UK

Partly Sunny with Showers 11° London Hi 12°C / Lo 6°C

A whole generation of women is lost to politics

On International Women's day, a damning new report says female politicians are failing to act as role models

By Jane Merrick

Harriet Harman is the frontrunner to succeed Gordon Brown, according to bookmakers

PA

Harriet Harman is the frontrunner to succeed Gordon Brown, according to bookmakers

Leading female MPs are failing to inspire a "lost generation" of young women to become interested in politics, a damning report has revealed. Girls and young women feel disenchanted with and disengaged from politics, the major study found.

More than 90 years after women won the right to vote, the survey of young females aged up to 25 concludes they are "outside politics", with many feeling detached from local and national policies and decision-making.

The report, which has been highlighted to mark International Women's Day by Girlguiding UK, the largest women-only organisation in the country, casts doubt on the ability of high-ranking female politicians to act as credible role models for girls.

Ruth Kelly, who resigned from the Cabinet last year to spend more time with her family, has left the impression that women cannot have both a high-flying career and children, one Guide leader said yesterday.

The study places the blame on a lack of information about how to take part in local and national politics, and the small proportion of female MPs – 19 per cent – in Westminster.

The report, Political Outsiders: We Care, But Will We Vote?, is published in partnership with the Fawcett Society and the British Youth Council. Its findings are all the more worrying because it is based on the views of Guides, traditionally more active in volunteering than others in their age group, suggesting disillusionment in the wider public is even greater.

Denise King, the chief executive of Girlguiding UK, said: "This report shows that greater efforts are needed to inspire the next generation of female policy-makers, empowering them to have a real say on issues affecting their daily lives and the communities they live in."

More than a quarter of girls are put off by a lack of information about how they should take part, while 17 per cent believe it cannot make a difference.

Nearly half of young women say they would like to be more involved in volunteering, but when this comes to local or national politics, the figure drops to 28 per cent. Domestic violence, gangs and knife crime, bullying and equality at work emerged as the most important issues for young women.

The report calls for a new Youth Green Paper, including a demand for one person under 25 to be on every parliamentary shortlist, and the ability to vote by text message or through social networking sites such as Facebook.

Katherine Rake, the director of the Fawcett Society, said: "The gap between Westminster and the daily lives of today's young women is rapidly widening into a chasm as young women struggle to see the relevance of national politics."

Jess Alcroft, 21, a student at Leeds University and a Guide leader, said: "Ruth Kelly is my MP in Bolton West, and when she resigned to spend more time with her family it put across the perception that women cannot have a high-profile political career if they want a family as well.

"Deep down I really want to be in politics... But I get the impression that the majority of male MPs are sitting around just filling in their expenses forms."

Asked whether she believed Harriet Harman was a good role model, Miss Alcroft said: "Any woman in a high-profile position is a good role model, but there is a sense that you have to hide your femininity to achieve things in politics, and be a person rather than a woman. I would dispute that, because there are benefits to having a feminine side."

Theresa May, the most senior female member ofthe shadow cabinet, said: "Without sustained efforts by politicians from all parties these young women... will become a lost generation politically, disengaged from the decisions that affect them."

The Liberal Democrat MP Jo Swinson, the youngest member of the House of Commons, said: "When I was growing up I too felt that there was a lack of female role models in politics and a lack of young MPs who would champion the issues important to young people and inspire us to be active citizens."

Harriet Harman

The frontrunner to succeed Gordon Brown, according to bookmakers, is criticised for not being 'feminine' enough and does not cut through to ordinary young women.

Hazel Blears

The Communities Secretary admits 'we still have a long way to go' to encourage more women to become involved in politics. Guides say Blears is recognisable only inside Westminster.

Ruth Kelly

By resigning from the Cabinet to spend more time with her family, she 'left the impression' that women cannot have both children and a high-flying political career.

International women's day protest: Calls for official action against domestic violence as thousands march in central London

Thousands of women and children marched in central London yesterday to demonstrate against domestic violence. The protest, organised by a coalition of women's groups and volunteers called Million Women Rise, was held to mark International Women's Day.

An estimated 5,000 women and children – including those who had suffered domestic abuse – gathered in Portman Square. They then marched to Oxford Street and up Regent Street before arriving at a rally in Waterloo Place.

Ange Jones, one of the organisers, said: "We want the Government to implement a strategy on violence against women and for it to be fully resourced. We also want the funding and acceptance of women's services, because they are under threat."

Sandra Horley, chief executive of Refuge, said: "Abused women and children should not have to depend on charity. We are talking about the social infrastructure of our nation. Domestic violence is undermining the social fabric of our country. This is not only about women; it is about our children, and about future generations. And the Government has a duty to ensure that an infrastructure of services is in place and that women and children are given protection."

Representatives of Million Women Rise have been invited to tomorrow's launch of the Home Office strategy for violence against women.

Emily Dugan

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

[info]swander wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:15 am (UTC)
No mention of Claire Hazelgrove or Emily Benn?
Social engineering...
[info]europat7 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:35 am (UTC)
Due to a growing disrespect of women in positions of responsibility and power, demonstrated for one by the picture below, women are discouraged by a feeling of hostility and antipathy from men.

Further, caricatures of women in power are almost always related to gender-bashing, whereas a man in power, no matter how incompetent, if he is caricatured, is rarely bashed simply because he is a man. Thus women suspect deep down that men simply cannot abide an aspect of female power, and a woman in power is even worse... Misogyny, that age-old problem rears its head as the masters of the universe decide to send women back to their stoves, bare-foot and pregnant, and dependent upon men.
More Fawcett Society Misandry...
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:17 am (UTC)
Firstly, the whole concept of the 'role model' is flawed - the only 'role models' that matter are those in our immediate life, ie our parents. There is NO evidence that the concept of the 'role model' so often parroted by PC feminists and others has any validity; it's just another PC psychobabble american smelly nonsense word.

Secondly, the Fawcett Society published this report - as usual it is a misandrist, victim culture sob story lie from those 'professional feminist women' who have spent decades telling lies and worshipping the false dogma of feminist, blaming everything on men and the 'patriarchy'.

Thirdly, the idea that women should be 50% of every job (I notice the feminists only yearn for the good jobs, not working with sewerage for example) and 50% of every level of every job is a lie. Men and women are not the same and not equal in their aptitudes and abilities. The evidence is there in our brains and in evolution, in history and in all cultures. Men excel at some things; women have evolved to try and get the best man they can and to have babies and look after them. In IQ terms, women tend to be very middling; men massivley dominate the higher levels of IQ - and so it is natural and right that they dominate the higher levels of every profession, whcih they do. In fact, it is men who suffer far more sexism these days - passed over for promotion so a mediuocre woamn can leapfrog into a promotion (Look at councils, the BBC etc). And the assumption that men get any unfair advantage is nonsense and offensive: men achieve because they have talent and work their guts out to develop it in an obsessive way. Women are not in general made like that.

Fourthly, in a country where men are massivley discriminated against in law, where fathers have practically no rights over their children, where most of women's money is earned by men and goes to women through unfair divorce settlements, where women get 7 time more health spending than men, where women get far more from the welfare state in benefits and earlt retirement, where politicans - even though mostly male - NEVER defend men or stand up for their rights, where TV and media is massivley misandrist portrayimng men as buffons or monsters, where all men are seen as guilty paedos unless they constantly express and prove their innocence, where the education system in massivley sexist against boys and rigged against them - and male teachers - I think it is extremely rich and lpathetic for the usual moaning minnie feminist brigade to engage in envy and sour grapes - agains spreading the lie that men supposedly get an unfair advantage in poiltics or elsewhere.

And as usual, the feminists hate women who are not like them even more than men. Why should a woman not put her family over her career? We in the UK have the highest divorce rate, the high single parent family rate, and the unhappiest most messed up kids in europe. Some would say that is cause by US-style feminism which the UK just apes. By the way, feminists in France would be happy with the idea of putting familt and children first - it's just the hairy armpit brigade in the US and its femi-poodle the UK that are anti-men and anti-family.
most child abusers are women
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:21 am (UTC)
And let us not forget that most abuse of children is violent and emotional, and most of that is done by women, usually mothers, and not men. Most children and babies who are killed are killed by women too - but they usually cry and tell some sob-story and get two years probation for unlawful killing. But that truth is rather inconvenient to the man-haters who want to make men into bogie men and monsters. Women are more violent in the home, and domestic violence is 50/50 men/women.

And how dare these awful women use children as pawns in their little feminist games on silly marcheas for specious causes! I pity the children having mothers like that, especially the poor boys. Where are their MALE role models eh? As they get brainwashed into thinking all males are evil by their twisted sick sexist mental 'mothers'.

EQUALITY FOR MEN IN LAW NOW!
No all of us are self serving sadists and masochists
[info]forwardplanning wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:23 am (UTC)
"A whole generation of women is lost to politics

On International Women's day, a damning new report says female politicians are failing to act as role models."

Precisely! The have brought women's age-old ability of basic household economics and team management (the family) into disrepute, no-one in their right minds wants to sign up to say they want to be an exceptional idiot to the rule


This old chestnut again...
[info]rojaws wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:32 am (UTC)
What is feminism?
It's merely chauvanism with a frock on.


Women in Politics
[info]johnnynorfolk wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:36 am (UTC)
They probably take one look at Harman and then understand why its not for them as they have to much common sence, the one thing Harman does not have.
When is International Mens day
[info]cm999 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:04 am (UTC)
Given that all this movement want is equality can I ask the simple question "When is International Mens Day?" Presumably in these days of equaility there must be one and presumably it will be reported in the media in the same way that international womens day is being.
whole system rotten
[info]dimlocator44 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:18 am (UTC)
Harman, Kelly, Blears - role models? They're part of the problem, not the solution
This Antifeminists says Women better suitable to motherhood and home.
[info]isaacbrown wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:23 am (UTC)
It's not just girls and young women who feel disenchanted with and disengaged from politics - remember the Power commission report a couple of years ago, which showed a disenchantment with politics throughout society? Why do these irritable feminazis persist in trying to corrupt the superior, noble an incorruptible nature of our women - do they not realise that women are too good and honest to descend into the political gutter with the men? It's all to do with the evolutionary ancestry of women - they have evolved instincts best suited to their role of home maker, child bearer and nurterer, tasks which are not compatible with the horrible cut and thrust of politics. Little wonder society is falling apart after the family has been under attack by the feminazis for 30 or more years. I often think it's been done deliberately to destroy our society:

http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/pcorigins.htm
Politics - The Greasy Pole
[info]markmyword1949 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:29 am (UTC)
Rising to the top in politics is always going to be difficult regardless of gender. There are just as many disappointed men who do not "make it". Kelly, Morris and many others were not up to the job that's why they fell off the greasy pole.

You want more women in politics then forget women only shortlists. In my constituency in 1997 we had one being told that the result would be the candidate would be the "best of the best". What a disappointment she proved to be. Only average at her job at best. Keeps a low profile except in the couple of months before the election. Replies to letters with "cut and paste" quotes from Labour Party headquarters. Votes the party ticket regardless of local concerns. Waits to see which way the "wind is blowing" before deciding her stance on a subject. In fact a typical "lobby fodder" MP. Hardly likely to enthuse the sisterhood that politics is a worthwhile occupation.
Validity
[info]mjohnm wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:17 am (UTC)
This report is significant only if young women's alienation from politics is different from young men's. Since no attempt at comparison appears to have been made, the report amounts to no more than special pleading for women.
Re: Validity
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 11:25 am (UTC)
Excellent post; excellent point. You are 100% right.
Re: Validity
[info]chunky234 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:17 pm (UTC)
aha! Of course a women's view is only valuable when compared to a man's. Seen and not heard goes the saying doesn't it?
Politics is lost to women
[info]hodgeey wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:18 am (UTC)
It says a lot for our women that they have disregarded the example set by Blair's babes, and kept well out of the den of thieves and murderers that calls itself Parliament.

They wouldn't lower themselves.
Ruth Kelly Resignation
[info]theelectrician wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:55 am (UTC)
Ruth Kelly
By resigning from the Cabinet to spend more time with her family, she 'left the impression' that women cannot have both children and a high-flying political career.

Yes, but was this the real reason why she resigned? Or did she lose out in the complicated political power plays that consume most of the energy of modern politicians?

Million Women Rise
[info]colinru wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:01 pm (UTC)
What these women seem to have forgotten is that a majority of Domestic Violence incidents are started by Women. Once it really kicks off, however, Women tend to come off worst because Men are physically stronger. So when the Fuzz arrive, the Woman usually has the worst injuries. Groups like Million Womwn Rise never acknowledge this basic fact.
What do you expect....
[info]jonny_socialist wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:11 pm (UTC)
When you have iron hard harridons like Jaqui Smith and Hazel Blears. Thatcher would be proud of these prudish waspy women.
Misogyny
[info]aegian wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:51 pm (UTC)
Some of the comments on this thread are surprising, considering that we have some of the most violent and dangerous men in Europe. We're putting more people in prison than anywhere in Europe and most of them are men. All of the faces appearing before Select Committees lately have been male.

I haven't seen any women saying, "Oh I'm sorry, I can't imagine where that half trillion went."

Most jurors and legislators are men, as are most criminal gang members and weapons carriers. Drugs cartels are run using force by men. All porn, violent films and computer games are made by men to cater for the male love of violence. Most wars are started by men and WMD were invented by men. The armaments industry is run by men and sold to men and is used by men to kill not just other men but innocent women and helpless children too.

Most carbon emissions are excarcebated by the male obsession with burning the world's fossil fuels in ever bigger and faster internal combustion engines and even bigger factories producing goods men think the world needs.

Most domestic violence occurs by men on women claiming the men were nagged by the women but taking no account of the sore provocation men mete out to women on a daily basis.

All political systems, including the vilest dicatorships, were put into force by men.

All the financial instruments that have caused the current crisis were invented by men. In fact, all the world's banks, insurance houses and stock exchanges were founded by men for their own enrichment. The bonus culture was one of theirs, as are the tax havens and hording of capital and gold for personal instead of public benefit.

So yes, let's carry on allowing men to run the show until mankind becomes extinct. Perhaps then nature might have a chance to regenerate from what this wonderful species has done to it. You notice men have even named the entire species after their own sex, homo sapiens.
Re: Misogyny
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 03:43 pm (UTC)
YOu are SUCH a misandrist you manhating bint.

Most violence in the home and against children is done by women.

Women benefit from men's money-making and hard work - criminal or corporate. Women are treated way more leniently than men by the law, and never get arrested for profiting from their criminal men - they are the motivation for crime after all.

Men excel and women are middling, so it's no surprise that those before select committees are male , when men make up 80-90% of senior management - through talent, not sexism. Women are jjust no good at leading, being at the senior levels of business or politics. Let's face it - men created and invented everything - women are more suited to fulfilling their evolutuionary destiny: being middling and looking after babies.

Half of jurors are women actually. But of course, as most in politics and the law are men, most legislators are men. But that does NOT mean they represent male interested more than womens. In fact quite the reverse. Male politicians never stand up for men and men';s rights - they're accused of being weak by women if they try and defend men against the injuctice of a system rigged against them.

Men do no=t start wars - people do. You atre obviously unaware that women in general are more right wiing and religious than men. To blame drugs and crime and capitalism and environmental problems on men and not people just shows you for the damaged sad manhating woman you clearly are. PEOPLE are to blame - not men. You portray women as utterly innocent and men as all evil. Get some help love. You sound like a cariacature hairy lipped lesbo misandrist nutter. You probably are.

Porn is healthy and includes men as well as women. It hurts no-one. try some - it may chill you out sister.

Men invented everything, and there would be no civilisation without their wondrous risk-taking and hard work and inventiveness. That is not to disparage women - just to point out how nuts your argument is. Without men there would be no art, no music, no shakespeare, no technology, no human civilisation. You left those out Dworkin-brain.

Women motivate men to do good and bad things, and women's shopping habits are the real cause of consumerism and environmental disaster.

Men naturally run the show directly; women though run the show indirectly, through their families and children. So surely your argument is that men are awful and to blame for everything - but whose fault is that then? Their mothers. Behing every hitler is a hitler mum.

You are ignorant as well as obsessed, sexist and mentally disturbed and deluded: 'homo' in Latin means Man, as in Mankind which includes women - as the male pronoun does and did until very modern times. The latin for 'man' is 'vir'.

Now go away, grow up and book an appointment with the doctor love - you need an injection for sure. Perhaps even a love injection, but don;t look at me for god's sake...





Re: Misogyny
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:35 pm (UTC)
Re: Misogyny
[info]hotfat72 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:33 pm (UTC)
So to summarise the rant from Aegian. Throughout the history of the world, women have achieved nothing?
Re: Misogyny
[info]humble_sparrow wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:45 pm (UTC)
aegian

Did you also notice the entity that keeps males in fresh air, reproductive capacity and places to display their enormous unstinting egos is often referred to as Mother Earth. ummmm? :-)
Remember the roots of Women's Day
[info]rjm77 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 01:06 pm (UTC)
Its a pity that so many people want to turn Women's Day into an opportunity to rehearse some increasingly boring and unproductive battle of the sexes arguments. Behind this is careerism, which leaves the vast majority of women behind, and plays into the hands of some pathetically insecure male chauvinist arguments.

In general I don't care who is the bigger victim: its divisive and generally lacks self-respect. This wasn't the argument made by the founders of Women's Day, the Socialist Party of America and the Second International. It was inspired by mass demonstrations and strikes by women workers in the US for better working conditions and basic civil rights. They correctly sought and obtained the support of men in these struggles. Many men still want to support Women's Day, but are not particularly keen to hear a lecture on how they are the oppressor by a government minister or a member of the Institute of Directors.

In so many ways the 'equality' agenda is flawed as it depends fundamentally on keeping society more or less as it is. I'd like to see it replaced by one of 'liberation', which emphasise the need to chane society in general. This means accepting that we do not want more women plutocrats, militarists and pocket-lining politicians, because we don't want these categories of persons in general. The salaries some of these people are obscene. I'm not interested if some greedy careerist wants her slice of the pie whilst trying to dress it up as radicalism.

Far better to celebrate the essential contribution of women to society in everyday life. Its not the corporate superheroes that make the world go round - they merely foul things up - but masses of ordinary people. So I say, for this women's day we should demand decent pay for those women-dominated professions which the corporate sisterhood tend to ignore, but which are the central part of the great majority of women's lives. That would really solve the 'pay gap'. Then you'll soon discover how the capitalist system cannot 'afford' real feminism - giving women the material means to make their own choices - and all the local authorities will start screaming about going bankrupt because of such 'unreasonable' wage demands. For this reason, the struggle for socialism is thus the inevitable consequence of a serious struggle for womens' rights, just like it was 100 years ago


Re: Remember the roots of Women's Day
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 03:29 pm (UTC)
Yes, dear...
Re: Remember the roots of Women's Day
[info]lynsey888 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 04:08 pm (UTC)
Spot on! The true struggle for wage equality is not only for women but men too. I believe that it is both young women and young men that have become apathetic toward politics. Even the slightly older generation don't have a proper choice anymore due to political parties seemingly blending into one. We know that it's going to be a battle between Labour and Conservative in the next general election and since the majority don't want Labour to retain power the votes will go to the Tories. Political apathy is a problem for all that will only be solved through better education and a shake up of the political system, and this benefits nobody in power.
Lady politicians
[info]marinebigmike wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 01:23 pm (UTC)
Nonsense ! Harriet Harperson is a wonderful examole for us all.
Ruth Kelly - Time with family? I think not
[info]jarobald wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 01:28 pm (UTC)
Ruth Kelly left the cabinet because her religious views precluded her from supporting the government's embryology bill. Nothing to do with family.
[info]thisglasnost wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 04:10 pm (UTC)
Some of the comments to this story are disgusting.

Nice to see Million Women Rise getting some coverage though.
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:15 pm (UTC)
Yes I know - but then some women are very damaged and disturbed and just hate men. Let's just hope they don;t breed eh...
[info]thisglasnost wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:21 pm (UTC)
I was actually talking about the disgusting anti-woman comments.
Ruth Kelly - Pushed?
[info]miranda33 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 04:41 pm (UTC)
Ruth Kelly was no doubt 'encoraged' to resign because of her demonstrated incompetence in the various ministerial posts that she had been awarded. A classic example of the Peter Principle, whereby she was promoted to her level of incompetence. By using the excuse of 'spemding more time with her family', she was ostensibly able to leave without having the humiliation of having to be sacked.

I believe there are a number of potentially excellent MPs in Parliament - why is it that we see only the same old faces?
Misogyny
[info]aegian wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 05:48 pm (UTC)
Somebody is making assumptions that aegian is female.

Now remind me how women are supposed to have got us into this messed up world ...?
Re: Misogyny
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:19 pm (UTC)
You are an idiot and a sexist. Blame people by all means - but do not blame men. Men, the sons of women, who are motivated do things good and bad to attract women, who pay for women and support them, created human civilisation - women supported them.

I'm with ou on the misanthropy - but your misandry it ttruly vile, not to mention childish. Perhaps you are jujst a mentalist and full of self-hatred - I neither know nor care. But your analysis is utterly specious and spurious. If civilisation had been left up to risk-averse, middling women we'd still be in caves - no we'd still be fish, because growing legs and walking on land is very risky y'know, what with all the traffic and the paedophiles...

Just accept that men and women are not the same or equal and that that is innate and decided by evolution and you will have learnt something today.
Running Start
[info]paicines wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:24 pm (UTC)
I think someone should start a nonprofit like this one in Washington, DC. It's a wonderful organization helping teens prepare to become our leaders of tomorrow: Running Start -- http://www.runningstartonline.org/home/
Bolll.x
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:28 pm (UTC)
Hail Boadicia Deen the formidable
Re: Bolll.x
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:46 pm (UTC)
Re: Bolll.x
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:05 pm (UTC)
role models
[info]comradekaff wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:58 pm (UTC)
To most air-brained young women, wags, singers and film stars are their role models.
Savvy Types
[info]kodak321 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:12 pm (UTC)
Look, there are no role models. We've established that. Younger woman aren't particularly interested in politics. OK. So what. I can't see the problem. Most young men aren't interested in Politics. Infact, most people have little interest in politics and a damn good thing too. However, people are savvy and pick and choose information fed to them by the media. They then make political choices based on their needs.

This is a "Women must be in politics to represent the female population" and, "Men purposely subjugate Women limiting their opportunities" discourse. It's about principles, equality, fairness, representation, modernity etc etc.etc. It's a PC nonsense debate. If you're good enough, interested, and prepared to make sacrifices, you'll make it. Male or female. Or should that be Female or male to please some commentators.
Re: Misogyny
[info]aegian wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:14 pm (UTC)
hotfat72'

"So to summarise the rant from Aegian. Throughout the history of the world, women have achieved nothing?"

My post was not meant to address the achievements of women but those of men. The implication was that they have excelled at negative ways as well as positive and caused a great deal of mischief.

The achievements of women would constitute another topic altogether.
What?
[info]kodak321 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:27 pm (UTC)
Actually, my last post was bollocks. Men are naturally competitive, aggressive and singular, and thus rise to higher positions. Women aren't.
Lost Women
[info]ilkalottie wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:28 pm (UTC)
If an entire generation of women must be lost to politics, why couldn't it have been the one that featured Margaret Thatcher.
Misogyny
[info]aegian wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:41 pm (UTC)

Re my saying previously, "Most jurors and legislators are men," I meant, of course, "Most jurists and legislators...".

Sorry.

humble sparrow,

What else!
so what
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 01:10 pm (UTC)
i would imagine that very few young women have the education or intelligence even to understand politics
certainly those to whom I speak simply do not have a clue, nor do they hold political opinions

neither to the young men I should add
Ruth Kelly
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 01:15 pm (UTC)
i have a shrewd suspicion that if you check you may find that Ruth Kelly has a job with BAa or soon will have. no surely I must be wrong
unfaithful politics
[info]cabra_perdido wrote:
Friday, 3 April 2009 at 10:18 pm (UTC)
i am 25, female and have no faith in the political system. i believe that the goverment does not want its population to have a real interest in politics so that we vote blindly and keep the coruption funded. If they wanted peole to be interested and active in poilitical matters than they could use all the systems of advertising and mass media which infiltrate our average daily lives.
It does not need to be made funky or fun it needs to be made honest, accessable and ultimatly our veiws as indivuals and as a nation need to be heard, understood and acted on.
I would be politically active if i felt i could make a difference as it stands i would rather not vote and not be involved in the system at all.
[info]templatesites wrote:
Tuesday, 7 April 2009 at 10:07 am (UTC)
Good article, many thanks for writing.

Matthew Anderson - Director for Franchises For Women

Most popular in UK News



Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date