Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Falling out of love with Blair

Tabitha Tickletooth

20:18 / 27.04.05

It seems that women, according to reports in various media, are falling out of love with Tony Blair. Will I go to the ballot box convinced by intellect to vote Lib Dem, only to have my heart and womb betray me with a tug for Tony Blair? Obviously my head has been turned and I so easily forget why I might have voted Labour before (what with all the puppies, kittens and pretty lace in the world) but I don't remember voting out of love last time. Are there really 'women's issues' in this election and if so what are they? Is the language of luurvve so frequently employed in discussion of what might be putting women off - sorry turning women off - voting Labour in any way helpful, if not actually insulting?
This is an example of the kind of thing that's pissing me off (ok so maybe you expect this from the Star, but I believe the sentiments and language are reasonably widespread); as is this and this.

14:41 / 29.04.05

Avoiding a whole host of unfunny posts that popped into my head, it is extrememly bad, lazy journalism to go with the whole dumbed down and all about the gloss that the elections have become of late. Blaire was responsible for one of the first 'putting on the glitz' elections that I remember seeing (his first victory was full of President Blaire and US style reports). Plus there are very little policy issues being raised during this whole campaign, so I guess newspapers need to fill the pages somehow, and they'll always find a voice for a quote, whatever they are writing. It's massively insulting considering that the sufferagette (excuse spelling) movement is still quite a potent piece of political history.

13:13 / 01.05.05

"there are very little policy issues being raised during this whole campaign"

That is a bit unfair. They are discussed a huge amount. I think human nature means we also vote based on other factors such as how good looking someone is, how much we feel we trust them. That is just human.

...

I know what you mean about the "women's vote" but there are issues and policies that are of specific interest to half of the population.

Equality is important and you have to target specific groups for that.

20:42 / 01.05.05

Buk, I feel policy issues have been completely brushed under the carpet on this one. The big two are so close in their policy template that they have chosen not to bring up much, and instead revert to a 'yes we're the same, but we'll do it better' campaign and a 'you're numbers don't add up' attacking stance, and the Lib Dems are flagging up that they are the 'different' party of note. Even the war, the one area that could cause Blaire discomfort, has been supported by Howard.

12:30 / 03.05.05

"The big two are so close in their policy template that they have chosen not to bring up much"

Policies have been brought but yes they all seem to be variations on a consensus. Not necessarily bad though. Just means the majority of people agree on the big issues. Taxes should be fair and public services should be well run and well funded.

19:11 / 03.05.05

Well, no, I'd disagree with that - I don't think there has really been a serious discussion of *any* policies in the media. There's been a lot of publicity for talking points that are put out by the various parties, but very little actual analysis. Even the nonsense about immigration has been mostly left unchallenged. The situation is one where news organisations feel that saying "party X says this, but party Y says that" is sufficient. (There've also been the usual politically motivated writings in various ideologically-aligned papers, but analysis and discussion doesn't come into that either.)

The idea that lack of enquiry into the positions of parties is a result of the majority of people agreeing with them is frankly nonsense I feel. Would people really agree with, say, PPP if how it worked was actually covered in the mainstream media? The coverage of this campaign has basically been about press releases, personalities and irrelevant bullshit talking points. The neo-liberal orthodoxy established in recent years is simply never challenged.

In connection with the original post... that Guardian article made me chuckle. Apparently, women nowadays have about the same level of support for Labour as men do, as opposed to previously, when it was about the same as men's. And that deserves a specific headline about women it seems.

22:09 / 03.05.05

Fridge - I find that policies are analysed in depth everyday in the press and television. What do you feel is missing?

Newsnight is on every single night and it seem to do what you are asking for. From the website -

"Our aim on Newsnight is simple: to give you the best daily analysis of news and current affairs on television."

12:51 / 04.05.05

Well... the only decent analysis I've seen of PFI/PPP was by Paul Foot in Private Eye - there was an opinion piece about it in the Guardian a while back, but that was largely taken from the Foot piece, I thought. I don't know about Newsnight's coverage as I don't have a television, but from what I have seen of it, it's unlikely to expose the motivations behind PFI in quite the same way (to take Fridge's example).

17:04 / 04.05.05

So would you agree that there is no serious discussion of any policy in the media, Kit-Cat? What kind of coverage do you think there should be?

Tabitha Tickletooth

20:20 / 04.05.05

I also feel that there has been little in the way of quality analysis and debate - and what little trickle there was seems to have dried up in the slanging match during the final days. Being a major consumer of BBC radio, I agree with those who are critical of the 'total parity = no bias' approach which seems to discourage or curtail a lot of decent discussion.

Strangely, the issue that I do see/hear women being vocal about in the media is the war on Iraq. Putting aside the insulting tendency of some to explain this as straightforward 'I want my man back safe' thinking, surely war is an issue which would be expected to belong firmly in the men's issues camp - if you credit the dichotomy at all.

On the other hand, when abortion surfaced briefly as an issue - one I would have thought tailor made for the women's issues pile - I could have sworn it was male, smug-bastard Tories that raised it.

Buk: I know what you mean about the "women's vote" but there are issues and policies that are of specific interest to half of the population.

Problem is, I really don’t think I agree with this. What are these issues and policies that are of specific interest to only half the population? Why would gender divide the electorate? Surely even ‘equality’ issues, by definition, concern everyone – even if they are specifically designed to target certain groups to help them achieve some kind of parity, they benefit and are of interest to everyone.

15:33 / 05.05.05

"What are these issues and policies that are of specific interest to only half the population?"

Childcare is dominated by women so policies there are going to specific interest. Policies for greater to prevent discrimination for being a women. Women's health issues. Abortion.

I know these are of interest and value to everyone but ya know what I mean...