Anyone wanting to support greens but really stuck on their trans beliefs and policies?

[ForCraftyWriter]

I haven’t heard anything else that I disagree with, but I’m so disappointed by the outright ‘trans women are women statement’ and consequent policies. In my view this attitude doesn’t fit with the other green policies. Here we are saying that women are an unimportant subspecies, and that the wants of a very small number of trans identifying males trump the rights and needs of all the actual females.

How is anyone squaring this in their minds? Can you bring yourself to vote Green?

Saw this on another thread…Two political parties with no experience governing and full of uniformed ideologues. The UK is going to be such a huge mess.

Rising societal and racial divisions and not enough jobs or money to soothe the electorate. No strong sense of what ‘Britishness’ is any more accelerated by the privatisation and erosion of British institutions that were/are the subtle glue holding a heterogeneous society together.

It’s all gone downhill so quickly. The financial crash in 2008, austerity years, Brexit in 2016, topped off by Covid in 2020-2022 with the clown King PM and the will-no-one-think-about-the-cheese clown queen PM. Labour having a whacking great majority but making so many own goals and dreading next week’s budget. No one seems able to halt the political entrenchment of crazy big tech multi billionaires foisting technology that accelerates job losses and work intensification.

All feels hopeless atm. I need to give my head a shake and try to be more positive.

Trying to add image…

I’m undecided who I’ll vote for and I’m probably nearer gender critical than anything else, but I can’t be bothered with the right wing hysteria about trans people, especially now the law has changed. The issue wouldn’t stop me voting for anyone.

I wouldn't use the term 'hysteria', but I think the Green Party's opposition to women's rights is right wing.

I agree that you have to weigh up all policies and that often the only option is to choose the least bad thing, but the Green Party don't even seem to be that strong on Green policies. All they have to offer is the omnicause and NIMBYism.

I’m really torn on this and in all likelihood will probably abstain in the next general election. Politics is a farce.

@nicepotofteaYou deliberately twisted my point. I think the trans hysteria is largely on Mumsnet, and in the far right parties.

It's interesting how far down the list 'climate protection' actually is 😂 They might as well just come out and say 'We believe in things our privileged buddies will applaud us for. We're doing alright Jack, so fuck those women needing single sex refuges, my brother likes wearing a skirt on a Friday night and he's a jolly good chap, also we just can't get a cleaner these days and Mummy has dementia and care is eating into our inheritance so more cheap labour, yes please!'

Having worked with a number of these people (you'll find clusters in Brighton, Bristol, North London and university cities) I can assure you that nothing is more important to them than showing they are 'the right sort of person' and 'part of the cool club'. They're fascinating in a terrible way.

The phrase 'Trans hysteria' is the is the only drama I see on the thread. Hysteria is a misogynistic word for dismissing women's concerns.

Only someone completely insulated by privilege or someone not looking at what is happening to safeguarding could fail to be concerned about the impact of gender ideology. Many of us have neither the privilege nor ignorance to ignore it.

A family of votes were lost here. We try to live in greener ways (and will continue to do so) but a party that is so careless of harm done to half the population can't have our votes!

The safety and well-being of women is important to men women and children.

'hysteria'

Always goes down well on the FWR board.

I'm not clear which part of your point you think I twisted.

I simply pointed out that the gender ideology espoused by the Green Party is also right wing.

I agreed with you that people have different criteria for voting, and different priorities.

Fundamentally a lot of the green party members who are actually most focused on environmental matters probably just haven't thought too deeply about the real implications of "transwomen are women".

The issues are that (1) effective implementation of genuinely useful Green policies on environmental issues requires a general mindset of authoritarianism and top-down decision-making because all the things that need to happen to save the planet are less convenient and less luxurious on an individual level, and if people are free from that authoritarianism their free choices will not tend to be environmentally beneficial. (2) therefore the Greens have been an easy target for ideallogues to capture from the top and get trans ideology embedded and accepted into the whole narative (3) part of that ideology is to embed that any kind of "but" any kind of compromise or concession to other vulnerable groups is absolutely identical to hating transwomen and wanting them to die. The idea that one could simultaneously be supportive of trans people's rights to live free and safe without discrimination in almost all contexts but that there nevertheless exist some circumstances where single-sex provision is appropriate and it is impossible to have a single sex space for women if any man can choose to gain admittance is incompatible with their ideology. The nub of it is that this position (as in bold above) is a pretty liberal one and therefore doesn't sit well with the black and white authoritarianism thar sits within the Green mindset, which needs to command agreement rather than accept plurality.

The "if any man can gain admittance" bit is crucial and comes from a different bit of dogma than TWAW - every barrier and condition that could be envisioned for defining whether a person is trans has been rejected, and rightly so. It would be wrong for any kind of condition for surgery or hormone treatment or dress or anything else to be a condition that one must meet in order to be able to embrace a trans identity if that is your wish - and that is right and good. However that means that any person of any ethical status and any motive can therefore present themselves as trans whenever they wish, which means that therefore it cannot be the case that a trans identity gives you any additional rights or privileges that one would not have if one was not trans. To argue against that one would have to either (a) have a rock solid faith that 100% of human beings are too noble and pure and good hearted to ever attempt to gain additional rights or privileges that they aren't entitled to, or (b) just not be very bright.

They have always been mad.
And I say that from having been to some of their meetings in the early 90s.

No. Their gender woo stance is enough to not support them ofc, however they are shit in many ways. They have zero economic sense - kind of needed in a government position of power. All anyone needs to do is look at what the Greens did to Brighton. Terrible. Under no circumstances would I ever vote for them.

Agreed.

The nub of it is that this position (as in bold above) is a pretty liberal one and therefore doesn't sit well with the black and white authoritarianism thar sits within the Green mindset, which needs to command agreement rather than accept plurality.

You might be right, but it's ironic that in practice the Green Party want the green power, but not the pylons that carry it through a Green Party constituency, and they want to welcome asylum seekers, but just as long as they are accommodated somewhere far away. They seem to be very much in the mould of the Lib Dems.

Widespread rejection of Supreme Court clarification on Reddit and X and within Political Parties, like LibDems, & Labour Party. Rosie Duffield still being hounded. How many Bash Back are also supporters of Zack or Bristol Council?
Does all that not count as hysterical?

My husband is a green voter
I've tried having a discussion with him about this
He says it's just people who want something to complain about making a fuss and realistically how many times have I met a trans person in womens spaces .
I don't really know what to say to get through to him about this being an important issue..he has an answer for everything

I've never seen people drown while crossing in small boats... but it happens
I've never been evicted for not being able to pay the rent... but it happens
I've never been raped...but it happens
I've never been burgled....but it happens
I've never been assaulted at work... but it happens
I've never been murdered (obviously), nor do I know anyone who has... but it happens
I've never had to use a food bank... but it happens

I could think of lots more, and I'm sure he could too!
What does he think is important, and has it actually happened to him?

(I have seen trans women in women's spaces, though).

The issues are

1. the complete removal of the boundary.

Either a space can be mixed sex or single sex. There is no other option.

2. the loss of the language required to define and defend women’s rights.

And the third thing - the Institutional enforcement of gendered stereotypes that women have fought for so long.

DH might vote for them if it wasnt for their batshit gender ideology.

I want to say thank you to those who have added extra detail about Green policies that aren’t super obvious to general public.
Ive learned things that mean there are unfortunately too many other reasons to not vote for them besides trans beliefs

No because they oppose nuclear power, which is a deeply unserious position for a party that’s supposed to care about the impending climate doom.

He says it's just people who want something to complain about making a fuss

Would he support all single-sex spaces becoming mixed-sex?