Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Change in focus in equality policy...

141 replies

RedToothBrush · 16/12/2020 23:20

Lucy Fisher @LOS_Fisher
EXCL: Gvt has focused too heavily on “fashionable” race, sexuality & gender issues at expense of poverty & geographical disparities, Liz Truss will say tomo.

Overhaul of equalities policy will see pivot away from quotas, targets, unconscious bias training & diversity statements

In major policy reset speech, Truss will hit out at “identity politics, loud lobby groups & the idea of lived experience” in debate about a fairer society.

She will unveil new approach to equalities based on “freedom, choice, opportunity, & individual humanity & dignity”.

New equalities policy will seek to dovetail with PM’s “levelling up” agenda

Gvt will:
• look to move Equalities Hub from capital to the North
• launch equalities data project
• move Social Mobility Commission into Government Equalities Office

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/12/16/pivot-fashionable-race-sexuality-gender-issues-focus-poverty/
Pivot from 'fashionable' race, sexuality and gender issues to focus on poverty in equalities overhaul
Liz Truss hit out at identity politics and unconscious bias training, saying her policy reset will instead look at geographic disparities

Trying to think about down sides to this. Focusing on poverty is a key thing for women and the BAME community anyway.

It strikes me as occupying a space that Labour should be, given their roots and history.

This is definitely culture war related, but its also a sensible move, because it is an approach that is needed in many respects.

OP posts:
LukewarmCustard · 18/12/2020 09:24

Harman’s response is correct in so far as she says that the Conservatives don’t actually do the things which address poverty and inequality, like sorting out childcare. It is incredibly weak in refuting the many, many problems with the identity-driven approach which Truss identified. It is hard for Labour to come up with an effective rebuttal, as the criticisms are well-founded.

QuentinWinters · 18/12/2020 09:52

Thank you chatty - that's a much more eloquent way of expressing the "trojan horse" that I had in my mind.
nicegerbil I agree with what you said about FWR too. I'm also scared....

Sillydoggy · 18/12/2020 10:19

I liked her focus on data over anicdotes, practical action over virtue signalling and recognising that those with protected characteristics are not the only ones disadvantaged in society.
I reserve judgement because we havent seen this implemented yet but I don’t see an immediate threat to anyone who can pull out data to back up their disadvantage.
If the examples she gave are representative of her thinking she is not ignoring outright discrimination or structural disadvantage just looking at a different way of addressing them.
What we can’t ignore is that the current approach is not working well and we can keep hoping it will have an effect or we can try something different.

QuentinWinters · 18/12/2020 10:30

OK silly you need to spend some time arguing with MRAs on here about whether there is a gender pay gap, or whether men are bigger victims of domestic abuse than women.
Data is useful but there are lies, damn lies and statistics. At the end if the day, a lot of discrimination can be framed as a "choice" (e.g. working class people choose to leave education so aren't as qualified so won't get the good jobs). Data doesn't help identify the reasons why people choose what they do. Qualitative analysis does.

I think the Torys are rubbing their hands in glee at the opportunity to get rid of the pesky Equal Opportunities act

Imnobody4 · 18/12/2020 11:06

The emphasis on creating opportunity can't really be separated from outcomes. How else can you evidence your policies are working? I think what she spoke about was identifying and removing barriers.
She's against the idea of setting quotas etc. I used to believe in AWS but considering that has produced a group of women in the Labour Party who believe TWAW I'm not so sure. Comparing todays female politicians to those I grew up with like Barbara Castle etc I can't say hand on heart it's been a success.

MedusasBadHairDay · 18/12/2020 11:45

I used to believe in AWS but considering that has produced a group of women in the Labour Party who believe TWAW I'm not so sure.

I don't think that's a great argument against AWS. The purpose of AWS is to make sure women are represented, it's not to ensure that only women we agree with are represented.

PlantMam · 18/12/2020 12:18

Barbara Castle was ace.

(By that I mean, top of the pack, not asexual. 2020 is confusing)

PlantMam · 18/12/2020 12:24

AWS do cause some issues but I think it’s largely in terms of which constituencies are assigned them. It can mean a very popular, local candidate with a proven track record can be excluded for a shortlist of parachuted in candidates that no one locally knows anything about. This has contributed to the divisions between communities and the parties who are tasked with representing them.

50/50 representation for female and male people is a great goal, but thought needs to be given as to what the unintended effects are in other areas, and how we achieve 50/50 without alienating the voter base and leaving those furthest from parliament (geographically and culturally) disaffected.

RozWatching · 18/12/2020 12:28

The Equalities Office was very much Harman's "baby" so I can understand her horror, but has she ever spoken up against the self id proposals?
The GEO seems to have turned into the governmental arm of various pressure groups, none of which advocate for women. This has happened under coalition and Tory governments, and now Truss is shifting the blame onto the left. This should be an open goal for Harman.

RedToothBrush · 18/12/2020 12:28

Oh do not think, I see this through a narrow scope and being brilliant news. However, bringing a focus back on material reality is not a bad thing and has to be part of any process forward to break whats been going on. So that part I do welcome.

My feeling is that the path out of the mess we've got into is certainly not going to be easy or straightforward. There are huge numbers of people who believe in this and for whom it has become 'a sacred belief'. So even if material reality is allowed to be spoken there will be problems. And I'm well aware of Tory opportunism in exploiting fractures in society. Its something I'm very mindful of. The whole culture war thing is here with us for a very long time to come.

My hope is that it which shift the overton window again and this will be a subject that can be talked about again. And that speech has at least some of the right tone and approach. Which is needed to break the status quo.

That said: Liz Truss. Her record is appalling. She has many parallels with how May was as PM and at the Home Office.

This is also where I draw distinctions between what is said and what is done. Truss spent time at the Department for Justice and it wasn't regarded as good. She was Lord Chancellor at the time of 'Enemies of the People' stuff in the Daily Mail and never stood up as her roll required to defend the integrity of the judges and the courts. This was the very essence of the job and a failure to do so was a complete undermining of the independence of the justice system.

We know that there are moves to totally gut and revamp the civil service. There are concerted efforts ongoing to rid it of people deemed problematic. This is in part to try and balance the echo chamber of the service which has tended to favour people from a certain background and therefore likely to hold similar views (which are most likely to reflect 'liberal identity' view and be in favour of this time of identity politics). There has been moves to try and establish a civil service where loyalty to the government has become important (the civil service is supposed to maintain political independence). And there's been efforts to drive out those who are not ideologically driven and prefer using evidence as a base. I was reading one article just last night about how the strategy by ministers is to fuck up as much as possible with brexit/covid and then to blame it all on the inadequancy of the civil service. There is a desire to instead use the restructuring of the civil service to give power to more Tory cronies.

We also know that a lot of what is going on is related to lobbying power. The government tried a while back to disrupt the lobbying influence of charities during elections - think charities like the Trussell Trust rather than Stonewall in 2017. A lot of power on the left does derive from charities. And unfortunately you have charities which have looked for power rather than serving the interests of those who they are supposed to help and become almost corrupt in their own right - which makes them vulnerable to (and perhaps dare I say asking for) a crack down on the blurring on the lines between lobbying and charity. The current government is seeking to consolidate the lobbying power and influence it has from big business and private conflicts of interests and charitable organisations tend to be one of the large opposition groups to this. (To simplify - a battle between two groups of essentially corrupt power groups with a vested interest in lobbying is going on).

My concern is not what the Tories say its what they do - the devil in the detail if you will.This government, may well say they support lots of things, but the acid test is whether the proposals they make actually give the power and agency to the people who need it or not. There isn't a lot about the Tories to suggest they will go near this path from their track record. And from my earlier point about Liz Truss and the undermining of the justice system, I think this is where I tend to sit. The government attitude on rights seems to be that people have the law so can enforce the law if there are breeches of it. At the same time as defunding any sort of ability for the most vulnerable to access legal aid or support financially. In terms of Human Rights the overall move seems to be to moves to make it much more difficult to challenge abuses of power by the state - and large organisations (including the very ones that Truss seems to be saying she's against).

But things currently are fragile and there are no guarentees over anything going forward. We are close to several major crisis blowing out of all control and deciding into complete chaos.

And the demographics for the Tories are also precarious. They are not attracting any level of young support. And they traditionally simply have been unable to attract the vote of renters - they tend to only get that of home owners. This all poses an existential crisis to them in the long term (which may be part of the reason of the current power grab).

None of this is by any means decided as to how this will fall.

So I do think it could be used as a trojan horse. It depends on how the next few years pan out. Indeed the big worry is the economic and where the blame game on that leads. And how politicially stable the UK remains (jury is out on this, despite what anyone may be saying or how big Johnson's majority looks).

At the moment, i'd say its premature to be be predicting where this goes just yet for that reason. The next six months are critical.

And they are equally relavant to Labour. They need to spot the problem here and where the Tories are scoring wins.

Overall, I think my particular fears centre less on this issue of equality as a singular one, and more about where the UK is headed more generally. There are huge societal fractures and they need to be acknowledged and there needs to be better public awareness of them. The public have demonstrated their apathy, indifference and outright malice in the last six months in a number of disturbing ways. The assumption has been in recent months that we've dodged a bullet with Trump and this will cause the UK to change tact and direction. However I do think things like elected judges and a justice and civil service system more similar to the us which is politically aligned (with things like bail bonds possibly something the government would seek to bring in here) are a reasonable prediction which don't bode well for equality on any level. Brexit is a major driver of all this and I've spoken at length on that subject...

I think I am inclined to look for and enjoy small victories for the time being at least. Ahead of what I see as a storm of even more political turbulance.

OP posts:
ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 18/12/2020 14:37

Large chunks of the speech have now been redacted...

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/fight-for-fairness

RozWatching · 18/12/2020 14:46

The bits where she mentioned Labour/the left?

HecatesCatsInXmasHats · 18/12/2020 14:53

"Failing to defend single sex spaces" appears to have gone?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/12/2020 14:58

Failing to defend single sex spaces" appears to have gone?

They had already left that bit out, she mentioned Rotherham as well.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/12/2020 15:00

They're closing the stable door way after the horse has bolted, the full speech is available as a transcription on other sites and people have reacted on social media to it.

MichelleofzeResistance · 18/12/2020 15:01

Interesting that there's the courage to say it, but apparently not to leave standing evidence of it.

Hmm
RozWatching · 18/12/2020 15:13

@HecatesCatsInXmasHats

"Failing to defend single sex spaces" appears to have gone?
Yep, because she blamed it on "the Left".

"We have seen the Left turn a blind eye to practices that undermine equality: Failing to..." and then she mentions anti-Semitism and Rotherham.

I think it's common practice to redact (party-)political content from speeches before publishing on gov.uk.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/12/2020 15:17

The Independent have decided there's a story in it

t.co/N1yYO4nbYO

HecatesCatsInXmasHats · 18/12/2020 15:25

I think it's common practice to redact (party-)political content from speeches before publishing on gov.uk.

Ah

HecatesCatsInXmasHats · 18/12/2020 15:26

[quote Ereshkigalangcleg]The Independent have decided there's a story in it

t.co/N1yYO4nbYO[/quote]
A very Independent take

DaisiesandButtercups · 18/12/2020 15:49

@ChattyLion

By driving reforms that increase competition, boost transparency and improve choice, we can open up opportunities.

But that is not levelling the playing field, that’s passing the moral responsibility for success back on to the individual who may be way out of sight still trying to slog their way up the steep cliff at the far end of the road which is on the way to the bloody playing field

This statement was the one that stood out for me as one of the most worrying ChattyLion.

Transparency seems like a good idea to me.

However when I hear Tories talk about competition and choice I tend to think that they mean they want to destroy public services... to privatise everything and have all things be driven by profit.

Choice then is for those who have the means to afford it.

I suspect that this may be on the way anyway due to Brexit, please someone who knows better tell me that I am wrong but won’t WTO rules mean that we are subject to the General Agreement on Trade in Services or in other words “state monopolies” are forbidden and all our public services must be opened up for sale to all interested providers from all over the world for the sake of fair competition?

Trade and equalities is a strange mix and I didn’t really understand her point on that.

It was great to hear Liz Truss take such a firm stand against identity politics and I do think ID pol does more harm than good, creates divisions, entrenches prejudices and stifles progress on tackling inequalities. No party on the left sees it in that way however so what choices are we left with? There is currently no party I would trust to improve things in this country (or even prevent them getting any worse).

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/12/2020 15:51

A very Independent take

Quite.

nosswith · 18/12/2020 16:05

Whilst at first glance the criticism of identity politics seems good, is it being used as a trojan horse. @RedToothBrush raises concerns in a better way than I could.

nancywhisky · 18/12/2020 16:06

[quote Ereshkigalangcleg]The Independent have decided there's a story in it

t.co/N1yYO4nbYO[/quote]
The Independent is a Russian Troll Farm.

stumbledin · 18/12/2020 16:48

‘Bonkers’ Liz Truss speech pulled from government website
Rant about Foucault replaced with note saying content has been redacted
But after appearing in full yesterday on gov.uk, by Friday lunchtime large swathes of the speech had been cut and replaced with a note saying that "political content" had been redacted.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/liz-truss-equality-foucault-b1776142.html

Swipe left for the next trending thread