Advice on spoiling ballot

[JellySlice]

I'm firmly in favour of Remain.
I am also firmly Gender Critical.

Not only is there nobody I can vote for, but, as I am also in a firmly Conservative constituency, there is hardly any point in voting!

Is there a way to spoil my ballot that clearly demonstrates my inability to exercise my democratic rights?

But you have just told us we care about the wrong thing, Sara. Again. I've explained to you that I care about all the things you care about, but, differently to you, I am putting women and girls at the top of the list. You are free to do otherwise, but don't belittle my very genuine fears for the female sex by saying "it's just toilets, who cares, blah blah blah".

I AM ALLOWED TO PRIORITISE WOMEN AND GIRLS. THAT IS A POLITICAL CHOICE.

It's not about trans rights. It's about women's rights. It is also about safeguarding the vulnerable in our society.

And as for the NHS, education, housing, you will find that access to good quality healthcare, education and housing goes hand-in-hand with protecting human rights. Societies that treat women as chattels, as non-men, as lesser beings, have poor human rights overall, and all the vulnerable members of such societies suffer.

It seems that most people here can't.

Au contraire, we are angry about other things. We are angry about two women being murdered by men per week, but none of the parties are pledging to fix that, so we can't vote about that. We are angry about the low conviction rate of rape, but none of the parties are pledging to fix that, so we can't vote about that. Self-id threatens the things we can do at grassroots to alleviate those things, but none of the parties are pledging to drop that, so we can't vote about it either. Self-id is worse than the other issues because it stops us from meaningfully helping the women let down by the state AND removes the legislative reasons for the state to do anything. Self-id is absolutely worth spoiling a ballot over.

The things I care most about, namely the effects of male violence on women, none of the parties seem to want to fix.

And you'll note that I've not expressed an opinion about trans rights being a threat to women

Liar. When you said "you'd rather spoil a vote because of shared toilets" you erased our erased our concerns about losing same-sex healthcare practitioners, single-sex wards having males in alongside vulnerable women, Girl Guides letting male children in etc and in doing so expressed the opinion that transwomen in our toilets were the biggest thing we had to worry about.

You lied, you then denied that you lied, it's called "gaslighting" and I see it clearly.

And you'll note that I've not expressed an opinion about trans rights being a threat to women.

Yes you have. You think it's about toilets. Maybe reread bd67th's post. You don't seem to care much about her rights.

Yet people have assumed that because I'm not prepared to spoil a vote that could be used to fight cuts to the NHS, social care and education, I can't possibly care about women's rights too.

No, I inferred (not assumed) your contempt for women and their rights from your minimisation of women's concerns, misrepresentation of our motives, and gaslighting about said misrepresentation. There are plenty of women on this thread and the thread about considering voting Tory who intend to vote for the party that they feel poses the least harm to women and I respectfully disagree with them. What none of them have done is minimised concerns about self-id.

I'm a systems thinker and I can see how self-id will have wide-ranging adverse effects upon all aspects of women's lives. To give one example, relevant to your point that we need to worry about public spending cuts:

If a female protester against cuts breaks the law in a principled and non-violent way (aka "civil disobedience") e.g. she lies down in the road or handcuffs herself to railings, she already runs some risk of being incarcerated alongside an intact male, with the risk of rape and forced pregnancy that that poses. Under self-id, the presence of a male in her prison or police cell becomes much more likely because the barrier to a male becoming legally a woman will be much lower and a legal woman must[1] be housed in the female prison estate even if said legal woman is a penis-possessing sex offender, increasing the risk of a woman being jailed with a rapist. A woman who is currently prepared to go to jail for her cause will be less willing to do so if it means sharing a cell with someone like Karen White or Jacinta Brooks and this will have a chilling effect on women's ability to use civil disobedience to protest against cuts. The loss of female-only prisons will forever stop women from using civil disobedience to protest against cuts, whether those cuts are implemented by the current government, the government we will have after 12th Dec, or any future government. You'd agree to that in exchange for a single term (because there's no assurance of a second term) of a Corbyn government? You sell women's rights very cheaply.

The effect of self-id stopping us from resisting cuts and filling the gaps caused by cuts with charity is replicated across the whole of the services women use. Consider the following:

A) Council stopped funding the women's refuge, feminists have a whip-around, oh wait, the law changed and now we have to let penis-wielding males in and the women no longer feel safe and are preferring a tent or returning to abusers over staying in the refuge.
B) Council still funding the refuge but the law changed and now we have to let penis-wielding males in and the women have moved out into tents or gone back to violent partners because "better the devil you know".

What's the difference between A and B other than in A a bunch of women ended up out of pocket? If we keep self-id out of the statute books then there becomes a point to having that whiparound AND a point to fighting the cuts to funding. If women refuse to use the service because they fear males, no point fighting for it to be council-funded, is there?

[1]: On paper, women who are too dangerous to be managed in the female prison estate can be housed in tbe male estate. In practice, this hasn't happened yet and seems unlikely to occur.

I have done it once for the police commissioner thing.Iwrote none fit for purpose across the paper.

*You’d need to write about 5 words in a sharpie

Something like:

WOMAN = ADULT HUMAN FEMALE*

Yes, that is what I am going to write. Decided this last night.

I spoilt mine before

I wrote "This is a spoilt ballot", heavy line through every candidate and "Sex not gender: woman = adult human female"

I'm not spoiling it this time but I do not think it devalues the work of the Suffragettes to do so. They fought for our right to vote, not to force us to do so. Meaningful political enfranchisement must allow us to express our distaste, disapproval or, indeed, disenfranchisement.

I've got some of Standing for Women's Adult Human Female stickers. I might stick them onto my ballot paper.

Bloody hell, pleasantly surprised by response from a candidate of a TW are W party. GC!

I have said this before. It does not matter so much whether you spoil your ballot or grit your teeth and vote for one of the parties after all.

What is important is that you tell any canvassers or candidates why you are not voting for them. That is feedback that gets noticed.

I'll do the same Justhad no truer words spoken (or written)

I wonder if there was a mass of spoiled votes someone might pick it up and the media do a story on it?

Worth a try, no one listens anyway!

May I suggest that those of us who do spoil our ballots post pictures of them on this thread - just to assist any journalists who may wish to run with a story .

Been lurking on FWR board for about 2 years, learning, weighing up the discussion, etc. I've really struggled the last couple of weeks to feel ok about spoiling my ballot but reading all these comments has been so helpful. On PP put it brilliantly: I am voting, I'm voting "NO".

I love the idea of everyone who spoils their ballot posting it on here so I'll be doing that.

Same dilemma. I'm in a swing seat area. Between conservative and lib dem. Lib dems don't want my vote. Can't possibly vote for Boris. What am I supposed to do?

I'm tempted to write "ask Julie Bindel"

Excellent idea @MrsFogi

Well as I've not yet heard back from my conservation candidate, it's looking increasingly likely that I will be spoiling my ballot. He's been the MP for about ten years, huge majority, so I suppose the doesn't feel the need to win over one more voter by giving even the smallest shit about women.

Will be interesting to see the manifestos when they are released. I wonder how specific they'll be about how many women's rights are to be handed to men on a glittery rainbow coloured plate. Fuckers.

While I don’t think it’s a good idea to spoil a ballot, if you’re going to do it, make sure that you deface more than one box. I believe a voter who drew a cock and balls in the box for one candidate at a recent election, and nothing else on the ballot paper, had the vote counted for that party on the grounds that it was a clear mark in the box for one candidate.

What happens is that when votes are counted, if they are ambiguous or contentious then people from one party or another can argue why they should or should not be allowed.

I think ‘woman=adult human female’ is too cryptic. Those in the know know what it refers to but most people aren’t in the know.

I agree Charles, and as anyone reading it is likely to only glance at it, it needs to be completely clear.

I'm thinking maybe "protect women: no gender self ID" instead. Admittedly though, if they don't know what gender self ID is then we run into the same problem.

I think "Protect women's rights" rather than "Protect women". We are not claiming to be delicate ladies who need looking after by big brave men from nasty men.

True, Jelly. I was going for brevity but you're right, it's an important distinction.

I'm going to use your brief version, over my explanatory version. Much as I'd like to spell it out, I will have to reserve the spelling out for letters and face-to-face interactions.

"Protect women's rights. Transwomen are men."

I think I'm going to go with "Protect women's single sex spaces - reject self-ID". It would take a considerably larger voting slip to outline my concerns fully, but I would hope that any candidate who did read that message would have an idea of what self-ID is.