Aral Balkan
Ireland votes that a woman’s place is in the home. A sad day for social progress. The whole way the government handled this referendum was a shambles.
#ireland #socialJustice #womensRights #marriage #civilPartnerships https://chaos.social/@antiaall3s/112070455326810487
Aral Balkan
@zardoz03 See my last sentence. The fact that the government – willfully or otherwise – bungled up the referendum does not change the outcome and the statement that it makes and the rights and legislative protections (for unmarried couples, for example) that it will leave unrealised.
algernon.st
@aral i don't think its as simple as that as apparently the disabled in ireland weren't consulted and the constitutional change would have affected their rights. in general the information about the referendum was scant and seems to mostly have been posturing
Callionica
@aral I looked at the proposed changes to the wording, but otherwise don’t have much context on it. It looked to me like the changes would have removed some governmental obligations to support mothers while adding no specific, measurable, and accountable benefits for them or others in society. Hard to see that as a vote that a woman’s place is in the home, more like “better the devil you know”? What am I missing?
Aral Balkan
@callionica That this would have been a step towards introducing legislation that made it easier for unmarried couples who cohabit, etc. (e.g, not losing the house you own together because the law treats you as strangers and the government taxes you out of your house).
Now folks who don’t want any such reforms can point to the referendum result.
hsarfaraz
@aral I have great appreciation for your strong moral values!
Aral Balkan
@hsarfaraz I mean, this stuff should be the bare minimum. Here’s to a world where we don’t even have to mention someone’s devotion to basic human rights because it’s such a given :)
Aral Balkan
@RobertoArchimboldi Here, take a look at who’s celebrating: https://gript.ie/a-landslide-no-no-ireland-rejects-changes-to-family-and-women-at-home-provisions/
Roberto von Archimboldi
@aral I am not in Ireland but I think that is quite a bad take, at l least wrt Article 41.2, the support of women. As Selma James and the Global Women's Strike have taught us, capitalism relies on domestic labour. It needs a healthy, fed, educated workforce. That labour is done by women because it can use a patriarchal division of labour to refuse to pay for it, externalising a major cost, hence the demand for wages for housework.
Although Article 41.2 does not enshrine a wage for domestic work, it comes close. 'The state shall endeavour...' The proposed change seriously weakened that commitment.
It is true that the focus on women as the providers of domestic labour is patriarchal and the proposed change would have recognised any carer, but at the cost of reducing their current protection. Existing equalities legislation can be used to achieve the same effect. Any scheme guaranteeing income support to mothers would have to be extended to all primary carers or be in breach of nondiscrimination legislation.
In the end what has been rejected is a change that would reduce the rights of mothers and increase the patriarchal protection exploitation of women (its still overwhelming women doing domestic labour) for the purely symbolic recognition that there is nothing essential about care and womanhood. I don't see that as a set back in the struggle for women's liberation
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.