English Political Rally Ensures Men Don't Have To Sit With Women

BigAndy99BigAndy99 Posts: 3,277
Forum Member
✭✭✭
4th May 2015

Should this be happening?

Please discuss.


As high priestess of political correctness, Harriet Harman, Labour’s deputy leader, has been a fearless champion of women’s rights — even touring the country in a pink battle bus trying to win the female vote.

So what will she make of the decision of five defending Labour candidates to appear as ‘chief guests’ at a public meeting where the women were segregated on one side of the room from the men?

The rally took place on Saturday in the packed Diamond Suite hall in Saltley, two miles from Birmingham city centre, while the flyer indicates a separate event was also organised only for women.

Ukip leader Nigel Farage says: ‘This is totally unacceptable in a civilised society’ — and many will agree. But not, it seems, the Labour candidates taking part, including Liam Byrne, the last Labour Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who left the infamous note revealing ‘there’s no money left’.

There was also Tom Watson, a close ally of Len McCluskey, general secretary of the Unite union, which has given Labour £14m since the last election, and is wedded to equal rights.

But most surprising of all was the presence of Jack Dromey, the defending Labour candidate from Birmingham Erdington... better known as Mr Harriet Harman!


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3066740/Labour-rally-segregated-sexes-star-speaker-Equalities-zealot-Harriet-Harman-s-husband-ANDREW-PIERCE-stories-spin-doctors-DON-T-want-read.html#ixzz3Z9zZ2Kjq
«1345

Comments

  • ba_baracusba_baracus Posts: 3,236
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I would prefer to discuss why you feel the need to put the date at the top of all of your threads, when the forum software does this anyway.
  • BigAndy99BigAndy99 Posts: 3,277
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ba_baracus wrote: »
    I would prefer to discuss why you feel the need to put the date at the top of all of your threads, when the forum software does this anyway.

    But i would prefer to discuss the degradation of women, the erosion of a free society and the non-action to stop this by our leaders.

    I win every time.

    Have a nice day.
  • stoatiestoatie Posts: 78,106
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why the date thing, for the love of God?
  • Doctor_WibbleDoctor_Wibble Posts: 26,580
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BigAndy99 wrote: »
    4th May 2015

    Should this be happening?

    Please discuss.
    That depends, which bit is in your own words and which bit was copied/pasted from the article?
    It's hard to tell what opinion you are putting forward as you only ask the question.

    On the other hand I'm almost thankful that the link doesn't include the 'follow us on twitter' bit that seems to be auto-pasted by the DM forspapp* that some seem to insist on using even if it does still include a tracking tag.


    * might be a word, 'forum spamming app'




    It's definitely the "please discuss" thing that irks - if you want to set homework for people, train to be a teacher!
  • zx50zx50 Posts: 91,227
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I wonder if it's a coincidence that The Daily Mail chose to do an article on that because a Labour MP was at the meeting? Hmm...
  • BigAndy99BigAndy99 Posts: 3,277
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That depends, which bit is in your own words and which bit was copied/pasted from the article?
    It's hard to tell what opinion you are putting forward as you only ask the question.

    On the other hand I'm almost thankful that the link doesn't include the 'follow us on twitter' bit that seems to be auto-pasted by the DM forspapp* that some seem to insist on using even if it does still include a tracking tag.


    * might be a word, 'forum spamming app'




    It's definitely the "please discuss" thing that irks - if you want to set homework for people, train to be a teacher!


    I always take the last line of the link out - really annoys me too!
  • dee123dee123 Posts: 46,195
    Forum Member
    The date AND "please discuss" ?
  • StigglesStiggles Posts: 9,618
    Forum Member
    BigAndy99 wrote: »
    But i would prefer to discuss the degradation of women, the erosion of a free society and the non-action to stop this by our leaders.

    I win every time.

    Have a nice day.

    Yeah well if you do, quit the date thing. And also the please discuss bit.
  • Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    BigAndy99 wrote: »
    But i would prefer to discuss the degradation of women...

    Why do you think that making men and women sit apart degrades women, in particular? :confused:
  • flowerpowaflowerpowa Posts: 24,386
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    stoatie wrote: »
    Why the date thing, for the love of God?

    What's the love of God, got to do with it.;-)
  • muggins14muggins14 Posts: 61,844
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Si_Crewe wrote: »
    Why do you think that making men and women sit apart degrades women, in particular? :confused:
    Haha! Fair point!

    ETA: Looking at the link, which I was rather loathe to do, I would say that the speakers had little say in who sat where. Judging by the photo, and the enthnicity of a majority of the people I could see in the photo, it could possibly have been a decision made by those who attended.

    Squinting a bit, I can see a man sat in the section further back on the right-hand-side - a bald man about 5/6 rows back (the female section supposedly) ... it does seem to blend more towards the back, but I may be wrong about that.
  • TerualTerual Posts: 388
    Forum Member
    Why cant we discuss the actual subject of the posting rather than whether or not a date is added to it?

    The point I think is, that here is a report of a meeting having taken place where the mean and women present were segregated.
    This cannot be normal , and to have Mrs equality herself there endorsing it makes it more remarkable.
  • scottie2121scottie2121 Posts: 11,284
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think the OP should just provide a link to the whole World Wide Web, add 'please discuss' then disappear.
  • scottie2121scottie2121 Posts: 11,284
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Terual wrote: »
    Why cant we discuss the actual subject of the posting rather than whether or not a date is added to it?

    The point I think is, that here is a report of a meeting having taken place where the mean and women present were segregated.
    This cannot be normal , and to have Mrs equality herself there endorsing it makes it more remarkable.

    Freudian slip?
  • Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    Terual wrote: »
    The point I think is, that here is a report of a meeting having taken place where the mean and women present were segregated.
    This cannot be normal , and to have Mrs equality herself there endorsing it makes it more remarkable.

    TBH, it seems like a fairly good metaphor for the way Labour seem to enjoy sticking their oar into everything and attempting to micro-manage it, rather than having any sexist overtones.
  • muggins14muggins14 Posts: 61,844
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Terual wrote: »
    Why cant we discuss the actual subject of the posting rather than whether or not a date is added to it?

    The point I think is, that here is a report of a meeting having taken place where the mean and women present were segregated.
    This cannot be normal , and to have Mrs equality herself there endorsing it makes it more remarkable.
    Do you not think that the speakers are invited to the hall, they speak, then they leave. The audience decide where they will sit (or even somebody else there decided, who knows - it doesn't say), but I doubt that those invited to speak told people where to sit.

    Unless there is documentation somewhere that Harriet Harman told women they had to sit separately from the men (or vice-versa), which I haven't seen.
  • bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Terual wrote: »
    Why cant we discuss the actual subject of the posting rather than whether or not a date is added to it?

    The point I think is, that here is a report of a meeting having taken place where the mean and women present were segregated.
    This cannot be normal , and to have Mrs equality herself there endorsing it makes it more remarkable.

    Typical DS - searching for a way to have a pop at the OP. Even down to such minutiae as that.

    As for the subject matter, I agree it does seem very odd to segregate the sexes. Maybe they are bending over backwards for muslims.
  • MinnieMinzMinnieMinz Posts: 4,052
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    blueblade wrote: »
    Typical DS - searching for a way to have a pop at the OP. Even down to such minutiae as that.

    As for the subject matter, I agree it does seem very odd to segregate the sexes. Maybe they are bending over backwards for muslims.

    Birmingham has a large Muslim population and perhaps they were just ensuring everyone got to hear the speakers and decide if to vote and who for by allowing female muslims to feel they could attend without breaking any rules of their religion. I don't see it as sexist just a marketing ploy to gain the female muslim vote.
  • Doctor_WibbleDoctor_Wibble Posts: 26,580
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Freudian slip?
    :eek: An attempt to derail the discussion with talk of psychological undergarments!
  • Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    MinnieMinz wrote: »
    Birmingham has a large Muslim population and perhaps they were just ensuring everyone got to hear the speakers and decide if to vote and who for by allowing female muslims to feel they could attend without breaking any rules of their religion. I don't see it as sexist just a marketing ploy to gain the female muslim vote.

    Inconveniencing and/or alienating 85% of the audience in an attempt to accommodate 15% of the audience doesn't seem terribly wise to me.
  • stoatiestoatie Posts: 78,106
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    flowerpowa wrote: »
    What's the love of God, got to do with it.;-)

    What's the love of God but a second-hand emotion?
  • anne_666anne_666 Posts: 72,891
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think the OP should just provide a link to the whole World Wide Web, add 'please discuss' then disappear.
    :D
    My mind just wanders off trying to remember which TV programme/film or whatever started with the bloke saying the date. Anyone know?

    Erm on topic, shocking stuff, on a par with having to read any Daily Fail link.

    Big clue, Daily Fail delight, Muslims. Of course it's wrong and pandering.

    Supporters attending theses meetings have a brain and have a voice. If they don't like it, don't accept it, if it was forced on them.
  • muggins14muggins14 Posts: 61,844
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So we are going on the (unfounded) assumption that they were segregated by the speakers rather than segregated themselves? Did they ask the attendees whether they were told to sit separately, and why didn't the few men sitting on the right do as they were told :D
  • MinnieMinzMinnieMinz Posts: 4,052
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Si_Crewe wrote: »
    Inconveniencing and/or alienating 85% of the audience in an attempt to accommodate 15% of the audience doesn't seem terribly wise to me.

    I'm not sure why 85% would be inconvenienced/alienated does the report not state there was a female only option with speakers, as well as the original speakers in the main event. Wasn't the females only an add on? not a replacement. Or have I got that wrong?
    The rally took place on Saturday in the packed Diamond Suite hall in Saltley, two miles from Birmingham city centre, while the flyer indicates a separate event was also organised only for women.
  • stoatiestoatie Posts: 78,106
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    anne_666 wrote: »
    :D
    My mind just wanders off trying to remember which TV programme/film or whatever started with the bloke saying the date. Anyone know?

    The news? Or Star Trek.
Sign In or Register to comment.