Anyone else GC and left wing in their politics?

[mids2019]

I am finding the conservative party conference difficult in some sense as I agree with some of their GC policies and attitudes yet would describe my self as a working class died in the will leftie. I really don't like this assumption that being for women's rights automatically means people associate you with right wing politics in general. For me it's simply not the case.

Why is it that poor now associate left with trans rights????

Sorry but I'm with @MargotBamborough on this one. I didn't understand your original ordering a meal analogy and it has become even more incomprehensible through repetition. Please could you post what you mean in simple English without any analogies?

Emmmm, OK. I thought it was obvious:

1. We are not here by accident, the ideology people here are so upset about is a direct and inevitable consequence of liberalfeminism and the liberal left. That they claim to be opposed to it but seem intent on voting for post-modern liberal centre left parties all over again is particularly hilarious to me.
2. You cannot just take away the parts you don’t like, because it’s baked into liberal ideology and it is logically consistent so either we continue as we were and accept it or it’s time to rethink the the last 60 years.
3. This is so obvious to any clear thinking person who gives it any amount of thought that the only reason people can’t see it here is because they don’t want to see it.
4. While I find myself in agreement with the feminists on this forum, I also find the whole situation so deliciously ironic it’s a source of never ending amusement to to me.
5. I think the so called TERFs can and should win this debate but I won’t be lifting a finger to help them do it. If they do win then they will end up kicking much of ideological foundations of the liberal left away and permanently damage the centre left and its institutions in the process and will no doubt complain about what that will lead to in the future, which again makes me laugh. I don’t know if they know what a resounding defeat for the liberal left will lead to, but I think I know what it will lead to.

On second thoughts, I'll have the octopus. It's much nicer than bollocks.

“On second thoughts, I'll have the octopus. It's much nicer than bollocks.” Left wing debating at its finest 😂

Oh, did I say that I am left wing? You may want another guess.

Ok removing the daft metaphors doesn't actually aid comprehension as much as I had hoped.

Aren’t they just saying centre left will have to decide, give it all up and vote for the other side or you’re kind of lumped with it

Mary Harrington fan. Don't know if she spends as much time explaining via octopus.

I admit I got a bit lost. I think it's 'we're in this mess because women wanted to join golf clubs', but I could be wrong.

@EasternStandard Yeah I suppose I kinda am really aren’t I? And I probably shouldn’t be taking the piss.

The modern centre left came out of the 1960’s, it’s the dominant ideology in the west now and what people are calling gender ideology is an inevitable part of it.

The choices are rethink the last 60 years or accept it.

I personally would love to see everything since the 1960’s deconstructed and rethought but I really don’t think most of the people posting on here would, in fact I think they would like the consequences of that even less. It would be ironic if feminist attacks on the post-modern liberal left lead to cultural domination by a materialist, illiberal right.

tbh left wing politics offers very little here anyway

The policies are the same due to lack of funds, this will not change, so you may as well go for getting your rights back

Duffdee, I read a long Twitter thread from Dr. Jane Clare Jones where she was in lock step with Naomi Klein on the leftist analysis of capitalism, but 180 apart on her acceptance of US intersectional/TWAW takes, saying it was all an aberration, allowing fertile ground for the Trumps Bannons Walshes of the world to come back in and enforce a new world where gender stereotypes are once again set in stone.

I really disagree with her, and am more with you. TWAW isn't an aberration, it's the natural consequence of Left ideology, as the Left jumped all in with big business, tech, social media, medicine. Imho it was presaged by Thatcher and Reagan reign of promoting selfish individual desires over communitarian ones. Blair and Clinton then locked the move to individual rights in law. And despite Trump and the Conservative Party, laws have been passed to maintain and supplement the status quo. The left have worked their grip on the institutions since the late 60s, DEI and affirmative action the final evolution.

The results are fermenting and boiling over today, as hyper individualism with the protection of any number of human rights laws, is naturally flexing its muscles to deal with any objection or resistance. Women.

@MadderthanMorris

Sadly I don't think your faith in the critical skepticism of forumites is justified. The number of times I've opened a provocative thread based on a link to an article, when there's already loads of replies reiterating the OP's opinion in the most fulminating righteous outrage - only to find that the authors of those replies have clearly not bothered to even open the link, as the most cursory glance shows that it doesn't actually anything like what has been claimed.

I'm sure that can happen.

But that doesn't stop other posters, coming from a different side, from reading the articles and attacking them, or attacking how they were misrepresented.

There is nothing to stop someone posting a thread, "I keep seeing people using the Daily Mail as a source, here are all the lies in the last 3 articles that got posted...".

If someone posts something here that is supporting the trans-activism side, then I'm pretty sure that people are going to check it for factual or logical errors, or limitations of a scientific study or whatever.

And that probably goes the other way. If the Daily Mail is regularly using lies then there are people around that will be motivated to complain about them, even assuming it gets missed by some other posters that are happy to go along with the story.

I don't really know as much about liberalism , Adam Smith et al , as I should. But I can't see it as a monolithic faith so to speak. Duffdee makes it sound like the Catholic Church , where rejecting one tenet of faith means you must reject all.
The priests used to say " you can't be an a la carte Catholic ". In practice , of course , everyone is.

As for the woo having its source on the left , that seems even more bizarre. People like Peterson or Hitchens have tried to account for its absence from the writings of old socialists by speaking of cultural Marxism. Which nobody can pin down.

No , for me this lunacy bears all the hallmarks of Possessive Individualism. Now , if people are arguing that this has infected parts of the left , I can't disagree. But that's a different subject.

So you would like to see abortion banned, marital rape legalised, no more gay marriage and sex discrimination to be legal then?

I think Duffdee is trying to say that to successfully win the attrition against TRA will by definition necessitate attacking the foundations of social changes since the 60s integral to liberal left ideology.

And that we won't like other results of this outcome if gender ideology is defeated. Because that may bring the whole house crashing down.

Trump may well gateway to the Peter Thiel New Catholics, this movement is gaining traction fast in US, and the New Conservatives in UK are aligning towards Miriam Cates and Danny Kruger "family faith flag" mantras, and I suspect Braverman and Badenoch can get behind this as well.

So many on MN are talking about vanquishing the GRA and leaving the ECHR if need be to achieve this. That would be a massive blow against TRA if ever achieved, but would also undermine the left liberal direction of the UK in the last half century.

Duffdee is here primarily to sneer and laugh at women, let's be clear.

Does that mean that I won't be getting octopus?

I think the problem is so many institutions are so fully enmeshed with gender ideology it’s hard to see how we’ll get out of this

Can't comment on other narratives of Duffdee, but on this one, I'm sharing the page with them.

The company you keep, lol.

That sounds too much like the "if you object to men in women's spaces you're playing into the hands of the far right and you'll lose your right to an abortion" argument for my liking.

It's a heartfelt observation. I'm on your side, as you must know from my posts over the last several months since I joined.

But we can come to different diagnoses and prognoses based on the available evidence.

I'm not saying it's definite or even very likely, but there is a reasonable possibility that to get a change in the way GC women want, may either require the kind of government that would be "faith family flag" in the image of Cates Badenoch Braverman.

Or the change ruptures aspects of the liberal left settlement since the late 60s that it ushers in politicians that push for more "traditionalist" policies.

I really can see America taking an interesting religious turn, especially if Trump wins next year (not him, but the Republican successor to him).

In UK, I'm really not sure. But if Starmer fails big in 2024-29, I don't think the Conservative Party that may pick up the pieces will be the one of Major Cameron May Johnson Sunak.

It'll be one closer in ethos to Thatcher, emphasis on smaller state, but unlike her, less focus on hyper individualism. The aforementioned Cates Badenoch Braverman.

So many here want the GRA to be wound down, if so via us exiting the EHRC. Do we really believe a Tory govt that exits that and winds down the GRA would be absolutely fine with so many other established rights of women.

It's not likely, but it's a greater possibility than you might admit to yourself.

Mary Harrington puts forward the post liberal thesis that so much of feminism hasn't helped women, and that to break the inevitable slump towards transhumanism and tech capitalism trampling women's rights will require a massive jolt to the system.

Certainly if a Miriam Cates becomes PM, she'd push for the kind of family agenda that would grate with second wave feminism.

You can be sure she'd be up for the fight against TRA.

@MargotBamborough “MargotBamborough · Today 17:49

So you would like to see abortion banned, marital rape legalised, no more gay marriage and sex discrimination to be legal then?”

Well I’d certainly like to see some legal protections for unborn life but that is irrelevant. Rethinking everything since the 1960’s doesn’t necessarily mean reversing everything since the 1960’s. It means questioning and reevaluating the assumptions these changes were based on to see if they still hold true now that the moral and philosophical paradigm has changed.

Everything comes up for debate once the liberal left get trashed, that’s not the same as everything changes or goes back to the way it was. Everything comes up for debate because the post-1960’s liberal paradigm is what we live under today and if that’s discredited it’s like the death of god. Everything that was once automatically taken as a given no longer is and is questioned, do you really not know that this site is a small but important part of doing this? Do you really not understand what you are wreaking and why I wish you well in your endeavours?

You're not wrong, @RealityFan, but this is why we really need the political left to remember that women's rights are in fact human rights too. You know, the boring old fashioned kind of women with wombs, as Ricky Gervais would say.

I almost think the best outcome would be for Labour to lose the next election over this issue go away and do some soul searching, and win five years later when they've grown the fuck up.

@Duffdee sounds unpleasantly gleeful at the prospect of seeing uppity feminists get more than they bargained for.