Email sent to LP member from Dawn Butler: Equality will never be an afterthought

[DeRigueurMortis]

So despite having left the LP I still get all the "party" emails.

This corker came in today from Dawn hot from the Women's Conference.

Whilst there's nothing "controversial" (and tbh welcome help for re: DV victims - albeit overly simplistic imho which make me wonder just how much they really care about DV, and talk of a ministry for Women & Equalities) I just can't get past how meaningless all this is when the Party can't even properly identify what a woman is and through policies on Self ID are undermining opportunities such as AW shortlist's.

I can't help feeling it's a sop to women tbh. Here are some crumbs off the Labour woke feast table, just to keep to from starving. I just felt insulted reading it.

Am I the only person annoyed by this? Have I just become so damn cynical I can't see the good in any of this?

No, it’s bollocks. The fact it’s from Dawn Butler confirms that.

If they actually gave a shit about women they would split ‘Equalities’ from ‘women’.

I read it the same way. There's no point fobbing people off with a Ministry for Women and Equalities if you stack the deck with appointments and preconditions (e.g., TWAW) to the point where it's nothing but cargo cult science.

In the South Seas there is a Cargo Cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they’ve arranged to make things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas—he’s the controller—and they wait for the airplanes to land. They’re doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn’t work. No airplanes land. So I call these things Cargo Cult Science, because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they’re missing something essential, because the planes don’t land.

calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm

It's such crap - 10 days to leave their partners, find new homes and protect their families - all in 10 fucking days - whoever signed off on this claptrap wants firing - it's like saying women fly to the moon and back and we'll give you 10 days to do it - and btw we want proof you were actually victims of DV and that will take you on average a year to get through our bureaucratic hoops where you can't falsely accuse anyone of abuse - right - so helpful/s .

I said recently said that the LP is on the PR lookout for clickbait that's "pro-women" - this is just the latest in a lot of disingenuous "sound bites" looking for policy - after all, they can't even define a woman.

I prefer the bloody MRAs who at least are overt in their misogyny-this gaslighting is enraging by belittling women's abuse at the hands of men.

Thanks - I wasn't sure if I was being irrationally angry when I read it.

The DV statement got to me most.

What about victims who don't work?

Then the implied supposition that the "thing" preventing women from leaving is work commitments, let's not think about the fear of violence, years of "grooming", lack of finances and erosion of self esteem hey .

Just tell your boss what's your most private "secret" and get 10 days off to find a new place to live for you and your kids, in a crowded rental market, whilst worrying about your abuser wondering why your off work and browsing letting sites in the internet?

Doing something helpful like supporting shelters financially? Nope. Making sure shelters really are safe havens and female only spaces? Nope.

Then the Ministry - well I'd better not say what I really think (and whose probably eying up running it in the future) or I'll be a recipient of the MN ban hammer.

Also how many women who are victims of DA are prevented from working to keep them isolated as a form of control?

What will labour be doing to assist those women?

What they could do is define ‘women’. acknowledge oppression is sex based, improve female only spaces and support and commit to tackling sexism throughout society, starting by teaching girls in schools about their rights to boundaries!

Wankers. Absolute wankers.

Are they still trying to claim that voting for them is the moral high ground? Fuck Off.

I really should stop reading this board, it’s bad for my blood pressure!

YANBU!!

It's so fatuous and shows a complete lack of awareness of DV and how women escape and what they need. The ministry of something that we can't define-right - really great idea (/s) of some PR intern that probably cost them twenty thousand pounds in fees :(

Let's make equalities centre stage but don't ask us what that means for women....

words escape me

Just tell your boss what's your most private "secret"

This bit. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING?

Off you go dears: just disclose all over the place. There's no shame or fear attached at all. No stigma. No office gossip.

Did they learn nothing from the Tories and the rape clause?

Dawn is useless. Disgrace to the job.

Thanks everyone - as I said I've got to the point where I'm starting to question if I'm missing something because the "flaws" contained within the email just seem so blindingly obvious.

I can't begin to fathom how DB could allow that email go out with her name on it.

It's like negative campaigning yourself wrt explaining why you're not fit to do the job your in.

It's just so bloody shallow and ill considered - a demonstration of just how little thought women's issues "deserve"

I got the email too. I sent a rather terse email into them. Idiots.

I've tried to write something coherent about the DV part of this several times and failed. I'm normally reasonably articulate but a red mist descends just thinking about this nonsensical proffer of assistance.

Does anyone else have a suspicion that the people who wrote this have absolutely no idea of what's involved in DV or leaving an abuser?

Never mind the paper work, finding someone to take you and the children, re-homing pets, trying to ensure continuity of education etc.

I heard Dawn Butler on Radio 4 this morning talking about thus. She sounded less than convincing, I have to say....

With the response to her raising the Militant ghost, it’s not going brilliantly for Dawn Butler.

This was proposed by a DV survivor through a platform called Organise.

She wrote: I had a lot of time off that I didn't get paid for when I really needed the money to take my son somewhere safe. It would be such a help for sufferers of domestic violence to receive help with paid leave.

It's also law in New Zealand. The email I got from the Organise platform acknowledged that it wasn't a complete solution.

I have to admit that I didn't see the DV leave as a major insult. I wondered how it would work in terms of informing staff, and of course whether a DV survivor would be able or willing to stay in the same place of work, but I thought the offer of some help as better than nothing. One less thing for people to worry about. The trans stuff I see as a separate issue.

In that case, I'm wrong and the proposer of the 10 day paid leave does have experience.

However, I'm still failing to think this would: be adopted by employers; be feasible in all companies; be something that all people affected by DV would wish to admit to their employers; be feasible to prove in some instances; be applicable to some of the most vulnerable people with ZHC or insecure work.

I'm relieved that it's seen as part of an overall package. Now, if only we could be confident that Labour would introduce timely amendments to Universal Credit; access to refuges and safe housing; an agreed path for dealing with DV perpetrators; decent Family Courts etc. etc.

No, it’s bollocks. The fact it’s from Dawn Butler confirms that

She is extremely dim.

However, I'm still failing to think this would: be adopted by employers; be feasible in all companies; be something that all people affected by DV would wish to admit to their employers; be feasible to prove in some instances; be applicable to some of the most vulnerable people with ZHC or insecure work

It would be feasible in firms like mine because (a) we have enough people to cover (b) being cynical , this is the sort of stuff that goes well with the sort of touchy/feely / "we are a great place to work at" image we want and which is an adavantage when tendering for public sector contracts (c ) we have a proper HR department who (i) know how to deal with people being off for private, personal reasons without it becoming office gossip and (ii) have authority from management to tell line managers they might not like this sort of thing but for reason (b) they will accede to such a request.

To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if there had been requests made for leave for this sort of thing- our emergency leave policy is already wide enough to cover it.

It would be feasible in firms like mine because

I can imagine my (1000+) employer coping with this well, my sister's ex-employer with about 20 staff and no HR dept and generally poor about H&S and that kind of thing, not so much.

She is extremely dim.

At this stage that would appear to be the only viable explanation.

The email I got from the Organise platform acknowledged that it wasn't a complete solution.

This is the crucial point. As a standalone measure this is so weak (and makes the ignorant assumption all women will want to disclose) and, more to the point, requires no commitment of government resources.

I imagine someone at Labour HQ has told Dawn that uppity feminists have managed to get some traction about Labour's massive misogyny problem and Dawn needs to throw some crumbs in their direction to shut them up. Nothing that would a) cost money or b) upset the menz though. Perish the thought.

And Dawn is so useless she couldn't spin it successfully to save her life.

50,000 women lose their jobs every year over maternity discrimination.
I have no confidence that DV leave won't also be a problem for women, given how many people blame them for getting into that situation in the first place or staying so long.

Apparently the Labour Party is considering a new co- deputy role and pushing for it to be a woman and names suggested are Emily Thornberry, Dawn Butler, Diane Abbott and Angela Rayner.

For those of you who have access to The Sunday Times there are several articles on the Labour Party conference highlighting just how far left the party is being driven and the stupidity and hypocrisy behind this.

Lass if they think any of those appointments are going get women like me to return to the fold then they are barking up the wrong tree.

Shame when they've got some damn good women MP's who have a lot of credibility - the fact they would pass them over speaks volumes (basically we just want a female mouthpiece/mascot not anyone who might challenge the status quo).

db67 I'm obviously in favour of anything that helps victims of DV. The issue I have with this is that it's being presented as something "ground breaking" and highly tangible when as a stand alone policy it's incredibly thin and patronising.

It's easy to impose because the reality is that very, very few women would even be eligible (even if they felt able to take up the offer) and then still face massive challenges that go unrecognised.

As part of a wider package of support - yes, good stuff, but without that it's just virtue signalling that some people will swallow because they haven't a clue/don't care.

Just reading The Times now....