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:
PlentyOfPubeGardens · 07/11/2015 20:58

Yes I agree, I need to know the definition of 'woman' that the WEP are working with before I can support, for all the reasons in Queen's post.

I would totally understand if WEP toed the line on this or dodged the issue altogether - we've seen what happens to women who question the current predominant ideology around gender. I'd understand, but would be disappointed and could not support you.

reni2 · 07/11/2015 21:07

MotherKat- trans-exclusionary because people are dismayed at a violent criminal with a penis in a women's prison?

That is trans-exclusionary only in the same way as it is male-exclusionary, because nobody wants to see a male-bodied person who identifies as a man in there either.

Alternatively, it could be seen as trans-exclusionary if you believe sex to be changeable rather than gender identity, because prisons segregate sexes.

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/11/2015 21:10

What percentage of the UK are born male, now trans? Out of that number what percentage have been convicted or accused of violence? It must be a massive number if it skews statistics on female health and wealth. And risk.

Women are most at risk from poverty, non trans men and societal problems than they are from trans men/women. Yet this single, tiny issue is derailing all the other feminist work that is happening?

No it doesn't. Feminism is alive and thriving. It is about women and the real problems they experience in society. And it is about focusing on how to redress the balance.

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/11/2015 21:17

The idea that a WEP cannot function until it addresses a very small minority issue is depressing.

Garlick · 07/11/2015 21:25

Dione, the problem is that we need to define 'women' in order to address women's issues. Transwomen certainly have many issues to face, some of which are the same issues and some are different from those facing born women.

Ignoring this, we end up with even greater confusion about where women are at and what needs doing.

It also makes gender critical feminism a lot more difficult. This might not affect the WEP, which doesn't seem gender critical, but I think the party will have to clarify its attitudes around gender if it's to develop strong policies.

Garlick · 07/11/2015 21:32

Anyway, I don't know why I'm here Blush I quit during the Labour leadership campaign as was disillusioned by the WEP response (it amounted to "vote for a woman, any woman".) I guess I keep hoping to find it's grown up ... The lack of a definite policy on most major topics suggests I'll have to wait a bit longer.

Kittlekattle · 07/11/2015 21:35

In some instances it is about individuals skewing the data eg crime as the number of female sex offenders is so very low in comparison to male sex offenders. In the case of preop transwomen in prisons the end results are extremely frightening. Ill try to find the numbers in a bit..

I also have a concern about other statistics eg there are some transactivists who don't want sex/gender to be recorded on documentation like birth certificates. If you aren't recording male or female (or you have lost the ability to clearly define what you are measuring) you can't measure differences anymore.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 07/11/2015 21:52

Disappointed to see no response from Sandi here.
I don't want to think that the WEP were relying on an untroubled shared warm feeling that it's nice not to be sexist but that they hadn't properly thought through what they meant by 'women' or 'equality ', but it is certainly starting to look that way.
I guess Sandi & co are being very mindful here of what happens to feminists who take a less zeitgeist-y position on the trans thing, in the wake of Greer. But it seems a bit cowardly and disappointing.

ThevoiceofRosie · 07/11/2015 21:59

If you were born with female primary sexual characteristics, (ovaries), then you are female, a girl.

If you were born with a set of primary sexual characteristics which identify you as male, then you are a boy. If, after living as a male you later wish to have your genital organs removed, that does not turn you into a female. You are a male whose body has been altered by surgery and medication, to look and feel like it is female. You are very brave to put yourself through this, but you do not possess ovaries, have the ability to gestate or lactate, you are not a woman.

I defend anyone's choice to reassign their gender. I defend anyone's right to identify themself however they wish. I met someone the other day who identified as gender neutral, and I have no idea what primary sexual characteristics he/she possessed! I believe we need more strong women in the world supporting the quest for equality. But a trans woman is not a biological woman, regardless of how she views her new body.

EmpressKnowsWhereHerTowelIs · 07/11/2015 22:00

It does make you wonder, if WEP aren't prepared to face down the transactivists are they actually going to really do anything for women? Please come back & prove me wrong!

IPityThePontipines · 07/11/2015 22:02

I agree with Dione. Austerity is having a disproportionate effect on women, but instead we have to endlessly discuss the trans issue instead.

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace · 07/11/2015 22:12

It is almost as though Sandi thought she could fly in, tell us what's what, count on our vote, and never engage or give detail. I do usually like the woman, but it's a bit annoying.

WEP: what do you understand by 'woman'?

HamaTime · 07/11/2015 22:16

The WEP have made the trans issue an issue by supporting the petition to house a violent male bodied prisoner in a female prison without any segregation facilities.

I think it does need to be cleared up before their can be a proper debate on how the WEP will address issues that effect women. They have 'women' in their title but until we know how they are defining 'women' then how do we know what they stand for?

I would also like to know about the stance on post natal wards. Women already have to endure the longest visiting hours bar ICU/HCU/paeds and they don't even get protected meal times. Why would a party for women want to make the circus 24/7?

grimbletart · 07/11/2015 22:19

It is disappointing that such a tiny minority (and trans activists are a tiny minority even of MTF trans people) can hog centre stage like this.

If feminists were sympathetic to trans people before (and they certainly seemed to be) this insignificant minority are rapidly eroding all the goodwill there was.

And WEP are playing into their hands by not understanding the difference between sex and gender.

I would be more interested in hearing WEP's ideas on the economy, home and foreign affairs etc. - real important issues - than their emoting about this headline grabbing bepenised "woman".

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/11/2015 22:24

Empress, I would much prefer a WEP that works to redress the balance wrt poverty, DV, limited opportunities and unpaid work than one fixated on an issue that really isn't that important to most women.

QueenStromba · 07/11/2015 22:36

So you really don't give a crap about the couple of hundred vulnerable women who are being forced to share a prison for the next three months with someone who is legally and physically a man Diabolist?

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/11/2015 22:51

I think that the issue of women's equality is much bigger and much more important than the trans issue. Do you not give a crap about the millions of women in this country who are effected by poverty, non trans violence, pay inequality, reduced health care and the impact of low/non paid caring work Queen?

howtorebuild · 07/11/2015 23:04

If you want prison reform., why are WE or we not making them safe places in other ways too, smoking for example?

QueenStromba · 07/11/2015 23:05

Of course I do. Unfortunately though most feminist websites have turned into primarily trans rights promoting sites where you can't even bring up things like fertility rights and FGM without being accused of being a TERF as they don't apply to transwomen - there's no reason why that couldn't happen in a feminist political party. Given that the WEP have already promoted the petition which helped to put a fully functioning male into a women's prison (i.e. putting the wants of one transwoman above the safety of a couple of hundred women) there is very real concern that the WEP is already going down that route. Many of us do not wish to waste our time, money and effort supporting a party that could end up doing more for transwomen than actual women.

AmeliaNeedsHelp · 07/11/2015 23:06

The WEP can't address any issues which disproportionately affect women if they aren't clear on what their definition of the word 'woman' is. In particular, when dealing with DV safe shelters are a hugely important issue. Women's rights to sex segregated safe spaces has been eroded by the Tara Hudson decision, and it was a decision seemingly supported by WEP.

Kittlekattle · 07/11/2015 23:22

I can't find the post I was thinking of so I've worked it out again:
81900 male prisoners in uk prisons.
Studies show MTF show same rates of crime as males.
Conservative prevalence of transgender people in population is 0.2% so that makes 164 transwomen out of 81900.
17% of male prisoners are sex offenders.
Therefore 28 transgender sex offenders in 81900.
There are 3943 women in prisons in the UK in 12 prisons.
If all the MTF transwomen are moved to female prisons that makes 1 in 140 prisoners MTF sex offenders or 2 in each female prison.

This is a conservative estimate.

There is currently an increase in prevalence of transgenderism partly due to the expansion of the definition beyond transexualism. The Gender Identity Research and Education society estimates prevalence is more like 1-2% population. This is also conservative by their reckoning.
In addition the British Association of Gender Specialists have documented concerns to the recent Parlimentary Enquiry on Transgender Equality that they are concerned about male prisoners who wish to claim identity as women in order to be moved to female prisons for any number of reasons (including to have access to vulnerable women).
So, if it is not just 0.02% but more like 1-2% of the prison population who suddenly start to do this if the Equality Act is altered, then the above figures suddenly are 10x that ie 1 in 6 prisoners in female prisons could be MTF and 1 in 15 MTF sex offenders. The majority would not have had sexual reassignment surgery. Female prisoners are often vulnerable women who tend to have a very high percentage of mental health problems and history of child sex abuse and other sexual assault and rape.
At the moment governers have discretion but transactivists are campaigning to make that discretion illegal under the equality act. All those including the WEP who campaigned for Tara Hudson are making the above outcome more likely.
This is a bad path to be following.

I actually completely agree with you Dione - we should be fighting the effect austerity is having on women. However, currently we seem to be suddenly about to lose even battles feminists thought had already been won (to a certain extent at least), like single sex facilities for vulnerable women prisoners or women only refuges for victims of domestic violence.

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/11/2015 23:23

The inequality, violence and deprivation that women in this country have suffered for millenia cannot be addressed or put right until the trans issue is resolved to your satisfaction?

I sincerely hope that that is not the case.

WhenSheWasBadSheWasHorrid · 07/11/2015 23:24

Bit annoying that the first issue Sandi brought up was the pay gap but it's pretty much been ignored.

So many issues are more important than demanding WE talk about who gets to be a real woman. Almost makes me wish they had called themselves the equality party.

CharlieSierra · 07/11/2015 23:35

But if we can't define a woman, how will we measure the pay gap? Or the number of women on boards? Winning awards?

squidzin · 07/11/2015 23:37

Looking at their policy document, the tone is gender critical.

They support the "let toys be toys and clothes be clothes" campaign, which criticises gender-bias on products.
They set out aims to remove unnecessary gender

Swipe left for the next trending thread