Westminster and sexual harassment

The DM has always been a sexist rag and thus would never have ever supported any side other than the abusers. But even by its abysmal standards the articles by Vine and Hitchens in recent days have plumbed new depths. They are clearly terrified that change may be on the cards.

Was it wikipaedia that refused to accept DM as a proper news outlet?
Why can't Gransnet?

I notice that the Daily Mail is piling on on the side of the abusive men, with a vengeance. These headlines: "Hare-brained hysteria and the death of British sense of fairness", and the how-low-can-you-sink: "What will women gain by this squawking about sex-pets? A niqab"

I think you are spot on MaizieD. I think that the sexual harassment scandal currently hitting Parliament is a symptom of the problem in society as a whole where the treatment of women and their exclusion from power is historical and culturally embedded.

My son knows someone who suffered inappropriate sexual behaviour in the Commons from an M.P. twice her age. There is nothing trivial about this problem.

Very good post, MaizieD - it reflects my experiences pre and post "the pill".

Nellimoser

Nice to be doubly complimented Thanks.

Don't know how that happened!

MaizieD Sun 05-Nov-17 14:27:54

IMO You have hit the nail well and truly on the head there.

MaizieD Sun 05-Nov-17 14:27:54

IMO You have hit the nail well and truly on the head there.

Forceful piece from the Independent on the Tories record on gender equality. www.independent.co.uk/voices/sexual-harassment-westminster-jacob-rees-mogg-tories-womens-rights-a8033331.html

Well it will be interesting to see what evidence if any the former police officer produces.

Wonder if Damian Green can cling on? If not Maybot will be totally isolated -then I wonder if she’ll carry in.

And so do some women judging by some of the comments on GN

What it all boils down to, in my opinion, is that for hundreds of years women have been regarded by men as sexual objects who exist to service their needs; either to have their children or to indulge their preferences. Especially men in positions of power. Although the advent of the Pill in the 1960s offered women sexual liberation in many ways and helped to drive the feminist movement I don't think it helped to alter the views of men who saw women in that way. I think it gave them the impression that all women wanted sex and, because of the removal of the fear of pregnancy, would be more than willing to comply whenever they, the men, wanted them. Women who didn't submit could be castigated as being frigid or unnatural.

So, while it gave women freedom over their own sexual activity it didn't do anything to alter the power relationship.

Well, that's what I think. Others can disagree, but I think some men have a long way to go yet in recognising women as equal and autonomous beings who don't exist for their pleasure.

I hope that what comes out of all this is a set of rules and regulations that protects anyone from any person in power. We know from some of the physiological experiments that have been done that all it takes is telling someone that they are in a position of power and telling another person they are not for the boundaries, such as they are, in society to break down very quickly.

The neoliberals ideas, which have been turning our previously accepted ideas of 'right' on there head with their no rules, no regulation society, are being found out fast and furiously in all aspects of life at the moment. Of course, the wealthy and the powerful wanted to have these ideas accepted generally - it is what they have always lived by and enabled their sense of entitlement to be seen as accepted (while not acceptable) by society.

That depends, also, on an unbiased selection process.

I absolutely agree Eloethan. The real issues is the barriers that exist to prevent women coming forward - if women had equal opportunities with men, then it could be argued that the best person was selected.

Why should women not be the right people for the job?

There has been a lot of research that demonstrates the benefits of having much greater representation of women at senior levels, including politics and business.

An article by Gwen Young of CNN on this subject contained this extract:

"............... It's not just developing countries that can benefit from increasing female participation in the workforce, including in leadership positions. A 2014 a Goldman Sachs report argued that Japan could boost its absolute GDP by 12.5% if female workforce participation rose to match that of men.

"And in Canada, one study on the impact of women in public service showed that women have had a clear impact on "policy, programs and operations such as in fisheries, the automotive industry, national security, natural resources, the environment, science, human resources and international relations." This impact arises not only from the inclusion of women's perspectives, but also from leadership styles that are open, collaborative and less hierarchical............."

I would add, however, that I would not vote for or support the advancement of a woman merely because she was a woman.

With a teacher or doctor for example, you can protect the public s/ he would normally come into contact with at work by suspending them ie they can’t carry on doing their job until the disciplinary/ court case is finished. With MPs simply taking away the whip still leaves the public at work at risk. It’s really difficult isn’t it to work out how to protect other workers from an MP facing serious allegations? He can still get into a lift in Parliament and have a grope or make a lewd remark. So as the system can’t protect us maybe we all just have to know what he’s accused of so we
can choose for an example to give him a wide berth.

As for having more women MPs,it’s rather naive to think that the present system automatically results in the best candidates being appointed or even being prepared to put themselves forward for selection.

I enjoyed Hadley Freeman's column in the Guardian yesterday:

So it is clearly time to ban men from the workplace. They obviously cannot handle working with women and we’ve been through sagas like this too many times now to expect them to change, really. So stay at home, men: take some time to think about your collective behaviour, have cold baths, grill some meat. Leave the grown-up work to women now.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/nov/04/evidence-mounting-mans-place-in-home

It's not serious, of course but it does reverse a discourse which women have been subjected to for a long, long time.

And the drinks are subsidised

The drinks should cost more than elsewhere. The HoP needs funds for refurbishment.

No

We need the right person for the right job.

www.5050parliament.co.uk/

Do we need more women in parliament?

I see they are wheeling out Edwina Curry to stand up for these poor downtrodden male MPs.