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:
howabout · 14/11/2015 10:54

WE believe that families should immediately have access to affordable, high-quality childcare.

I am against this. I do not believe that sexual equality for some women in the workplace can or should be bought at the expense of providing appropriate high quality childhoods for children. If the policy were around a wealth transfer through taxation and non means tested benefits from those not responsible for raising DC to those responsible for raising DC then I would be in favour. As 90% of single resident parents are women this would achieve a lot more in terms of giving women choices and levelling the playing field than subsidised childcare.

QueenStromba · 14/11/2015 12:26

The problem with WEP is that a lot of their policies sound good until you actually think them through which makes it seem that they haven't actually thought their policies through.

The first policy listed in their policy document is that all companies with more than 250 employees (and eventually all companies with more than 50 employees) should have to produce and annual report of how many men and women they employ plus details of age, disability etc. That's great except they don't say what is to be done with this data other than statistical analysis and since they think that males should be able to self-identify as women the data could be pretty skewed. One Martine Rothblatt would mask the crappy pay of 1000 care workers if we are going by mean pay. Plus, if we're not actually counting by biological sex what is to stop companies from counting some of their well paid men with long hair or other stereotypically feminine appearance or mannerism as women?

The childcare policy issues, male primary school teacher quotas and father's being allowed to stay on the maternity ward at all times have already been covered so I won't go into those again.

I also take issue with "WE will work to build a general social and legal expectation of the full involvement of both parents in the lives of their children even if the parents are not together, unless there is a pattern of violence or clear risk to either parent or child." This sounds great in theory but that to me sounds like it will be harder for women to protect their children from their fathers when abuse is happening that hasn't been proven yet. We've all seen threads on here from distraught mothers who are having to send their children off to be abused every week because they can't prove it. How much worse is that going to get if these men don't even have to make an effort to get access to their children for half of the week. It's also going to do bugger to stop deadbeat dads from abandoning their children since they haven't specifically mentioned it or suggested how they could force men to be involved.

"To encourage fathers to engage more closely with their children’s education, WE will promote the Fathers Reading Every Day (FRED) scheme introduced by the Fatherhood Institute in nurseries and primary schools." is going to make children of deadbeat dads feel even worse than they already do.

"WE will work with campaign groups like Let Toys Be Toys and Let Clothes Be Clothes to challenge unnecessary gender bias from clothes and toy manufacturers and retailers." So they think that there is some necessary gender bias?

"Extend Respect-accredited perpetrator programmes for those with a history of abuse where their partner wants to stay in the relationship". Respect won't touch abusive relationships because couples counselling doesn't work and therapy for the abuser can take months or years to have any effect and that's when the abuser really wants to change. Counselling so that the victims feel strong enough to leave would be more effective and save lives rather than killing women.

" WE aim to ensure that all women and girls who experience sexual, domestic or other violence have access to specialist support and advocacy services in their community that are for, and led by, women and culturally appropriate." Here they recognise that women who have been subject to male violence need to be helped by women but given their 'definition' of woman, those 'women' could be fully functioning males.

"

  1. Criminalising the purchase of sex and providing women who sell sex with support services including help to those who wish to exit the sex trade. This approach penalises the demand for commercial sex, as well as pimping, while decriminalising individuals who sell sex and providing them with support services. Referred to as the Sex Buyer Law or the Nordic Model, this approach recognises sexual exploitation as a form of violence mainly directed at women and children.
  2. Decriminalising and regulating the sex trade. This approach calls for a regulated sex trade. It legalises the purchase of sex with Registered Sex Workers only. Registered Sex Workers will be guaranteed regular health checks, a named contact in local policing and given access to support and exit services.". Would anyone like to buy some flip-flops? Great that they've suggested the Nordic model but then they buggered it up by giving an alternative that still lets men legally buy sex and gives the get out clause of 'I thought she was registered' when they do break the law.

Then there are all sorts of goals for government and businesses to have no more than 55/60% of leaders being either gender but no real plan on how to make them do it other than ask nicely.

FloraFox · 14/11/2015 12:39

That's really disappointing Queen. I thought they were for the Nordic model but they've bastardised it. Angry

IrenetheQuaint · 14/11/2015 12:51

Yes I thought they were for the Nordic model too! What happened? Did they cave in the face of the sex worker lobby?

QueenStromba · 14/11/2015 13:06

You probably both thought that because that's how it was described in The Telegraph at the very least:

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/11943260/Womens-Equality-Party-policy-launch-Everything-you-need-to-know.html

I assume that journalists read the same policy document as me and either didn't spot the alternative suggestion or didn't feel like mentioning it.

HermioneWeasley · 14/11/2015 13:07

Queen, it's a real mess isn't it?

QueenStromba · 14/11/2015 13:15

It is a mess Hermione. There's some good stuff in that policy document but a lot of that is cancelled out or worse by other policies and the rest is so wishy washy as to be ineffectual or actively bad for women.

HermioneWeasley · 14/11/2015 13:48

How have they got themselves into this situation so early?

QueenStromba · 14/11/2015 14:04

I blame the patriarchy. They're a party founded by people who have been socialised to put other people above themselves and be nice. This has lead to their daft inclusivity policy and the crowd sourcing of policies which was never going to result in anything better than wishy washiness. I assume the conversation that lead to the founding of the party was along the lines of "Wouldn't it be nice if..." rather than "I'm really fucking angry that...".

HermioneWeasley · 14/11/2015 14:13

Yea, crowd sourcing is a bad idea.

The reality is that most people are idiots spectacularly uninformed.

Jux · 14/11/2015 19:26

She's not come back then? Not even by now. That's really disappointing. I had always assumed she was a highly intelligent woman who would enjoy a debate.

venusinscorpio · 14/11/2015 19:32

Totally agree Hermione and Queen. "Crowdsourcing" policies is a shit idea.

venusinscorpio · 14/11/2015 19:35

It's like a particularly cringey episode of The Apprentice. "The teams are tasked with creating a political party. First job, the focus group".

DioneTheDiabolist · 14/11/2015 21:41

But at least they got off their arses and are having a go at changing stuff instead of moaning on the internet.Smile

JugglingFromHereToThere · 14/11/2015 22:11

I think moaning on the internet is valid too Dione?

In a way I'd rather see women putting their energies into influencing some of the existing progressive parties, such as Greens or Labour, rather than starting a new one focusing mainly on the one issue - even though I've always thought it is a massively important one.

Agree with Jux that it's disappointing Sandi hasn't come back as yet for a quick response. How about it Sandi ? Smile

ArcheryAnnie · 15/11/2015 16:25

Thing is, Dione, that many of us here who are now moaning on the internet are doing it as a break from all the bloody hard work we do offline to support women and girls. What are you doing, apart from telling us off for moaning on the internet about us moaning on the internet?

ArcheryAnnie · 15/11/2015 16:28

Sandi is too important busy to engage with us about her post, Juggling.

QueenStromba · 15/11/2015 16:29

You call it moaning on the internet, I call it awareness raising. Good luck trying to change anything when hardly anyone realises it's a problem.

EmpressKnowsWhereHerTowelIs · 15/11/2015 16:41

I've started mentioning it to people who I know who are interested in the WEP. You can see them realising why it's a problem.

ArcheryAnnie · 15/11/2015 17:30

Good point, QueenStromba.

Jux · 15/11/2015 18:18

Yes, she is important busy. Perhaps her PR person wrote the post for her, too.

EmpressKnowsWhereHerTowelIs · 15/11/2015 18:32

Oh, come on.

Don't you know we're meant to be dazzled by Sandi's celebrity and honoured by the personal attention of Sophie Walker? What more do you want?

Woman is a meaningless term now, remember?

I think the priority now is tweeting and talking to people who don't realise what the Whatever Equality Party is actually about. Whatever that is.

ArcheryAnnie · 16/11/2015 09:29

Perhaps her PR person wrote the post for her, too.

That's perfectly likely, Jux. And the thing is, if that was the case, that'd be OK! We all know how political parties work, and I should imagine most guest posts which come from a group rather than an individual are written collaboratively, or at least with other people's input. That's totally fine! Parties have public faces and spokespeople, that's understood, without them having to write every word that is published under their name.

But even when that's the case, you still don't do something so daft as to invite engagement and then walk away from your audience.

Jux · 16/11/2015 09:31

Quite.

QueenStromba · 16/11/2015 09:35

I think what they meant by engagement was 'Give us £2 a month and go talk to the people who are far less important than Sophie, Sandi and Catherine at the local meetings'.