Scottish Referendum - Any Feminist Thoughts?

[CKDexterHaven]

I've been on some of the Indyref Mumsnet threads and the general vibe seems to be firmly in the 'No' camp (and pretty right-wing in some of its reasoning to me). However, on the news today they are claiming that women are fuelling the last-minute swing towards a 'Yes' vote. Does anyone have any thoughts about feminism and the referendum? I can't help thinking that an independent Scotland will have more female MPs and more left-leaning policies towards education, the NHS and wealth-distribution and, thereby, be better for women than Westminster. Is it just the trend for women to vote for more caring, people-driven, socially responsible policies that is driving women to vote 'Yes'? A lot of the political punditry I have seen on the issue up till now has suggested that women are more risk-averse than men and I think it would be very interesting if this were proved to be untrue.

You have made a heck of a lot of assumptions about no voters and yes voters there.

oh i meant to start a thread on this a few weeks ago when they talked about women and the referendum on woman's hour! completely forgot, how annoying

it's still available here - first slot

the gist of what they were saying, which as things have changed rapidly over the last few weeks is probably out of date now, was that women were less likely to have made up their minds yet or to favour the "no" vote as you say. there was some discussion debate about whether this was the case, and if so, why would that be. the commentator suggested that women are researching the issues and details more deeply.

i'm not scottish and i live in england , i want scotland to stay in the union, but i totally understand why a scottish person would vote for independence

but i wonder whether with all political change, women tend to be more at risk rather than risk-averse. if there is political change, any negative effects will likely have more of an impact on women, and any positive effects will more likely have an impact on men (sweeping generalisation, but this is my impression of spending cuts over the last few years - and it doesn't matter enormously whether it's true, just whether that is the impression women get). so it wouldn't surprise me if women were more of a "better the devil you know" way of mind. their current state is always more precarious, so they are more cautious about the unknown - if they are going to vote for change, they need to be absolutely sure that they're not voting for greater negative consequences for themselves.

i may be totally wrong, but it's one reading of it i think

I don't know whether as a woman I would be "better the devil you know" or not and as I am not Scottish it is probably cheeky of me to have a view anyway, but I feel that there is a strong emotional element to the Yes vote. Personally I would be eschewing the "heart" element of voting for a more hard-headed one. If the economics don't add up (and I would need a heck of a lot more convincing that they do than I have heard so far) then all the touchy-feely stuff about fairness, wealth distribution etc. won't be worth anything.

To the Yes voters my feeling is "be careful what you wish for…."

grimbletart re the heart vs head thing and taking your example of the economics not adding up, what i'm wondering is whether a man (subconsciously perhaps) might take the view that ultimately even if the details aren't ironed out yet he'll probably be fine. women may be more likely to take the view (again possibly subconsciously) that as she's used to being fairly low down the pecking order in economic considerations, she wants more information before she makes up her mind

massive swing of women to yes vote is surely massive reaction to that fucking awful video.

and I can't blame them

If I were a Scot I'd be voting yes.
As an English person I'll be very sorry to see them go, if it goes that way, it would be a huge loss.

There has been some talk about what public services will look like in Scotland is they get the yes vote. As public services are majority employers of women, this could have long reaching consequences.

Before voting yes, I'd want some answers to some pretty fundamental questions, like currency. It's all very well the yes campaign blithely saying that England will let them use the pound, but as the government has pretty categorically said they won't, where's the plan B?

Having said that, I don't live in Scotland so have no say in any of it.

Leader of Scottish Conservatives is a lesbian.

Don't think it's relevant myself but I thought I'd pass that on as if you are outwith Scotalnd you'll have probably never heard of Ruth Davidson.

I'm in England and I've heard of Ruth Davidson

Good.

I'm not really sure what your point is. Do you have any insights into some of the thoughts here? If you have more experience and involvement it would be helpful and interesting to hear that

I don't have a vote, but I think it would be an economic and historical mistake to separate.

It's not a position driven by my feminism though.

AD and AS are coming on for a webchat - I've put a question on the thread.

Weird assumption about feminists altogether

I've posted extensively on IndyRef threads.
Winifred has it.

Look closely at the SNP.

are we not allowed to talk about it on other threads? with a specific focus on feminist analysis?

why did you bring up the fact that ruth davidson is a lesbian?

Sorry for being short but it was to explain why I hadn't posted further!

I'm finding a different interpretation on the question of risk. I think men may have more invested in protecting the status quo, whereas women may be embracing risk because, what the hell, they're already on the bottom of the heap anyway.

I find the tactics used by the 'Better Together' campaign very interesting - 'If you leave I'll make sure you don't get a penny from me', 'I'm sorry I said that. If you stay I'll be nicer, I promise. I'll let you make more of the decisions.' 'Why are you doing this? You're breaking up the family. The kids are going to hate you.' It all feels very familiar.

I don't see why most women would vote for independence when they are far better off under a big welfare state with the benefits and the huge number of ''feminine'' jobs it provides. The only reason the vote is close now is because Salmond has promised (after finally realising that women will decide the vote, like in every election or referendum in the last 100 years) more handouts and freebies under an Edinburgh government.

Men pay the great majority of taxes and rule the competitive, cut-throat private sector while women benefit from the taxes paid by men and make up the vast majority of public sector employees. Much more money is spent on women since they use the NHS much more than the men , they retire earlier and die later so more pension and healthcare benefits, most do degrees that are not exactly valuable on the job market so they never pay back their student loans or help the economy grow, much more is spent on helping women with special programs or campaigns etc.

As for the risk taking factor, it probably makes sense that the sex that brings life into the world and nurtures it for years and has been doing it for eons would be less likely to engage in risky behavior. Same reason animals that can't swim don't go jumping into rivers.

Isn't it funny that the fate of union that shaped the history of the world in so many ways and was a bastion of patriarchy and ''machoism'' will be decided by stay at home and part time working mums? If yesterday's patriarchy was an english mastiff then its 21st century version is nothing but a neutered chihuahua.

Welcome to FWR, isee!

Is there a difference between male animals and female animals that can't swim jumping into rivers?

Is anyone else on this thread in Scotland?

I am, have been involved in feminism-related and women-related discussions for years about independence, and I do think there are plenty of feminist thoughts on independence for Scotland.

Cay Boyd from radical indy recently spoke in Dundee about her book on a feminist perspective on pro-indy. It was a good discussion. Amina MWRC has been holding women-only events on it for ages. Most of those turn out to have women keener for independence than when they entered the room, even though the speakers and chair are balanced.

With Plan B, it would be dishonest for anyone pro-indy to say 'we will for sure do xyz when the UK government has refused to discuss it in advance. All we can do is talk about possibilities, with the knowledge that Scotland has plenty of natural resources and industry to enable us to have a working economy that will hopefully serve us well as a nation.

For reference (insofar as the sexual identity of a politician is relevant), Ruth Davidson campaigned against equal marriage.
And the deputy head of the SNP (and next in line for leadership) is a woman. That's beside the point though. Margaret Thatcher was a woman. Right-wing groups are great with tokens. It's policies that matter.

i was feeling uncomfortable that the only contributions on this thread mostly were from people who were acknowledging that they weren't in scotland, so thanks for your post Super

inevitably the feminist and women's discussions around independence haven't really filtered down to other areas of the UK (and why should they - it's nothing to do with us, it is a discussion for scotland-based women and feminists to have)

There's been a huge group called 'women for independence' going for years www.engender.org.uk/news/blog/guest-blog-women-for-independence-indyref-thursday-8/ www.womenforindependence.org/

Lesley Riddoch of Harpies and Quines wrote 'Blossom' which sets out possibilities after independence as well as a case for being self-governing. She's been campaigning and writing articles non-stop.

Talat Yaqoob is campaigning for Better Together, as are many Labour women.

There's plenty of women's voices being heard and here, it's not so much about Alex Salmond as the BBC would lead you to believe.
academic-report-indyref-bias-scottish-media-blackout-must

I found it interesting that when Sheila Jeffreys, a political scientist, was in Scotland, she was talking about the way small states don't tend to favour women. I hope that in Scotland things will be different and if the women who've been speaking out up to now are able to participate in policy decisions, I think we can have policies that work for women. But wherever you are, it's interesting to think about ideal structures of government.

I've always favoured smaller states as they can be more responsive to local needs and they're less likely to result in warmongering and colonisation. (in my opinion)

Plus in Scotland we have better political representation for women than in Westminster.

Cat Boyd made good points about the national identity that tends to be portrayed outside Scotland being 'braveheart'/fighting men etc.

Don't Scandinavian countries (small in terms of population, at least) have a better track record on women's rights? I would hope Scotland would model itself on a progressive, Scandinavian model.