Several sources told the broadcaster that Finns Party Minister Ville Tavio pulled Finland out of the alliance because it intends to promote the causes of gender and sexual minorities.
“As far as Ukraine is concerned, the humanitarian aid side has focused more on the disabled, the elderly and so on. It’s a question of focus,” the minister said.
It is backed by the Ukrainian and German governments in particular, with the Ukrainian branch of UN Women playing a key role. Participants in the alliance include the foreign ministries or development agencies of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Estonia, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as the EU.
Finnish media outlets have previously reported that issues related to sexual and gender minorities do not progress under Tavio’s watch, and that he does not allow any mention of sexual or gender minorities in his speeches.
Sounds like the usual regressive far right bullshit to me, only with an obviously even more transparent excuse this time.
It’s more about, in this case, how he’s openly sexist since that’s what this alliance seems to be against. But either way that’s a classic false binary. There’s no reason they cant provide aid for both groups at the same time, it doesn’t take away from either group to do that. This wasn’t even much additional funding, it was a policy oversight thing who’s stated goal decidedly wasn’t “care more about women than disabled people”.
That’s true I suppose. His motivation does not appear to be altruistic but if it was a case of diverting limited funds, I can see his excuse not to fund this being reasonable.
That sounds…reasonable?
Because it’s a lie told to cover up bigotry.
Sure… if you ignore the entire rest of the article.
… It does?
Sounds like the usual regressive far right bullshit to me, only with an obviously even more transparent excuse this time.
I mean I’m not doubting the minister is a bit of a homophobe but I don’t think it’s wrong to focus aid on the disabled.
It’s more about, in this case, how he’s openly sexist since that’s what this alliance seems to be against. But either way that’s a classic false binary. There’s no reason they cant provide aid for both groups at the same time, it doesn’t take away from either group to do that. This wasn’t even much additional funding, it was a policy oversight thing who’s stated goal decidedly wasn’t “care more about women than disabled people”.
That’s true I suppose. His motivation does not appear to be altruistic but if it was a case of diverting limited funds, I can see his excuse not to fund this being reasonable.
Oh good, so you agree that his excuse is unreasonable then! I’m glad we had this little discussion.
Yes, thank you for the polite discourse.