Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Guest post: Sandi Toksvig - "The time is right for the Women's Equality Party"

533 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 06/11/2015 17:49

I'm rather old fashioned in my beliefs. I always thought that when Parliament passed a law, people were supposed to take notice. So how is it that 45 years ago an Equal Pay Act was introduced, and yet no one has really acted to make sure we get it? When I mentioned the gender pay gap to the environment minister, Liz Truss, she said "It's smaller than it's ever been." It's at 19%. How big was it before?

Much of the world baffles me. How does the UK tolerate the fact that so many women because they are women still live in poverty, suffer harassment and violence, and abandon careers they enjoy because of the exorbitant costs of childcare? I've come to the sad conclusion that in its current form our political system can't be trusted to deal with any of this. There are twice as many men as women in the House of Commons, and they seem to spend most of their time shouting and jeering at one another. Frankly, like many of you, I'm embarrassed by it. Seven months ago, in conversation with my friend Catherine Mayer, I realised it was time for us to take matters into our own hands.

So in March 2015 we founded the Women's Equality Party, a new political force that (we hoped) would unite people of all genders, ages, backgrounds, ethnicities, beliefs and experiences in the shared determination to see women enjoy the same rights and opportunities as men. It would be something new. Non-partisan. Attracting people from the left, from the right, from the centre. People who have had enough of waiting for equality. I have to say even at my most ambitious and optimistic, I could not have predicted the flood of support that soon washed over us. Within seven months WE have more than 50,000 members and supporters, ably led by Sophie Walker, 65 branches across the country and will be standing candidates in the spring elections.

This is not some dreamy group wistfully hoping for change. Late last month, just six months after that initial conversation, I found myself sitting in a hall packed with cheering activists and supporters, clutching a book of wonderfully pragmatic policy proposals. Policies developed through close consultation with experts and our members, and representing the experiences and concerns of thousands of women and men across the country.

WE heard from mothers who want to go back to work but can't, because of crippling childcare costs, and because so few workplaces have actually embraced flexible working.

WE heard from mothers who choose to stay at home, but feel dismissed by society for doing so because, despite its immense value, caring labour is still not recognised, respected and supported.

WE heard from fathers who desperately want to share the joys and responsibilities of parenthood, but are stigmatised for wanting to balance work and home life.

All these experiences reinforced our awareness that care is not taken seriously in our society, nor are the people who care.

WE want to change that.

That's why we propose a dramatic overhaul of parental leave policy. We would guarantee both parents six weeks of non-transferable leave on 90% pay, with an additional 10 months of shared parental leave at statutory pay. This policy would, of course, encompass same-sex couples and adoptive parents, while single parents would be entitled to nominate a second caregiver.

Once this period of leave has passed, WE believe that families should immediately have access to affordable, high-quality childcare. The educational benefits of childcare are clearest in the first 15 hours a week, so those hours should be entirely state funded, with the rest payable at one pound per hour by parents.

These policies are good for women, who have greater freedom to balance work and home life (which will, of course, mean different things to different people). But they're also excellent for men who, for too long, have been excluded from participating fully in family life because care is seen as unmanly, and paternity leave as unprofessional.

Of course, all of our policies require a blend of legislative and cultural change. The reason the Equal Pay Act still isn't working properly is because back in 1970 we changed the law without changing the way people think.

And that's where education comes in.

Many people think equality in education has already been achieved, since girls consistently outperform boys academically. But education is about more than grades, it's about learning how to live, and work, and build relationships. And at present, our children are learning to live according to ludicrous, outdated notions of 'masculine' and 'feminine' behaviour.

So WE want more diverse role models for both boys and girls, starting with encouraging more men to enter primary school teaching and other caring roles. And WE want careers guidance that pays no heed to gender when helping young people to map their futures. And WE want proper, honest sex and relationships education to finally become a reality.

It all sounds very obvious and straightforward, doesn't it? Sadly, enacting these policies will be a lot harder than formulating them. And that's why WE need you. Join us, share your ideas. The time is right for this movement, and WE want you to be part of it.

Photo: Fiona Hanson

OP posts:
HairyLittleCarrot · 11/11/2015 23:01

I read the WEP policy document. There is so much good stuff in there it made me want to weep, that WEP fail to see that not a single objective can be achieved if you cannot identify clearly WHO are the people you are campaigning for?

Phrases from the document caught my attention:
"Fleeing an abusive partner can be the most dangerous time for a victim of domestic violence and her family. WE believe in the absolute right to a place of sanctuary for women, children and other victims of domestic abuse"
By changing the definition of women from "adult human female" to "anyone who self identifies as woman" you CANNOT provide the sanctuary those women need.

"Our country has a gendered culture where men are seen as entitled to dominate"
Yes, and this is hugely apparent in the way that many transwomen who have grown up in that gendered culture, been socialised to feel that male entitlement, are now feeling entitled to redefine women, dominate women and erode the rights of women whilst calling themselves women.

"Women need to feel empowered to, challenge not tolerate, sexual violence and gender-based abuse. "
We are challenging this. Are you hearing us?

"We all know that the picture of women presented in the media is false. It has to change to ensure our girls and boys grow up comfortable in themselves. It has to change so women can be heard, and to make sure women get an equal chance to shape the way our society thinks."
We will never be equal if we cannot even be recognised as a group accurately.

"challenging gender stereotypes"
Why not challenge gender completely? Gender IS Stereotype.
Sex is about biological differences. Gender only exists to provide a justification for adding stuff onto sex that doesn't need to be there.

reni2 · 11/11/2015 23:01

What is the WEP's position on the no-platforming of Germaine Greer and Julie Bindel?

reni2 · 11/11/2015 23:05

Agree HairyLittleCarrot, and would like to add

"challenging gender stereotypes" by saying performance of gender=woman

ShortcutButton · 11/11/2015 23:22

I have voted Labour for 30 years. I was very excited about the emergence of the WEP and was going to change my allegiance. I will not be doing that now, in light of WE definition of 'women'.

Trans rights are in direct contradiction of women's rights. Its impossible to fight for both at the same time. WEP have chosen to represent Trans interests over women.

May as well change the name to Trans Equality Party

reni2 · 11/11/2015 23:35

Empress called it the Whatever Equality Party earlier on the thread.

ArcheryAnnie · 11/11/2015 23:42

I'm sorry you feel as though we haven't been listening. We are listening. I'm here. What question can I answer first?

So much for "listening".

Run in, slap down a laundry list of ideas, run out again. Run in five days later, slap down a cut-and-paste soundbite, run out again.

Still never answered my question.

Bah.

ShortcutButton · 11/11/2015 23:52

WE want proper and honest sex and relationship education to become a reality

I'm interested in what sex education is going to look like, if we are embracing the idea that sex is determined by your 'gender', and biology is irrelevant...

Garlick · 11/11/2015 23:55

what does "living as a woman" mean?

I don't know many women who earn a living via their penis which they use to penetrate people for sexual gratification.

Or is it having fake tits and hair extensions that is "living like a woman".

I've been doing Being A Woman wrong all my life, too! If only I'd listened to all the misogynists and pouted more instead of striking for things like maternity pay.

If living as a woman means wearing high heels all the time and calling all my mates "girl" or "missy" ... I'm not a woman. I have a uterus, ovaries (well, one) and my own breasts. I was socialised as a girl and have fought for women's rights all my life. But I don't "feel like a woman" or meet the evident criteria for living a woman's life.

Shucks. The WEP can't be for me, then, can it?

Garlick · 12/11/2015 00:00

Seriously, Sophie, you can't change your SEX by identifying it differently.

You can identify your gender however the hell you like - but how much are transwomen helping the gender problem by reinforcing the binary stereotype?

What is gender, in your opinion?

ArcheryAnnie · 12/11/2015 00:01

WE want proper and honest sex and relationship education to become a reality

And what should this proper and honest sex and relationship education say about lesbians who told they are bigots for not considering people with penises as sexual partners?

HairyLittleCarrot · 12/11/2015 00:40

Sophie, please find time to read this, if you can
gendertrender.wordpress.com/2015/10/14/written-evidence-submitted-by-sheila-jeffreys-to-the-transgender-equality-inquiry/

"The demand for transgender equality may create a ‘clash of rights’ in which the rights demanded by one group of people can substantially endanger the rights of another group (Sniderman, Fletcher, Russell and Tetlock, 1997). In a clash of rights some adjudication has to be made as to whether the group involved in the rights demand that compromises the rights of another group, can be accommodated in human rights norms."

Please try to understand the clash of rights here. You cannot in good conscience be a party supporting women's rights and also a party supporting the endangering of those same rights.

You will have to throw women under the bus if you continue your current stance to its conclusion.

howtorebuild · 12/11/2015 00:46

I hope Sophie comes back. They may need to have a discussion and chat with their legal team, then return.

TensionWheelsCoolHeels · 12/11/2015 01:13

I'm 42 yrs old & despite being engaged by & interested in politics my whole life, I never felt motivated enough to join any political party or movement. But I did with WEP. I bought into this idea, this movement & had high hopes this would be a positive thing. It's landed on its arse now IMO.

I emailed WEP asking that this subject be considered for discussion & debate with members. I highlighted this thread too, and hoped that at the very least members would be given the chance to put forward their thoughts/views so that a consensus would be reached. I've had no response personally to my email but hoped that my comments/request would be considered etc. However, it seems that Sophie (or rather, her PR/legal team that no doubt my membership fee pays towards) has decided what WEP stands for with regards to transgender issues without the need for any further debate.

I'll be cancelling my membership too & sending that money to one of the organisations QS listed earlier.

reni2 · 12/11/2015 01:26

I predict the WEP will be neck and neck with the Monster Raving Loony Party.

BubsandMoo · 12/11/2015 01:36

Just to add another voice, I am a paid up WEP founding member & have volunteered for local branch as well. I feel massively let down by WEP's failure to choose safeguarding women's right to a safe space in prison over the wishes of a violent male-bodied person to be in a female prison. You simply cannot have both. Tara could & should have been safeguarded in a vulnerable prisoners unit in the male estate.

I also tweeted WE about this several days ago, alerted them to this thread and got an unhelpful link to policy in reply. So it really shouldn't be a surprise to them tonight.

WEP, your response on this issue has been appalling - late, insincere, patronising and unintelligent (learn the difference between sex & gender, ffs!). I am so disappointed. You're failing at the first challenge here- and I pretty much feel I have to withdraw my support as well, as I do not want to be funding & volunteering for a group who campaign for a transwoman's desires at the expense of safeguarding vulnerable women.

dontcallmecis · 12/11/2015 01:58

If you accept transgender women as women, you must accept that it is fair and reasonable for them to be considered not only as suitable for incarceration in women's prisons, but suitable:

for positions on boards earmarked for women
for scholarships earmarked for women
for positions on women's sporting teams
opponents to other women in individual sports - everything from long jump to cage fighting.
for placements in all girls' schools/universities

Sometimes I think groups like WEP, in their rush to be all inclusive, and nice, and kind, just don't think things through.

Garlick · 12/11/2015 02:37

in their rush to be all inclusive, and nice, and kind

Dear WEP. It is not nice to be nice. One might hope that women of experience, who've chosen a path in politics, would have figured that out by now.

Nice - particularly as expected of women - means rolling over and hoping they'll tickle your tummy. Most often, of course, they'll kick you in it. Then you apologise for putting your tummy in the way of their foot, and they praise your niceness.

Inclusivity begins with definitions and boundaries, it is not "nice".
Kindness is selective and subjective; it is not "niceness".
Compassion can't exist without boundaries; it is often not "nice" at all.
Respect is meaningless unless given & received equally; it has nothing to do with "niceness".

Give up on the tummy-tickles, please. Take a long look at your respect & compassion. And your boundaries.
Thank you.

DeoGratias · 12/11/2015 06:51

You do women no good at all if you spend all your time arguing about what is a woman though. You get drawn into those discussions at your peril.

Instead ignore disptues over what is woman and campaign on the platform advertised which as someone said above is all the issues most women support.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 12/11/2015 07:12

How absolutely, utterly, offensively, pathetic.

I would say I hope Sophie et al have read the posts which appeared after she buggered off, but despite the avowals that 'we are listening and responding' I somehow doubt it.

Though maybe in another six days I'll be proved wrong!

What a shower.

ShortcutButton · 12/11/2015 07:13

On the contrary, if we fail to bound trans-women out now, then you are going to find it next to impossible to advance the interests of actual women, going forward

Trans interests are in direct opposition to women's interests in a lot of cases. There was an excellent post earlier in the thread (by queen?) which explains why, with examples

I am not on Twitter and if it wasn't for this thread, I would not be aware of WEP support for Tara moving to a female prison. It feels really duplicitous

Justgetthruthegoddamday · 12/11/2015 07:16

This is just what the other parties want to happen. Please don't destroy it people. The organisations you mention are awesome and do amazing work but we'll never get the change I think (hope) we all want without being an electoral threat.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 12/11/2015 07:19

WEP are never going to be an electoral threat, though - and to be fair, I think they know it.

People who can't support a party because they are fundamentally opposed to its policies, as feminists, aren't ruining the party's chances though. If any chances they had are ruined, that's on them not the people who can't support them.

DeoGratias · 12/11/2015 07:21

It's a side issue (trans). Ignore it. It is not important to most women and there are not huge numbers of trans women in the UK.

In fighting destroys many new groups - male and female. Anything that leads to it is a problem. I accept that the differecnes between say Corbyn and most other Labour MPs are not a side issue so the in fighting there is/will be there will have to happen but that is because of fundamental differenecs within the Labour party. The trans issue does not have to divide women.

Concentrate on the things which matter to women - equality at work and at home.

EmpressKnowsWhereHerTowelIs · 12/11/2015 07:26

Doesn't the Tara Hudson issue bother you, Deo? The precedent even if not this specific case?

WhenSheWasBadSheWasHorrid · 12/11/2015 07:41

deo is possibly thinking in a similar way to me. There's a whole raft of other issues WE need to tackle.

I'm a member of WE
I've read the whole and will be continuing my membership

Swipe left for the next trending thread