National Women's Council of Ireland calls for gender quotas in local elections

iptba · 27-05-2019 6:12pm #1

National Women's Council of Ireland calls for gender quotas for candidates in local elections

Female candidates likely to secure over 23% of local authority seats

https://www.rte.ie/news/elections-2019/2019/0527/1051990-local-elections-women/

---
Minor point:

Kildare County Council, however, is bucking the trend, with a rather intriguing surge for women councillors. Women hold 11 (27.5%) of the 40 seats on the outgoing council.

The results so far of the 2019 count indicate that could change. With less than half of seats so far filled, 14 have already gone to women. That’s expected to rise to 16 in total - or 40%.

There is one interesting statistic. Of the 90 candidates who ran there - 28 were women. If 16 get in, as is probable, then 57% of all female candidates have managed to get elected.

By contrast, only 24 of the 62 men who are contesting the election will get elected. That's 40%.

In other words, women are more likely to get elected than men in Kildare County Council.

This is only one council. Statistically, one should expect some variations.
I think it's more interesting to look at the overall figure. 28% of candidates nationally were female.

In all 563 women ran out of a total 1977 candidates across the country.
https://www.rte.ie/news/elections-2019/2019/0526/1051828-election-2019-women-councillors/

It looks like the percentage of those who are elected who are female will be slightly less than 28%.

Silentcorner · 27-05-2019 6:36pm

Does anyone really care what gender their politician actually is...

If we introduce further draconian quotas will we then get rid of the Womens Council and all the other advocacy groups that the taxpayer funds?

NIMAN · 27-05-2019 8:43pm

Surely to have gender quota's you need to have more women taking the decision to run?

Galwayguy35 · 27-05-2019 8:45pm

I don't like the idea that a person should be entitled to a job because of their gender, let them get elected on merit.

titan18 · 27-05-2019 8:45pm

How many women ran as independents out of interest?

27-05-2019 8:50pm

It's a cod worthy of Mary Mitchell O'Connor. The number of male candidates running vastly outweighs their female counterparts. Which in turn informs a greater likelihood of a man being elected. The introduction of gender quotas eliminates a meritocracy.

NIMAN · 27-05-2019 9:27pm

The North shows what would happen if more women decide to run in politics.....all their MEPs are female.

...Ghost... · 28-05-2019 12:48pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Does anyone really care what gender their politician actually is...

It matters only if they use their position to further the agendas of their gender.

There is no need for gender quotas and they were introduced, I would not vote for female candidates as I would rightly hold the gender quota card against any and all female politicians. Let them be voted in on merit, not on gender.

NIMAN · 28-05-2019 11:04pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Does anyone really care what gender their politician actually is...

If we introduce further draconian quotas will we then get rid of the Womens Council and all the other advocacy groups that the taxpayer funds?

I don't care one bit.....but see when they use it as a defence, like in SwingGate, when she said "I am a strong, female politician", it does annoy me.

iptba · 28-05-2019 11:11pm

NIMAN wrote: »

I don't care one bit.....but see when they use it as a defence, like in SwingGate, when she said "I am a strong, female politician", it does annoy me.

Full quote:

"I am a strong female politician and some people don't like that."

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/politics/maria-bailey-dean-hotel-seanorourke-16207946

I don't believe that has anything to do with why she's being criticised.

the-island-man · 28-05-2019 11:18pm

Don't know what to make of the gender quotas in elections but this whole idea of equal pay and eradicating the "gender pay gap" could lead to a situation where it effects the concept of supply and demand in the jobs market.

Imagine a situation where a man or women can't negotiate a higher salary with a new company because a member of the opposite sex in the new company gets paid 10k less.

looksee · 28-05-2019 11:22pm

I'm female and I agree, no to quotas. Anyone in any job should get it by merit, not by quota.

iptba · 28-05-2019 11:28pm

titan18 wrote: »

How many women ran as independents out of interest?

I don't have any figures to hand, but I remember when it was being discussed with regard to Dáil elections and it was claimed that female candidates were disadvantaged when applying to be candidates for parties that the percentage of independent candidates who were female was lower again. Independent candidates don't have to be approved by any party; it suggested that simply fewer women were interested in becoming candidates rather than discrimination and disadvantage within parties.

Nobelium · 28-05-2019 11:30pm

What society should be striving for is equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome.

It's a great shame so many people fail to understand the very important difference.

Calhoun · 29-05-2019 1:14am

Of course they are calling for the quota's and you know what the mainline parties will eat it up to an extent.

Ireland doesn't have a gender balance issue it has a nepotism issue. They won't really do anything unless it benefits them and some of it does because they have daughters and sons.

Overall though it should mean sweet **** all what your gender is I can tell you one thing though Ireland being as small as it is its not what you know but who. How you counteract it though in a democratic way is the hard thing.

khaldrogo · 29-05-2019 1:18am

Nobelium wrote:

What society should be striving for is equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome.

Nobelium wrote:

It's a great shame so many people fail to understand the very important difference.

Is that you Dr. Peterson???

Nobelium · 29-05-2019 1:27am

khaldrogo wrote: »

Is that you Dr. Peterson???

Really, that's the best you can do ?

khaldrogo · 29-05-2019 2:42pm

Nobelium wrote:

Really, that's the best you can do ?

Me? What you said is nearly verbatim from the man himself. If you're going to use another person's words at least give them the credit

Nobelium · 29-05-2019 6:03pm

khaldrogo wrote: »

Me? What you said is nearly verbatim from the man himself. If you're going to use another person's words at least give them the credit

Rubbish, this factual principle has always existed, long before Peterson

bren2001 · 29-05-2019 8:34pm

Nobelium wrote: »

What society should be striving for is equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome.

It's a great shame so many people fail to understand the very important difference.

If there was equal opportunities for men and women, over a long enough sample period, it is fair to assume that their would be an equal number of male and females elected. Certain cycles may have more men than women and vice versa. It is clear, that more men are being elected and I would argue that is due to certain biases in the process for determining candidates and the electoral process. The troupe "equality of outcomes" is utter rubbish from a mathematical perspective.

I have no issues with gender quotas. There is a plethora of research to support the claim they increase participation levels of women and after a period of time they are no longer needed both in elected positions and in industry. I personally take the view that Ireland is roughly 50% men and 50% women and the Dail and local councils should reflect this. I think there is merit and logic in constituencies and wards to have male and female positions to represent its constituents fairly.

I see why men don't like it. It personally will affect me negatively but if it moves us to a more progressive society then I have no issue with their introduction.

Silentcorner · 29-05-2019 8:54pm

bren2001 wrote: »

If there was equal opportunities for men and women, over a long enough sample period, it is fair to assume that their would be an equal number of male and females elected. Certain cycles may have more men than women and vice versa. It is clear, that more men are being elected and I would argue that is due to certain biases in the process for determining candidates and the electoral process. The troupe "equality of outcomes" is utter rubbish from a mathematical perspective.

I have no issues with gender quotas. There is a plethora of research to support the claim they increase participation levels of women and after a period of time they are no longer needed both in elected positions and in industry. I personally take the view that Ireland is roughly 50% men and 50% women and the Dail and local councils should reflect this. I think there is merit and logic in constituencies and wards to have male and female positions to represent its constituents fairly.

I see why men don't like it. It personally will affect me negatively but if it moves us to a more progressive society then I have no issue with their introduction.

See this is the problem I have with quotas, who are doing these studies, are these the same people who believe that the gender pay gap is a consequence of men being paid more than women for the same work?

I'll bet, the Catholic Church could commission a plethora of studies about election quotas they could make an argument that we need to have fair representation of catholic identifying politicians, would you support religious quotas? if not why not?....quotas are manifestly undemocratic full stop....it is not easy to get elected male or female, nor should it be!

What is a more progressive society...one which forces/persuades women into stem and working the same hours as men, working in the same industries as men, commuting the same distances to work as men? Who gets to define what "progressive" means...

I would have thought allowing for freedom of choice and free speech would be a progressive liberal society, but it seems that's taboo these days!!

Plenty of men and women don't like quotas...if we can't recognise that there are differences between men and women which will be reflected in their life choices then it is a regressive society in my opinion.

bren2001 · 29-05-2019 9:23pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

See this is the problem I have with quotas, who are doing these studies, are these the same people who believe that the gender pay gap is a consequence of men being paid more than women for the same work?

I'll bet, the Catholic Church could commission a plethora of studies about election quotas they could make an argument that we need to have fair representation of catholic identifying politicians, would you support religious quotas? if not why not?....quotas are manifestly undemocratic full stop....it is not easy to get elected male or female, nor should it be!

What is a more progressive society...one which forces/persuades women into stem and working the same hours as men, working in the same industries as men, commuting the same distances to work as men? Who gets to define what "progressive" means...

I would have thought allowing for freedom of choice and free speech would be a progressive liberal society, but it seems that's taboo these days!!

Plenty of men and women don't like quotas...if we can't recognise that there are differences between men and women which will be reflected in their life choices then it is a regressive society in my opinion.

Researchers in a host of independent universities publishing in peer-reviewed journals and conferences. They undergo the same rigor as scientific and engineering papers which are widely accepted. If you want to question who is carrying out these studies, then fine, but without any research on your part, you cannot meerly dismiss them.

I never defined progressive as what you have there. That's not how I would define it at all. I also agree that men and women are different and should be treated differently. In fact, that is one of the underlying point of why quotas should be introduced imo. It allows for a fairer representation of our society and allows for a womans voice for women. Ultimately, I have no idea how men and women are different. Thus, how could I legislate on their behalf?

Silentcorner · 29-05-2019 9:29pm

bren2001 wrote: »

Researchers in a host of independent universities publishing in peer-reviewed journals and conferences. They undergo the same rigor as scientific and engineering papers which are widely accepted. If you want to question who is carrying out these studies, then fine, but without any research on your part, you cannot meerly dismiss them.

I never defined progressive as what you have there. That's not how I would define it at all. I also agree that men and women are different and should be treated differently. In fact, that is one of the underlying point of why quotas should be introduced imo. It allows for a fairer representation of our society and allows for a womans voice for women. Ultimately, I have no idea how men and women are different. Thus, how could I legislate on their behalf?

Research in the whole gendered studies area is like the wild west...any moron who ticks the right boxs can get research published in peer reviewed journals.

You never answered my question, would you support religious quotas if there was research published that justified it?

fly_agaric · 29-05-2019 9:40pm

bren2001 wrote: »

They undergo the same rigor as scientific and engineering papers which are widely accepted.

They can't. That is not the researcher's fault, or the fault of reviewers/people trying to repeat the experiment, just the nature of the subject(s) is such that they cannot IMO.
More complicated, more factors to pin down, harder (or impossible/unethical) to do a controlled experiment.
The strength of a conclusion coming out of research in the soft sciences cannot really equal that coming out of basic physics/chemistry/biology research IMO.

bren2001 · 29-05-2019 9:50pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Research in the whole gendered studies area is like the wild west...any moron who ticks the right boxs can get research published in peer reviewed journals.

You never answered my question, would you support religious quotas if there was research published that justified it?

I'd have to read the study to see what they are concluding and what methodology they used. It's far too complicated a question to be answered with yes or no.

Saying that, I'll bite, chances are I wouldn't support religious quotas. I think dividing people up according to a biological fact to ensure that they have equal representation is fair. Dividing people along lines of who believes in a made-up story does not seem correct to me.

fly_agaric wrote: »

They can't. That is not the researcher's fault, or the fault of reviewers/people trying to repeat the experiment, just the nature of the subject(s) is such that they cannot IMO.
More complicated, more factors to pin down, harder (or impossible/unethical) to do a controlled experiment.
The strength of a conclusion coming out of research in the soft sciences cannot really equal that coming out of basic physics/chemistry/biology research IMO.

I'd disagree with that. I see a lot of scientific research that's plain wrong (well Engineering but it's the same thing). I think there are issues in both fields but they both go through peer-review which ensures some level of integrity. However, I do accept that most people wouldn't agree with me and it'd be pretty fruitless for me to argue it. So I accept that.

Silentcorner · 29-05-2019 10:01pm

bren2001 wrote: »

I'd have to read the study to see what they are concluding and what methodology they used. It's far too complicated a question to be answered with yes or no.

Saying that, I'll bite, chances are I wouldn't support religious quotas. I think dividing people up according to a biological fact to ensure that they have equal representation is fair. Dividing people along lines of who believes in a made-up story does not seem correct to me.

I'd disagree with that. I see a lot of scientific research that's plain wrong (well Engineering but it's the same thing). I think there are issues in both fields but they both go through peer-review which ensures some level of integrity. However, I do accept that most people wouldn't agree with me and it'd be pretty fruitless for me to argue it. So I accept that.

Have a quick read of this... https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/hoax-papers-the-shoddy-absurd-and-unethical-side-of-academia-1.3655500

Let me ask you another question, should men and women be given two different lists to vote from, if we cannot achieve 50/50 representation...one a male list the other a female list? And for what purpose would a 50/50 gendered parliament serve? Please don't mention the patriarchy, I don't buy into made up fairy tales myself.

And can you give me one example, of how men seemingly benefit from our gender advantage in health, education, justice and mens issues advocacy?

iptba · 29-05-2019 10:35pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Have a quick read of this... https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/hoax-papers-the-shoddy-absurd-and-unethical-side-of-academia-1.3655500

Let me ask you another question, should men and women be given two different lists to vote from, if we cannot achieve 50/50 representation...one a male list the other a female list? And for what purpose would a 50/50 gendered parliament serve? Please don't mention the patriarchy, I don't buy into made up fairy tales myself.

And can you give me one example, of how men seemingly benefit from our gender advantage in health, education, justice and mens issues advocacy?

Yes, there may be more male politicians but it doesn’t mean they necessarily have much of an interest in speaking up for men specifically; while there are quite a number of politicians who sometimes or often speak up in some way for women.

Calhoun · 29-05-2019 10:39pm

Totally disagree on the need for quota's especially in Ireland where all things are not equal.

The only way i would consider it at all is if all public sector roles had 50:50 quota's. Which would mean that our education sector would be due one hell of an overhall. It still cheapens the candidates for me because its a case of they just aren't good enough to get in on their own.

I also would be very careful about putting stock in anything peer reviewed on gender studies, wasn't their a case in the past year or so where a group submitted parts of mein kampf and had them peer reviewed because thats how corrupt and safe space the education sector has become.

Then again when your so woke you don't believe that you should have to put effort into something and your sex is all you need to be qualified for something you don't let stuff like that get in the way.

utyh2ikcq9z76b · 29-05-2019 10:47pm

bren2001 wrote: »

If there was equal opportunities for men and women, over a long enough sample period, it is fair to assume that their would be an equal number of male and females elected. Certain cycles may have more men than women and vice versa. It is clear, that more men are being elected and I would argue that is due to certain biases in the process for determining candidates and the electoral process. The troupe "equality of outcomes" is utter rubbish from a mathematical perspective.

I have no issues with gender quotas. There is a plethora of research to support the claim they increase participation levels of women and after a period of time they are no longer needed both in elected positions and in industry. I personally take the view that Ireland is roughly 50% men and 50% women and the Dail and local councils should reflect this. I think there is merit and logic in constituencies and wards to have male and female positions to represent its constituents fairly.

I see why men don't like it. It personally will affect me negatively but if it moves us to a more progressive society then I have no issue with their introduction.

Why stop there, let's break it down by % of travellers, blacks,disabled, transgender etc etc etc and if not, why not? Should these groups have to feel under represented? What about all the other genders
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit

Etc

Calhoun · 29-05-2019 11:22pm

I also want to add i love the double standards we have in society, and how we approach things.

Male problems are explained away with logic which basically says your on your own but when it comes to females its a case of something must be done.

Don't get me wrong i much prefer that we all take personal responsibility and drive in our own lives but i just gotta laugh at the idiots who get sucked into siding with one gender and ignoring the inequality on the other.

Nobelium · 29-05-2019 11:26pm

iptba wrote: »

Yes, there may be more male politicians but it doesn’t mean they necessarily have much of an interest in speaking up for men specifically; while there are quite a number of politicians who sometimes or often speak up in some way for women.

When's the last time a male Irish politician spoke up and demanded quota's in professions where males are underrepresented like teaching and law ?

When are they going to be gender quotas in the dirty dangerous outdoor jobs in Ireland that man have to do I wonder ?

When are they going to do something about the higher male unemployment rates ? the higher male suicides ? the higher male homeless rates ?
The less chance of a male getting into university than a female ?

You won't hear much call for equality in these issues.

- Can you imagine the hysterical shrieking if it was the other way round ?

...Ghost... · 30-05-2019 7:09pm

bren2001 wrote: »

Saying that, I'll bite, chances are I wouldn't support religious quotas. I think dividing people up according to a biological fact to ensure that they have equal representation is fair. Dividing people along lines of who believes in a made-up story does not seem correct to me.

Utter BS. You support gender quotas presumably because men and women think differently, partially due to their biology. At the same time, you not only rule out, but you mock religious quotas (and religious people) and why? Because someone who has spiritual belief might think differently? Hypocrisy there.

bren2001 · 30-05-2019 8:28pm

...Ghost... wrote: »

Utter BS. You support gender quotas presumably because men and women think differently, partially due to their biology. At the same time, you not only rule out, but you mock religious quotas (and religious people) and why? Because someone who has spiritual belief might think differently? Hypocrisy there.

One's based on scientific and biological fact owing to different chemical and hormonal balances. The other is based on belief and belief alone with no scientific fact to back it up.

You should check the definition of hypocrisy. I might disagree with other posters here, hell everyone seems to disagree with me, but they are at least presenting something logical.

is_that_so · 30-05-2019 8:31pm

NIMAN wrote: »

Surely to have gender quota's you need to have more women taking the decision to run?

The idea behind them is to help redress the imbalance in politics so that in future more women will want to run through having more role models and we'll have less need to resort to crude quotas. In theory of course!

NIMAN · 30-05-2019 8:36pm

True, but if 75% of people who run for election are men, and you make it 50/50 appointments, then surely that's discimination too?

If more men run, maths tells you more men are going to get elected.

munsterbear · 30-05-2019 8:40pm

If they want quotas for elected officials, then introduce quotas for every single job. Including bin men, road sweepers, etc etc

iptba · 30-05-2019 8:56pm

is_that_so wrote: »

The idea behind them is to help redress the imbalance in politics so that in future more women will want to run through having more role models and we'll have less need to resort to crude quotas. In theory of course!

There was no time limit put on the gender quotas for elections to the Dáil.

iptba · 30-05-2019 8:57pm

NIMAN wrote: »

Surely to have gender quota's you need to have more women taking the decision to run?

Well it's not 100% essential, but if one is picking from a smaller pool, it risks a lower quality of candidate an average.

NIMAN · 30-05-2019 8:58pm

munsterbear wrote: »

If they want quotas for elected officials, then introduce quotas for every single job. Including bin men, road sweepers, etc etc

I think you'd enjoy this film

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3686998/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1

Calhoun · 30-05-2019 9:10pm

I love the right on bull**** about women needing the quotas becaus they need them role models. Next will be minorities both racial and sexual.

The sooner the better we have the snap back of people turning against PC culture the better.

Pawwed Rig · 30-05-2019 9:12pm

How about racial quotas or class quotas?

Or maybe just let people vote for whoever they like

is_that_so · 30-05-2019 9:13pm

iptba wrote: »

There was no time limit put on the gender quotas for elections to the Dáil.

No but I reckon it will be less of an issue after about 3 election cycles. Really what parties should be doing is getting women involved at very local level rather than scrambling to find enough females.

NIMAN · 30-05-2019 9:15pm

is_that_so wrote: »

No but I reckon it will be less of an issue after about 3 election cycles. Really what parties should be doing is getting women involved at very local level rather than scrambling to find enough females.

Is it up to the party to go to the women, or women to go to the parties?

If there's women out there who want to see more of their gender in politics, why do they have to wait to be approached?

is_that_so · 30-05-2019 9:17pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

How about racial quotas or class quotas?

Or maybe just let people vote for whoever they like

Technically they can never do that if they want to choose a party, seeing as parties pick the candidates for election.

is_that_so · 30-05-2019 9:19pm

NIMAN wrote: »

Is it up to the party to go to the women, or women to go to the parties?

If there's women out there who want to see more of their gender in politics, why do they have to wait to be approached?

Well the quotas are already there so I'd say the parties need to attract them in. Incidentally the quotas are only for the GE but here's some data in the recent locals.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2019/0519/1050380-female-candidates/

Calhoun · 30-05-2019 9:25pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

How about racial quotas or class quotas?

Or maybe just let people vote for whoever they like

Racial quota's are probably next and as i said have to add the LGBT flavor on top. Cannot let all the CIS folk have their way.

Calhoun · 30-05-2019 9:27pm

is_that_so wrote: »

Well the quotas are already there so I'd say the parties need to attract them in. Incidentally the quotas are only for the GE but here's some data in the recent locals.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2019/0519/1050380-female-candidates/

Imagine having to vote for a dud you knew was only their because of her sex. You would think they really are the weaker sex.

is_that_so · 30-05-2019 9:28pm

Calhoun wrote: »

Racial quota's are probably next and as i said have to add the LGBT flavor on top. Cannot let all the CIS folk have their way.

It's not going to happen. They are more individual calls for parties. At local level there is a case for looking at candidates from specific communities if they think they can get them elected.

is_that_so · 30-05-2019 9:31pm

Calhoun wrote: »

Imagine having to vote for a dud you knew was only their because of her sex. You would think they really are the weaker sex.

A vote is your own choice. Someone else might view your choice as a dud.

BTW Dun Laoghaire have hit 50/50 and the world hasn't ended.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/d%C3%BAn-laoghaire-rathdown-first-ever-council-with-50-50-gender-split-1.3906304

Calhoun · 30-05-2019 9:52pm

is_that_so wrote: »

A vote is your own choice. Someone else might view your choice as a dud.

BTW Dun Laoghaire have hit 50/50 and the world hasn't ended.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/d%C3%BAn-laoghaire-rathdown-first-ever-council-with-50-50-gender-split-1.3906304

No one is saying the world will end because you have 50:50 in office. What we are discussing is getting elected based on sex rather than merit.

Would you rather have sexists like Mary Mitchell O Connor or Regina Doherty who are only to happy to take advantage of the system to stay in power or back a decent female leader / role model.

Calhoun · 30-05-2019 9:53pm

is_that_so wrote: »

It's not going to happen. They are more individual calls for parties. At local level there is a case for looking at candidates from specific communities if they think they can get them elected.

When they see how well the free meal pass is for females why wouldn't they try it ?

National Women's Council of Ireland calls for gender quotas in local elections

Comments