How dim is Stella Creasey?

[Sausagenbacon]

Today she tweeted about how great the Milad ad Nabi march was in Walthamstow.
Of course, it's segregated and the women get to march afterwards or celebrate in halls.
According to Stella, the Garrick Club is problematic because it only allows men to join. But this is fine.
I know that she is pandering to her constituency, but she really seems to have no awareness.

It’s a religious event in her constituency. I’m quite surprised by some of the responses tbh. ‘Muslim women’ as a group are often cited on here as people who absolutely wouldn’t be able to use some spaces if they didn’t provide single-sex facilities.

ETA. Which is where SC is clearly a hypocrite as she’d cheerily deny the young women, she lauds on Twitter, access to the single-sex spaces they may want.

It's actually astounding. Muslim women are apparently only worth bothering about as a means of attacking trans people. Any other time and they are totally ignored and demaned themselves.

She's no role model.

Thank you @alcovecupboardsyou have articulated some thoughts I had about this post and it being directed at one individual. It feels like targeted online abuse and inciting hatred which is far from ideal, sophisticated or mature.

She is a Labour politician. The very definition of dim

The burka or face coverings are banned in countries including France, Belgium, Austria, Denmark, Switzerland and heavily restricted in others. The idea that normalising these coverings in this country is ok is absolutely worthy of debate.

Just because on some issues I disagree with Stella Creasey, does not mean I consider her dim.

Voluntary?
You think the Muslim women have voluntarily segregated themselves?

The entitlement to single sex spaces doesn't need to take into account the reasons behind it

Depends on the circumstances.

If you are providing a service you very much do need to explain why the space is single sex.

This is a religious event, and that would be the legal justification for segregation, but we are also free to argue about any kind of religious practice.

Out of 100??

A solid 90, i reckon. She’s a div.

She's probably not dim at all, she's done very well for herself in life, and the LSE doesn't hand out PhDs like Smarties.

She just one of those people who have a big gap in their intelligence and reasoning, and anything that isn't full-on TWAW/TMAM falls through the big gap..

There are a lot of them about: people who can be quite sensible about other things, but mention the word 'transgender' or 'JKR' or 'sex-based rights' and they lose the ability to think rationally or speak objectively and lapse into tired old clichés like '#bekind', 'toxic', 'both sides...'inclusivity' 'TWAW/TMAM'.

That makes them captured, beclowned, whatever word you want to use, but it's not necessarily because they are dim - they've just hitched their wagon to a fashionable cause that has no factual basis, and have to keep to the script because if they stray off topic, their intelligence might kick in and they'd realise - oh, sh*t, this trans stuff doesn't actually make any sense!

That's my theory anyway😏

But should we be celebrating it like Stella is?

Again you don’t seem to understand the difference between having agency to choose and it being forced on women by men who oppress them.

Are you being required to celebrate it? I must have missed that.

They can leave the religion...

Are you under the impression the billion or so Muslim women in the world don't believe what they actually believe? And that they are only pretending because they are controlled by men? You only have to look on here for the surprising number of women who are insistent that we're all vulnerable fragile flowers who can't possibly compete with men in any possible circumstances. It's unhinged!

It's often difficult to leave a religion, but leaving that aside, is your argument that religion shouldn't be criticised?

You only have to look on here for the surprising number of women who are insistent that we're all vulnerable fragile flowers who can't possibly compete with men in any possible circumstances.

I think you must have hallucinated this.

😂😂😂😂😂😂oh sweet summer child.

It certainly appears that we’re not allowed to criticise it.

So the women who have been punished for taking off their hijabs don’t exist to you?

You're mixing up religion with culture.

Only as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

Generally, the aims of women's single sex spaces and resources are legitimate because they protect women from male entitlement and/or create opportunities for women to reduce our economic or cultural disadvantages relative to men.

Generally, the aims of men's single sex spaces and resources are not legitimate because men do not need protection from female entitlement and have economic and cultural advantages relative to women.

When those generalities do not hold, for example the clear legitimate aim of the Men's Sheds movement, the case can easily be made for men-only spaces or provisions.

And sometimes, the need for woman-only provisions to mitigate problems faced by women creates a subsequent need for men-only provisions so men do not lose out even though the men themselves would not be disadvantaged by being with women.

All this is to say, the idea that there's some sort of tit for tat, sauce for the goose is good for the gander moral equivalence to single sex provisions for men and women is to misunderstand why these things exist.

In a world where we were totally equal and equally safe already, it's not that we'd have equal single sex spaces, we'd have none. Single sex spaces exist to solve/mitigate problems of inequality.

(All this said, I'm sure religions get exemptions anyway. Doesn't make it right though).

💯