English Political Rally Ensures Men Don't Have To Sit With Women
BigAndy99
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
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
0
Comments
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.
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!
Yeah well if you do, quit the date thing. And also the please discuss bit.
Why do you think that making men and women sit apart degrades women, in particular?
What's the love of God, got to do with it.;-)
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Inconveniencing and/or alienating 85% of the audience in an attempt to accommodate 15% of the audience doesn't seem terribly wise to me.
What's the love of God but a second-hand emotion?
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.
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 news? Or Star Trek.