that’s the tip of the iceberg in terms of their true thoughts. What about the Reform candidate who was convicted of kicking his partner while she lay on the ground outside a nightclub and Reform simply said “he’s done his time”

I attach a copy of what our dear friend Nigel wrote after the Sarah Everard case. Where was the energy he is giving for Henry Nowak? Oh wait because the perpetrator was a white man there was no opportunity to create tensions that suit his agenda.

IABU - women who vote Reform need to wake up, and fast

IANBU - I agree with Rob Kenyon and all the other things they have said against women (I’d love to hear why if you don’t mind)

People vote for self interest

Some of you do, some of us don’t. Although it’s difficult to see how self interest would lead anyone to vote for policies like privatisation which just lead to more taxpayers’ money ending up in the pockets of the wealthy.

I have repeatedly said I wouldn’t vote Reform with a gun to my head.

But people all have their own biases and vote accordingly. I know that on MN people have to claim they vote against their own interests (hence your use of ‘you’ and ‘us).

I am sure you all believe that. But the only people who would do that are those who have enough of a financial safety net that it makes little difference.’

@Anarchy99, you are absolutely correct. I just ask because I have yet to have heard from a reform voter why they think the party is the answer for all the issues the UK is facing, particularly in the context of the global economy and international issues. Apart from the immigration rhetoric. I really do want to know why they think Reform is the way forward to in regard to the economy, public services etc.

Absolutely. I disagree with voting Reform for many reasons, not least of which is I think they'll sell off the NHS to America, but bloody hell, when only them and the Communist Party of Britain recognise what a woman is, what's the option? Just let our rights get flaked away bit by bit until there's nothing left?

I'm saying the mainstream parties should support women's (50% of the electorate)'s rights, or vote Communist Party, to avoid confusion.

None of it is law. It is guidance. That is the salient point.

In the highly unlikely event that the politicians from other parties REALLY didnt know what a woman was, thanks to FWS and the SCJ, they now assuredly do.
There may well have been a time when this was an issue to sway voting, but (with the exception of the Greens) that time has passed.

I said earlier but our rights weren't flaked away. There was a concerted effort to do away with women's sex based rights( "getting ahead of legislation" aka breaking the law) that was sadly supported by many MPs. However, this was pushed back on through the courts (often crowdfunded) under employment legislation and the Equality Act. Ultimately women were able to prove, in court, that single sex services should be single sex. There has been much frothing from TRAs and foot dragging but short of abolishing the Equality Act not a lot they can do. And they don't want to abolish the EA because it protects them too.

Reform DO want to abolish the equality act..to support them to do that, after a lot of women put money and effort into winning legal protections based on it seems counterproductive. It's actually more important to have that legislation and accompanying court judgements than it is for every MP to "know what a woman is" because MPs come and go and change their minds.

I'm not sure wanting to own your own home, save money and improve your family's situation is the same thing as selfishness. A lot of people who bought their council house or started a business weren't thinking "me, me, me". They were thinking about giving their kids opportunities they never had.

You can criticise Thatcher's policies without pretending aspiration is a bad thing.
Personally, I'd be more worried about the growth of the welfare state and corporate greed than an someone wanting to get on in life who pays their taxes.

Agree I’m more worried about those who want to sit on their arse doom scrolling on their phones and living of pretty cushty benefits than those who want to go out and make something of themselves.

Tony Blair’s push to get everyone to University was a massive mistake. The closing of technical colleges another one. Nothing wrong with an honest trade.

Some figures I was listening to on R4 the other day about growth. At one time every generation knew that they would be better off than their parents’ generation but that is very much not the case now with growth so stagnant.

@NorthXNorthWest, exactly people just wanting to get on in life and have aspirations for their family making huge profits whilst veiwing those who were not in a position to buy are just 'benefit scroungers'. Many of the council houses sold in 80s are now owned by private landlords. There is a really good documentary about the social history council housing and estates made by the BBC shown on BBC 4 which is worth seeking out.

Legal protections aren’t much consolation to the women and children who still have to stand aside for men. Men are still getting prizes in women’s categories and intimidating women so they don’t question them.

@Dameputtingonabraveface
There is a long way between making huge profits and an ordinary taxpayer who is simply trying to do the right things in life. Most people aren't trying to become property tycoons or lead huge corporations. They are trying to own a home, build some savings, provide for their family and avoid becoming a burden on the state for as long as possible. Its lazy and dishonest to Lump those people together with large corporations or wealthy investors

On a plane, you are told to put your own oxygen mask on before helping others. Not because you're more important, but because you are no use to anyone if you have passed out. Wanting to own a home, build some savings and achieve a bit of financial security is much the same. It's not selfishness. It's putting yourself in a position where you can look after your family, stand on your own two feet and also help wider society.

STEM courses teach people to think rationally and critically. They deal with the realities of the world not people's subjective 'truths'. Non STEM courses have too often become merely vehicles for ideological indoctrination, no debate allowed, churning out identikit identity politics advocates who think they're so superior to the stupid gammons and bigots who should know their place.
They're all so shocked when anyone they thought was one of them, an 'educated' middle class person, dares to admit they won't be voting Green.

I agree with this.

It’s one way my AuDHD has helped me as well. There is a joy in working with something where opinions and views are irrelevant. Facts are facts.

If you study gender studies at University you will end up not knowing what a woman is. If you study maths you will end up not knowing what a number is. STEM subjects are one of the worst subjects for producing people who are proud of the fact they know nothing about the subject they spent years and much money studying.
The main point is to know that the ratio of a circles circumference to its diameter is Pi but also that it's not possible to use Pi to calculate a circles circumferanc and you need to fudge it instead. Likewise, the actual definition of a woman might be very complicated when you get into the weeds. But in law it's an adult human female and everyone knows what that means really. Philosophers, artists and mathematicians deal in the abstract and the impossible ideal. Lawyers and engineers deal in rules of thumb and the real world.
There is no inherent difference in critical thinking between humanities and STEM. We need both. But knowing that we don't know anything is the starting point and has been since Socrates.

Maybe because none of the other parties take the electorate seriously, and they need to be shown that if they continuously ignore them for decades, they will be voted out.

Is it any wonder they won’t engage though, it was the same with Brexit. The remainers thought the leave lobby were thick and/or nasty and they were the loud majority on here.

Nobody is going to willing to engage with so much hostility

The few educated Reform voters I have met just believe the proposed policies are better for the country long term and that Reform are more likely to make the tough decisions that need to be made, that both Tories and Labour failed to make. We can’t keep spending more than we earn and that’s a given and people are all taxed out. So I can see their point of view. They don’t think it’s a magic bullet, just better than Labour or Tory.

On defence, I do have to agree that is urgent and the spend needs to be intelligent and towards drones, cyber security etc at the sophisticated people and tech level. Rather than Labour policing dumb people venting US style free speech nonsense online, I would really much rather there was huge focus on actual malign influences and we know who the bad actors are. The US whilst temporarily somewhat ideologically out of sync, are definitely not our enemies but will always be our allies.

Guidance that then gets acted upon by motivated police forces and other public bodies.

This is a dirty way of the government changing the behaviour of public bodies and enforcing our behaviour by the back door instead of openly by a change to the law.

The public bodies say “it’s the guidance, I can sanction you for this”

The government says “it’s only guidance, we haven’t really changed anything”.

They have deliberately created plausible deniability and your post demonstrates that clearly.

Except that many many organisations including the Civil service and other government departments are refusing to abide by any recent rulings and are maintaining their previous anti women policies on single sex spaces and services.

There is a lot of political mileage left in that topic.

I have a genuine question and apologies if it's already been asked but, people who are understandably pissed off about how Carol Voderman was treated, how do you feel about Mandelson's connections to Jeffrey Epstein?

Mandelson is literally facing criminal charges for corruption and conspiracy with a convicted high profile paedophile reapons for trafficking women.

I mean it seems like Labour have been enabling much worse behaviour, so wouldn't that mean that women would be voting against themselves voting for Labour?

If it were a choice between vile behaviour and actual criminal behaviour involving sex trafficking as the moral standards of a political party, one is far worse than the other surely?

Why is this such a blind spot or is it just a case of telling women what to think and ignore the actual criminal behaviour?

Mandelson hasn’t been charged with anything yet. If he is it will be a charge of misconduct in public office. It’s a massive stretch to claim enablement of paedophilia and sex trafficking by a political party in those circumstances. You’re also assuming that everyone who is disgusted by Kenton’s misogyny is a Labour voter, there are equal numbers of Tory and LibDem voters who are equally appalled.

I haven't seen anyone on here defending Mandleson. He is pretty loathed. And I think Starmer showed a huge error of judgement (putting it mildly) appointing him ambassador. Of course at the time Farage was fully in favour of this but TBF he wasn't PM Starmer is so the buck stops with him. And he has faced a huge backlash for it. Also if we are talking about links to Epstein there are quite a few between our merry band of Brexiters and Bannon/Epstein. I don't think getting into all that helps Farages case much.

Why would we judge the moral standards of the entire Labour Party by the criminal behaviour of one man?
I'm not concluding Reform are harmful to women based on Kenyon. That's down to their stated policies.
I'm judging Kenyon based on his misogyny, and if I were in Makerfield wouldn't vote for him regardless of the party he represented.
Unfortunately there are misogynist men and their enablers everywhere. Often we don't know who they are. Sometimes we do. And when we do, it makes sense to give them a wide berth.

And no, women exercising their right to discuss and question support for Reform is obviously not 'telling women how to think". That's just trying to shame women you don't agree with into silence on the topic, by implying they are trying to control other women, when at most the aim of a debate is to persuade. On both sides.
Are you telling women how to think when you're implying that left wing women shouldn't be concerned about Kenyon because of Mandleson?

Yep.