We thanks Paul for a link to this. It takes a Guardian headline writer living in an ideological bubble to believe no one hates the Women’s Equality party.
Gaby Hinsliff is a columnist with the paper, and a former political editor with the Observer. If you can wade through some of the predictably silly content in her piece, there are some insights into one of the reasons we welcome the advent of the Women’s Equality party, the potential fracturing of the ‘progressive’ female vote (and the ‘progressive’ male vote too, come to that). From Ms Hinsliff’s article:
I know two of the WEP’s three founders a bit and they’re smart people. And they’ve certainly spotted a juicy demographic there for the taking: broadly progressive female voters who don’t want to waste a vote other women died for [women? Even the Guardian admitted Emily Davison’s death wasn’t the result of a decision to risk her life, so which ‘women’ is Ms Hinsliff referring to?] but are profoundly depressed by what’s on offer…
There are still too few female MPs [for what, precisely?] and a million things to change. [a million?] But watching those three did not make me think that strong female candidates would be better off heroically losing their deposits for a new party than becoming MPs for old ones, and using that platform to shake things up. If anything, it was a reminder that being corralled into safe spaces, outside the rough and tumble of the mainstream where stuff actually gets decided, is dangerous for women; and that the progressive feminist vote probably doesn’t need to be split any more than it is.
Another reason we welcome the advent of the WEP is that it gives us an easy target to attack, given that they distil so many demonstrably absurd feminist narratives in one place – a supreme example being their policy document, launched earlier this week.
Over the weekend I’ll be publicly challenging Sophie Walker, the leader of the party, and I expect a week or two later to award her next month’s Lying Feminist of the Month award. Sandy Toksvig, the party’s spokeswoman from the outset, won two of the awards in the space of just three months – here and here.
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
Thanks, Mike and apologies that I have repeated myself somewhat. I thought my previous similar post had disappeared, but now it seems to be back.
Feminists demanding no media male stereotypes, eh? Almost as unlikely as Germaine Greer being accused of misogyny. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/germaine-greer-may-be-barred-from-womens-rights-lecture-at-cardiff-university-after-petition-accuses-a6706751.html
Their position (pp.6,7 of their policy document) is that they want more paternity leave so that women can more readily go to work (the opposite of what most women, and couples for that matter, actually want). But you’re right, other feminists oppose any increase in paternity rights.
I have no time for this party, but, having read some of the comments underneath the article, can anybody confirm or deny that this is one of the WEP policies?
‘Equal Parenting and Caregiving
Stand Up For Dads
Join our campaign to stand up for dads. Help make sure services for parents are open to all, and say no to media stereotypes of hopeless husbands and foolish fathers.’
Have they misunderstood the feminist stance?
The WEP model themselves after UKIP, the article says. The writer goes on to point out that this is not a good comparison, because UKIP appeal to a “vocal minority”, who want us to pull out of Europe. Vocal Minority? Really? Polls published in other papers consistently show high figures for wanting to pull out of Europe. I recall one poll which put the figure at 80%. The figure in other polls has been lower than this, but still pretty high. Only in Guardianistaland do people believe this to be a minority view. That’s the Guardian’s problem. They’re trapped inside their own Alice in Wonderland bubble.
“Being corralled into safe spaces … is dangerous for women.”
Yes, safe spaces are dangerous. An absolute classic piece of feminist double-think, from the same people who brought you “Women never lie”.
One such comment underneath her article is as follows. Can anybody (be bothered to read their manifesto and) confirm it? If so, we might have found a policy we wouldn’t necessarily hate. Maybe it’s a wind-up.
‘It’s easy to make fun of this bunch (and I have been), but kudos for this (from their website):
Equal Parenting and Caregiving; Stand Up For Dads
Join our campaign to stand up for dads. Help make sure services for parents are open to all, and say no to media stereotypes of hopeless husbands and foolish fathers.’
Absolutely so. Weepy WEP – working hard* for ‘equality’ for only half of the species.
*Only joking!
Undoubtedly. Toksvig will be dangled in front of every available BBC camera and microphone like some awful little totem. Perhaps ‘dangled’ is the wrong word, maybe they’ll shove a… I mean, maybe they’ll mount her on a stick with some feathers and chicken-blood and shake her at people instead. Either way, prepare yourself for Toksvig with everything.
The problem for the Women’s Equality Party is that it has less than nothing to peddle – it’s the equivalent made incarnate of setting up a political party to push for ‘the equality of the right hand in comparison to the left’.
You can bet they will continue to get fawning support from the BBC though, no (awkward) questions asked.
No one hates it? Maybe no one outside her narrow little echo-chamber perhaps. Even then if she cares to read half of the comments on her own article, she’d see that even among Guardian readers there’s growing disillusionment with feminist lies and misandry.
Look forward to your rebuttals Mike. Hang them by their own lies
The problem for the Women’s Equality Party is that it is run by and for women.