Women independents

Just read the below story on irish examiner

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/columnists/joyce-fegan-the-reason-more-women-arent-running-for-election-977513.html

What struck me is if women feel so aggrieved, why have more not run as independents in protest and I am sure if the 50% women vote for them it would show the parties.

Seems to constant comparisons, so in an election where you can be an independent why dont more run in protest.

By the way my opinion is why would anyone want to be a TD, constant scrutiny and abuse

biko

According to Oxfam, in Ireland, women put in 38m hours of unpaid care work every single week. If women received a living wage for this work, it would cost the State that €24bn figure.

Maintaining a house is now "work" when it'a woman.
I think Joyce Fegan should get a job as a binwoman, for equality's sake.

suicide_circus

be interesting to see the age profile breakdown of housework. I do all the cooking, laundry and DIY. She does all the cleaning. If i had my way, we'd get rid of most of the furniture, soft furnishings, crockery, glassware, nik naks, houseplants etc and live a pretty spartan life resulting in very little cleaning but i've been over ruled on that.

Eric Cartman

suicide_circus wrote: »

be interesting to see the age profile breakdown of housework. I do all the cooking, laundry and DIY. She does all the cleaning. If i had my way, we'd get rid of most of the furniture, soft furnishings, crockery, glassware, nik naks, houseplants etc and live a pretty spartan life resulting in very little cleaning but i've been over ruled on that.

The standard at which most women consider something clean means that they basically have to do it all on their own to meet their own standard, you cant share a part of the housework where somebodys exoectations are much higher than the other,

Eric Cartman

Every time I see these articles it just screams at me ‘i want to skip the queue and you should give that to me’

Youve young lads who were in the party at 16 years old, canvassing and leaflet dropping, went to every ard fheis , went on committees , went to the council, became a td , and now you have a lot of women who joined the oarty at 22 in college and want to he on the ticket right away.

Now there are women that cut their teeth the way through also but its so entitled now, wanting the quick escalation to status and monetary levels without decades of prep.

spurious

It's all the women's fault anyway.
OK Thread finished. Thanks for playing.

Eric Cartman

spurious wrote: »

It's all the women's fault anyway.
OK Thread finished. Thanks for playing.

Basically yes, there are no longer any barriers and its completely up to women to decide how many women run and are elected as politicians, the problem is taking that decision requires loads of hard work for the indiviual and lazy journalists cant comprehend that women are capable of hard work

biko

We're getting off topic I think.

Women politicians are a necessity in my opinion.
Without them we would miss out on their views on life and politics.

So Joyce Fegan is complaining about that women are only representing 30% of the contestants in this election.
Her conclusion seems to be, somehow, that housework is keeping women from politics.
If fact her conclusion is quite unclear.

But somehow it's white middleaged men's fault.

The whole article is a joke, so fed up of the type.

My point was instead of her complaining why dont women run along with all the other independents. It's the constant poor women victimhood, I feel sorry for the women who made it without all this nonsense, joyce forgets to mention the social Democrats are heavily lead by women, sein fein, DUP, Theresa may a while back, Angela Merkel,Maggie Thatcher in her day, bloody mary Harney.

I've heard it mentioned now in workplaces that theres your token women manager, it's taking away from the ones who worked hard to get where they are

Kidchameleon

I just messaged her asking what her opinion is on what is stopping women from wanting to work in construction. I dont expect a reply.

suicide_circus

the inference is that if men did more housework then women would be free from the shackles of domestic drudgery and would run for office. there are of course a few holes in this theory but if we take it at face value it seem men just dont want to do more housework. In my group of friends, domestic duties are all shared but when kids enter the mix i think women tend on doing more.

Silentcorner

Wait until they start putting an economic value on "emotional labour"...headbangers the lot of them!

Kidchameleon

Its funny how they think child rearing and house work are "unpaid". How do mothers eat and pay bills? Could it be that the state and working dads pay them?? Surly not!

JohnnyFlash

Get a cleaner. Best 50 notes a week you’ll spend.

KiKi III

Well, having a Dail that’s 80% male isn’t working out so well for the country.

Saying “why don’t they just run as Independents” is to ignore the fact that it’s much harder to get elected as an independent and much more expensive.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

Well, having a Dail that’s 80% male isn’t working out so well for the country.

Saying “why don’t they just run as Independents” is to ignore the fact that it’s much harder to get elected as an independent and much more expensive.

And the 20% of female politicians are hardly raising the bar now are they?

bmc58

[PHP][/PHP]

suicide_circus wrote: »

be interesting to see the age profile breakdown of housework. I do all the cooking, laundry and DIY. She does all the cleaning. If i had my way, we'd get rid of most of the furniture, soft furnishings, crockery, glassware, nik naks, houseplants etc and live a pretty spartan life resulting in very little cleaning but i've been over ruled on that.

Sometimes you just have to let the boss have her way.It leads to a happy medium.

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

Well, having a Dail that’s 80% male isn’t working out so well for the country.

Saying “why don’t they just run as Independents” is to ignore the fact that it’s much harder to get elected as an independent and much more expensive.

Why would having 50% women there make it any better? The highway workers are nearly 100% male and the roads are pretty good no? Would schools be better if we changed the 80/20 female/male teacher ratio to 50/50?

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why would having 50% women there make it any better? The highway workers are nearly 100% male and the roads are pretty good no? Would schools be better if we changed the 80/20 female/male teacher ratio to 50/50?

Because politics concerns society as a whole rather than certain specific sectors.

And since society is made up of men and women in almost equal numbers, it makes sense that government would be too.

Would it make for better government?

In some respects I believe it would. For example, I believe that a government with close to 50% women would be more likely to prioritise issues like the cost of childcare. Men in their 50s/ 60s don’t care so much about this because it effects them not a jot.

I believe more young politicians would be a good thing too (though I would rather see them do a good spell in government before they are promoted to senior ministries beyond their experience like Harris and Murphy)

Essentially I believe the Dail should represent a greater cross-section of society overall; more women, more young adults, more working class people.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

Because politics concerns society as a whole rather than certain specific sectors.

And since society is made up of men and women in almost equal numbers, it makes sense that government would be too.

Would it make for better government?

In some respects I believe it would. For example, I believe that a government with close to 50% women would be more likely to prioritise issues like the cost of childcare. Men in their 50s/ 60s don’t care so much about this because it effects them not a jot.

I believe more young politicians would be a good thing too (though I would rather see them do a good spell in government before they are promoted to senior ministries beyond their experience like Harris and Murphy)

Essentially I believe the Dail should represent a greater cross-section of society overall; more women, more young adults, more working class people.

And thankfully we live in a country where all those people can run for election...there is nothing stopping them...if you don't like how the people vote then propose a system that doesn't rely on who ordinary citizens vote for...

careless sherpa

biko wrote: »

We're getting off topic I think.

Women politicians are a necessity in my opinion.
Without them we would miss out on their views on life and politics.

So Joyce Fegan is complaining about that women are only representing 30% of the contestants in this election.
Her conclusion seems to be, somehow, that housework is keeping women from politics.
If fact her conclusion is quite unclear.

But somehow it's white middleaged men's fault.

If they cut down on the amount of time spent nagging they could easily have time to run in politics

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

And thankfully we live in a country where all those people can run for election...there is nothing stopping them...if you don't like how the people vote then propose a system that doesn't rely on who ordinary citizens vote for...

I think our system of voting is pretty good; it’s more about getting underrepresented groups on the ballot.

I think our current Oireachtas is probably the most diverse one to date, but it’s still far from being a decent cross-section of society.

And yes, a working class person/ woman/ young adult have the same rights, I understand that - but so far it hasn’t translated into a representative government.

mikemac2

There’s a Chris Rock joke somewhere about parents proudly declaring “I raise my kids right”

You don’t get credit for that. Its what you are supposed to do!

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

I think our system of voting is pretty good; it’s more about getting underrepresented groups on the ballot.

I think our current Oireachtas is probably the most diverse one to date, but it’s still far from being a decent cross-section of society.

And yes, a working class person/ woman/ young adult have the same rights, I understand that - but so far it hasn’t translated into a representative government.

I'm terrified of people like you...you don't destroy democracy in one day, you erode it over time...death by a thousand cuts, in normal society people like you should be shunned, but I probably sound like the nutter!

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

And yes, a working class person/ woman/ young adult have the same rights, I understand that - but so far it hasn’t translated into a representative government.

There are no barriers to women entering government. They just don't want to as much as men. Men seek power more so than women. Other than forcing women to be representatives, you will never see a gender balance in politics. These same natural tendencies are the reasons for gender imbalances in nursing, construction, teaching, tech etc. You will never have your utopia.

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

I'm terrified of people like you...you don't destroy democracy in one day, you erode it over time...death by a thousand cuts, in normal society people like you should be shunned, but I probably sound like the nutter!

You think I’ll destroy democracy through my desire for more people to run in elections? That’s a hot take.

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

There are no barriers to women entering government. They just don't want to as much as men. Men seek power more so than women. Other than forcing women to be representatives, you will never see a gender balance in politics. These same natural tendencies are the reasons for gender imbalances in nursing, construction, teaching, tech etc. You will never have your utopia.

Can you point me to any research that suggests women simply don’t want it as much as men? Or is that just an opinion based on nothing?

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

Can you point me to any research that suggests women simply don’t want it as much as men? Or is that just an opinion based on nothing?

Just look at the list of people who are running for office...this isn't difficult.

EmmetSpiceland

Silentcorner wrote: »

I'm terrified of people like you...you don't destroy democracy in one day, you erode it over time...death by a thousand cuts, in normal society people like you should be shunned, but I probably sound like the nutter!

You do.

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

Just look at the list of people who are running for office...this isn't difficult.

That’s a no, then.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

You think I’ll destroy democracy through my desire for more people to run in elections? That’s a hot take.

Would you have a problem with a quota of Catholics...or Scientologists, or deisel car drivers or cocaine users...anybody can run for public office as it stands...you wish to subvert the democratic process...so yes, people like you frighten me.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

That’s a no, then.

Well...I know this is controversial in this day and age...but you can assume their gender and work it out for yourself!!!

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

Would you have a problem with a quota of Catholics...or Scientologists, or deisel car drivers or cocaine users...anybody can run for public office as it stands...you wish to subvert the democratic process...so yes, people like you frighten me.

You must be mistaking me with another poster given that I have not at any point suggested or endorsed quotas.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

You must be mistaking me with another poster given that I have not at any point suggested or endorsed quotas.

It is the only way to achieve the desired diversity you wish to see.

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

Can you point me to any research that suggests women simply don’t want it as much as men? Or is that just an opinion based on nothing?

Its an opinion based on observable evidence. There are no barriers yet women are not putting themselves forward.

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

Well...I know this is controversial in this day and age...but you can assume their gender and work it out for yourself!!!

I think what you’re trying to say is that more men are running? Well, at least you’ve got that much right. And you’re extrapolating from that to suggest that means women aren’t interested? But you have no proof that they’re not interested. That’s a guess.

There could be a myriad of other reasons.

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Its an opinion based on observable evidence. There are no barriers yet women are not putting themselves forward.

Cool, as long as we’re clear that you have zero actual evidence for your opinion.

Whereas a Joint Oireachtas report has suggested there are multiple barriers to women getting involved in politics.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/lifestyle/the-five-cs-in-womens-way-29207130.html

No doubt you’ll reject this actual evidence for one reason or another, but there’s real research gone into this unlike your half-baked opinion which you’ve backed up in no way, shape or form.

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

It is the only way to achieve the desired diversity you wish to see.

I disagree, and please don’t ascribe political positions I don’t hold to me. It’s bad manners, especially when once you’ve done it you say I should be “shunned by society” based on your mistaken assumption.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

I disagree, and please don’t ascribe political positions I don’t hold to me. It’s bad manners, especially when once you’ve done it you say I should be “shunned by society” based on your mistaken assumption.

Well don't just come out with utterly banal statements like "more diversity please" without expressing one iota of an idea of how to achieve it then....

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

Well don't just come out with utterly banal statements like "more diversity please" without expressing one iota of an idea of how to achieve it then....

I’m not allowed to point out something I see as a problem unless I have a fully formed solution?

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

Cool, as long as we’re clear that you have zero actual evidence for your opinion.

Again, the evidence is there for all to see. Less women are putting themselves forward for election. This is observable and was in fact observed by the feminist author or the article.

KiKi III wrote: »

No doubt you’ll reject this actual evidence for one reason or another, but there’s actual research gone into this unlike your half-baked opinion which you’ve backed up in no way, shape or form.

It is not "evidence" at all, you have cited a report written by a biased group of femenists (womenforelection.ie). have you got a more unbiased account of the "barriers" women are facing? Anyway, here is a response to the 5 C's mentioned in the paragraph long link you shared...

Confidence

Grow a pair. If you don't have confidence I don't want you to represent me anyway.

Childcare

Don't have children if you want a career in politics.

Cash

Raise money like everyone else. Men have to raise money for their campaigns.

Candidate Selection

Parties are crying out for women. If a woman is available who is remotely confident, she will get selected over a man in many cases.

Culture


Again, it is not culture that is stopping women from becoming politicians. It is personal choice. There are many many top politicians who are women but they will always be in smaller numbers than men.



None of these "5 C's" have anything to do with sexism.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

I’m not allowed to point out something I see as a problem unless I have a fully formed solution?

Ya I know, it sounds nuts right!

This is why I am afraid of people who drink the identity politics Kool Aid...they don't know what they are doing!

KiKi III

“Grow a pair” What a fantastic way of putting it. You think women need balls?

“Don’t have children if you want a career in politics.” Men don’t have to choose between the two.

Anyway, I’m not going to convince you of anything, your mind is made up. And your arguments are so lacking in any kind of depth, nuance or evidence that it’s hard to take you seriously.

So I’m off to do something more pleasant with my afternoon.

suicide_circus

KiKi III wrote: »

“Don’t have children if you want a career in politics.” Men don’t have to choose between the two.

life isnt fair. there are loads of well known stats of how men have worse lives than women and vice versa. ce la vie. we're not going to socially engineer biological realities out of existence any time soon.

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya I know, it sounds nuts right!

This is why I am afraid of people who drink the identity politics Kool Aid...they don't know what they are doing!

It is nuts. You sound unstable based on your posts on this thread.

This is a discussion forum. If people were only allowed to discuss problems they have all the answers for it would be a quiet place indeed.

Like kidchameleon you have no interest in engaging in a genuine discussion aimed at finding solutions. You’d rather simply pretend men being in charge is the natural order of things.

Slán.

Yurt2

KiKi III wrote: »

Cool, as long as we’re clear that you have zero actual evidence for your opinion.

Whereas a Joint Oireachtas report has suggested there are multiple barriers to women getting involved in politics.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/lifestyle/the-five-cs-in-womens-way-29207130.html

No doubt you’ll reject this actual evidence for one reason or another, but there’s real research gone into this unlike your half-baked opinion which you’ve backed up in no way, shape or form.

The only one of those that is a genuine barrier is childcare. The rest is BS.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

It is nuts. You sound unstable based on your posts on this thread.

This is a discussion forum. If people were only allowed to discuss problems they have all the answers for it would be a quiet place indeed.

Like kidchameleon you have no interest in engaging in a genuine discussion aimed at finding solutions. You’d rather simply pretend men being in charge is the natural order of things.

Slán.

Ya, in this day and age, someone like me does sound nuts...I've already mentioned that....I like living in a culture rooted in "democracy" where all can run for public office and we all have the freedom of choice to do so or not.

You haven't even presented anything that remotely looks like a solution...without which there is no discussion...you just expect us to unquestionably accept your desire for "more diversity" because you believe you live your life to a higher moral standard , otherwise known as virtue signalling...this is an open forum not a twitter rabbit hole!!

The reason there is disparity is that not even women will vote for women

Kidchameleon

Yurt! wrote: »

The only one of those that is a genuine barrier is childcare. The rest is BS.

Its not really. If you want to raise to the top of any career, it is better not to have children. If anything, it is unfair on men, they CANNOT have children.

tritium

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The standard at which most women consider something clean means that they basically have to do it all on their own to meet their own standard, you cant share a part of the housework where somebodys exoectations are much higher than the other,

Interestingly there was a study (in the US I think) that concluded exactly this. A large amount of the effort was to do things “they way they wanted it done”. Fine and good but I’m not sure if I hire someone to do a job and they deliver on what’s asked to an acceptable standard I’m certainly not paying the company again to redo it or augment it just because someone decided it could be done better in their view.

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

Anyway, I’m not going to convince you of anything, your mind is made up. And your arguments are so lacking in any kind of depth, nuance or evidence that it’s hard to take you seriously.

So I’m off to do something more pleasant with my afternoon.

Wow, politician material right there :rolleyes: Well done young lady