The Women’s Rights Party

Written By: - Date published: 10:58 am, July 2nd, 2023 - 50 comments
Categories: election 2023, feminism, gender critical feminism - Tags: ,

People who follow my politics on The Standard will know that I favour strategic voting over voting for the people one ‘likes’ or whether a party is a good cultural fit.

While I am a supporter of the Green Party, I primarily vote for them not out of a sense of belonging or loyalty or partisanship, but because they hold the ground in New Zealand parliamentary politics that is most likely to push us in the direction I believe we need to go, especially on the great crises of climate and ecology. In fact so great is that impending disaster that I won’t abandon the Greens over their well intentioned but fundamentally anti-women positions on gender identity despite my being almost completely opposed to their position.

This is perhaps an easier thing for me because I do like and admire a number of the Green MPs, but if there were a party standing in the election that was to the left of the Greens and pulling harder on climate, and that had a chance of gaining enough MPs to make a difference in parliament, I would most certainly consider giving them my vote. At this election however, the priority on climate/ecology (from which all else flows) is to get as many Green MPs elected as possible. 

Others take a different view on voting choice, or perhaps don’t consider climate to be that important, and there are a chunk of former left wing voters who now say they are politically homeless over gender identity politics. 

My radical feminist sisters point out that it’s not possible to be politically homeless, because if one is left wing it is because of the class analysis and positions, not the parties we may or may not vote for. A view I largely agree with, along with the position that just because half the left has lost its goddamn mind over gender identity, that doesn’t mean we should abandon the left nor our left wing values and principles.  But the thing about humans is the desire to belong is hardwired into us and when we lose that sense of belonging it hits deep. Irrespective of my views on voting, there are people for whom other things matter more.

So despite it running against my long held position of strategic voting, I am pleased to see the emergence of a new political party this election, the Women’s Rights Party. It’s not a party that will win electorates or list seats, at this election at least, but its agenda is elsewhere and smart. Two of its priorities are,

  1. Get women’s issues highlighted in the election and hold all political parties to account on that
  2. Give politically homeless women and men someone to vote for rather than not voting at all, and demonstrate to the mainstream parties that many people consider women’s sex based rights to be important.

The party’s tagline,

We are the only political party in New Zealand that puts women first

Its list of priorities is,

We exist to maintain and protect women’s rights, including:

  • The right to speak freely
  • The right to peaceful assembly, association, and movement.
  • The right to safe single-sex spaces for women and girls.
  • The right to be free from violence in all its forms.
  • The right to equitable reward and recognition for women’s contributions to society and work, whether paid or unpaid.
  • The right to have control of our own bodies, including reproductive autonomy.
  • The right to protect and safeguard our children.
  • The right for motherhood to be recognised as exclusively female.
  • The right to fair play in sports.
  • The right to evidence-based education and healthcare with informed consent.
  • The right to use clear and plain language when referring to women in the media, academia, in healthcare, at work and at home.

This is a blast of fresh air. Women speaking up strongly about women’s rights. Unapologetically. In public. Does anyone else even do this anymore? I’m excited by the degree of freedom WRP have to say what they want. 

WRP is in the process of finalising its formal position as a party in the general election. They had their Conference last weekend, electing office holders, and endorsing the constitution and policy platform. Members have spent quite some time putting together WRP’s policy positions. The party has been publishing press releases on issues important to women, and doing some initial media work. Fronting the media is WRP National Secretary, Jill Ovens. 

Ovens has solid left wing, and workers’ and women’s rights cred. From Wikipedia,

Jill Ovens is a New Zealand trade unionist and former political candidate. She was co-leader of the Alliance party before changing her allegiance to the Labour Party. She is currently the Women’s Rights Party National Secretary, a New Zealand based political party.

She previously had a long history involved in New Zealand Unions, having served as the president of the Association of Staff in Tertiary Education and was heavily involved in the Council of Trade Unions (CTU) Women’s Council Convenor and attended the ICFTU World Women’s Conference as one of two CTU delegates.

Ovens stood for the Alliance in two elections, and served as the party president. Later leaving the Alliance, Ovens became involved in the Labour Party over a long period of time including as a rep on the Labour Party’s Council, and continued her union work. She left the Labour Party this year over concern about women’s rights. More about her background in this interview. 

Last week Ovens was interviewed by Sean Plunket on The Platform, Jill Ovens on aiming to get the Women’s Rights Party on the ballot (youtube). While there may be criticism of Ovens for appearing on The Platform at all, she is clearly not resiling from her left wing roots or current socialist politics. Plunket is refreshingly open about this too. It’s like no-one cares about the partisan stuff, it’s there and clear but it’s not a deterrent to having a conversation (this too will be a big attractant to many people sick of the aggressive pressure to pick the right side).

Plunket tries quite transparently, a number of times, to push his right wing agenda by suggesting that people who vote on the left can no longer do so because of gender identity politics and therefore should vote on the right, but Ovens just carries on talking about the WRP’s spotlight on women’s rights this election and the party offering people a new option. I’m pleased to see the WRP doing well on this already.

I’ve been hesitant to write about women’s sex based rights issues lately because of the potential for an election year shit fight around ‘what is a woman?’ This has been an important political dynamic in the UK for Labour, the SNP, the Libdems and the Tories. New Zealand is caught in a kind of culture wars time warp, where we haven’t hit the hard yards on this yet and there is still a large amount of confusion and even denial.

But in the end I’ve come to realise that the most important thing that can happen on sex/gender right now, and to be frank in left wing politics generally, is to have strong left wing voices consistently talking about both women’s rights, and what the gender critical issues are, and maintaining a progressive frame, especially in regards to women’s rights.

WRP isn’t overtly positioning itself as a left wing party, but it doesn’t need to. Its policy platform speaks for itself, and it’s a party for women’s rights. As with Māori and Green politics, women have our own politics that exist independently of the traditional left/right spectrum, but the nature of the positions makes its natural home progressive and feminist. 

The WRP constitution is here (PDF) and the party structure and roles are here (power point download).

You can join the Women’s Rights Party here, and donate here.

Mod note: please stay on topic with this post.

50 comments on “The Women’s Rights Party ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Muttonbird 1
    2 July 2023 at 1:18 pm

    I have been, over the last few years, increasingly likely to vote Greens but for their housing policy rather than their climate policy. Was going to in 2020 but felt it would be churlish to not recognise the effort JA and her government put into our Covid response.

    From the WRP list of priorities, a few are about protecting GC viewpoints (The right to peaceful assembly, association, and movement), and a few are longstanding women's rights calls (The right to equitable reward and recognition for women’s contributions to society and work, whether paid or unpaid), and a few are specific to GC debate (The right to evidence-based education and healthcare with informed consent).

    One of the last stood out;

    • The right for motherhood to be recognised as exclusively female.

    Why is this a demand? Transgender men are capable of bearing children and caring for them but do not wish to be identified as female. If it is the position of the WRP to refuse to acknowledge transgender men as performing the role of mother, then according to their own sex based binary theory, they can only be performing the role of father. They then acknowledge the transgender man is male so must also consider transgender women as female.

    • Roy Cartland 1.1
      2 July 2023 at 1:56 pm

      Do not wish to be

      Maybe that's their argument. Maybe I don't wish to be identified as middle class, in fact I'd like to be recognized as an actual king, with obligatory obsequies, property, subjects, residences and state payment of every flight and trip I take, thank you very much.

      Doesn't make it so, unfortunately.

    • weka 1.2
      2 July 2023 at 2:16 pm

      Why is this a demand? Transgender men are capable of bearing children and caring for them but do not wish to be identified as female. If it is the position of the WRP to refuse to acknowledge transgender men as performing the role of mother, then according to their own sex based binary theory, they can only be performing the role of father. They then acknowledge the transgender man is male so must also consider transgender women as female.

      Trans men are female. The word female refers to biological sex not gender identity. TM can identify however they like of course, but WRP's position doesn't exclude trans men. It sets a boundary for women (adult human females) to retain our sex-based language. It would be good if you could get up to speed with these issues.

      Also, please stop misrepresenting positions. This really is not ok in an election year especially. You can argue against WRP's position but you can't make up shit about it.

      The issue of retaining 'motherhood = female' centres around gender identity activists pushing the idea that males can be mothers (ie trans woman or NB males). Again, male here means biological sex. If mother can be anyone, then we no longer have a word for women that bear and/or raise children, and understandably quite a lot of women are not ok with this.

    • Sabine 1.3
      3 July 2023 at 8:26 am

      Well you can call Transmen

      Birthing Body

      Birthing Parent

      Birther

      Incubator

      Breeder

      I have been told by many services – governmental ones even – that these are totally acceptable terms.

    • Natasha 1.4
      3 July 2023 at 12:44 pm

      Trans men are still female biologically, this is why they can still carry children. If they choose not to call themselves mothers this is their choice, but their choice to reject the term mother should not impact those that value that role. Female healthcare is important to trans men, trans men still need pap smears and will still respond to medications as per their sex and not their gender. Birthing a child is an exclusively female activity.

      As males cannot carry children, no matter how they identify, it would make no sense to give them the right to motherhood, the protections, healthcare and policy that are applied to mothers. The term parent is adequate in law for those who identify as the opposite gender wish to raise children and reject the term fathers and mothers.

      • Muttonbird 1.4.1
        3 July 2023 at 1:47 pm

        What is it that is currently happening for the WRP to have, "the right for motherhood to be recognised as exclusively female" as one of their priorities/policies?

        • weka 1.4.1.1
          3 July 2023 at 2:33 pm

          I can't speak for them but I would guess it's partly to do with two issues that have been happening that affect women.

          Removing women's language

          The Midwifery Council of NZ is updating its Midwifery Scope of Practice guidance for midwives to entirely remove the words 'mother' and 'woman'.

          https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/GE2211/S00011/nz-midwifery-council-drops-the-words-mother-and-woman.htm

          Some trans women raising children wanting to call themselves mothers

          This has a number of impacts including where children have a father how transitions late in life and insists the children then call them mother/mum.

          It is an issue on formal documentation, including impacts on children eg this trans man in the UK lost the appeal to be legally registered as his child's father,

          A court of appeal panel headed by the lord chief justice, Lord Burnett, effectively came down in favour of the right of a child born to a transgender parent to know the biological reality of its birth, rather than the parent’s right to be recognised on the birth certificate in their legal gender.

          …

          Laws passed by parliament had not “decoupled the concept of mother from gender”, Burnett said in a ruling that focused strongly on the Gender Recognition Act. He said any interference with McConnell’s rights to family life caused by birth registration documents describing him as mother when he lives as his child’s father, could be justified.

          Continuing to call McConnell and other transgender men “mother” on their children’s birth certificates would protect the rights of their children to know who gave birth to them and that person’s status, the appeal court found.

          https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/29/transgender-man-loses-appeal-court-battle-registered-father-freddy-mcconnell

          There are also trans women trying to claim that they can breastfeed babies. This raises two distinct issues of child safeguarding. One is whether the fluid some men can express is in fact breastmilk (a nutrition issue). The other is what the motivations for trying to chestfeed are, ranging from a need to be affirmed as a woman through to fetishisation of breastfeeding by AGP males.

          I will put examples in the following comment.

          • weka 1.4.1.1.1
            3 July 2023 at 2:52 pm

            Can men produce breastmilk? Unlikely. Here's some analysis from a feminist lawyer (Daily Mail link),

            https://archive.ph/ekhDf

            A tweet from today about what breastfeeding is and isn't,

            I can't believe I'm having to say this in 2023 but in case you didn't know, the reason why female breast milk is THE ONLY human milk a child should be receiving is because its specific nutritional value and component percentages can only be produced in the female body. Breast milk and its mechanisms are so complex that there are compounds within it that scientists don't even understand.

            Even the rate at which it is produced is meticulously regulated by a woman's body. For example, it's consistency and chemical make-up changes towards the end of a feed which signals to the child when feeding time is coming to an end.

            These biological functions simply cannot be replicated by taking cross-sex hormones.

            What you're doing for your own selfish affirmation is child neglect. Children need vital nutrients, particularly during this early stage of life, for healthy development. You are starving their vital organs of nourishment by engaging in this behaviour instead of giving the child formula and it is my sincere hope that our lawmakers take note and criminalise this accordingly.

            https://twitter.com/theneonrequiem/status/1675579748544593920

          • weka 1.4.1.1.2
            3 July 2023 at 3:01 pm

            Are there trans identified males who try to chestfeed for their own needs, either to affirm womanhood, or because it's an AGP fetish? Probably.

            This TIM has posted on the same account their experience of trying to chestfeed and their sexual fetish around that.

            https://thepostmillennial.com/transgender-mother-appears-to-feed-newborn-baby-with-milky-substance-he-claims-secreted-from-his-nipples-after-taking-hormones

            It’s not bigotry to point out this guy literally has an only fans equating his synthetic galactorrhea to being a cow. And the obvi parallel to comparing actual lactating mothers to livestock is just about as misogynistic and fetishized as you can get

            https://twitter.com/SunshineSunnier/status/1661813954170028044

            (I would object to a woman doing that too, although I think there are differences).

            At the least there are questions to be asked here about boundaries, appropriate decision making, and child safeguarding. We also see the fetishisation happening in queer culture,

            https://twitter.com/roseveniceallan/status/1675633744265216000

            Context for that photography shoot https://reduxx.info/baby-seen-breastfeeding-from-male-model-in-disturbing-binary-shifting-art/

            The immediate problem here is No Debate means progressives aren't able to fully talk about this, and sort through the issues to see where the problems are. Along with that is the denial by many that AGP is real. Again, No Debate means society can't fully talk about AGP and see what is actually going on.

            • weka 1.4.1.1.2.1
              3 July 2023 at 3:12 pm

              there are more receipts btw, different TIMs, so this isn 't a one off. All of this is discussed in gender critical circles a lot. The reason that some progressives aren't aware of the issues is because of No Debate, and the whole terf = Nazi thing. It's not like these discussions haven't happened in public.

              One of the concerns for GCFs currently, myself included, is that No Debate has left the narrative in the hands of reactionaries who outweigh progressive GC people. There are a lot of people starting to hate trans people because of what I have just shared. This is not good for GNC people, including many women and trans people, and it's not good for society. We need to be able to talk about the issues openly and without telling women they are bigots and need to STFU. Which is another reason I support WRP's emergence on the political scene. We need level headed, progressive women raising these issues and it not being left to the right wing fundamentalists who hate drag queens or the conservatives who are rubbing their hands with glee at the culture war.

            • Molly 1.4.1.1.2.2
              4 July 2023 at 10:38 am

              A good resource to read about some of the proffered research into male lactation:

              https://lascapigliata.com/2023/07/03/case-study-2-experiment-of-induced-lactation-in-a-trans-identifying-male-excerpt-from-born-in-the-right-body/

              "This brings me to another glaring omission in this report. While the authors consistently refer to their trans-identified male patient as “she”, they never state the sex of the infant involved in this experiment.

              In addition to my concerns about high levels of testosterone in breast milk, this male patient is also reported to have used domperidone to stimulate galactorrhoea. Domperidone is banned in the US (FDA, 2004), and is only used off-label internationally to induce lactation in women. Domperidone is sometimes used to treat reflux but it has been discontinued for use in children under the age of 12, due to potential cardiac side-effects (MHRA, 2014). When domperidone is given off-licence to stimulate lactation, it requires ensuring that the mother and infant don’t have any contraindications to this treatment (Nottinghamshire Area Prescribing Committee, 2021).

              There’s no evidence, here, that the authors attempted to ascertain this.

              There’s also no evidence that the patient stopped using clonazepam, a drug that can cause sedation in infants, or zolpidem (also known as Ambien), which could exacerbate the effects of clonazepam, prior to commencement of “breastfeeding”."

  2. Jilly Bee 2
    2 July 2023 at 1:51 pm

    I have been following this situation since the inception of the WRP. A Facebook acquaintance (male) has thrown his lot behind this group, which I normally wouldn't have any concern about. However, he and the WRP are so stridently anti transgender almost to the point of being transphobic, I barely recognise my FB friend as the same person I knew a few months ago. I'm concerned where this movement is taking us, if not down a rabbit hole. I'm also of the opinion that any group who hitches their wagon to Kelly-Jay Keen Minshull aka Posie Parker and has to grovel to The Platform (Sean Plunkett) to get their message across won't get any sympathy or support from me. I'll stick to Labour and/or Greens, warts and all.

    • weka 2.1
      2 July 2023 at 2:20 pm

      However, he and the WRP are so stridently anti transgender almost to the point of being transphobic

      Here's my problem with this. Without an explanation and/or evidence, in the current climate it amounts to an unsubstantiated slur.

      We know that the word transphobic gets used very broadly and is applied to people who say that women have sex based rights, or that trans women are biologically male, or that children cannot consent to transition drugs and surgery. The word is approaching uselessness. So when you say WRP are stridently anti-trans, I don't know what you mean, because you haven't said.

      If you want to make arguments like this on TS, you will need to provide evidence and an explanation.

    • Kath Lauderdale 2.2
      2 July 2023 at 8:20 pm

      The answer to what you take as “transphobic” is just pushback. Push too hard and that’s what you get.

      Womens rights are going backward so more prioritisation of Mens want and sexual proclivities isn’t a priority wonen and childrens needs are.

      Naturally all problems effect women and children more and as Parliament is and has been gerrymandered by wealthy privileged men to their own advantage it is long past time as signatory to UN Human Rights and at least two left wing parties having used womens unpaid labour to achieve their position the erasure of women as a class is more than a little insulting.

      So it’s ready ti label this negligence but it is a longstanding and repeat problem which takes us exactly nowhere forward.

      Which to keep hoarding resources for themselves is what I suspect it is actually designed to do, given we don’t even have adequate birthing or childcare and legal rights support yet.

      It has nothing to do with Transphobia as women seriously don’t usually care about what men do in private the problem is womens rights are being neglected and identities, needs and resources literally erased. By men.

      So what you’re labelling is actually righteous anger to a system that enslaves, abused and erases women and children like a Dickensian throwback. STILL.

      Its audacious I’ll give you that.

    • Sabine 2.3
      2 July 2023 at 9:35 pm

      However, he and the WRP are so stridently anti transgender almost to the point of being transphobic

      It could be said that all the parties in government that voted lockstep for Self ID are stridently anti woman – human female to the point of being misogynistic.

      The issue was / is never Transpeople, the issue was and still is Self ID which just means all males.

      We need no longer ask 'what is a woman', as we clearly know what / and whom they are – and most certainly when we need to rent the womb of a woman for some baby incubating, or for some political point scoring with the '50% of parliament be women' 'but please don't ask me to define what a women is cause that is not something i can answer' PM of NZ, when convenient they all know what a woman – human female is.

      The big question we should ask is 'what/who is a transperson' and what defines them. Unadulterated males in dresses with a bit of lippy and a pair of sensible heels such as 'Suzy Eddie Izzard' are considered 'transwoman', non binary males fall under trans, Georgina Breyer was one, and these are three very distinct and different group of people, and all of these have access to all female spaces including the female categories in the Olympics and women – human females are told to suck it up in the name of kindness and inclusion.

      Labour, Act, National, Greens, TPM, all voted for Self ID. All of them, without exception. Finally something that had bipartisan appeal. Go figure. If only they could find that bipartisan approval of some policies that would result in houses, jobs, and a future for our young. Instead they agreed on removing female single sex spaces and opportunities and gave them to blokes and the promotion of the medicalization of healthy kids in the name of profit err kindness.

    • Dawn Trenberth 2.4
      2 July 2023 at 11:35 pm

      Perhaps Jilly Bee you have changed rather than your friend. After all five years ago almost no one would say that men could self identify as women. This is a very new movement which seems to come out of nowhere. Many people were totally shocked by the violence perpetuated by the anti-women mob at Albert Park. I was there and they had signs such as suck my dk ct directed at the small group of us waiting to hear the speakers. We were even more shocked that government MPS were with the anti women protesters and not one government MP condemned the violence, Rather they minimised it and the PM said her would have been with those protesters. This is why I had that conversation with Jill Ovens in the early hours of Sunday the 26th, we thought a Women's Rights Party was needed so we woud have something to vote for. I would suggest that you have a respectful conversation with your friend and try and explain why you think men should be able to self identify as women and go into women's sports and spaces etc and also listen to his point of view. As for Kellie Jay Keen can you explain what she has said that is so controversial and offensive? Have you actually listened to her or is your judgement based on what other people have said? We all need to do a lot more listening. And by the way the rumours about the Nazis supporting her rally in Melbourne are totally miscontrued. The Nazis came to protest both the women and the trans group. They are misogynists. The Melbourne women's rally was organised by a Jewish woman and she and the Australian Jewish Council condemned those who accused Kellie Jay Keen of being a Nazi as minimising the holocuast and what was done to the Jewish people. Our poorly resourced media jumped right into this false story uncritically and are also to blame for the violence that was meted out at Albert Park.

      • Shanreagh 2.4.1
        3 July 2023 at 11:32 am

        Thank you Dawn for your work.

        The Nazis came to protest both the women and the trans group. They are misogynists. The Melbourne women's rally was organised by a Jewish woman and she and the Australian Jewish Council condemned those who accused Kellie Jay Keen of being a Nazi as minimising the holocuast and what was done to the Jewish people. Our poorly resourced media jumped right into this false story uncritically and are also to blame for the violence that was meted out at Albert Park.

        Nazi adjacent is how one of the woman politicians in Aus described the reaction of the media to the Neo nazis turning up, unwelcomed and uninvited to Melbourne. So you just need to be in the same general area as a neo nazi and you become a Nazi. Which of course is rubbish. It would mean, conversely, that being adjacent to PP that the Nazis were in support of her or the Trans movement. We know they were not.

        The Nazis had very restictive roles for women connected to the ongoing production of the master race. As you say they are misogynists.

    • deb 2.5
      4 July 2023 at 6:58 am

      We don't need sympathy we need thinking grown ups to look at the issues as Green Labour have imposed this ideology by stealth in 2017 and then rolled out these women hating process's. Please explain how advocating for women and girls in the face of these losses to our sex'd class is in any way transphobic…this is thrown around liberally when women advocate for women..please why is this anti anything. Membership 500 achieved!!!

  3. DS 3
    2 July 2023 at 2:18 pm

    Others take a different view on voting choice, or perhaps don’t consider climate to be that important, and there are a chunk of former left wing voters who now say they are politically homeless over gender identity politics.

    *Sniggers*.

    Try being a Leftist who considers economics and class paramount.

  4. Ad 4
    2 July 2023 at 3:21 pm

    Will they get to 500 members faster than Liz Gunn's New Zealand Loyal Party?

    The race is on.

    • Anker 4.1
      2 July 2023 at 7:26 pm

      Word has it that the. WRP have got their 500. But don't let that deter you Ad, you can still sign upwink

    • Sabine 4.2
      3 July 2023 at 8:28 am

      Would it matter? Would many those of us that consider joining, joined vote for L or G or TPM or even N or A? On this matter its a NO to all of them. Maybe not just running roughshod over women – human females and insulting them, belittling them, calling them nasty names, assaulting them watch them being assaulted to much glee is not a winning strategy.
      I mean where would Labour be if the all the human females would say: No, thank you!

    • deb 4.3
      4 July 2023 at 7:00 am

      Membership achieved!!! Come ye one n all for truth based discussion and advocacy from WRP.

      • weka 4.3.1
        4 July 2023 at 9:19 am

        Settle down deb. As a new commenter, please read the site Policy (top of the page) and About.

        I will wait for official confirmation from WRP that they have the numbers, and have registered as a political party.

  5. Delia 5
    2 July 2023 at 3:47 pm

    Happy to see a party that highlights the issues. We have been silenced from talking about our own sex based concerns and needs. It is no good for women and girls.

  6. Thinker 6
    2 July 2023 at 4:02 pm

    From a purely political viewpoint, doesn't it create a bit of a "catch-22"?

    This election is going to be a tight race between the liberal and conservative elements.

    Obviously, the WRP is set up to attract votes, but it seems to me an irony will develop where the more votes the WRP attracts (presumably more likely to be left-leaning voters), the more likely it will be that a paternalistic, conservative culture will be the outcome (at least in comparison to the liberal options), which is exactly what the WRP doesn't want to happen.

    • weka 6.1
      2 July 2023 at 4:12 pm

      this is indeed the dilemma, which is why I still advocate for strategic voting. However I would rather see progressives voting for WRP than not voting at all.

      Strategic voting depends on polling closer to the election as well. If the election is tight then it really does come down to whether someone wants a Labour/Green or NACT government. Some people believe that principles are more important than that.

      Otoh, I have had it pointed out to me (thanks Komyoun!) that protest votes can help shift the Overton Window. We will probably see vote splitting on the right as well depending on which of the protest parties manage to get registered.

      • Thinker 6.1.1
        3 July 2023 at 10:36 am

        Perhaps the WRP could promote itself as an 'issues' party for both blue and red aligned people.

        Then it could gather support from the right which would help to lessen the dilemma.

        We of the left might be surprised to find a significant number of otherwise-conservative voters who are tired of the 'blokey' (I can't think of any other single word to encompass what I'm trying to describe, sorry) culture they end up voting for, each election.

        • Shanreagh 6.1.1.1
          3 July 2023 at 11:23 am

          Good points Thinker…….

          An issues party sounds good. I think the world of women has taken a real battering of late. Aside from the men in women's spaces one of the parts I feel strongly about is having women's sports for women. This is on the basis that it takes dedication, commitment and will power to train and train and then to have some bloke come in and swoop the prize is unfair. It is this kind of issue that couls be addressed.

          A concern I have not researched very much is if the statistics that govt agencies rely on to give women a better deal will become unusable/unreliable as they include males. And women miss out as there is no apparent problem. .

          'Blokey' sounds good to me. I use 'misogynistic' to describe the lack of pushback from males on the whole trans issue, womens safe spaces. I know that it is correct but 'blokey' is better.

          Sort of 'well if some bloke wants to dress up in women's clothes and go into a women's toilet who am I to stop them? Or 'just blokes having a kick/having fun. Or, in relation to various chemical interactions….'he's a bloke and I am sure he has thought very deeply about this……rinse and repeat with lashings of 'who am I to stop them?'

          I will join.

        • weka 6.1.1.2
          3 July 2023 at 3:16 pm

          I think WRP will probably get votes from a range of places. I don't think they should abandon their progressive positioning to chase that however, because we need the progressive frame to stop the whole thing becoming a nasty, reactionary culture war.

          We also need to convince the pro-gender left (or nominally pro-gender left) who have a lot of power on policy, legislation and culture, and we can only do that with progressive positions (we being feminists and gender critical people generally I'm not involved in WRP).

  7. Anker 7
    2 July 2023 at 5:08 pm

    Jill is hugely impressive. She is very articulate and a true left wing advocate.

    The Labour Party have lost a great asset.

    They have also lost a lot of other women as well

  8. Sabine 8
    2 July 2023 at 9:22 pm

    Oh well, joined. I guess i am one of the five hundred. 🙂

  9. adam 9
    2 July 2023 at 10:47 pm

    Good to see this party up and running.

    Breaking the 5% would be bloody awesome.

    A real left turn, rather than the cultural wars BS we have been subjected.

  10. Dennis Frank 10
    3 July 2023 at 6:23 am

    I wish this enterprise the best possible outcome. It's good for the country, and the world. I'll be watching with considerable interest. However my disgust with the Greens remains intense more than two years after they alienated me, so despite voting Green 11 general elections in a row it ain't happening again! Just like in '72 & '75, no party is representing my views so I lack a motive to vote…

    • Sabine 10.1
      3 July 2023 at 8:16 am

      Then vote for the women’s rights party Why? To show and support women- human females. It might be a 'lost' vote in the terms of winning, but it'd be counted.

      Sadly, non of the above is not an option, as I would tick that.

      • Dennis Frank 10.1.1
        3 July 2023 at 8:48 am

        I wondered about that. It's a valid rationale. However I can only identify a semi-plausible basis for taking democracy seriously nowadays: the fact that it was designed to operate on the basis of representatives.

        Another fact is that none of the available options represent my values & aspirations. So to be my authentic self I must decline. I get your technical point re a none of the above option & would be tempted by that, except that ticking it would endorse the system and my conscience has always made me reluctant to do that. Sometimes my pragmatism defeats my conscience. Unlikely it will.

        • Shanreagh 10.1.1.1
          3 July 2023 at 11:07 am

          '….except that ticking it would endorse the system and my conscience has always made me reluctant to do that.'

          A bit like the placards and bumper stickers

          'don't vote it only encourages them'

          that my idealistic, change the world self in the 1970s and 1980s, viewed with horror at giving away one of the prizes of democracy especially for women and voting.

          In these days of turmoil this phrase has popped into my head more and more.

          The thing that will get me to vote will be the point about women and voting, and not letting 'sisters' of old down.

          So perhaps this reason of mine is in sync with your reason

          the fact that it was designed to operate on the basis of representatives.

        • Sabine 10.1.1.2
          3 July 2023 at 7:53 pm

          Perfect does not exist. We must make amends daily in order to have a co-operative and civil society and democracy reflects this. It is not perfect, but at present it is the best we have. I don't think i have ever voted for someone that would have presented all my values or aspirations, mainly i have always just voted for the greatest benefit to all hoping that i did not back the wrong horse.

          This time around, sadly our choices are without inspiration and aspiration.

          Hence why you could vote for the Women's rights Party, you would not be voting for yourself, but in support of someone else. 🙂

    • RoseyK 10.2
      3 July 2023 at 11:09 am

      If you can't find a party/candidate you feel you want to vote for, please consider spoiling your ballot – then at least will be honouring those who fought for universal voting rights and your action will be registered as discontent rather than apathy.

      Interestingly, apparently, historians study spoiled ballots from Nazi Germany to look at resistance and discontent from the voting public.

      • Dennis Frank 10.2.1
        3 July 2023 at 11:37 am

        your action will be registered as discontent rather than apathy

        I've wondered about that. The notion has been recycled on more than one media occasion I have seen in the past. How realistic is it though?

        I've never seen proof of this concept. It may be a flawed assumption. For instance it relies on a binary (discontent/apathy) analytic default interpretation. Is that binary conceptual structure an agreed democratic institution? No evidence of that as far as I've noticed. One would need to cite legislation to prove the existence, huh?

        Also, who does the interpreting anyway? Is there a corps of democracy interpreters hidden away in the public service somewhere? Do we rely on media quoting political scientist opinions?? Unlikely, I'd have thought…

  11. Tabletennis 11
    4 July 2023 at 12:00 pm

    And then there is the right of the child regarding its birth certificate. This government and all the parties, NZ authorities and the legal fraternity have push this aside.

    A birth registration certificate of the new born can now have two males or two females as its ‘fathers’ and ‘mothers’ or a male as its ‘mother’ or female as its ‘father’. In order to validate adults who want to reject their sexed bodies.

    Whereas in the UK the interest of the child is paramount, stating that a birth certificate is the child’s document, not the parents. Further more that the child has a right to know the truth of its biological origins. (see the McConnell case, were the biological mother wanted to be registered as the father on her child’s birth certificate).

    Hopefully the WRP will address this too.

    • weka 11.1
      4 July 2023 at 12:13 pm

      what blows my mind about the BDMRR changes is the argument that the birth cert is not that an important document.

      The McConnel case is linked above if people want to read about it. That the judges affirmed the child's rights over the parent's is a good sign/

      • Tabletennis 11.1.1
        5 July 2023 at 1:02 pm

        The birth certificate is no longer an important document from an authorities perspective. All they want these days is a date of birth and a name and you'll will be provided with a number that follows you for the rest of your life.
        (simply a record of a new citizen)
        As all NZ departments info are hanging together the number of the person is all they need.

        From a personal level I would argue it is important – e.g. most children who don't know they true parents will end up looking for them.
        Also there are many of us that look back at their family history and this is all going to be made so much harder, if you don't know what is female and what is male