Giorgia Meloni against surrogacy & gender ideology

[Ravensclawdropout]

She could be the first Italian Female Prime Minister; the votes are currently being counted.

She is an unwed single mother who wants women to have the freedom to be at home or work with financial support either way by having free nursery including Saturdays.

Here is a speech to give you a flavour

And in international negotiations, you have a perfect example where you are going to be negotiating with people you have fundamental disagreements with. About basic things like human rights, what is good, how politics should work, all kinds of things.

If people really want internationalism, or pluralism, they will have to learn to talk and negotiate with those who have really different ideas.

Did anyone hear Jeremy Vine on BBC radio 2 today? He had the Italy correspondent from The Speccie, Nicholas Farrell, on and also Jane Fae, whose name will be familiar some here. JF said Meloni wants to repeal the laws preventing torture so the police can do their job properly. Cue much outraged snorting from Farrell. So I tried to hunt down Meloni's policies but couldn't find much at all. Anyone know where to find anything useful?

The BBC is notoriously left wing. Here is what Rod Liddell (not himself a noted right-winger and a member of the SDP) said this morning:

Here is a quote from the BBC Europe Editor, Katya Adler’s, very short piece on the BBC Radio 4 Six O’Clock News this evening, concerning the electoral victory of Giorgia Meloni in Italy:
‘Millions of Italians didn’t vote for her. They say they do not recognise themselves in her nationalist, protectionist proposals, her anti-immigration rhetoric and her conservative family mores.’
Isn’t that remarkable? Can you imagine the awful Adler, or indeed any correspondent, commenting on the victory of a left-wing candidate:
‘Millions of people didn’t vote for her. They say they do not recognise themselves in her mentally unbalanced identity politics, ranting support for cripplingly high taxation, foreign policy characterised by a hatred for the West and absurd energy policy based upon the harvesting of unicorn tears.
It wouldn’t happen. It has never happened. What Adler did was otiose, performative, left-wing virtue signalling. Of course millions of Italians didn’t vote for her – the point is that millions did. And of course those who didn’t vote for her will not agree with her policies. That’s why they didn’t vote for her.’
What Adler did was demonstrate left-wing bias, pure and simple.

* I'm all for the views OP refers to. I just wish they weren't increasingly (only?!) aligned with right wingers and extreme right wingers. It makes it harder for anybody else to come out and stare them because they're then more easily called bigoted and/or "agrees with the far right".*

Hope you realise that there is nothing you could say or do to stop people calling you ‘right wing’ to shut down debate right? And that’s exactly how you play into the ideologues hands.

I don't care what people call me. I'm not aligning my politics to a party, I look very, very broadly at issues. I'm already labelled because of people I listen to, like Ben Shapiro, who I generally don't agree with myself. I don't care.

However, generally people DO care though, especially those on the professional political Left. And when people considered - publicly labelled - Far Right take up certain issues, then it makes people who are publicly on The Left (ie Labour politicians) more hesitant to do so. And that's a problem.

There is nothing ‘far right’ in taking up issues like the preservation of the family, sanctity of life and values which have been generally recognised as decent human values for generations. If people want to label one ‘far right’ for doing so it is only because they haven’t got an argument.

There is nothing ‘far right’ in taking up issues like the preservation of the family, sanctity of life and values which have been generally recognised as decent human values for generations. If people want to label one ‘far right’ for doing so it is only because they haven’t got an argument.

That's kind of the point though. It's all about perception. Once something - anything - is labelled as "a Far Right view", the "the Other Side" aka The Left or here, Labour, won't touch it right now. As we currently see with the definition of a woman. And that means that there's no discussion happening. Nobody needs to shout No Debate, because it's baked into the system. Well, at least this way around it is. Those Right of centre seem less concerned about debating or discussing something that The Left claims.

People should read up on the Cultuural Revolution in China, where as soon as someone is labelled a ‘capitalist’ , e.g. because they look intellectual, wear glasses, play a violin, there is no escaping the mob justice of public denounciations and shaming.

if the West think it can’t happen here, they are being arrogant and delusional.

I was amused to learn that veteran broadcaster David Dimbleby, aged 83, was told by a minion in the BBC, that he had to do some half-baked course on ‘Impartiality’ before making his latest documentary! Knowing the BBC one can guess what their idea of ‘impartiality’ is!

Thank you for your calm and well reasoned contribution

She is incredibly impressive. Good to hear someone speaking up so vocally and unapologetically for women - though I wasn't able to understand her stance on abortion from the speech. Assuming that as a right wing leader her stance on other issues is less palatable, but I can see how this speech could make her an attractive proposition to more moderate, liberal voters.

Is it homophobic to question the ethics of 2 rich older gay males being able to purchase a baby from an impoverished woman, so they can have a family?

I would say she is centre right not far right.

I think whether that’s homophobic depends very much on how you got to the position of being against surrogacy to enable gay men to become fathers. There are lots of possible objections - some of them are probably more ‘far right’ and others not ‘far right’ in the least.

There’s a difference, for example, between objecting because you think being gay is wrong and a child being brought up by two gay men is in some sort of moral danger and being against the way in which women’s bodies and the children they carry within them are commodified and traded within surrogacy systems.

But, as I said before, if we are looking for points of consensus there may be some ground there for the latter group to start talking to the people motivated by what I would definitely describe as homophobia.

The problem is people use these words so carelessly. I would say it’s wrong for a rich older heterosexual couple to purchase a baby from an impoverished woman without an awful lot of checks and balances. That people can stick a word like homophobic on it is very convenient to shut down an argument

Quite. It's only 'homophobic' if it's specific to homosexual people and you would be fine about the same thing in people who were not homosexual.

I have very serious qualms about the exploitation of women, that renting women's bodies for reproduction is not a good thing, that this is effectively trafficking humans, that there are major safeguarding loopholes for children here, and that this completely obliterates the rights, feelings and voice of the child against standard policy in all other areas of adoption, in favour of adults being able to purchase a wanted personal experience and entitlement. Ethically this is a major minefield and it needs to be discussed as such. It has nothing to do with anyone's sexual preferences.

I agree @ImherewithBoudica

Personally I oppose all surrogacy in all circumstances as I oppose using women as breeders, and that babies should either be purchased or passed around/gifted between family members or friends.
And lots more besides but I'll keep it short.

As regards homophobia I think the thing that needs talking about, which we aren't allowed to talk about and may get this post deleted is the misogyny of men who view women as walking wombs for hire. Yes, obviously women use other women as surrogate mothers too and the Kardashians for starters show how little respect they have for women lower down the financial scale than themselves.
But some men have appalling attitudes to women and their treatment of women they hire to breed babies for them shows a complete ignorance and disregard for the welfare of those women.

Let's start talking about that.

the misogyny of men who view women as walking wombs

And the misogyny of men who view homosexual women as walking sex equipment to be provided to them regardless of the woman's consent or sexual orientation or wish to be involved.

And the women ridiculous enough to pander and support men in this. Yes. That would also be homophobia.

Couldn't agree with you more FannyCann & ImherewithBoudica.

Yes, let's start talking and stop trying to shut it down with cries of homophobia or you're being mean, everyone has a right to have a child - no, they don't.

She wants to cut taxes, resuscitate nuclear power, manage migration, and increase welfare allowances to families. It’s hardly the March on Rome, is it?
Ms Meloni is also a clear-minded critic of the new politics of identity and the way it negates older, more traditional forms of identity. National identity, religious identity, family identity – all are under attack, she says, by cultural establishments that would rather reduce us to ‘citizen X, gender x, parent 1, parent 2’. If it is ‘far right’ to be concerned about the erasure of the language of womanhood and motherhood, and to believe that family life and a sense of loyalty to one’s nation are good things, then millions of Brits and Italians must be fascists. Many, many people are similarly concerned that their way of life is forever being smirked at and undermined by the laptop elites.

There is nothing ‘far right’ in taking up issues like the preservation of the family, sanctity of life and values which have been generally recognised as decent human values for generations. If people want to label one ‘far right’ for doing so it is only because they haven’t got an argument.
"The preservation of the family" as in mum and dad and old fashioned family values?
That's what it boils down to, doesn't it? Your family being the only one deemed "right and acceptable" and others not
Where does that leave families with two mum's, then?
Same with stricter limits on when you can have abortions. Policing women's bodies even more.
I mean my family would be ok as we're what you would call "traditional" and I'm not wanting any more kids ( too old to start all that again lol) but it doesn't stop me worrying about the way things are turning for other people who arent me.
As who is to know who is next or what it would take for you to be affected next?

Many, many people are similarly concerned that their way of life is forever being smirked at and undermined by the laptop elites
Sorry, but what exactly does that mean and who are you referring to?
I'm assuming you mean straight, married, couples with children upset because they can't cope with others not having the same set up as themselves?
If that's not what you mean apologies but not sure what else you do as you're not clear!

That's a bit of a leap, there are plenty of examples we talk about here pretty regularly.

The poster will hopefully clarify what they mean then if that's not the case, won't they?

Just typical of the sort of comments I would expect from people determined to impose their so-called ‘progressive values’ where they call killing children ‘policing women’s bodies’ and assuming we judge everyone who is not like us. What you are really doing is judging everyone who stands for traditional values.

Well, I guess there's the answer.
Wasn't much of a leap really then, was it?!
Killing children "emotive language for abortion, yes?
Yes, I think a women should never be forced to carry on being pregnant against her will, you should have bodily autonomy
I'm not judging people for "traditional family values" either - I'm in a traditional family myself as that's what I wanted but just think there's nothing wrong with other family set ups either, interesting you didn't mention where I asked what your thoughts are on a family with two mum's and no dad?
I guess your omission and repeating traditional family values is your answer though and that's fair enough.
You're entitled to your beliefs, it's when people start enforcing their "traditional family values" on others what's a problem though, and this rise in the right may start doing exactly that

In fact enforcing extremist views on non consenting others in the absolute belief of personal superiority and entitlement and total lack of respect for other views and negotiation of, is the defining characteristic of both the extremist right and the extremist left.

Neither should be anywhere near power.