[Closed] Segregated audience at Labour rally

[s]Ernie[/s] mudmumcher - you have dodged my main questions, so I'll put it to you again....

I wont really

Doesn't this say more about the audience than the platform?

Nice anecdote thanks for sharing

don't trivialise someone's real world experience.

How do you feel about toilets segregating on gender?
Better or worse than ones that do it on race or sexuality?

toilet separation is pretty universal and is related to safety, not the subjugation of women.

if I was giving a talk and they wantd to segregate people I wouldn't do the talk. However, if they don't want to sit next to woman thats their asinine choice.

looked like it was in a mosque mind you

+ 1 Slowoldman

poah - Member

if I was giving a talk and they wantd to segregate people I wouldn't do the talk.

In which case, maybe some of those women in the audience don't get to hear you, and the democratic process withdraws itself from them.

Sometimes, you get 2 bad choices. I'm not certain that in this case walking away would be the right thing.

Some communities separate themselves from others and maintain different cultural norms.

The degree of isolation is often the issue as what are seen as hard won rights by some communities are culturally alien to others.

Having said that I am not happy living in a society where the "forced marriage season" isn't a national scandal. Or where communities cut themselves off from the police choosing to implement their own system of justice for crimes such as armed robbery.

This is the UK now.

Remember the suffragettes moron, we don't need another womens revoution we have already had one.

"there's the whole issue of impressing Western values on people of other cultures."

This is absolute cobblers. Oppression of women has been a universal value for most of humanity's existence; fair treatment of women is not a Western value.

Toadying scumbags failing to stand up for their principles.

(as an aside, I'd call that a meeting, not a rally).

In which case, maybe some of those women in the audience don't get to hear you

And of course some of the women guest speakers too. Women weren't just in the audience they were also at the front speaking, giving their opinions, arguing their points, taking questions, etc. Including Councillor Jess Phillips (definitely a woman) Councillor Mariam Khan (a woman, a Muslim, and one of the organisers) and Shabana Mahmood MP (a woman, a Muslim, and a barrister)

Yes that's right, an audience consisting of women AND men sat listening to the views of women, including the local MP for Birmingham Ladywood a woman and Muslim elected by Muslims (including Muslim men) and non-Muslims to represent them. How did that happen?

I don't see anything bad in this at all, never mind "2 bad choices".

It seems that the person most outraged by this event is Nigel Farage, that well-known defender of Muslim women.

It reminds me of the EDL's campaign against the burka :

[img] [/img]

Bless their bleeding hearts.

Which brings me to the point had men and women not sat separately surely it still wouldn't have been acceptable if the Muslim women had worn veils - that symbol of "oppression". In fact let's be fair no meeting involving Muslims who follow their beliefs would have been acceptable.

In other words Muslims should be ostracised and excluded from the full political process. Disengaging Muslims and excluding them from the political process is the obvious way forward for these people. And it's the way to counter Muslim "extremism", obviously.

The meeting did not occur in a mosque btw poah.

as an aside, I'd call that a meeting, not a rally

Apparently they called it a "jalsa/rally".

I recognise their right to call it whatever they want to call it.

[img] [/img]

In which case, maybe some of those women in the audience don't get to hear you, and the democratic process withdraws itself from them.

Sometimes, you get 2 bad choices. I'm not certain that in this case walking away would be the right thing.

if I was giving a talk it wouldn't be about politics ha ha ha ha

The would be able to see me at a different venue were men and woman are free to sit where they want to.

ernie_lynch - Member

I don't see anything bad in this at all,

You have no issues with the gender segregation at all?

poah - Member

The would be able to see me at a different venue were men and woman are free to sit where they want to.

That's just it, would they? Or would they find it harder to attend without the guarantee of segregation? I don't know, in this case, nobody does without speaking to the individuals but I reckon it's possible.

It's a bit like "ban the veil, it's oppressive", which sounds great as a rallying cry, but ends up with some of the most oppressed people getting it even worse.

5thElefant, mitsumonkey, and bloodynora, I'm waiting for enfht to turn up.
Those Muslim-loving champions of tolerance.
It's Labour Party/Lefty bashing time

You have no issues with the gender segregation at all?

No of course not, why would I? If the Muslim community wants to organise a political meeting/rally and the women and men decide that they would rather sit separately then it's completely up to them as far as I'm concerned, it has nothing to do with me.

Obviously if they were being forced to do something which they didn't want to do then I might have an issue with that.

I don't tell people how they should live their lives, and I don't think others should either. That's why for example I'm so hostile towards homophobia despite the fact that just the very thought of two men engaging in sexual activity makes me wince.

I think it's a real cheek to tell other people how to live their lives and quite frankly none of anyone elses business.

Getting back to the meeting in question I think it is hugely encouraging to see the Muslim community within the Labour Party organising themselves.

This was not a case of the Labour Party organising a meeting for the Muslim community but Muslims organising a Labour Party meeting/rally, exactly as it should be, and what true democracy is actually about, ie, making your own decisions rather than relying on others to make decisions for you.

And it's clear from the both the audience and the speakers that Muslim women have an active role in UK society. It might well be the case that much more needs to be done but that is also true of wider British society, not least in the case of working-class women.

And just to give one small personal anecdotal example one of my local GPs is a young Muslim woman, it would appear that being both a Muslim and a woman hasn't held her back in life, despite what Muslim-haters would have you believe. Of course she might have been forced to become a doctor against her will, who knows, but she is an absolutely lovely and charming person who seems very happy in her job.

ernie_lynch - Member

and the women and men decide that they would rather sit separately

Are you being deliberately disingenuous here?

at what point does being indoctrinated in certain ideologies and the social pressure to conform with certain associated rules become being "forced into doing something"?
how can we operate as progressive and inclusive societies when segregation on the basis of gender exists and is at odds with a universal view on equality?

Are you being deliberately disingenuous here?

OK you obviously think that the people at the meeting/rally were forced to do what they didn't want to do despite it being organised by themselves. It's inconceivable that the women might have wanted to sit separately. Presumably you also think that Cllr Mariam Khan pictured in the leaflet was forced to wear a veil and my GP was probably forced to become a doctor. Everything that Muslim women do is forced on them, including Shabana Mahmood MP for Birmingham Ladywood.

Let's leave it at that, I can't see this going anywhere useful.

One of my greatest pleasures in life is to watch self-confessed diversity activists heads explode and how they then warp their own values around a new reality when they meet values that are clearly counter to their own and would usually make them rage out, if it weren't for the fact that those values belonged to a minority group.

Then again, I'm a ****.

[img] [/img]

^^^^^ Inhabited by idiots who have opinions that they think matter. I don't know why this world keeps turning.

Good for you Tom, I'm sure it fits in nicely with your Zionist views. Conversely I can't say that I get any pleasure from seeing those who purport to espouse tolerance to show so little tolerance.

It's a funny ol' world.

Well, if you think about it Ernie, twisting your own viewpoint in response to a minority viewpoint is the racist stance. It's saying that they don't know any better, so let them be.

Either feminist values are good for everyone and not just white women or they aren't.

I will continue being apathetic to just about everyone I meet who has an opinion on anything, cheers.

Let's leave it at that, I can't see this going anywhere useful.

One of my greatest pleasures in life is to watch self-confessed diversity activists heads explode and how they then warp their own values around a new reality when they meet values that are clearly counter to their own and would usually make them rage out, if it weren't for the fact that those values belonged to a minority group.

Tom_W1987 has got your number with this

"It's as frustrating as living on a planet full of starving people where you could occasionally point out food...." 😀

Either feminist values are good for everyone and not just white women or they aren't.

😆

You obviously don't read much of what I post otherwise you would realise how ridiculous that comment is.

I am notoriously un-PC and have no time for 'feminist' claptrap.

I don't engage in middle-class/Guardian Reader pontifications. I don't assume a self-righteous prerogative to tell people how they should speak because I went to university and now read the Guardian.

Nor do I waste my time arguing whether the person chairing a meeting should be addressed as chairman, chairwoman, chairperson, or just chair. I have actually known the start of meetings to be held up because herberts who learnt their politics from reading books wanted discuss bollocks like that.

Then me and you probably have a little more in common than you think Ernie......although I would regard myself as being supportive of feminism in general. Not all of it is "claptrap", I just can't be bothered with any of it.

ernie_lynch - Member

It's inconceivable that the women might have wanted to sit separately.

I think it's pretty inconceivable that the women got together and all said "Yeah, let's segregate from the men" and everyone was happy with that, yes. Do you think there was not one woman that was thinking "This sucks, why are we split like this"?

TBH I think the way you're immediately reducing the conversation to absurd extremes and caricatures of the actual arguments suggests you know how dubious your position is.

you may like this

I'll refer you to my comment : [i]"herberts who learnt their politics from reading books"[/i] 😉

EDIT : I see that you've edited out your recommendation that I read "A Farewell to Truth". Since a blank post would look a little strange I'll just leave as it is 🙂

Barghhh, you're irritating me more than usual today ernie. 😉

Its 1am, it's too late to be an obfuscating git lol.

Do you think there was not one woman that was thinking "This sucks, why are we split like this"?

Assume for a moment* that the problem is that for a load of the ethnically-specific muslim women in the audience, mixed seating would require them to choose to go a Labour meeting knowing they'd be shamed or shouted at by their father, husband, imam or whatnot.

Of course, Labour is delighted to talk to the ones who say “screw the patriarchy, I'm going to the meeting”, and all power to their elbow. But it doesn’t seem to me to be shameful to address the women who aren’t ready to have a row with their husbands as a condition of their political participation. Insisting on that point leaves you in the position of saying “[i]Labour is [u]so[/u] committed to gender equality that it cannot talk directly to women who are seriously constrained by patriarchal social structures in their daily lives[/i]”.

Unlike Ernie, I [i]am[/i] a middle-class Guardian-reading tosser, but I agree with him that there's a useful distinction between procedural stuff like seating or what you call the person chairing the meeting and substantive stuff. If you end up cancelling the meeting because of the seating arrangements, it's not clear you've necessarily won.

*sounds reasonably plausible to me, but don't know

🙂

ernie_lynch - Member
You have no issues with the gender segregation at all?

No of course not, why would I? If the Muslim community wants to organise a political meeting/rally.....

Wrong - It was a labour meeting for that constituency organised by a Labour councillor.

ernie_lynch - Member, and the women and men decide that they would rather sit separately then it's completely up to them as far as I'm concerned, it has nothing to do with me.

It was on the poster that there was a "woman's section", not sure they had much choice in the matter

If you'd been living in that constituency and wanted to attend with your misses you would have been separated.

...And why do we have to always assume that anyone of an Asian/****stani background is a muslim? There are more educated ****stanis who think religion and Islam is a load BS.

ernie_lynch - Member
I think it's a real cheek to tell other people how to live their lives and quite frankly none of anyone elses business.

As an atheist it concerns me Labour will drag our progressive society backwards with more faith schools pedaling this nonsense and more acceptance of this outdated religious dogma. We should be challenging their beliefs and trying to bring them into the 21st century not encouraging this. Ultimately if people want to believe in fairies, God, father Christmas or whatever that's up to them but we should draw the line when they start imposing their crazy beliefs on others.

Of course if Ed gets in he said he is going to criminalise Islamaphobia so after Thursday we might not be able to have these discussions anymore.

Spot on.

BigDummy - Member

Of course, Labour is delighted to talk to the ones who say “screw the patriarchy, I'm going to the meeting”, and all power to their elbow. But it doesn’t seem to me to be shameful to address the women who aren’t ready to have a row with their husbands as a condition of their political participation.

Yep, exactly how I feel about it. Refusing to speak at a segregated event, IF there's discrimination involved in the segregation, punishes the people being discriminated against.

Of course if Ed gets in he said he is going to criminalise Islamaphobia so after Thursday we might not be able to have these discussions anymore.

I haven't seen anything islamophobic in this discussion. I reckon there are a few islamophobes posting though.

[post edited to include quote]

As an atheist it concerns me Labour will drag our progressive society backwards with more faith schools pedaling this nonsense and more acceptance of this outdated religious dogma

are any of the major parties against faith schools?

personally I think they should be banned, sadly both ed and dave want the votes

Ultimately if people want to believe in fairies, God, father Christmas or whatever that's up to them but we should draw the line when they start imposing their crazy beliefs on others.

Of course if Ed gets in he said he is going to criminalise Islamaphobia so after Thursday we might not be able to have these discussions anymore.

Well you should have said when you first started this thread a day ago mudmuncher, that the real issue for you here wasn't anything to do with the seating arrangement at a meeting, but that you are just one more tedious EDL type Muslim-hater.

It would have been more honest.

Although I can see why you didn't, it allowed the usual bigots to crawl out of the woodwork and some well-intentional people to stick their oars in, all in apparent concern for the seating arrangement.

but that you are just one more tedious EDL type Muslim-hater.

For the record, I think Christians are just as deluded as Muslims.
...And I'm not in the EDL
...And I don't hate anyone

[url= http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/04/free-speech-campaigners-concerned-by-ed-milibands-vow-to-ban-islamophobia--without-defining-what-he-means ]http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/04/free-speech-campaigners-concerned-by-ed-milibands-vow-to-ban-islamophobia--without-defining-what-he-means[/url]

I think there are grounds to be concerned.

And I don't appreciate your bigotry towards atheists

I see you deleted you previous post Ernie?

For the record you accused me of being a bigot and implied I was unintelligent for being concerned about Ed's Islamophobia law.

Was it because I posted the link showing my concerns were valid you deleted your post?

A bit sneaky Ernie!

he cannot delete a post only the mods can [ I dont know if he did or if he did not post to be clear]

if Ed gets in he said he is going to criminalise Islamaphobia so after Thursday we might not be able to have these discussions anymore.

It will really depend what the law says as to whether i support it as one needs to balance free speech v say hate crimes of all types. It's worth noting islamic preachers can be charged if they speak freely about their views of the west. Did I miss your thread complaining about this curtailment in free speech ?

No I didn't delete any post, I can't do that. A mod obviously did.

For the record you accused me of being a bigot and implied I was unintelligent for being concerned about Ed's Islamophobia law.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up. Although I used the word daft, which I assume is what caused the post to be deleted as it's presumably considered to be an unparliamentary term.

But anyway, carry on.

Apart from the obvious desire of certain people to manufacture a stick to beat the labour party with is their any evidence that women were forced to sit in the women's section rather than the section being provided so that women could if they chose to do so could sit there?

If it was enforced segregation it seems odd the panel were not also segregated.

How would all those so gleefully outraged by this BLATANT HYPOCRASY chose to engage and include women who either by choice convention or coercion would not feel able to attend a non segregated event or would they simply adopt the simplistic accept our terms or tough approach to inclusion?

There should be an Edinburgh Defence type phrase reserved for whenever Ernesto loses the plot posting EDL/BNP pictures and personal insults.

Any ideas what it should be called?

Business as usual?

Ernie, I can't work out if you're a lefty or an American style libertarian....or a weird mix of both.

Any ideas what it should be called?

the Enfht insults rather than defends his view?

Not catchy but at least its accurate.

Edinburgh defence was used to bully TJ by those unable to debate with him
Oh the irony.