‘No need to attend’: Young Labour responds to critics of straight, white men ‘ban’

Is this good or bad politics?


Other urls found in this thread:



Not a good look optics wise and will alienate people
However minority ethnic doesn't mean non white it means non brithish White so they'll probably be poles and Romanians


We had a whole thread derailment about this where some Peterson fanboy started sperging out, screaming "YOU ARE ALL IDPOL ADMIT IT," expect more of that with this exclusionary bullshit

I don't agree with this but it's an 'equalities conference' for electing minority reps, it's not really as bad as you make out. It's not like white men are being banned from Labour

Where exactly?

The Peterson thread, yesterday. Even by Holla Forumsyp shitposting standards, it was some seriously exasperating dumbfuckery.

Why should straight white men have a say in an "equalities conference?" They're already on top of the pile, and pretty much guaranteed to be out of touch on race / gender / etc. issues than people who, you know, experience oppression along those lines. But of course, a lot of SWM seem to have internalized the idea that their experience is the default and therefore every space should cater to them, even at the expense of those who the space is actually for. It's like Gamergaters whining about queer representation in vidya becoming a thing when 90% of the market is still AAA schlock tailored to focus groups of 12yo boys.

there shouldn't be one

This sounds like an accident waiting to happen for Holla Forumsyps to use

Its for the 'equalities conference' to elect 'equalities officers'. Equalities means according to the Equalities act those categories. So its not exactly bad labour policy, its just that the diversity quota managers for labour's youth wing will be selected by those they are meant to be representing. Which is hardly controversial.
The media naturally will fucking love to paint this as Labour banning straight white men from the party which will go down really well in the schizoid minds of daily mail readers, Holla Forumsyps and other assorted tory drones.
We shouldn't need fucking 'equalities' officers, especially not in the bloody youth wing, but this isn't at all unreasonable. Its bad optics but its not like the media covers the stuff labour does well anyway.

this is good for nationalist populists

I mean you aren't wrong. The left has known that electoral politics are more or less a dead end for 100 years and yet everyone still gets worked up over literal non-issues like this or Democratic Cops of America using the progressive stack. Maybe y'all should try getting your own shit together first

Why are English men not allowed be equality officers? They are retarded not naming it something else

Also no elderly, fucking hell that's great optics.



Why would there be elderly people in Young Labour?

Doesn't this contradict the slogan "For the many, not the few"?

what did it mean by this?

British law defines the term 'equalities' as issues concerning 'protected' (read minority) characteristics.

I wonder what fraction of the population of ethnic britons would need to dwindle to until liberals embraced their identity politics.
I'm guessing less than 20%.

There's absolutely no problem with an under represented minority being represented. I can't really believe this is even an argument.

how does something like this even get approval?

how could The Absolute Boy even let this happen? Are there even enough ethnic minorities in England to make an entire conference just for them? And disabled? As a fucking idenetity? What sort of ideology is this? How can somebody fucking identify as disabled??? HOW DOES THAT WORK???


yeah but that's fucking california.

If socialists want equality, why do they want to steal money from rich people???
checkmate commies

basically they want every member trying to attend to tell them about their sexual orientation, gender identification, health and ethnic background
all private matters

imagine any ML party had done that

anyway, if you were disgusting libshit who wants in on that crap you can always just say you are bisexual and shame them if they demanded evidence with their own idpol arguments
also could easily claim you have slavic background, any white could do that


Remember that time YL had balls was actually like fucking trotskyist and stuff? Kinnock remembers.

She's from North Carolina, not CA

well, she clearly is disabled. mentally. i do feel bad for her.

ask Holla Forums

he's a cuckdem, stop acting surprised over him pulling dumb shit and letting it happen.

Young Labour is a blairite org set-up in 1993.

so is anyone who "identifies" as something they're physically not. that goes for trans-species, trans-gender, trans-disabled, trans-racial, etc. It's all a mental disorder, by definition.

Wait how and people who are with it enough to be Anti-NATO also be this deep in Idpol?

I identify as the human race. Wtf

You mean for those that want to LARP as socialists but don't want to be associated with Soviet Union? And had nothing to do with Trotskyist thought?

How did you think it was going to end? Not in liberals?

Remember that time when the left was anti globalist and would go on G8 meeting and caused all sorts of havoc?

Tell Corbyn some bigots said thanks.

but like, then have candidates from minorities run maybe? Which I think labour already does? And labour is only like 30 something % of the parlaiment? So they'd have to convince the tories to run more people of colour? What, do they want fucking ulster loyasists and the SNP to run black and brown people for MPs?

Also, I am digging that anime Trotsky.

better send the fucking Corbyn NVKD to purge them then. Blairites to the gulag unironically

That's three walls too many.

as long as it's in the ICD i wouldn't argue about it being a mental issue.
for transgenders there is ways to explain it biologically so things are more nuanced,
and race doesn't even exist so dunno,
but "identifying" as something where there's clearly no connection, it's some mental disability for sure.

No Militant were actually really fucking Trotskyists that got purged.

Militant were aesthetic af tbf.



Why does the Aussie look like she is enjoying it.

You just described MLMs

Why does this always get me so damn hard


She looks like she's trying her best to act like she doesn't give a fuck.

Canada, on the other hand, is making puppydog "please tell me I've been good" eyes.

I repeat the point that the headline of a "straight, white men 'ban'" is stupid because straight white disabled men and straight white minority-ethnic (i.e. polish, irish) are still invited.

It's not considering it as an identity. It's using self-definition because:
(a) Some people have what are legally disabilities, but don't consider themselves disabled. (i.e. Depression is legally a disability.)
(b) If you start laying down what you do and do not consider disabled officially, you get into the farce of having to challenge people as to whether they're really depressed or not.
Indeed, the word identity doesn't actually appear in the letter used as the OP image.

Spend less time on imageboards.
Spend less time jumping to unwarranted conclusions.
Spend more time buying British manufactured goods.

*blocks your path*

is nationalism a mental illness now

Sure, the headline might be stupid then but the idea is still stupid.

I always loved Spitting Image's version of it.

Why would you want to eat me, my crocodile friend? Wasn't it I that always fed you so that you could grow strong enough to devour me? -t.leftypol

if you identify as a nation, I would say you're incredibly mentally ill tbh

The idea is more stupid in terms of optics than it is practically. As far as I'm aware there has been no meaningful change in party policy or position.

Given that what happened until now was

Then they moved to online voting for electing positions like the chair which can be done over the internet since they've got membership lists. It's a clusterfuck when dealing with the equalities positions because the party doesn't hold relevant information, and even if they did it may be outdated or inaccurate. (It's probably also a data protection nightmare.) So then they held a conference but stripped out all the stuff that they're now doing online, which only leaves equalities positions up for a vote, and so you get the equalities conference, for which there's no point in people outside various caucus groups showing up to because there's quite literally nothing for them to do once there.

So if we're objecting to the existence of specific caucuses for defined groups it's worth being clear that's an objection to a longstanding policy. The only thing to object to with the 2018 variation is that it's been an optical misstep. In any meaningful sense, it's not news at all.

Actually read the article. Nowhere aside from headlines does she say she "identifies" as blind.

good post, thanks
i had another case in mind too, i think it was about some womans skin she wanted to get rid of and replace with plastic
as i said in i did not consider it an "identity issue", thus putting it in quotation there
but i admit to poor wording, it was a lazy post by me

whatever you say m8

Why white people attend meetings for a party designed to dispossess them period?


why does this redirect to /a/?

No idea lmao, I didn't think it would take you anywhere

If white men are so out of touch with race and gender issues why ban them from somewhere where they can actually learn something

Because it's your skin pigment and your male genitals that make you a bad person. You can't learn to not be a detestable human, you were born an oppressor and there's nothing you can do to not be a white devil.

This shit right here is exactly why people associate the far left with idpol.

Pants on head retarded politics. The optics of it are like a rightist fever dream.

Yet more fragmentary identity-politics that will ultimately do more to divide than unite. I see no good reason for such a conference to exist, and many reasons why it should not.


my thoughts exactly

Self-define yourself as a bisexual if you're a fucking white male and everything will be fine, nobody will check your sexuality.

Why does Holla Forums not understand that electoral politics are a fucking joke?! How do you all hope to compete with the ENTIRE Capitalist system in the CAPITALIST leader selector as a SOCIALIST. Seriously, a minority of the population are going to revolt, the majority are going to fall in line, and a minority are going to resist. The vast majority of people that Holla Forums hates are going to shut up, sit down, and go to their now democratic workplace. The people that hold "minority elections" are going to practically disappear when the now ubiquitous Socialist political system rejects them competely. This is reality. I hope the caps helps some of you, because it makes no fucking sense why Holla Forums can't get this.
>leftypol is a collective not a person
no shit

I really dont see the problem here. It's one conference, directly about minority voices within labour.

Leftypol are the easily offended SJWS now

Here's your image

Because it shouldn't be
but about

do you bros also get upset about there being an all black BET channel?