Commentators

Partly Sunny with Showers 5° London Hi 5°C / Lo 2°C

Editor-At-Large: Oh Sarah, you've just taken a step back for women

Janet Street-Porter
Sunday, 28 September 2008

I like Sarah Brown, always have. She's tough, resilient and doesn't suffer fools. Until last week, I had marked her as a woman who'd stand her ground and not be pushed around by anyone. So what happened? Suddenly you can't open a newspaper without a picture of Sarah with her shiny new meet-the-people smile. There's Sarah in a sequinned top with Sarah, the freaky hockey mom who has designs on the White House; Sarah snapped with Wendi Deng, aka Mrs Rupert Murdoch; Sarah with the most worrying of all her new girlfriends, Sarah Ferguson, the ex-royal who wants to help us fight obesity. Sarah Brown used to be a highly successful PR woman – and after her marriage to Gordon she morphed into a wife who'd opted to remain firmly in the background. At a reception in Downing Street a few years later, I told her my sister was having a tough time with cancer. When Pat died, Sarah wrote me a personal letter of condolence, which I greatly appreciated. It was typical of her thoughtfulness.

Sarah has spent her married life supporting the charities she feels passionately about, and bringing up her two small sons. I thought that her decision to adopt a low profile was admirable, and quite unusual in our celebrity-driven culture. Who can forget Tony Blair – who told the media his family should be given privacy – posing on the steps of Downing Street clutching new baby Leo? What a photo opportunity!

At the end of a week in which Sarah took centre stage at the Labour Party conference to introduce her husband, boarded a private plane to New York (giving a free ride to Elle Macpherson and Sarah Ferguson), and then hosted a dinner with Queen Rania of Jordan and Wendi Deng, I've come to the reluctant conclusion that she's decided to raise her profile and return to the old Sarah of her PR past.

You can tell things are grim when a tightly buttoned-up bloke such as Gordon Brown adopts Yankee tactics, using his wife as a way of wooing voters. Sarah Brown, like Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain, isn't running for office. She hasn't been voted into power by anyone. She lives a comfy, nice, middle-class life with a hubby who has no mortgage worries and a fat pension when he leaves office. When Gordon was asked when they decided she should introduce his speech at the Labour conference, he had the gall to reply, "We talked about it in the summer." Rubbish – this tactic was pulled out of the bag after seeing how wives were being flaunted on the other side of the Atlantic. Sarah's move is a step backwards for women; I would have been more impressed if she'd taken the microphone and announced she'd decided to run for Parliament, instead of acting as her fella's warm-up.

Jetting off to New York to host a celebrity-laden lunch supports my belief that many famous women use charity as the ultimate form of networking – no matter how worthy the cause. When Sarah hosted a lunch in the UK, attended by Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, female journalists were thrilled to receive free tickets, ensuring a tidal wave of gush about Carla and Sarah. The truth is, politics is a brutal, punishing, macho world – look how Ruth Kelly was hung out to dry when she dared to announce she was stepping down to spend time with her family. Sarah's behaviour reinforces the notion that the best place for women in politics is standing one step behind their husband.

Screen test Television's challenges hit a new low

Bad news if you think that reality television has run its course. The BBC's 'Maestro' seemed to mark a more upmarket version of the genre, as it involved classical music – and everyone I know thinks that Goldie was robbed – but a couple of forthcoming shows mark a return to more familiar territory. This Thursday, the Living channel unveils 'The Underdog Show', in which 10 celebrities, including Lesley Joseph and Brian Blessed, have to train mutts from animal refuges. I'd be more interested if the underdogs concerned were failing football teams that armchair footie fans had to get back on their feet. Meanwhile, ITV has come up with the most outrageous idea yet. 'Paris Hilton's My New Best Friend' will be hitting our screens in the new year. This involves eight wannabe friends of the pouting princess who are put through a series of tough challenges before one claims the ultimate accolade – Paris is their (temporary) buddy. Hopefully one of the challenges won't involve a contestant being videoed having sex with one of her ex-boyfriends – that's surely too hot for ITV, although Trinny and Susannah have been stripping off in search of ratings.

Why we're all rooting for turnips

First, Waitrose announces it is going to promote offal and cheap cuts of meat. Now Tesco reports another milestone in recession cuisine – turnip sales are up 75 per cent. Of course that statistic means very little, because as far as I know turnips have not exactly been popular with your typical Tesco shopper, whose trolley tends to be laden with pizzas, cheap beer, wine and bogof baked beans. I love turnips – some chefs may sneer at them, but they are the star of my vegetable patch. I don't demean my gorgeous little pink and white turnips by using them to bulk out stews, where they can be swamped in gravy and overcooked. I toss them in oil and roast them whole or in quarters – delicious with shoulder of lamb. They're nutty and gorgeous. Bit like me.

Make school meals compulsory

At last Ed Balls follows my advice by offering free school meals – the only way to get kids eating healthily. Why aren't school meals compulsory? Sometimes it's best to set boundaries and impose rules, especially if many parents don't at home. I'd like to see children cooking their own lunch within five years – then you'd be making progress and teaching them all sorts of skills. Meanwhile, education bosses in Durham claim that pupils who took fish oil and evening primrose oil supplements in a trial improved their exam results by up to two grades. Many scientists think the numbers involved were too small to be meaningful, and say that home life should have been considered. If all children had compulsory well-balanced lunches, schools wouldn't need to act as promotional tools for companies flogging supplements.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Comments

30 Comments

Don't forget a Crisp is a highly successful teacher, writer, scientist, mathematician, internet guru, salesman, womaniser etc etc.

I also feel fortunate that I have been able to deal with every crisis life has thrown at me thus far to come out the other side with reason and, most importantly, humour in tact.

Any emotional of physical traumas that one has been through need to be dealth with and out to rest. Only that way one can learn from what has happened, learn precisely what 'was not to one's taste' (shall we say) about the situation and learn what to do next time to benefit oneself and everyone else. Until then one is, shall we say, stuck in a rut.

Posted by shame indeed | 29.09.08, 15:34 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Doesn't everyone realise by now that Crispy, in his many guises, knows everything about everything, is highly intelligent, educated and has a wealth of experience in every area of life. Anyone who disagrees is naturally a twit. Middle class men are of course going to be great at most things they turn their hands to, and women of all kinds (but especially Brit Women, yurgh!) are most definitely worse at pretty much everything and we should all look for foreign women instead.

Whilst we can have as many facts to hand as possible, most opinion is based on personal experience, we can all find 'facts' to back up our opinions if we try hard enough. I feel fortunate that my life has enabled me to be generally positive about most people and although there are many faults in the world, to try not to generalise and feel anger towards large sections of society.

I fear Crispy has not been so fortunate in his experiences, the daily (almost identical) postings say it all. I feel sad for him

Posted by what a shame | 29.09.08, 15:14 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Crispy should realise that the fraudulent part is professing false science, not pointing it out!

As Marcus said, statistics are science so if you want to use science in this day and age you must back it up otherwise it is opinion (a very mysoginistic one at that!). Having just read the conversation you were the one who introduced 'science' to the messages by 'quoting' statistics so if it isn't a science seminar leave science out of it, unless you want to provide evidence?

"Brit men cook better than most male foreigners."

Really - How many were asked, where, when, by whom?

Your question, I believe?

Posted by Terry | 29.09.08, 14:57 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Marcus - my insults are reciprocal, bounced back at you, you fraud.

Again I say, this is not a science seminar. Can you get that thru your thick head? No, obviously. NO statistics or proof are needed here mate - if you can;t accept that, buzz off. Or, if you want, provide evidence to prove me wrong. Or are you just a hypocrite?

I am NOT comparing middle class men with all women - and I was not comparing 18 year old girls to 18 year old boys (who were never part of my argument). Like many who work with maths you seem rather illterate and no good with comprehension.

I am comparing British women with foreign women - most of whom can cook. THAT is our problem coz 80% of meals for kids are cooked by women. THAT is our problem. Not lack of cooking lessons or boys not cooking - Brit men cook better than most male foreigners.

YOu are talking out of your onus mate, that;s for sure.

Go back to your nerd hospital nerdy Marcus - ask someone to read for you if you don't get it.

Posted by Crispy | 29.09.08, 12:35 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Crispy: the fact that you've resorted to personal insults when discussing lack of evidence shows immaturity.

You're the one making assertions to back up your point and the onus is on you to make your point seem believeable. That is how we do things in the scientific world. Otherwise your comment is not based on any scientific evidence and is therefore an opinion.

You need me to point out to you the 'bad science' in your comment:

Lack of back-up for statistics.

Comparing "many women of all classes in the UK" and "most 'middle-class' educated British men can cook just great" which is changing more than one variable in the 'test' (undertaken by yourself, it appears)

Not provided comparable evidence for 18 year old boys.

In France and Italy all children are taught to cook by all members of the family. Italy especially, however, has a matriarchal figure who is 'head of cooking' if you will.

That alone is enough to rubbish you and your comment.

Good day, Sir.

Posted by Marcus | 29.09.08, 12:28 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Marcus you utter prat - the point is this is NOT a scientific study or a university seminar - IT'S A MESSAGE BOARD. And if you think what I am saying is rubbish and a lie - feel free matey to post evidence disproving it. If I said WWII was 1939-1945 would you expect me to post evidence too? Probably you would you institutionalised jobsworth.

My point is: most food for children is prepared by women. (80% according to a report I heard a while back - sounds about right to me - and 70% of girls can't cook an egg) - so therefore it is women knowing how to cook which will benefit children more. Not sexist just realist. No woman in France/Italy would call that sexist - only Brits who can't cook and think it makes them 'strong independent women'. Middle class educated men are good cooks in my experience.

I am giving my opionion backed up with remembered reports. This is NOT a university essay you twit! Any evidence to disprove my points please you saddo? No? Shut up then.

Posted by Crispy | 29.09.08, 12:12 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Another point to note: just browsing other forums. YAB talks of ignorance within youths directed at foreign immigrants.

You made the point:

" "our youth in Britain, at least those surveyed, are anti-immigrant, are suspicious of Europe and believe the nation is losing its character and defining features."

Really - How many were asked, where, when, by whom?"

Good point, well made. And I echo the question to you to further emphasis my point:

"Sadly, many women of all classes in the UK (expect from ethnic minorities) seem to be proud that they can't cook an egg (70% of 18 year old girls can't!!!)"

Really - How many were asked, where, when, by whom?

Posted by Marcus | 29.09.08, 12:00 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Very highly educated and intelligent and making Simpsons quotes. Anyone can make any claim on here Crispy; it seems like you are doing so judging by your level of scientific knowledge. In the scientific world (where the subject of statistics resides) you are expected to provide evidence to back up your claims; which you have not done. This renders your opinion (dressed as fat) partisan and obselete.

To answer your question: 'Why would I lie?' is to prove your point that women are worse than men. That is your point isn't it? And what a surprise, you have the statistics to prove it. A fair comparison must be provided to show the amount of 18 year old boys who don't know how to boil an egg. You must see that?

Those who are educated see your points as being one sided, partisan and lacking in back-up. Which exposes them as being fraudulent and you as being a fraud.

Unless you are willing to provide evidence, as is common practice in scientific study? Thought not.

Posted by Marcus | 29.09.08, 11:56 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Marcus - facts are not sexist. This is not an undergraduate tutorial and I am not obliged to cite references for everything I say. You just have to accept I am very well educated and intelligent, and pick up information from everywhere as the highly-educated do. Why would I lie anyway? Do your own research to argue against me if you want - do you deny what I say? So where is your evidence? On the other hand, stop being such a pompous oaf.

I said middle class educated men can cook - not all men. Seems you're not very good at reading - sorry, but thos MB doesn't allow me to draw pictures for the slow learners.

Of course my comment was one-sided! It's my comment! DOH!

In France and Italy, girls learn how to cook from their grannies and mums - so they can cook - so their kids eat proper meals. They do not see that as sexist. It isn't.

In the UK where it is seen as a statement of female 'emancipation' to be unable to cook an egg, children are obese and malnourished. Geddit?

Posted by Crispy | 29.09.08, 11:37 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Crispy - where do you get your statistics from please?

Seems spurious that you conveniently have these statistics to back up your points. Do you have the stats on how many 18 years old boys can cook an egg, for example. If it is a higher percentage (which I anticipate that you will provide) then why shouldn't men take more responsibility cooking? Of course if it is lower then that contradicts your point. Sticky situation.

And if 80% of all meals by children are prepared by women who can't cook while all the men 'can cook just great' then men have a respsonsibility to ensure that their family eats properly.

But if you feel I've put you in too sticky a situation for you to reply, don't worry. I was merely pointing out your comment was one-sided, lacking in back-up and sexist!

Posted by Marcus | 29.09.08, 10:52 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

30 Comments

Columnist Comments

terence_blacker

Terence Blacker: The greasy gravy train of lobbyism

The idiocy and graft at work in the system barely merits a second glance.

dominic_lawson

Dominic Lawson: When 'life' should mean life.

Sometimes the public feel the perpetrator should not be released.

steve_richards

Steve Richards: Who is accountable for the police?

Why was Damian Green arrested with such spectacular insensitivity?