Political parties usually set out to maximise support by proposing voter-friendly policies. If they are partisan, they aim to be so with an electorate where the majority might support that partisanship. A prime example of this is the SNP. They are quite partisan when it comes to the issue of Scottish secession from the United Kingdom. They have recently discovered, to their cost, that quality of governance and having a leader who is not the most annoying person in the United Kingdom are also important.
The Women’s Equality Party (WEP) is also, by its nature, quite partisan. For some reason they believe that the demographic fact that half, if not more, of the UK population is female means they must be able to win elections. Sadly for them, this is not the case. It does also mean the WEP runs the risk of alienating the other half of the UK electorate instead, whom they more or less blame for the perceived ‘inequality’ that called the party into being. In the last general election, all seven WEP candidates lost their deposits as the two-party system reasserted itself across the country.
There is something quite unusual about this party, which is that its website makes virtually no mention of the people, who we can but assume are women, who run it. Of course, it is possible to find articles using Google and Wikipedia that mention names, but the party’s website is literally almost devoid of personality.
There also appears to be something unusual going on inside the WEP at the moment. It seems to be having a problem defining precisely what is a ‘woman’. On November 17, the following press release was posted anonymously on this anonymous website. I reproduce it in full:
On 15 November 2017, the Women’s Equality Party received complaints from Party Members that the conduct of an elected Party Spokesperson promoted prejudice against the transgender community.
The complaint has been raised with the Executive Committee in accordance with Article 7.10 of the WE Constitution and the spokesperson and complainants have been notified.
The Women’s Equality Party is a collaborative political force uniting people of all genders, diverse ages, backgrounds, ethnicities, races, beliefs and experiences in the shared determination to see women enjoy the same rights and opportunities as men so that all can flourish.
WE recognise that the binary words ‘woman’ and ‘man’ do not reflect the gender experience of everyone in our country and support the right of all to define their sex or gender or to reject gendered divisions as they choose.
Women, as a class, are discriminated against and oppressed. There is a shared experience as a class but that discrimination and oppression will often express itself differently for cis women and trans women, just as other factors such as age, ethnicity, economic background and disability are likely to have an impact.
WE are committed to addressing the very real oppression of trans people as well as the social structures that oppress and sometimes erase cis women and damage all genders. Cis inclusivity must never mean trans exclusivity, nor vice versa. There are huge and serious issues to address and it is vital that we find ways to discuss our experiences in an environment of mutual respect and tolerance if we are to progress to equality for all.
The Women’s Equality Party will ensure a thorough, impartial and transparent investigation for all complaints. We will not comment further on this matter until that process has been concluded.
The WEP has been hoist by its own politically-correct petard. I have written previously about how absurdly abstract the whole concept of ‘equality’ is. Now this party is having a fundamental identity crisis. They also now believe a ‘woman’ is actually a class. Who knew?
It seems likely that the WEP, which might have been started with the best, albeit misguided, intentions, is having to endure the ordeal of most ‘progressive’ organisations, namely infiltration by the hard Left. Communism is so generally unappealing that its practitioners can advance only through entryism into other organisations, so entryism is something they are quite good at doing. Diseases have similar survival mechanisms.
The press release could have been written only by someone well-versed in the works of Karl Marx. Only a Marxist would use the phrase ‘very real repression’ while campaigning in a Western democracy. A non-Marxist would have immediately spotted the inappropriate use of the word ‘class’.
The release also fails to explain what the words that caused so much offence actually were. So other party members are at risk of repeating this ‘crime’, and presumably being purged. How very Stalinist it all seems.
The WEP’s remit appears now to have been extended to include women who identify as men, as well as men who identify as women. The party’s constitution makes no mention whatsoever of transgenderism. However it is now standing in support of the men who simply feel happier wearing a wig and a dress in public. This is what is now meant by ‘women’s equality’. Again, who knew?
Perhaps the party needs to be renamed. The Women’s And Anyone Who Currently Identifies Or Previously Identified As A Woman’s Equality Party (WAAWCIOPIAAWEP) seems more appropriate.
The WEP might now be safely written off as yet another hard-Left front organisation. It is to be hoped that its existing members soon come to their senses and realise they have joined the legions of the useful idiots of communism.