Socialist Organiser

The weekly of the fused Workers Socialist League, July 1981 to April 1984

WOMEN'S shirlene out FIGHTBACK WE WANT Jobs

Socialist Organiser no. 89, 17 June 1982 · scan pp. 5–6 · about 439 words

Read it in the scan (PDF), scan page 5 →

Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.

Scan page 5

Munitie 20p

Women'smarch for jobs things that the feminists including Women's Fightback supporters, wanted to do. Firstly, we wanted to make sure that the Women's Conference has, in future, a direct input into the Labour Party Annual Conterence. We proposed that it should have the right to submit five resolutions to Annual Conference and that these resolutions be tabled under the relevant heading.

Accountable

We were anxious not to be fobbed off with a separate 'women's debate' which still did not affect the main fabric of the conference land which the do a simple thing to try and rectify the present sexual imbalance of the PLP, where only 1l out of 268 MPs are women. The proposal was to have a mandatory obligation that at least one woman be included on all parliamentary shortlists where a woman has applied. At least we thought it was simple...

This was the debate that the old women's committee did not want to hear: of course they did not attain their positions by the democratic processes that we were proposing. The start of the conference saw a battle with the Conference Arrangements Committee to change the debate froin the Monday afterMOST women claiming benefits were never in any doubt inat the Dos sull 1-.. 1.1 21. -1 11- -1*11 employs sex snoopers. But last week the DHSS kindly confirmed it. They had little choice since confidential guidelines issued to social security officers investigating 'fraud' fell into the hands of the Child Poverty Action Group.

These guidelines consist of nine questions which are supposed to be an aide memoire for officers.

They have to find out whether the woman has sexual intercourse - but they should not ask the woman that queston. ..._ thand Indicators of co-habitation are listed. These include whether the woman has cooked a meal for the man or washed his clothes - the assumption presumably being that if she does these things she must be sleeping with him!

Another indicator is if the man has decorated the house or done the washing up; the assumption here is that men only do this sort of things if they sleep with the woman in that house!

Now that this has come 1 - 1: -1. L 21.- NIICC light after the DHSS publicly denied that questions about sexual relations would be asked, the DHSS will investigate whether these forms should be withdrawn.

Not that this will make the slightest bit of difference for as long as the benefits system operates on the assumption that . single women cannot live without a man somewhere around.

Scan page 6

Socialist Organiser, Thursday 17 June

← Contents of Socialist Organiser no. 89

Something wrong on this page? Tell us →