Where will identity politics and intersectionality go next?

[MarshmallowSnowDon]

So I can see how feminism and the victimhood/oppression narrative within it lead to the recent trans rights movement, and I can see why women would been seen to be more oppressed than men but not as oppressed as trans people. I believe that under this type of thinking (group rights as opposed to individual rights) the rights of the most oppressed are protected first so a trans women’s right to use a female changing room (under this way of thinking) would trump a women’s right not to share a female only space with someone with a penis, but where does this go next? I don’t know but I predict that in 2019 we will see the BAME pay gap (where it exists) take more prominence in the media. And maybe even some white women and men in the BBC taking pay cuts if it turns out that people of colour are being paid less than them. A relative of mine working in the public sector has already been told she can’t do a management training course because it is reserved for BAME people. I imagine this will become more common in the effort to equalise outcomes across multiple groups now that having equality of outcome and not equality of opportunity has become firmly established as a goal in the mind of the establishment. What do you think 2019 will bring?

Equality of opportunity has not lead to equality of outcome and it won’t, because men and women are different.

Why do you imagine that after 1000s of years of inequality of opportunity we have suddenly reached a situation of perfect equality of opportunity now? When exactly did it happen?

The evidence doesn't seem to support this assertion:

• The UK has the lowest social mobility in the developed world.
• There is still huge inequality of outcome for women in many areas ( the only real macroeconomic way we have to measure equality of opportunity) but importantly those inequalities narrow when barriers to equality of opportunity are removed.

Yes men and women are different. When we reach some magical era of equality I would expect to see very similar (average) outcomes in most areas of life, with a few key differences. But the (average) inherent personality and ability differences between the sexes are small compared to social effects (gender).

For the time being class analysis and collective action is necessary. It doesn't have to be taken to a silly extreme. Loopy identity politics is not a natural extension of feminism or civil rights.

Personal identity can do whatever it wants. Identify however you wish. Fill yer boots!

But sex matters.

Keep penises out of women's single-sex spaces, keep penises out of women-only roles.

I think it will be disability, or any area where someone can say "they've got something I haven't got." I think it will especially hit people with invisible disabilities, where there is a less objective measure.

I have noticed, as someone that works in a university, that the same cohort who think female is a feeling, also think having autism or autistic traits can just be claimed. I see requests for similar "special treatment," as the disabled students get to "level" the playing field. The only explicit case I've dealt with was jealousy that a student with Ulcerative colitis was able to sit exams in a different room with a toilet on hand. They were also allowed to carry over time spent in the toilet. A very healthy student would have liked such a set up and really couldn't see why one person got it and not another. They see "equality" as everyone getting the same, and that's the root of the problem (in my opinion).

I think the current relentless attack on feminists is designed to soften people up for a relaxation in attitudes towards paedophiles, or 'minor attracted persons' as they call themselves these days. Once you've demonised feminists for (supposedly) being transphobic, then the next step is to attack them for their heartlessness towards the poor men who can't help their attraction to children.

It makes you wonder whose children will they be allowed access to. Which brings to my mind parallel issues to those in commercial surrogacy.

“The only explicit case I've dealt with was jealousy that a student with Ulcerative colitis was able to sit exams in a different room with a toilet on hand. They were also allowed to carry over time spent in the toilet. A very healthy student would have liked such a set up and really couldn't see why one person got it and not another.”

What? An adult objected to someone with special needs getting their needs met? That’s the mentality of a pampered spoiled brat before age 8. That’s like demanding a wheelchair because someone who actually can’t walk has one.

“They see "equality" as everyone getting the same, and that's the root of the problem (in my opinion).”

Well when the Women’s Equality Party is on TV demanding equality of outcome regardless of individual life choices, and the media and political establishment seems broadly behind that, I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised when someone takes it to its logical end and demands they get exactly the same as someone with genuine needs, but I am, I didn’t think we were there yet. But then again we live in a country that is peaceful, democratic, respects human rights and is rich and some middle class people fortunate enough to be studying at elite universities in said country believe they are oppressed victims despite the fact that they are some of the most fortunate people on the planet living at a time when life is easier than it ever has been.

WEP are useless. They think TWAW.

They are not feminists.

if you are born without disabilities into a loving well to do family and go to a good school your life chances are pretty good, doesn’t matter so much about your race, religion, gender or anything else. If you get a good upbringing, a good school and strong family support you are lucky and likely to succeed. Likewise if you are born on a slum council estate your life chances are much poorer than anyone who is middle class, even if you are white and male.

I don't agree with this. Surely the comparison shouldn't be between a black middle class kid for example and a white working class kid if you're pointing out class privilege? If you wanted a true comparison between classes then the only difference between kids should be their class. For example if you compared a poor white male, they are still better off than a poor black male or a poor black woman. Likewise if you compare two middle class kids the white one is more likely to succeed. I don't agree that if you are middle class then you will succeed..if that were true then there would be more BAME people in senior positions.

“Bowlofbabelfish

WEP are useless. They think TWAW.

They are not feminists.”

Really? Do they know this? They seemed to be claiming to be feminists to me... and whining...

Oh. You're one of those.

One of what?

You think that demanding a wheelchair because someone else has one would never happen, have you seen the buggy/wheelchair space debates on here? Plenty of folk who can't see the difference between a tired toddler and an adult requiring a wheelchair. It's not uncommon for people to think that their needs are somehow equivalent if it's the first time they have had to negotiate wheeling a buggy (they assume it's just like being in a wheelchair).

Also, the reaction a disabled child gets for being able to go ahead of the queues at theme parks? My friends daughter is very visibly disabled and it's awful, the same loud complainers would be even worse to an invisible disability and their kids are beside them taking it all in. These parents are bringing their kids up to lack empathy and simply see less advantaged as scroungers or people who have demanded special treatment. Therefore they can demand special treatment too, in the name of equality. It's the All Lives Matter mentality.

Whether blatant "feminists have brought this on themselves, you want equality - you got it," or internalised "girls got to play with the dolls I wasn't allowed to and now they've got their own sports, it's unfair," I don't think it's a massive jump. I'd love not to be proved right though!

@MarshmallowSnowDon
Thank you for showing us how UKIP will act towards women in the unlikely scenario that they are voted into power.

Spend an extra five minutes thinking about why it “just tends” to be the woman in a couple who gives up her financial independence to look after their children. Then devote another five minutes to trying to think of some women who didn’t genuinely naturally choose to do this- they’ve found another way, or they’ve chosen a different path altogether. I promise you we exist.

I wouldn't say feminism is in and of itself to blame. However when you want to make social changes or "corrections" you require large scale institutions and heirarchies to enforce those changes on the general population.

People who seek power will flock to said organisations, it doesn't matter wether it's right/left/sideways or the upside down. Those who want power will corrupt and tilt said heirarchy towards tyrannny. Note how many politicians will rush to wear "this is what a feminist looks like".

The market is also pretty good at co-opting and working the system towards greater efficiencies. Want to have women in the labour force? Great you've just doubled your workforce, and driven down the cost of labour. Now the average family NEED two incomes where in the past you'd have needed only one.

Some groups actually cannot afford to solve social problems. When people do well economically they tend to vote more politically conservative. Whereas those on the progressive/left side get to divide and conquer. If they actually fixed poverty, they'd lose their power base. So better to bring in cheap labour from abroad (which also suits those on the right), further driving down the cost of domestic labour, and thanks to modern identity politics anyone from the poorer classes who raises an objection can be safely dismissed with accusations of racism.

It will all get shifted around, as long as there is one group that can be identified as bottom of the pile that's where the powers that be will flock to, for as long as the general culture follows that narrative. So I wouldn't say feminism has caused it, but it HAS been co-opted and used as camoflage for those who seek more power. Remember the "This is what a feminist looks like t-shirts" of a few years back, worn by so many of our lords and masters?

dammit mentioned the t-shirts twice. I'm tired!!

Just for the avoidance of doubt I'm not against women in the workplace nor immigration either, as I'm generally in favour of more liberty so discrimination along gender or racial lines is an absolute anathema to that principle. However I don't think it's either sexist or racist to consider consequences.

Just for the avoidance of doubt I'm not against women in the workplace

Thanking you kindly sorr (doffs cap respectfully, tugs forelock, backs away gratefully.)

Jolly good to know. May we speak in public? I believe we can vote now too - perhaps that’s a little far?

Quite right! But not because I say so ofc! THAT would be ridiculous.

userschmoozer

@MarshmallowSnowDon
Thank you for showing us how UKIP will act towards women in the unlikely scenario that they are voted into power.

UKIP would be awesome to women and everyone else. They have promised to legalise freedom of speech similar to how it is in America so police won’t be knocking on TERFs doors because they have offended someone on Twitter. It would be like going back to the optimistic days of personal freedom and personal responsibilities in Mrs Thatchers time without the mass strikes and mass unemployment. I almost hope parliament keeps us in the EU because the outrage if that happens is the only way I could see UKIP getting the 10 million or so votes needed to form a government in a three party system. The independence referendum in Scotland seemed to reset the voting dials to yes voter = very likely SNP voter so it could happen if Brexit is stopped. Pretty sure UKIP would also scrap the Welsh assembly and Scottish Parliament too if they won. In fact, after Brexit I predict UKIP will target traditional labour voters and working class Tories with a message of don’t let political correctness get in the way of policing, legalising free speech, scrapping devolution and turning the BBC into a voluntary subscription service so that people aren’t forced to pay for a constant stream of overly woke left wing propaganda. I think those policies would be great for almost everyone, including women. And I don’t believe they will be as right wing when it comes to benefits cuts as the tories in future either, which was what always put me off them before.

Anyone else seeing a little black toothbrush moustache at this point?

What I got from this thread is that under UKIP, male sex offenders and rapists such as Karen White will still be able to call themselves women and access women only spaces and services, but at least women will be more free to whine about it without being cautioned.
Because after all, men are the more violent sex so its to be expected or something.

@bth.

Come on. Mumsnet’s better than that. This everyone I disagree with is a secret fascist stuff belongs on the looney left. UKIP get just as much stick for not being onboard with the modern trans rights agenda as the so called terfs do.
www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/08/15/ukip-welsh-leader-anti-transgender-rant/

I can't imagine UKIP sympathising with transcobblers in the slightest.

Hey everyone, this is your daily reminder to believe people when they show you who they are.