Politically Disenfranchised

[WomenShouldStillWinWomensSports]

I'm so fed up with all these totally shit options. I really like some policies which have been floated across the political spectrum, but I don't feel like I can vote for anyone who will legislate me out of existence as a woman.

What, realistically, would happen if we formed our own GC political party?

Being realistic, it's extremely likely to go the way of the Green party and Reform (lots of ideas, strong pitch, no big momentum). Add to that, the main parties wouldn't even need to do anything, the TRAs would immediately launch a smear campaign.

But I'm starting to think that this is the only way we will get heard and be able to bring what is happening properly into the light. Women working from within doesn't seem to be going anywhere in any of the left-leaning parties. Has anyone else thought about this? Have I missed a previous thread on it somewhere?

It has been mooted before but hasn't yet taken off. Kellie-Jay Keen has one in the pipeline, but last I heard there were still some hurdles to jump before it could be registered. She's planning to stand against Keir Starmer in the GE.

Rather than standalone single-issue, it would probably be more effective to team up with an existing small party and try to make them bigger.

The SDP has good women's rights policies. True and Fair are still formulating a full manifesto and last time I looked hadn't said much - but at least hadn't said anything off-putting. Both are broadly centrist so likely to get wide support than the Communists, who I think are the only other explicitly pro-women option.

I think there might be scope for single issue independents standing in key seats, but not really a party or not one that could form a government.

I cant see everyone agreeing an to education, foreign, health etc policies just on the basis that they want women to be women. There are left and right leaning gender critical people.

The drawback of teaming up is it's effectively a coalition where the message gets diluted and people don't vote for them due to the wider political position. I don't know what the answer to that is, though, because it's a risk with any party.

Also teaming up with a smaller party, you've effectively got to overcome people's opinions that they have already formed about why they don't vote for that party. Even a party whose main aim and name are to do with women's rights will need to have stated positions on immigration, health, education etc though, so I don't know what the answer is, but my thinking is that a separate party could centre women's issues throughout the manifesto rather than as an add-on.

@Spendonsend sorry X-post. The issue of wider policies really is the sticking point.

@Spendonsend although having said that, the more right-leaning women seem fairly well-catered for with major political parties who know what a woman is.

Yes, really, bring on new parties of new people offering something very different. What needs ending is the era of professional politicians. Like other things lately, it's been tried and it's been a disaster, and it's the reason there's this absolute mess of performance and similarity of ivory tower views across all the parties evenly. There is talent in the lower ranks of the parties, real talent, but it's not allowed to rise to the point of power.

It's how to get the system to get better quality and refocus on actual representation by people with a genuine interest in their local people and affairs, with genuine real life and real world experience, and a desire to improve things, rather than the current desire to further personal hobby horses.

I don't trust any established party, whether left, right or central, with women's rights any more. But equally - maybe because I remember the rise and fall of the SDP - I'm not optimistic either for new parties. I'll still keep an eye out for news from KJK, but I think I'm more inclined towards women forming cross party alliances on areas where they agree.

I would want a Science Party. Based on facts and pro-environmental concerns and medicine. Not based on historical ideologies but learning from historical evidence.

Everything based on evidence and expert committees. And also not afraid to say we got this bit wrong so we have listened and have more information so are now doing this…

And Arts need not be worried as art is needed to keep us sane! (But more comedy and entertainment and less emphasis on funding going to doom and gloom).

I would love this but as someone with a background in both academic science and science education, I know that most areas of science are open to furious debate (and endless re-examination and meta-analysis) rather than consensus, so I do wonder if it would lead to fewer concrete outcomes rather than more.

However it would have to be better than idiot men with PPE degrees blindly declaring "I'm following the science, yippeeeeee" while running in the opposite direction of science.

Particularly I'd like a Women in Science party that centres scientific reality in a number of key areas - biology, health policy, education, the environment, and defence. This is what I expected of the Greens but was a bit disappointed.

so I do wonder if it would lead to fewer concrete outcomes rather than more.

Yes this is the obvious disadvantage. But the alternative is having a PM thinking a hairdryer up the nose might solve covid and the leader of the opposition implying men can have a cervix.

Consensuses would have to be reached. And more women in government but not a party just for women.

The important thing is to vote for the least worst. There are a lot of important issues- gender politics is not the only one. Getting the Tories out is the most important thing, both nationally and internationally. A vote is a chess move, not a Valentine.

Except that in our current system the next chess move is 5 years away. I'm a past Labour voter, but I couldn't bear to see them destroying women's rights. I don't want to vote Tory. I'd love a new, sensible party.

Difficult as the decision is, it would be really nice to be credited with the intelligence to make up our own minds without the need for lectures or vacuous soundbites,

Why is getting the conservatives out 'The most important thing?'

Whom is it most important for? Real question.

If it's women, then I'd say based on what else is available to replace them, there's an argument that keeping the Conservatives in is the most important thing.

Which parties would these be?

Rishi Sunak may claim to know what a woman is, as do some other Conservatives, but the Tories have been in power for 13 years and the horrendous removal of women's rights has happened on their watch.

I was going to start a similar thread to this after reading the disturbing thread on female prisons and "transphobia". Who has allowed these "women" into female prisons? The Tories.

I think unless and until there is some form of PR a "Women's Party" will never have much influence as whether those of us on FWR think Sex Based Rights are a pivotal issue, from a recent survey only about 1% of the population thinks this.

With PR coalitions give smaller parties more power as they can be the balance of power.

And there is no doubt that neither of the 2 main parties will have women's issues as a top agenda item.

If somehow enough money can be found (I cant remember how much you have to pay to stand as an independent candidate, it could be quite an opportunity to have women in as many constituences as possible stand in the next General Election just to get a wider platform.

I think unless and until there is some form of PR a "Women's Party" will never have much influence as whether those of us on FWR think Sex Based Rights are a pivotal issue, from a recent survey only about 1% of the population thinks this.

PR in Scotland has given power to the Greens. I used to think this was a good thing, but I have very much changed my mind!

I used to think this was a good thing, but I have very much changed my mind!

In principle I think PR should be a way for minority voices to be heard and get a meaningful vote.

Until you start thinking all the different minority groups you really dont want to hear from, let alone think they have a deciding vote.

And its really sad that in the 21st century women wanting to protect and promote women's sex based rights, are a minority voice in the UK. :(

The First Past The Post system favours the two big political blocs - Conservative and Labour. It has its pros and cons. It's frustrating because smaller parties that want change don't really get anywhere but it is precisely why it also stops crazy, extremist parties from taking control. There's more national and political stability, and less chaos that arises from various little groups all forming coalitions / factions and using their numbers as constant bargaining chips.

But smaller parties can help raise awareness on specific issues. If they start getting very popular and affect certain voting bases, then it can spur the bigger parties to change their tune on policies.

Considering women (and men) have a wide variety of views on all kinds of issues and won't necessarily agree on everything, any new party for women's rights will need to focus on fairly broad principles that most people can agree on. UK is generally liberal but leans socially conservative and centrist, so a manifesto would have to appeal to this kind of approach / mindset. And votes will be needed from men too, not just women, and all demographic sections.

'No men in women's sports' is something many people of all political persuasions can agree on; 'down with capitalism and/or patriarchy' is guaranteed to alienate voters because it only appeals to certain types of people and is too fuzzy in its objectives, no tangible way of measuring success etc.

Such a party would also need to be prepared to be disbanded or accept a short shelf life if many of its objectives are resolved by future governments. For example, UKIP was rendered irrelevant once Brexit happened.

It would be good to have more independent candidates in local elections though....

I wish I had the political expertise to know what kind of strategies would help a new party establish itself on local as well as national levels. Elections also costs a lot of money and funds will have to be raised somehow. ☹️

I'm not sure I agree with this, I would describe myself as working class conservative voter, naturally more right leaning than left, and although the Conservatives say the right things...let's not forget who let things get this bad for women in the first place. It's under a Conservative government that the police now routinely visit women for wrong think, that government funded bodies are allowed to cancel wrong think comedians and actors, that the NHS can remove the word woman from all literature...

I agree, LondonLass. We've had the most right wing Tory government ever (to the point that it's been nicknamed BlueKIP), yet all the ministers in change haven't exactly been using their positions to stop the rot. The most we get are a few speeches, and then an expectation women will fall all over themselves with gratitude.

We are being best served right now by the courts and crowdfunding. That means British institutions have been doing their jobs, albeit painfully slowly. The last thing we need are more right wing radicals "helpfully" burning everything down for us.

I suppose in financial terms is the cost of a loss deposit worth the publicity of standing as an independent candidate.

As an independent you wouldn't get bogged down in having to agree a party position of this that and another, and could also reflect really local issues that impact on women localy.

And although it is great there have been some legal wins, if you add up the total amount of money donated for legal fees, how many independent women candidate would that pay for?!

Have found this but I thought the deposit was £1,000 this says it is £500

To stand for election, you'll need to be nominated by at least 10 electors from the constituency you wish to represent. You also need to pay a £500 deposit which you get back if you get more than 5% of the total votes in your constituency.
https://nationalcareers.service.gov.uk/job-profiles/mp

And brings up the question do any of us know 10 people who would nominate us ... pause for thought.

PR is not a magic bullet. But it is Proportional as it says on the tin. 15 % of the vote gets you 15% of the vote , approximately. Sometimes that 15% will be won by a party you dislike. Tough.

It also means no party can win a landslide election victory with 35% of the vote and claim they have a mandate to rule like an absolute monarch. There are no safe seats here in Ireland. Despite us - and Scotland- being Woke Central this would be a good place to try out a women's rights party.

Limerick might be a good location. Home of the Women's Prison where Barbie Kardashian was housed.

@Abhannmor but when that minority party is in a coalition they wield a disproportionate amount of power.