'Progressive' Green Bollocks again

[todayitstarts]

Can you believe this? From the bright Green bright-green.org/2016/12/31/2016-equality-triumphs/

Sex and gender

This year possessing a uterus became a little less deadly as a report revealed that the number of deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth has dropped by 44% since 1990, owing to progress in maternal healthcare worldwide. This would perhaps be one of the best pieces of news this year, if the same report did not also reveal that the distance between healthcare levels of the lowest and highest resourced countries had increased, contributing to global inequality.

Those with vaginas are also less likely to be illiterate than in previous years, as the number of those who the World Economic Forum identified as female who received some form of formal education increased by 5% in the previous ten years. UNESCO have even estimated that the gender gap in education will be closed by 2027, which is a comforting thought after the difficult year we have all faced.

The term is Women!

Fuckers

It's totally stupid, as in both paragraphs they then use a sex-based term to describe what they're talking about. So "maternal healthcare", and "female". Why is the word "woman" a dirty word? If you want to virtue signal, couldn't you say "women and those with uteruses that don't identify as women"?

Thanks for highlighting this
my comment is awaiting moderation ;-)

It's fucking maddening. And you would think that in the current political climate, where the Labour party is in shreds, the Tories are fighting about Brexit, the Libs are nowhere and the Nats in Scotland on the march, that the Greens would take the opportunity to be a viable alternative. But no, they can't even refer to 50% of the population by their name.

My comment is also awaiting moderation. We'll see. There are currently 4 published comments, all from women who are as flaming furious as me, which is encouraging.

I wonder if they're ever going to publish the other comments...

Why is the word 'woman' in the racism section but not in the 'things women have' section?

Some pissed off uterus owners in that comment section

Never voting green...fuckwits

What about this gem, from the page linked to above:

"Most recently, TFL revealed plans to scrap binary gender specific announcements such as “ladies and gentleman” after the Green Party of England and Wales Equalities (LGBTIQA) spokesperson and transgender woman Aimee Challenor was told she “didn’t sound like a miss” by staff. Speaking to Bright Green, Aimee said “Transport for London making its announcements across the network gender neutral gives the trans and non-binary community hope that even big companies are now willing to make changes to accommodate us.”"

I used to vote green, I even used to be a member of the Green Party. If they continue with this nonsense I'll never be voting for them again.

Actually I can't really see how it is trans friendly either, given that it appears to name having a vagina as being essential to being female ...

I quite liked the first usage - possessing a uterus is potentially deadly and the statistic was directly related to childbirth. The connection between vaginas and literacy however...

The most recent approved comments are from 6th January which suggests that the site is operating on an absolute shoestring. Even personal blogs usually moderate more frequently than that. I don't know how many volunteers the Greens have got - I'd have thought more than a handful. Of course at the rate they're going they're going to lose support from people who don't see women as non-men.

Those with vaginas? Ffs! As if it was the vaginas that had literacy problems.

OK, it's ridiculous but it's also very serious. If the Green Party doesn't have a class analysis understanding of women's oppression its policies can never properly address problems faced by women and girls.

Operating on a shoestring or deciding they're not going to publish any more negative comments?

Another Green voter lost.

I thought the Green Party had decided we were non-men. If they've decided to be offensive, I wish they'd be consistent about it.

You really couldn't make it up!

I brought the issue with "non-male" up with my local candidate (who also has a high up role in the party). Got a load of inclusive bollocks in response.

I feel like I'm in some sort of political wasteland. One that could have been used by the WEP, but that's just another wasted opportunity

Meh.

Last time I looked at this article there were 4 comments published, mine was awaiting moderation. Now there are only 2 comments published, mine is still awaiting moderation. what's going on?

There were 4 when I visited the site but, as you say, only 2 now and my comment is also still awaiting moderation. I wonder just how many negative comments they've had.

Mines awaiting moderation too. No reason it shouldn't go through - it's just agreeing with one of the standing posts

Could 'those with vaginas' and 'identify as female' include pre or post op transwomen?

I'm sure statistically, it is not enough to account for a 5% increase in literacy. But the deliberate choice of words looks like a protocol to me.

Time to screenshot those remain two comments. This is ridiculous!

Hmm, the author of that piece has really ballsed it up.

"(those who do not match the typical biological characteristics of a male or female sex)"

This statement is transphobic. We all know there is no "typical biological characteristics" of male or female bodies. Penis can be female.

"The diversity of human bodies finally achieved some level of recognition in pop culture this year – in particular in the form of toys as Mattel released 4 different Barbie doll body types including shorter and curvier versions of the original statuesque and impossibly thin model." They are all representing vagina-type body types though. This is transphobic. Where are the barbies with a cock and balls, chest hair, and voice which issues death and rape threats to "terfs"???

"Those with vaginas are also less likely to be illiterate than in previous years" This is fantastic and inclusive. It is good form to refer to girls in poor / sexist countries as vaginas, or for the more colloquial amongst us, cunts. The bit that angers me though is that I think the statistics for literacy of people with vaginas match up with "girls". This implies that girls have vaginas and therefore is transphobic.

"Meanwhile in Canada, the Ontario government have pledged a concrete plan to combat violence against indigenous women in the form of $100 million funding, " This funding is transphobic and should be withdrawn. Or rephrased to "people with vaginas", if that is who they want to help. Helping only people with vaginas is sexist as well though. Better to give the money to people with penises, who are in greater need anyway.

All in all a total shitshow of transphobia and cis-sexism. The author should be ashamed.

Oh Queen!
I'm chuckling away here!
Excellent post.

My 6 year old DD asked a Green canvasser why he called women "non-men". I wasn't aware she had overheard my conversation about this with a friend and was 😮. Sadly she didn't get any sort of response, even a right on patronising one. He just looked a bit unnerved and left quickly.