Sally Bercow on BB.....does she, or any spouse, have a duty to their spouses job/role?

She has done nothing to merit fame other than being married to her husband. That's what we've said. Not that she's done nothing.

Differences of opinion I understand. Lauding her as a feminist I do not understand and no one so far has come back to explain.

Surely, your husband shouldn't be sharing confidential information with you so you shouldn't be able to post it on websites.

However, if you were privvy to other sources not DH which provided you with confidential information then it would be down to you whether you chose to share that not as a duty to him but in line with your own sense of freedom of information.

DH is a civil servant in Westminster and is very careful not to post confidential stuff about his work on websites - so neither would I. So in that sense I have a duty to his role, also I feel we have a duty to support one another in our roles.

I follow Sally on Twitter and she follows me after I said that what was shocking to some people about the ES article (where she talked about finding her husband sexy etc) was that some politicians actually like to have sex with their own wives :)

hear hear amodmillymum, if anything her choices are her own. Also the crowd who keep saying she has done nothing / hanging on coat tails of her partner etc... nice to know that having and bringing up children is nothing . do we all really think he would be speaker if had raised kids as a single dad etc etc
and finally in terms of apparently acceptable political difference Maria and Arni??? it was not considered a deal breaker when he got elected

We are all independent individuals who should be accountable for our choices and decisions. She has the freedom to do as she wants - she is not the speaker of the house or his servant - she is his partner.

I would say that though because I am spend my life saying this to the military. I am not in the military. I am not bound by your rules and half the time I think they shaft people but let's not get into that. Although military/govt - it's not much different really. It's all horsesh*t - while she's on BB whose to say he's not tied up in some dungeon in Westminster by administered the cane by Madam Whiplash (this is a joke - I am sure he's tucked up with his horllicks keeping his vocals good to call 'order, order').

Yes, I'd like to know that.

Is it her using sex to get what she wants?

Is it her revealing outfits?

Is it her 100% reliance on her husband's fame and position?

What could it be?

What distinguishes her as a feminist?

I really admire her for being loud and proud about being a feminist, and for insisting on being seen as her own person. The Daily Mail have seriously got the sharp knives out for her - there was a story yesterday quoting 'friends' of the Bercows saying that they are encouraging John to divorce her over her unreasonable behaviour! Nice!
I do question her judgment in spilling loads of details about dirty weekend etc. In my view, that's private stuff and it's likely to be embarassing for her husband, which is unfair on him. And this is a very personal thing, and I know not everyone will agree, but I REALLY wish she had kept her own name instead of taking his! I know they have been married for 9 years but surely changing your last name to your husbands only makes it harder to be seen as an independent person!

How is she her own woman when she is riding 100% on who her husband is?

If accounts are to be believed, John Bercow is seriously, seriously pissed off with her going on BB and tittle tattling about their sex life whilst there ( she says she exhausted him on a dirty weekend to get him to agree), especially when he didn't agree!
I find her an attention seeking twat, personally but she is also, without doubt, a huge embarrassment.

Not selling access. Using their contacts.

I don't look at this as anything to do with feminism, maybe that's the big difference. I don't rate highly anyone who strains to be a celebrity on a basis of nothing, other than who you're married to.

She's her own woman? Yes, but by grabbing media attention however possible, well, it's SB who's riding on the back of her husband, not anyone else who's putting her in that position.

What is feminism and how does she illustrate it? I'm baffled.

Don't know much about her, don't really care. I do admire her for distinguishing herself from her husband. Just because he's 'important', she shouldn't have to live in his shadow. And, as prolesworth said, doing it for charity and raising awareness about autism. Go Sally!

This thread strikes me as pretty snobbish. So much so, it's hard to tell whether Sally Bercow is being criticised for [a] being loud; [b] having gained a platform with only a modicum of personal effort or [c] going on a crappy TV show ... and possibly [d], [e] and [f], I'm not sure I have enough angst to perceive them all.

Prolesworth, for once I agree with you. My argument may be summarised as "Why not, exactly?" She's doing her stuff. She seems to achieve more good effects than bad. I admit to not being a sleb-watcher, so perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why Sally Bercow is A Bad Thing?

But pointy, selling access to the Speaker would be far, far worse than going on BB. Charging for dinner with the Speaker would be just wrong. And probably unconstitutional (although I haven't checked that with Vernon whatshisface who is always dragged out as the expert on this stuff).

Beyond me why anyone would want to go on BB, tbh. But I really dislike all this 'how dare little wifie not keep her nose clean' stuff in the media commentary and parliamentary gossip. Very old fashioned attitude that a wife is a mere appendage. She's not the Speaker, she has every right to appear on a TV programme if she wishes.

Being? I meant bring her down.

But I think this might be where we enter into a bit of a deadlock, pointydog. Because you say that the tabloids want to pounce on a 'whiff of scandal' presumably not to being HER down but her husband (which I totally agree with) and I say 'scandal is not a SAHM going on BB or wrapping her naked self in some curtains or voting Labour'. If I find out she's been flogging crack out the back of her grace-and-favour flat, then maybe we can talk scandal...

There's more than one way to raise £100k for your favourite charity. Especially if you come from a privileged background and have all sorts of lucrative connections. A fine dinner with the Speaker perhaps?

She's also giving a sizeable chink to Max Clifford and taking a sizeable chunk for herself. So I've just read.

It's all part of the show. Having a story, having a charity.

Sally B personifies current society. Rather obsessed with courting celebrity for its own sake, having done nothing that merits a news story. Having hazy, ambiguous standards with regard to her own actions and how they might impact on others.

The Speaker hasn't got glittering sleb credentials. He is an MP and he is Speaker therefore the tabloids will pounce on any whiff of scandal. Not glittering at all, just more grubby postulating.

Oh, I totally agree sunshineandbooks - that's what I meant by my earlier comment about 'the arse stands alone'. She might be a total arse, insofar as any of us know her, worthy of being mocked in the street for being such a twit.

But no-one's come on the thread and announced anything truly scandalous that would actually impact on her (seemingly perfectly content) husband or his job, have they? And if she has only got there because of her husband, I'm a) amused that the Speaker has such glittering celeb credentials he can confer celeb-ness and b) thinking that it probably says more about current society than it does Sally Bercow.

I really cannot see what positive things she is mean to stand for or how she might be demonstrating some sort of feminism.

I'm saying (not brilliantly clearly, I grant you) that there's a distinction between someone living their own life independently - which they should be allowed to do with no constraints from their DP's job - and someone who is using the fame from their DP's job to launch their own career / burnish their own public profile, which perhaps gives their DP more of a right of veto.