March 8th Irish referendum on mothers in the home

[fromorbit]

Updating sexist language or removing the concept of motherhood from the Constitution so women's and mother's rights can be more easily crushed ?

The case for:
https://theconversation.com/according-to-irelands-constitution-a-womans-duties-are-in-the-home-but-a-referendum-could-be-about-to-change-its-sexist-wording-222477

The case against:
https://thecountess.ie/a-personal-account-of-why-i-will-be-voting-no-in-the-upcoming-constitutional-referendum-on-8th-march-2024/

The Countess and other groups are arguing for a no vote. Big No march today in Dublin.

What do people think? One thing is certain Irish women should be encouraged to discuss and debate this using their hard won freedoms and not tolerate anyone telling them to keep quiet.

More eloquently put than I did

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/10/liz-truss-sunak-bill-female-sex-safe-spaces/

If Sunak can pull this off, the GE might not be so clear cut as it might otherwise seem, especially with Labour committing suicide over women's rights as every day passes

Ah for feck’s sake MN would you let an imaginary explosive put together a post of multiple links in peace?!
BelTel
BelTel
BelTel
BelTel
And an archive copy of the Irish Independent article posted upthread.

I’ve less than no idea what the BBC thought they were playing at 😡

1. the far right who are using this as a win against immigrants are unpleasant. Others I just disagree with.
2. I’m lucky enough to work out of the home (I don’t consider it slave labour) and raise my children, and I couldn’t do it if me or my DH considered home duties to be solely (or even majority) mine. Still frustrating when others consider me “lucky” or DH put upon because he pulls his weight in the home, with me just being a woman neglecting her duties in the home
3. male entitlement to female unpaid labour arising from a rural, conservative mindset about gender roles similar to those that drove the inclusion of this wording in the Constitution in the first place
4. i make no assumptions about what my daughter will do, whether she will be straight or gay, married or not, children or none, but I certainly don’t want anyone to assume she has more duties in the home than any man! Nor do I want it assumed that my sons will be forced into the financial provider role if that is not want they want to do.

Exactly. Once the burden of caring does not fall disproportionately on women, then by all means amend the wording to be more gender neutral. Until then, it is excellent that Ireland's constitution explicitly recognises work by women that, in most countries, is ignored and taken for granted.

Another eloquent soul on here today

Exit poll reveals anger behind No vote - and how supporters of political parties voted in both referendums
Lack of clarity and mistrust of Government cited by voters as reasons for rejection.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/referendums/exit-poll-reveals-anger-behind-no-vote-and-how-supporters-of-political-parties-voted-in-both-referendums/a961278452.html

‘We didn’t do our job well enough’: Minister of State criticises colleagues over referendum campaign

https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/03/10/we-didnt-do-our-job-well-enough-minister-of-state-criticises-colleagues-over-referendum-campaign/

He said he believed there were several different reasons why the proposed amendments were rejected as emphatically as they were, including that people did not like the propositions, others did not want to change the Constitution on the status of the family, and some felt they were not explained as comprehensively as they would have liked.
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2024/0310/1437010-family-and-care-referendums/

I don’t understand why there’s not more talk of the document suppression. Because O’Gorman will be hiding something[s], let’s face it; but it also ties in to all this waffle about “we should perhaps have explained why to vote for the thing we were telling you to vote for”. Well yes, that’s traditionally how voting works (maybe the prehistoric microbiologist discussed on this thread was offering advice?) 🤦‍♀️ Actively refusing to disclose information the electorate are seeking (“the Courts will sort all that out later - it’ll be grand”) is both staggeringly arrogant & staggeringly stupid.

Great points!
But I think the government 'failed to explain the amendment' because the amendments defied explanation.
For instance, the amendment expanding the definition of family beyond those based on marriage would still state;
" The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage and to protect it from attack"

What attack? Like maybe a referendum on giving equal weight to relationships other than marriage? The State pledging itself to protecting it from itself?

I know a lot of people will think I'm naive, but I do not believe most of our politicians are stupid or venal or motivated by hatred of women. I think they got swept up in a wave of trying to look cool and progressive and modern and #bekind.

So this might be an opportune moment to point out to TDs [members of parliament] the hollowness at the centre of 'gender ideology' (? terminology, but you know what I mean), the factual inaccuracies like the most marginalized/sex is a spectrum/etc. , and now the fact that it's also a huge vote loser.

Offer them a golden bridge of good old cop-on plus the threat of losing their seat, and see how staunch their support for genderwoo really is...

My impression (just from people I've spoken to personally) was that there's plenty of talk about this, and this was a big contributor to the No votes. I think a lot of people had the impression the government and particularly O'Gorman weren't being honest and so decided the safest thing was to keep things as they are.

I think O'Gorman didn't want to give people details because he's a "rights are not a pie" man. You can only maintain this breezy approach to policy if you steer well clear of specifics. Vote the way O'Gorman says because he's a good person and wants only good things. That should be enough for you. You can't be trusted to come to your own decision based on all the available arguments and evidence.

It did infuriate me, I have to say, the way he just referred to court cases as though these are painless little technicalities rather than the emotionally and financially draining horrors they often are. I wish him an eternity of court cases.

Agree @MarieDeGournay "I do not believe most of our politicians are stupid or venal or motivated by hatred of women. I think they got swept up in a wave of trying to look cool and progressive and modern and #bekind." And also with your suggestion of golden bridges, although I'm not overly hopeful, especially from the left. I think FF may see a turn towards relative sanity. I hope the election is pushed back to give people a chance to show that they're thinking again.

I think O'Gorman didn't want to give people details because he's a "rights are not a pie" man. You can only maintain this breezy approach to policy if you steer well clear of specifics.

Well put. None of this can withstand proper scrutiny or analysis, which is why policymakers are so desperate to categorise anyone offering scrutiny or analysis as a bigot. And, in fairness, this has worked well across all high-income countries, and many middle-income ones, for the last 20 years or so, so you can understand why policy-makers have become so complacent that the electorate will do as they are told.

People often cite Brexit as an example of pushing back against this. I think the original sin of Brexit actually dates back to Maastricht, and the Tories' decision not to offer people a say on this huge change to how the UK was governed. However, I do agree that the Leave vote was definitely influenced by anger at the closing down of debate on a host of issues, including immigration (and I say this as someone pro-Remain and from an immigrant family). The point is not what votes actually think on those issues, but their anger at not being allowed a debate, and - in the case of immigration - at explicitly being labelled a bigot for even asking questions.

Most popular politician in Ireland, Willie O'Dea, just posted this; Looking through his twitter for the last few months he's had literally nothing on the referendums, so I suspect he was probably a No/No voter on a personal level and he's feeling ready to come out swinging today.

https://twitter.com/willieodeaLIVE/status/1767148817315467513

I don’t think Irish people are against modernising the constitution, but they rejected a version of modernity that involved a Thatcherite vision of society. I imagine an amendment that involved a more social democratic modernity - ie real supports for carers and people who need care would have passed (eg the citizens assembly wording), although that would maybe have fitted in the rights section of the constitution rather than the family section.
anyway, shame on FFFGG for such a dishonest campaign, and huge shame on all the opposition politicians who encouraged a yes vote and are trying to evade responsibility now

Oh my.

I feel there were a lot of No/No voters in all parts of the Dail, this might just be the catalyst to have a few differing opinions speaking up

I posted that to wrong thread, have requested it be deleted

I wonder will they ie the likes of WOD just ship to aontu?

I'd say he'd be more concerned with getting Martin out and replacing him with someone else/himself. Though Aontu would possibly jump at him as he's essentially worth two seats as he pretty much always brings in a second FF TD on transfers.

True, very true @alltheprivacy.
Aontu need more candidates big style. Whats happening to ireland is just terrible. What will it be like in 25 yrs some dystopian crazy place of the HS bill comes in. I mean leave it ouhhh !

WOD had already said he wasn't running again hadn't he? Those who aren't running again have nothing to lose by calling out ideological BS. Charlie Flanagan is another one who has done it (and isn't running again).

No, he's said he'll stay as long as people want him.

And he's now saying he voted no-no.
https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2024/0311/1437260-odea-referendums/

Lisa Chambers says she voted No/No...
sorry, MNers at large, are these detailed discussions of Irish politicians too local here? There's a discussion on Craicnet too, but this thread seems to have The Big Mo..
Sarah McInerney has just done a blistering interview of a FG TD (government MP) on RTE radio, she's a gem!

It’s very tiresome to see all those who promoted a yes vote now trying to disown it. They really need to be held to account - particularly the opposition party leaders.