Referendum on Gender Equality

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329041#Comment_120329041

i think people will need see what is actually suggested first.

will it be a removal of text, a text augmentation, or an addition to the existing text.

and what will the resultant read like.

it would be a brave person to outwardly shout "im against gender equality" in 2022

Nermal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120328951#Comment_120328951

That someone has sufficient spare time to contribute to a 'Citizen's Assembly' is in itself a very good reason to completely ignore them.

archermoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120328986#Comment_120328986

Why would you think I missed that. Do you dispute the facts presented in the article? If so, where is your substantiation of your assertion?

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329084#Comment_120329084

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329018#Comment_120329018

...

archermoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120328994#Comment_120328994

I'd be quite happy with both. Removing the gender specific assignment in the constitution and a working wage for a stay at home parent.

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329059#Comment_120329059

I'm guessing this

In my opinion, this is more about normalising all the non-binary genders that are now claimed to exist and removing the traditional male and female roles from Irish society.

will the main counter-argument advanced, regardless of whether there is any justification for it or not.

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329142#Comment_120329142

the main argument put forward by the citizens assembly is the article should be "non gender specific".... so, if anything, reference to non traditional genders will absolutely NOT be part of the wording of the constitution. "person" is about as "non gender specific" as you can get.

Smee_Again

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329196#Comment_120329196

Since when have "No" campaigns limited their argument to what is actually being voted on.

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329196#Comment_120329196

 reference to non traditional genders will absolutely NOT be part of the wording of the constitution.

Do you think the Catholic Right would let a trifling matter like that put a stop to their gallop? Remember how they tried to focus the same-sex marriage referendum debate on gay adoption...

StrawbsM

Part of the open letter from the citizens assembly….

“Some of the prevailing gender norms and stereotypes are deeply destructive and adversely affect all genders. Trans and non-binary people suffer from particular facets of inequality. Advancing gender equality through implementing our recommendations can benefit the whole of Irish society, regardless of gender identity. We are recommending behavioural change so that all citizens are respected and valued.”

For the above paragraph alone, I will be voting NO in the referendum. I’ve had enough of trans rights being deemed more important than my rights as a woman. “Persons who menstruate”, biological males in woman’s sports, rapists in women’s prisons. Women’s identities have been erased enough, thanks.

osarusan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120328938#Comment_120328938

There is no protection there for anybody either way. Both parents are already at work out of economic necessity, and if they're lucky enough to be in a situation where only 1 parent (or neither) needs to work, it has nothing to do with any constitutional entitlement.

It's meaningless as it stands - either revise it to say something meaningful, or just delete it.

Smee_Again

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329281#Comment_120329281

I'll probably wait until the wording is actually published before deciding, that way I can make an informed decision.

JohnnyFortune

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120328378#Comment_120328378

Will be interesting to see them define what gender actually is.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329316#Comment_120329316

Another other than man or woman and my suspicions will be confirmed.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329281#Comment_120329281

And that will be key - just what do ordinary women and mothers in particular think of the proposed changes? They will be the main influence on how people vote and rightly so.

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329271#Comment_120329271

yeah i can imagine the howls of laughter when the catholic right come riding into the debate under the banner of "we are here to protect women"

...Ghost...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329095#Comment_120329095

I would think you missed it because you have relied on it to prop up your argument as if the "opinion" article was a credible, peer reviewed document. Let's ignore the use of the image in the article where a woman is hoovering under her husbands feet while he relaxes and reads a newspaper and ask:

What "facts" would you be relying on in the article exactly?

The only fact worth a mention is the marriage bar, which not only ended 50 years ago, it also did not require the text of the constitution to enact the legislation, nor an amendment to the constitution to reverse that same legislation. Wrong as the legislation was, it did not prevent women from working, it only prevented them from working in certain public service roles, so that in itself is a blanket exaggeration used by some.

It points to a census from over a century ago about 93% of Irish indoor labour being women. The article is then peppered with old idiosyncrasies in an effort to draw nods from the already biased reader.....I say biased, because it's not an article I would tend to click into, as I know what direction it is going to take in omission of the actual facts.

The opinion article wrongly suggests that article 41.2 was the cause of womens economic woes. The argument is far more complex and outside of the constitution which I once again will say offers greater protection to women than men with this specific article. So, while I don't think it needs changing, I am quite happy for it to become a neutral term.

JohnnyFortune

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329327#Comment_120329327

Another what? You can't define something without giving a definitive of what it actually is.

archermoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329353#Comment_120329353

So you don't consider that it was used as a reason to give welfare payments for both members of a couple solely to the husband, or that the woman's portion of the payment was set to 60% of the man's payment to be worth a mention? Good to know.

Then again as long as it is changed to a gender neutral term I don't really care why people go along with it.

...Ghost...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329283#Comment_120329283

I have seen the protection in effect on many occasions. I have family and friends who have, or still do avail of unemployment benefits. All of the men received letters from the SWO after a period of time threatening to cut their benefit if they did not attend interviews at the SWO and engage actively in job hunting and courses. None of the women (including those with no children) ever received such correspondence, but could choose to engage in the services voluntarily. The protections are very much in place.

While they are at it they can change the 36 instances of the word Chairman in the constitution to Chairperson while they are on the Gender Equality buzz.

...Ghost...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329400#Comment_120329400

Conflation. Such legislation did not require the article to be in place. Similar to an 18-25 year old claiming unemployment or JS benefit receiving a lower amount than someone 25 or older. Or if they live at home with their parents, it's a fraction of the amount even though they are adults and should receive the same base amount as anyone else. It's not fair, but its also not the constitutions fault.

...Ghost...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329403#Comment_120329403

While they're at it, they can make gender quotas and so called gender pay gap fines unconstitutional. Pay and promote people based on their worth to the organisation, rather than their gender identity.

osarusan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329401#Comment_120329401

You think that there is consititional protection for women which prevents them from being sent letters by Welfare asking them to attend job-related interviews and engage in job-seeking?

You can't be serious.

Here's something from the government website:

A person must be available for work in order to qualify for and continue to receive Jobseeker's Benefit, i.e. be available for work in respect of each day for which he or she declares that he or she is unemployed.

You'd best get on to the government and let them know that's unconstitutional.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329453#Comment_120329453

Are you taking the piss?

Because I agree with your statement.

It’s not good enough just removing words from the constitution. The constitution needs to be modernised to reflect Ireland today.

Equality is for both Genders and this needs to laid out correctly in the constitution weather it’s good or bad for either side.

MrMusician18

I suppose we should remove the special place of women in the home because the States inaction has resulted in many Irish women not having any homes at all.

The greatest waste of money and virtue signalling nonsense to come from this government yet. The main thing is that it will keep the right people in the IT on side for a couple of months however.

Maybe instead of wasting time and money on a line of text that has no practical meaning or effect on the lives of people, they might actually spend some time dealing with real life problems.

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329498#Comment_120329498

The greatest waste of money and virtue signalling nonsense to come from this government yet

it hasnt come from the government

MrMusician18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329517#Comment_120329517

I'm sorry, but didn't the Taoiseach announce the intention to call the referendum yesterday?

Unless I'm mistaken, the Taoiseach is the leader of the Government.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120328897#Comment_120328897

Ha. Yeah right. Boards is famously supportive of women who don't work.

You're talking about a small subset of wealthy, middle class people who have a partner earning enough to support a family, house etc.

It's like most things though. Little will change immediately but things will likelynchange over time. I imagine there will be the usual suspects who think the sky will fall when this referendum passes, much like they did before the gay marriage referendum. But I doubt much will change in the short term.

Men getting a fair hearing in child custody disagreements would be a welcome change. As it stands, it makes sense to assume the woman will get custody of the children and the man will work and earn money to care for the children. It's how the constitution is written.

El_Duderino 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120329041#Comment_120329041

Might make John Waters relevant for a short while again.