Dozens quit Green Party - Daily Mail

[Awning10]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9232663/Green-activists-fury-transgender-campaigner-head-womens-section.html

Anyway the thread is all about this poster now.

Job done, eh?

@334bu

Wonder why a party whose whole reason for existing is based on scientific reality can be so ready to ignore that human beings cannot change sex? Why would they put their core message at risk? If people can say that their views on human sex are nonsense it allows climate change deniers the chance to query the Green Party"s stance on the environment.

Great back on topic.

Excellent point about deniers.

The general public to know this is all rubbish, but I don’t think they realise the extent of what they are supposed to believe now.

Why has this stuff taken such a hold in political parties?

Do, not to

@WouldBeGood

The general public to know this is all rubbish, but I don’t think they realise the extent of what they are supposed to believe now.

Why has this stuff taken such a hold in political parties?

Aren't all of our political parties overwhelmingly male?

@334bu

Wonder why a party whose whole reason for existing is based on scientific reality can be so ready to ignore that human beings cannot change sex? Why would they put their core message at risk? If people can say that their views on human sex are nonsense it allows climate change deniers the chance to query the Green Party"s stance on the environment.

I think the greens have fallen victim to the same problem some atheists have, which is that they adopt one position that is widely seen as rational and scientific and then instead of saying to themselves "I want to believe in scientifically verifiable things so I will believe x y z" they say "I am a scientifically minded person and I believe x y z, therefore x y z is scientifically verifiable". They tie their identify up in being rational and intelligent and stop actually bothering to check if the things they believe accord with that.

The left wing politic parties have the same problem but with virtue. Instead of thinking "we are good people so we want to support good causes" they end up thinking "we are good people therefore any cause we support is a good cause". The greens have a strong idea of themselves as science driven and progressive, and so instead of looking at the concept of gender and asking "is this science driven and progressive enough for us to support?" they say "we support this therefore it must be science driven and progressive". When other people point out that it isn't, on either point, they assume that its us who are the science deniers. At no point do they bother to actually interrogate their own beliefs because that would undermine their sense of self as being inherently good and clever.

@334bu

Wonder why a party whose whole reason for existing is based on scientific reality can be so ready to ignore that human beings cannot change sex? Why would they put their core message at risk? If people can say that their views on human sex are nonsense it allows climate change deniers the chance to query the Green Party"s stance on the environment.

Politicians don't go for facts. They see a group of people who want to be recognised, so they support them.

Popularity is the ultimate - whether it be in one group or several.

Numbers games.

The left wing politic parties have the same problem but with virtue. Instead of thinking "we are good people so we want to support good causes" they end up thinking "we are good people therefore any cause we support is a good cause". The greens have a strong idea of themselves as science driven and progressive, and so instead of looking at the concept of gender and asking "is this science driven and progressive enough for us to support?" they say "we support this therefore it must be science driven and progressive". When other people point out that it isn't, on either point, they assume that its us who are the science deniers. At no point do they bother to actually interrogate their own beliefs because that would undermine their sense of self as being inherently good and clever.

That's a pretty good explanation of why apparently good people believe bad or stupid things.

But surely the Greens' reason for being is all about the facts. If their views on the science of climate change can be denied or at the least put in doubt because their stance on other scientific facts are so demonstrably false, how can they hope to succeed in their core message.

Its the same with 'Extinction Rebellion'. One member, who is fantastic on climate change, refers to himself as 'a man of science', takes action is completely committed to direct sensible action etc, etc - was annoyed when I questioned the org's TWAW declarations.
'We haven't got time for that. This is an emergency.'
'Well, stop doing it then - you're the people making the declarations about it.'
'Yeah but, its fine...and we haven't got time for that.'
I was seriously underwhelmed. I get that you can't be an expert at everything, but c'mon!

I remember extinction rebellion as the people who left loads of litter on the streets.

I bet Greta wouldn't behave like that.

The greens were traditionally a fairly non conforming party and were often written off as hippies and swampy’s. I would guess their members were initially very open to other groups of non conforming people - I seem to remember historically they were one of the first parties to support gay marriage for example.

The position tolerance of all views and lifestyles seems to has morphed into a blind support of non conformers just for the sake of it

@Classylady

What was the point of banning *@wotapolava*? That will not end well.

Where did you read about that poster being banned classylady?

(Welcome to Mumsnet by the way)

@ArcheryAnnie

Haven't RTFT, but pretty sure it's a hell of a lot more than "dozens", as it's been going on for a very long time. Even a brief search of this topic on MN will result in threads years back about wtf the Green Party were doing.

Yep, I'm amazed that they still had dozens of sensible members left after their appalling handling of the Challenor case.

The ridiculous requirement for members to identify as 'self-identifying non-male/non-female' when standing for chair has been in place for ages. Bristow hasn't broken any rules by taking a co-chair place.

Bristow hasn't broken any rules by taking a co-chair place.

When rules make no sense it is not rocket science that people will exploit them

Exactly.

Not everyone's leaving. This great little video is helping more to stay and hang on to the party: vimeo.com/514423194

If the Greens really are working on an Ark, in anticipation of ecological disaster, I take it they're not going to 'check down the pants' of the pangolins, marmosets, and lionesses they drag on boards?

[quote GreenGretel]Not everyone's leaving. This great little video is helping more to stay and hang on to the party: vimeo.com/514423194[/quote]
That's a lovely video.

I do take my hat off to any woman in the Green Party - or indeed any organisation - who sticks in there and fights to keep women's rights. I understand it, too, as it's not fair that a bunch of wankers can come in and steal an organisation that has been built on the backs of those women. I am sticking with some organisations it would be easier to walk away from, so even though the Green Party isn't for me, and I totally understand why so many women left, I salute the women who are staying and fighting.