Jump to content

Harriet Harman

kiyan

Recommended Posts

kiyan

kiyan

Posted
Posted

Harriett has called for all male candidates  in the next Labour leadership contest to stand aside so a woman is elected to lead the party and potentially be PM.

So does she mean that women are not the best candidates or is she saying that the Labour membership will not elect the best candidate if that is a woman?  Surely either way that is a slur/condemnation of the Labour Party!

The Tory Party does not have woman only lists as candidates for election yet it has had 2 female prime ministers and Labour has not yet even had a female party leader, let alone a PM!

In its quest for equality is the Labour party, getting too wrapped up in the optics, and missing the whole point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ckn

ckn

Posted
Posted

Harman is a disgrace and an embarrassment to Labour. She has set back feminism in Labour by a good few years with her abysmal handling of the party in her stints as stand-in leader. I wouldn’t trust her if she told me a day had 24 hours. 

On the all-women shortlists. It always seems wrong to me to fix discrimination with discrimination. For me, she’s be better looking north of the border where a form of proportional representation ended up with the three big parties all having female leaders at the same time. FPTP will always have inequalities built in, this is just another of them. 

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Future is League

The Future is League

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, kiyan said:

Harriett has called for all male candidates  in the next Labour leadership contest to stand aside so a woman is elected to lead the party and potentially be PM.

So does she mean that women are not the best candidates or is she saying that the Labour membership will not elect the best candidate if that is a woman?  Surely either way that is a slur/condemnation of the Labour Party!

The Tory Party does not have woman only lists as candidates for election yet it has had 2 female prime ministers and Labour has not yet even had a female party leader, let alone a PM!

In its quest for equality is the Labour party, getting too wrapped up in the optics, and missing the whole point?

That's 100% sexism which is against the law i this country

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kiyan

kiyan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, ckn said:

Harman is a disgrace and an embarrassment to Labour. She has set back feminism in Labour by a good few years with her abysmal handling of the party in her stints as stand-in leader. I wouldn’t trust her if she told me a day had 24 hours. 

On the all-women shortlists. It always seems wrong to me to fix discrimination with discrimination. For me, she’s be better looking north of the border where a form of proportional representation ended up with the three big parties all having female leaders at the same time. FPTP will always have inequalities built in, this is just another of them. 

Say what you think mate!

So you agree with me that fixed lists of any description is wrong!

I hate them! I hate them!

I always believed in the best person for the job, but forcing someone is not going to make that happen. Labour seems to think it will

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kiyan

kiyan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

That's 100% sexism which is against the law i this country

Not entirely sure who you are having a rant at, but it is not against the law so your comment is pointless.

Your rant makes no sense  and does nothing to further your point.

Thank you for your contibutition though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob8

Bob8

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, kiyan said:

Say what you think mate!

So you agree with me that fixed lists of any description is wrong!

I hate them! I hate them!

I always believed in the best person for the job, but forcing someone is not going to make that happen. Labour seems to think it will

"The Best Person" is a rather vague description.  I can even see that when we have an image in a our head of the best person for the job, it tends to conform to a tradition and we might look for masculine traits.

That said, it is a self-serving, idiotic suggestion from Harmen, who seems to believe upper middle class women are the primarily put-upon group who should be elevatied.

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oxford

Oxford

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, kiyan said:

I always believed in the best person for the job

Which is very nice and dandy but the person who gets the job is as often as not er ... not the best!

And here I'm not assuming anything kiyan ... have you been on an interview or done the interviewing?

And is it not also true that for businesses the best candidate maybe because they're the cheapest ( not women surely!)and the reason we still have inequality in play is because parliament is full of .....men. And as you've chosen to laud two women PMs as a wonderful example why has that made no difference to pay inequality? Can you imagine how long it would take to give women the vote?

You seem to be a  "........... gone mad" person kiyan and a salford fan so the only way is up from here!;)

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saintslass

Saintslass

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Saint 1 said:

45% of Labour's MPs are women, versus 21% of the Tory's MPs, which suggests that it isn't Labour who have the issue with electing women. 

The Tories have 21% women without using all-women shortlists.  I wonder how many women Labour would have without the artificial boost all-women shortlists give to their numbers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Future is League

The Future is League

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, kiyan said:

Not entirely sure who you are having a rant at, but it is not against the law so your comment is pointless.

Your rant makes no sense  and does nothing to further your point.

Thank you for your contibutition though.

So i can advertise for women only when i have a job vacancy then can i?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Derwent

Derwent

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Saint 1 said:

 

I personally am not a fan of all-women shortlists but I can at least appreciate their merit. Currently 32% of MPs are women which suggests either: women are less competent at being selected as candidates; women are less competent at being elected as MPs; women are less interested in politics; women are possibly discriminated against, even subconsciously.

 

 

It isn't always as simple as that. There are many long-standing MP's in parliament (e.g. ~120 who've been there more than 20 years) who are male and are shoo-ins for the nomination in their constituencies. Once they start to retire then you may see a better female representation.

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ckn

ckn

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Wiltshire Rhino said:

If they do have an all-female list, will biological men who identify as a women be allowed on the list? :ph34r:

Yes, according to Labour's new policy.  And that causes fun, as discussed on last week's Question Time :P

In essence, some women want to be given a hand up but want to make sure it doesn't involve giving anyone else a hand up at the same time.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.