Night of the Petticoats

I am fortunate enough to live in a beautiful part of the world, South Dorset. While there are challenges to living in a predominately rural area, the chief one for me personally being the high rents and house prices and low wages, I count myself lucky to be a Dorset resident and I would not generally be tempted to go elsewhere.


I am, however, very ashamed that my fellow South Dorset residents gave a majority vote to Richard Drax, the Conservative MP for my patch. In my opinion, he is one of the very last people I could ever imagine wanting to represent me in Parliament.


Who voted for this man? Did they really know what they were voting for?


Let’s start with the latest news. He has taken to the press to bemoan the latest promotion of female MPs as “tokenism” and complained that positions in Parliament should be given on merit rather than on gender. He called the appointment of three new female ministers the “Night of the Petticoats” and patronisingly writes:


"First, I have no problem with women getting top jobs.

But, they, like their male counterparts, must get there on merit, and not just because they are women and a quota needs to be filled by 2015.

Experience counts, too.

The learning curve in the Commons is steep and my intake is still learning the ropes.

An MP’s life is busy enough, but a Minister’s even more so.

Perhaps it would be wiser to tackle the shallow end first, before venturing out of your depth."


Let’s have a look at the women who now serve in the Cabinet.


Theresa May, Home Secretary. Been in politics since 1986 and an MP since 1997. Has held several ministerial roles.


Nicky Morgan, Education Secretary. Studied Law at Oxford University and worked as a solicitor before being elected as MP in 2010.


Liz Truss, Environment Secretary. Studied philosophy, politics and economics at Oxford. A qualified management accountant who became MP for Norfolk in 2010.


Justine Greening, International Development Secretary. Studied economics at Southampton University and an MBA from London Business School. Became MP for Putney in 2005 and was promoted to the Cabinet in October 2011.


Theresa Villiers, Northern Ireland Secretary. Became MP in 2005, prior to that was an MEP for six years. Has held the role of shadow chief secretary and shadow transport minister.


Whatever you think of their politics, these are highly qualified women who have just as much right to be in Parliament as anyone else in government.


Now, let’s have a look at Richard Drax’s own credentials. No qualifications in business, economics, law or politics. A Diploma in Rural Land Management from Cirencester Royal Agricultural College, and a Diploma in Journalism. Nine years in the Army, seventeen years working in the highly esteemed and honourable field of journalism. Became an MP in 2010.


One cannot help but taste the tang of sour grapes.


Anyway, while we are talking about getting there on merit, I cannot help but wonder on what merit Mr Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax was selected to run as an MP in the first place. Could it have been for his clear educational achievements and strong economic, legal or political background? Or could it, perhaps, have been some other reason?


Interestingly enough, Mr Drax makes no mention of male MPs who were also promoted to ministerial roles, who have served just the same amount of time in Parliament. He only questions the suitability of the women, and in language which is clearly designed to be as patronising as possible. This is, of course, not the first time Mr Drax has let his misogyny slip out. Page Three of the Sun is, in his words, “A national institution, providing the girls with a job”. I wonder if he would be happy with his daughters stripping for men to ogle – of course, they will never need to.


Finally, let’s see what else Mr Drax is doing in Parliament to represent his voters:

• Voted strongly for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms
• Voted very strongly against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
• Voted very strongly against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
• Voted strongly for making local councils responsible for helping those in financial need afford their council tax and reducing the amount spent on such support
• Voted very strongly for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits
• Voted moderately against spending public money to create guaranteed jobs for young people who have spent a long time unemployed

And wait for it…

• Voted strongly against increasing the tax rate applied to income over £150,000 
• Voted moderately against a banker’s bonus tax 
• Voted very strongly against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax) 

Hmm.

So, about overcoming social disadvantage and getting people into better paid employment, Richard?

• Voted very strongly for raising England’s undergraduate tuition fee cap to £9,000 per year 
• Voted very strongly for ending financial support for some 16-19 year olds in training and further education 
• Voted very strongly for university tuition fees 

I wonder what Mr Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax thinks about those from privileged backgrounds?

• Voted very strongly against a wholly elected House of Lords 
• Voted very strongly against removing hereditary peers from the House of Lords.

Well, that's a shocker.


And these votes don’t even need any further comment: 

• Voted very strongly against equal gay rights. 
• Voted very strongly against allowing marriage between two people of same sex 

I think it is absolutely clear that Mr Drax is voting based on his own values and opinions, and for the very things that will benefit him the most and not citizens of the UK. It is also clear that his personal values are outdated, unpleasant and bigoted, and have no place in modern UK society.  

 Be proud, South Dorset.  You voted in this man.

Who is the real scourge of society?

When I was a small child, over 30 years ago, my dad used to swing me up on to his shoulders and carry me through the park.

One day, dad couldn’t do this any more.

It was explained to me that dad had had an accident at work (he was a dustman) and had damaged his back.  He needed to go into hospital for an operation.  Little did we know, this was the first of many.

Each operation seemed to make matters worse – things kept going wrong, and my dad ended up having numerous operations both at the local hospital and at Southampton General, at one point being told that he could be paralysed, so serious were the problems with his back and neck.

I have many memories from childhood of going to visit my dad in hospital, and of him spending months – including Christmas - flat on his back in a hospital bed.

Even after the final operation, he missed out on things that dads might otherwise do with their small children, and had trouble walking any distance, certainly not without pain.  Before this accident, he had been fit, healthy and very active.  Becoming disabled changed his life dramatically.

More recently, dad was diagnosed with blocked arteries in his legs and angina, and has had a heart bypass operation.  He also experiences anxiety and depression, which can leave him very distressed and upset.

Most of his days were spent indoors, right up until a few years ago when he took up bowls with the support of his doctor as it would help him to be as active as possible while also relieving depression.  This has been fantastic as he has become really involved with the bowls club and has given him something to fill his days.

So you can imagine how I felt when I heard that a Sun journalist and photographer had been knocking on his door, taking his picture, telling him that they were doing a story on benefit cheats.

While they were not at liberty to discuss why they had my dad’s name, this appears to follow a malicious complaint made to the DWP scroungers hotline last year suggesting that my dad was a faker, which was fully investigated (causing a huge amount of upset and distress) and correctly found to be a completely false accusation.  I feel rather sorry for whoever the person who made this report is, really, as they are one of the many in this country who have been completely suckered in by the Government and media’s anti-disabled people rhetoric, and clearly have no empathy or any understanding that being disabled doesn’t necessarily mean you are in a wheelchair or can’t do a single thing for yourself.  There but for the grace of God, some might say.

I don’t feel sorry for journalists, for this Frankie Cary who turned up on my dad’s doorstep tonight, because they should be educated enough and intelligent enough to understand what they are doing and the harm they are causing.  I am sure that they are not too dense to appreciate the damage they can cause and the actual truth behind the lies and false statistics that they peddle to turn the country in on itself.  Which makes me wonder just what sort of people they are.

Who are you, Frankie Cary?  When you decided to become a journalist, what did you see for yourself?  Did you see a long and glittering career seeking out the truth and highlighting society’s wrongs, did you see yourself being able to influence the world and all those around you, did you feel proud at getting your degree knowing that you were now in a position of great responsibility and power, that people would be reading your words and learning from them, that you would somehow help to make the world a more open, honest and better place?

Or did you see yourself standing on the doorstep of a 68 year old man with a long standing disability, anxiety issues and heart problems, harassing him and distressing him to talk about the lies you are peddling based on hearsay and rumour?

Are you proud of yourself, Frankie Cary?  Would your parents be proud?

Why people should never bet with Paddy Power again

I am quite ashamed of this country.

I am ashamed of the prejudice and vile stereotypes that are peddled in the media and in advertising, and of the way this is reflected in the opinions and attitudes of so many British citizens.

I honestly feel ashamed that I live in a country where it is seen as acceptable by many to create a blatantly transphobic television advert, or to write an article on a university-backed website encouraging rape.

It’s not just that a large company such as Paddy Power ever thought it would be OK to release an advert that calls transgender women “stallions” and encourages viewers to play “spot the man”, but also that swathes of the public have been commenting that they think this is funny and even admitting openly that they think trans people are “freaks”. 

And not just that one person thought it was funny to write an article suggesting that as 85% of rapes are never reported that is good odds to give it a go yourself, but also that hundreds of (mainly) men stood up in support of the article, even in some cases suggesting that people who complained “needed raping” themselves.

Of course, question them and the instant response is almost guaranteed to be “get over yourself”, “sense of humour failure”, “it’s just a laugh innit”, “political correctness gone mad” or something similar.  As for the complainant, you are uptight/dull/frigid/stuffy/humourless and you are the one with the problem.

What is wrong with these people?  Is it simply ignorance and lack of education, or is it that there is a general malaise in UK society which allows such views to breed unchecked?

Let’s look at just why this is a problem.

Here’s the Paddy Power advert in question, for those who have not seen it.

First of all, it is factually misrepresenting trans women.  Trans women are women.  Women.  The women represented in the advertisement are not men in a dress, they are not fetishists, nor are they a “stallion” as opposed to a “mare”.  They are not dogs, as no woman is.  They are women who have been born into a physical body incongruent with their gender identity, and the courage and fortitude needed to take the physically and mentally tough journey towards becoming physically a woman is enormous.  In all probability, a trans woman will have experienced discrimination, stereotyping and bullying in all areas of her life, from employment to relationships and even things that most people find simple, such as walking to the shop to buy a pint of milk without stares and harassment.

We know this is true because of some of the comments posted underneath this advert on Youtube, some examples are:

“ theres more ginger kids and adults picked on and or violently abused every day than transexuals wearing a frock. The difference being one has a choice the other doesn't.”

“you're either a man or woman, end of story. If you want to live that way, don't expect ordinary people who have come to terms with who they are to pander to your delusions about sexuality.”

“Transexuals have no reason to be offended by this ad. It was their choice to change genders in the first place. Live with it and don't be so sensitive.”

“Get a sense of humour. This ad is only highlighting what people already know - that there's something wrong with men who think they are women.”

“people still perpetuate the lie that you can be a 'woman trapped in a man's body' or vice-versa. What rubbish! You are what you are and that is either male or female. Deal with it and don't get upset if people don't agree with your ignorance of reality.”

“Hahaa, the artificial ladies.. poor souls...”

“Get a sense of humour people, if you're a man and have XY chromosomes you will never be a woman. Truth is that most people are too polite to tell you trannies that you're living a delusional falsehood”

“I hope more of them commit suicide. I's what those freaks deserve.”

“You people are political correctness gone mad, you fucking loons.”

“I'd rather be whatever that is [transphobic] than a big ugly bloke dressed up as a woman and bemoaning the fact that people are laughing at me."

“Nice ad PaddyPower its not in a bad way that I dont like transgender.  They are so sensitive people and they keep on hating thats why they feel like the world hate them too”

“Amazing ad. How is this offensive at all to most people ? It simply takes the piss out of trannies. Who cares.”

“Eww..lol.  Those are not gays they are manwoman.”

“this is fucking funny. Whats stupid is cross dressers getting their panties in a bunch over a fucking commercial. Get a life.”

Yes, some of these may be intentionally trolling, but there are many who would genuinely agree with what is being said here.  And the Paddy Power advert validates their prejudices and makes people think it’s OK to poke fun – or worse - at the “trannies”.  (Incidentally, the video on Youtube was tagged by Paddy Power with “Trannies” and “Tranny spotting” (now changed)).

This is the message that Paddy Power are sending out.

I could also mention the fact that they are marketing Ladies Day as some sort of shop window for men to ogle women, so not only is the advertisement transphobic but also misogynistic.

So, what was Paddy Power’s response to the email I sent them?

You can probably guess.

“Intended as mild mannered fun”.

Everything that they have posted since the advertisement being suspended from screens indicate that they are completely unrepentant and in fact suggestive that the entire campaign was intentionally designed to cause maximum offence in order to gain publicity.

For all the above reasons, I have closed my very long standing account with Paddy Power and fully encourage all readers to do the same.

I will look more at the “banter” and “humour” issue in my next blog.

Why TiVo is a good thing...

You can fast forward through advertisements.

I have a bit of a problem with TV adverts.  Some of them are very well made and clever, and I genuinely enjoy watching them (the original Activia advert for example, before they moved on to bloated women talking about their digestive issues).  The Meerkats might be everywhere now but it was clever and original and you have to give the advertising company a hats off for that one.

Some are just annoying, like the Go Compare tenor, or the terminally irritating Aviva ones which are only really there to see what terribly bad accent Paul Whitehouse can do next.

And some I have a bigger problem with, as they are reinforcing rather unpleasant stereotypes, sometimes in a completely inappropriate way.

Here are my top examples of recent adverts:

 

 This is Pepsi Max who think that using a group of moronic men behaving like children and encouraging the sexual exploitation of a woman is a good way to sell their product.

 

More idiotic men advertising Fosters.  Don't forget "you have to make the little lady feel good about herself".  It's in the boyfriend manual, apparently...

The usual Lynx advert objectifying women.  I know they sometimes say they are tongue in cheek, but to me it is tacky and undermines women.  

They have a Facebook page as well saying it is about, "Chat up lines, places to pull, some great exclusive parties, behind the scenes with some of the beautiful Lynx girls, and free stuff when we’re feeling generous...Get in there with Lynx!"

All this leads to actual women assuming the only people who wear this are young teenage boys.

This could have been pretty much any washing powder commercial.

Obviously only women do the washing.

And also they are fine with complete strangers showing up in their garden randomly.

By the way, Vanish is shit so don't bother with it.

There are a couple of men wandering around in this advert as a token gesture, but my main issue is with the strapline "That's why mum goes to Iceland"

Because obviously all "girls" who work in an office are shallow inconsequential employees who care more for fluff than for actual work, and use any chance to skive off.  Also promoting a bit of office bullying while they are at it.  I found it hard to choose one Boots advert to be honest, they are all absolutely excruciating, and to be fair also treat men like dirt.  I haven't set foot in a Boots for years.

Possibly the most middle class thing on TV, this advert has obvious gender stereotypes throughout.

Also, if you really care, let the poor dog inside!  I think the RSPCA might have something to say about that.

There's just too much wrong with this to comment.

This one wins the "weird" prize.

These are the messages that are churned out day after day on our TV screens, working their way into our subconsciouses and helping to strengthen the stereotypes that we all hold, and only some of us consciously rebel against. 

When people say that things have changed for women in society, you really only have to look at these adverts to see that there is still a long way to go as these portrayals of men and women are generally accepted by people without question.

Some people have noticed, though.  I will end with a further Youtube clip which demonstrates just why I love Mitchell and Webb and why David Mitchell is referred to in our house as "my other husband"...

Regrets...and changes.

I have to say, I honestly don’t have many regrets in life as events so far have led me to where I am now, which is a good place.  One of my major regrets though, one that still plays on my mind, is not taking a former employer to tribunal.  I could have done so on grounds of disability discrimination, sex discrimination or constructive dismissal, but I didn’t.  I threatened to a few times, but was afraid to see it through because I was scared to lose my job (even when I should have walked out and fought the constructive dismissal angle).  Instead I hung on and hung on, getting more and more miserable and depressed.  I don’t know what it was that finally pushed me to take action – I left for a job which paid a considerable amount less and was only fixed term – but I have never regretted that, even when the job came to an end and I was unemployed.  I only wished I had faced my fears and done it sooner.

I knew at the time that things weren’t right, and that there were deep and ingrained problems within the office.  But over two years since I left, I can look back and appreciate just how horrible the place was and the effect it, and some of the people, had upon me.  The training I have had since, and am learning about now, on equality and discrimination (among other things) has also helped me to highlight things that happened in the past that were, if not downright illegal, a recipe for inequality, unfairness, resentment and destruction of morale.

I can tell some stories.

Stories where female job interview candidates were, following the interview, rated on their looks openly within the office by male managers.  Stories where people they met while travelling around the county for their jobs were described as “totty” and the day would be a bad one if they hadn’t met any totty while out and about.  Stories where managers stated that they didn’t want to employ any more senior staff on part time contracts (even though there was no real reason for this).

I could tell you about the times I tried and tried to put my name forward for projects and for work, saying that I needed more to do and I knew I was capable of achieving this, coming up with ideas about how it could be done – only to find out later that the exact project I had suggested had been given to a male member of staff, and nobody had bothered to explain this to me.  I was basically ignored every single time I suggested things or asked to be involved, and eventually I gave up.

I could tell you about the time I fought to be involved in a project, did all the groundwork for it, then when another member of staff came back from sick leave it was all transferred over without consultation or explanation and I felt completely undermined and devalued.

I could tell you about the time I left a load of my own work in my own pigeon hole to remind myself to do it when I got back from a single day off, only to find when I returned that it had been taken out of my pigeon hole and put in someone else’s.  Or the times that mail addressed to me was passed to another member of staff to deal with.

I could tell you about the many, many times that staff walked past me to ask questions of my equivalent male colleague who had just been appointed to do the same job as me, even though he was new to the job and I had been doing it – effectively – for years and (with respect to my colleague) had a wider knowledge base and capability.  I could tell you about the time that I spoke to my manager about this as it was upsetting me greatly.   I could tell you that he told me that I was being “silly” and over sensitive, something I highly doubt he would have said to a man.  I could also confirm that I was not imagining this, as my colleague mentioned it to me himself a couple of weeks later even though I had not said a word to him (as it was not his fault).

I could tell you that the same male colleague, doing the same job as me, was employed on considerably more pay and it took many months of fighting and being brushed off and treated as unimportant to get this put right.  Then the day after I was told I had won my fight and would be paid more, I was brought into the manager’s office on a charge of misconduct and sent home.  They then proceeded to tell lies about me throughout the subsequent investigation, and not allow me right of reply.  This caused me to have a bit of a breakdown.  Pretty understandably.

I could tell you about the hounding I got over a chronic medical condition that I suffer from, which is covered by equality legislation, and when my manager told me not to “make my problems the employer’s problem”.  I could tell you that the company’s HR department was woefully ignorant of equality legislation despite being the largest employer in the area, and was forced to change their policies when I threatened to go to tribunal.

I was ignored, trivialised and talked down to.  I was undermined, harassed and discriminated against.

I am not a troublemaker, I am not negative and I never liked having to complain or threaten action but I found myself doing this over and over again because nothing was ever taken seriously and nothing ever got any better.  This led me to get a reputation as negative and a complainer, while the managers continued to belittle and ignore both my valid complaints and the suggestions I made to turn things around.

I think I struggled at the time to recognise the cumulative effect all this was having upon me, even when I was sitting at home on a Sunday night crying about having to go into the office the next day.  I had no confidence, and I wasn’t in the right place to be able to see how low I was.  It is often hard to observe your own moods.  At the time I was often told it was my problem, my fault, I was regularly accused of moaning and being negative.  I see it now as a total failure of management to have any understanding, empathy, support or awareness of their own staff.

Since I left, I have been a new person.  I have done several fantastic jobs and received absolutely glowing references which cite me as overwhelmingly positive, enthusiastic and hard working.  I have won staff awards.  I have been treated as a human being with worth and value.

And you know what?  I know am intelligent, I strive for what is right, give a lot to my work and to the people I work with, and anyone who employs me is fortunate indeed.  Provided they treat me with basic respect and understanding.  Which isn’t a lot to ask, is it?

All the small things

I seem to talk a lot on this blog, and will talk in the future, about things that many people would dismiss as fairly minor in the grand scheme of things.  Why does it matter for feminism and equality that a beer pump has a naked woman on it, or that drills are advertised as a male gift, or that little girls are dressed in pink and boys in blue?  These things are small and we can ignore them, right?

Let's have a look at associative memory.

We all subconsciously have ideas of what is feminine and what is masculine, what it is to be female and male.  Even if we do not consciously subscribe to these views, we are primed to have the thoughts in our subconscious, arguably even before we are born but certainly from the minute we are exposed to the world.  It is what we take on from the world around us, soaking it up like a sponge.  Even reluctant sponges don't have much choice but to get wet when you pour water on them.

Research shows that people implicitly attribute maleness to certain careers and certain personality traits, and femaleness to other traits, even if they do not consciously pigeonhole people based on gender.  This subconscious thought process can lead to unintentional stereotyping and discrimination. 1

People are quicker to recognise traits that match their stereotype (a caring woman, an aggressive man) than those which challenge them (a nurturing man, a strong woman) 2

Associative memory basically means that from birth we are exposed even involuntarily to many cultural associations.  This could be something simple, like "red means danger", we are learning about our own culture and what things mean within it.

It also incorporates many ideas of gender, all of which contribute to us subconsciously gaining a fixed set of associations of what is female and male, which we are not able to change.

Even the smallest things can contribute to our development of this associative memory, from the language and voice your mother uses to speak to you while you are in the womb, to being given a doll or a toy car, to seeing women doing housework in advertisements.  Your memory will take all this on board, even if your conscious mind rebels against the associations.  As Cordelia Fine puts it, your memory "picks up and responds to cultural patterns in society. media and advertising, which may well be reinforcing implicit associations you don't consciously endorse".  These patterns are then passed on to future generations.

I bet you know what gender the children that I have blanked out in the photographs below are.  That you do know shows how ingrained gender stereotypes are within our society.

This helps to explain why people who may not challenge their own thinking and preconceptions act the way they do, why people accept stereotypes, and why stereotyping is so rigid and unchanging in today's society.  To change this, we need to make huge changes at the cultural level and also challenge the way we are already thinking.  A very big task, but we can start by highlighting all the pieces that make up the gender association jigsaw.

So some of the things I talk about may seem like trivial matters, unimportant matters, things that don't have any real effect on how women are seen and treated on matters of real importance.  But as you can see, I argue it is a combination of all the many small things that lead to the ingrained stereotypes, which in turn lead to more serious discriminations.




1 - Cordelia Fine, Delusions of Gender, published by Icon Books
2 - Assessing Stereotype Incongruities

Some Good News

Good news in the Guardian today.  Arcadia Ltd, owned by Philip Green, comprising Topshop among other retailers, has seen a drop of 40% in their profits.

No, it's not good news for the economy, you might say.  And I would tend to agree with you.  But I can't help personally feeling a bit smug about the news.   Just on this occasion, since it's Topshop that is struggling, I would be more than happy to see the whole caboodle go down the pan and Mr Green disappear from business.

Why?

First of all, Mr Green's well publicised avoidance of paying his income tax.

He is a UK resident and always has been, the companies are operated within the UK.  But he cleverly registered his businesses in the name of his wife, a resident of Monaco where the tax rate is a whopping, um, 0%,  Yes, no tax.  Figures for 2005 show that he banked £1.2billion personally, avoiding a tax bill of £285million.

Second, you could see Topshop's hopeful demise as karma for the appalling T-shirts they put on sale earlier this year, glamorising domestic violence and comparing women with dogs.

While they withdrew these from sale after a public uproar (one thing the media can be good for), this was reluctant and they were not sorry that the items had gone on sale, only that they had offended people.  See their statement:

"We have received some negative feedback regarding two of our printed T-shirts. Whilst we would like to stress that these T-shirts were meant to be light-hearted and carried no serious meaning, we have made the decision to remove these from store and online as soon as possible."We would like to apologise to those who may have been offended by these designs."

Light hearted, carrying no serious meaning?  Do they really believe this, as if they do, it is at best naive and at worst wilfully ignorant of the effect that casual misogyny can have on society.

So, with apologies to the people that Topshop employs (except the snitty ones who look down their noses at you for daring to set foot in the shop if you don't look skinny and glamorous), I encourage people to shop elsewhere and let's see if the final nail can be hammered into their nasty little coffin.