Referendum on Gender Equality (THREADBANS IN OP)

This referendum has zero to do with trans people.

Do you also also class fathers who work full time as "part-time fathers" ?

It’s not marriage that’s the barrier to equality, it’s how the Family is defined in Irish law is the barrier to unmarried couples relationship to each other being recognised in law as being equal to that of couples whose relationship to each other is defined by marriage. The outcome of the referendum either way is unlikely to change how the Courts assess those relationships, in law they still won’t be equal to marriage if the referendum passes.

It’s for this reason the part which refers to carers within the family is being seen as Government fumbling an opportunity to recognise the value of care, provided by those within the family, and the wider community. They are not regarded as being of equal value either, which is a bit of a sticking point for carers who aren’t family members in that it doesn’t address any of the concerns they have about the provision of care. There are plans in the works for family members providing long term care which is basically the same thing as what is being suggested by the referendum -

Social Protection Minister Heather Humphreys is bringing forward legislation to provide pensions for long-term carers when they retire.

"This particularly applies to mothers who have looked after children with severe disabilities — they found themselves that they had to give up work. Now we're going to make provision so that they will get a pension when they retire," Ms Humphreys said.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/politics/arid-41273368.html

The Courts do that already though, in accordance with existing legislation regarding cohabitating couples for example, even down to recognising that a cohabiting relationship can continue to be intimate even if it’s not sexual (sounds a lot like a marriage 😂), but in practice there doesn’t appear to be any meaningful change proposed which would actually equate married and unmarried relationships.

It’s a token acknowledgment that durable relationships exist, which hardly needed a referendum for anyone to be made aware of that fact - it doesn’t mean those relationships will be assessed by the Courts in the same manner. What laws apply will still be dependent upon the circumstances in each case.

has there been anything on this on the current affairs programmes this week (debates or legal scholars / ex judges talking about it)? havent been watching anything.

No I get that much, I’m just wondering what does it actually change that doesn’t already exist in legislation? I get that a referendum was required to put it in there, but what function does it serve? When it passes it means that the State recognises the interdependence in relationships between family members, and then if the second proposal is also passed, it means the State supports family members in the provision of care based upon recognition of the relationship between them. It was supposed to be doing that since the founding of the State anyway.

The glaring omission is the aspect of support for care in the wider community, but I didn’t think it was that uncommon for people who are not family members providing care, for that care not to be recognised by the State either, in the same manner as they never acknowledged the care provided by women working in the home - the provision they’re proposing be removed that was also only ever a token nod to their economic and social contribution to Irish society in the first place. That would’ve been a game-changer - recognising the contribution of non-related individuals providing care in the community, like my neighbour who was my primary caregiver, who raised me as though I was her own family.

I realise that when you're in your 70s, accepting that times have changed is difficult.

Some people will always want to get married and good luck to them. Some people think a marriage certificate is just a piece of paper.

Nobody should ever have to get married to be considered a family in the eyes of the law, or their family have any less protection under the law due to being unmarried. Or being single, for that matter. Indeed, marital status is one of the nine grounds of discrimination.

Nor should anyone have to stay married. Many families are now blended.

I'm a woman, and a mother, and I have been a carer, and I don't feel any need to be singled out by my gender in the Constitution for recognition of my valuable contribution to society. It's completely out-dated.

Everyone who is raising children, or who takes on a carer role, should be recognised for their valuable contribution to society, irrespective of their gender. That is what equality is, and is what this referendum is about.

I'll be voting yes, as will my adult daughter.

Gender equality also has nothing to do with gender identity, and nothing to do with this Referendum.

Well that's not really true

Divorce referendum allowed women economic freedom and the right to remarry

Repeal the 8th gave women the autonomy to make choices in relation to their own bodies

Lots of archaic legislation in relation to women such as the marriage bar and allowing marital rape has been resolved

Political Gender quotas are increasing the number of elected women

Even the point you made earlier about child benefit going from men to women was a part of raising the status of women. Many women upto that point had zero personal income as their husband controlled all the household finances.

There has also been a wide range of policy and legislative reforms since the 1970s when the Commission on the status of women was first established

As a married man I have to call this into question.

Responsibilties towards children are not conditional on marriage, and rightly so. Increasingly, responsibilities towards a financially dependent partner are not conditional on marriage either, also rightly so.

Marriage is important, it's a commitment in front of one's peers, in front of society in general, and in legal terms, but it's certainly not the only way to form a family and families formed outside of marriage deserve recogniion, respect, and legal protection.

Well that's not really true

It is though, that’s why it’s particularly nauseating to hear Leo and Roderic come out with meaningless platitudes about a woman’s place in society is where she chooses to be. I don’t know of any women who choose a status of living in poverty, a status not of their own choosing, but a consequence of successive Government policies. The conclusions and recommendations of this report from 2019 are worth reading:

https://www.svp.ie/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Working,%20Parenting%20and%20Struggling-Full%20Report_2019.pdf

And yet you just glossed over examples of Constitutional and legislative reforms that I gave

"I'm a woman, and a mother, and I have been a carer, and I don't feel any need to be singled out by my gender in the Constitution for recognition of my valuable contribution to society."

Well that's grand for you but I believe there are a great many women out there who would read the present article in their many and varied life roles and see nothing wrong with it. Many would see that it's nice to be recognised, appreciated and given special mention in the constitution.

Maybe there are some men who would resent it as it does nothing for men, but any sensible man and father would have no difficulty in giving extra credit where it's due.

Marriage as a means of consolidating arrangements between families has been around for centuries. As regards the current proposed amendment, we live in the here and now and that is what is important. The issues surrounding marriage bars and other historical legislation related to marriage is irrelevant to the current debate.

There are reasons why partners choose not to marry, start looking at them and the holes they open up. It's never ideal and I would guess a worry for one or other party.

The function of the Constitution is not to single out any particular gender for "special mention".

That is what you're not getting, and I doubt you will ever get it.