Are women interested in current affairs? (And why I hate Woman's Hour)

[BrummieOnTheRun]

I spent the last few days ranting to DH about the fact that certain stories that primarily affect women don't appear in the media.
Like the nationwide policy of downgrading local maternity services (only reported locally, ignored by national media) putting 1,000s of women and babies' lives at risk each year. Or is that each month?
Like loans to women entrepreneurs being at higher interest rates than those to men as we are perceived to be higher risk.
Like the cost of childcare and impact on (primarily women's) employment being treated as a minority issue. We're 50% of the population and most of us have/will have children.
Blah, blah, blah.
Have always been pissed off that Woman's Hour, instead of having the political and intellectual clout of the Today programme, has spent approx 6 minutes superficially covering important issues to cut them off to discuss bloody borsch recipes. Or drama 'that women might enjoy'.
Then a depressing thought occurred to me...maybe it isn't that most 'current affairs' isn't interested in women, maybe most women just AREN'T INTERESTED in current affairs and that's why women-centric issues aren't widely covered?

Oh, also why harriet harman's recent speech pissed me off. One of the few women in politics gone 'native' spouting the usual irrelevant political waffle and bullshit. years of ridicule by male MPs has obviously worked it's magic.

I agree Paranoidandroid, good post; but are you a Radiohead or a Hitchhickers Guide to the Galaxy paranoid android or not??

Women do not go into politics more because power and the ability to influence and control others does not mean as much to them as to men. Same reason why there aren't more women in senior management and on the boards of companies.

I believe this need to grab glory and limelight is a function of ego and testosterone - which is why men tend to be disproportionately represented in these areas. However, there will of course be exceptions (Xenia being one of them and I respect that).

To really succeed at such high octane levels, it is not enough to be competent and hardworking. You need a thirst , an almost unnatural hunger for it, that allows you to weather the knocks, criticism, arrows that come with getting there.

In short, women don't want it enough. And are not prepared to make the sacrifices in terms of family life to go for politics, public office, senior management etc.

Women are included in the group of special needs, black and ethnic minority, disabled... for discrimination purposes. What if you are ALL of these things? Is it only white men who can do anything if they are not suffering from any other affliction? A world full of such incapable people? If only life were so simple!. Many people in positions of power are psychopaths and do not relate well to the human population.

My god, such jaded views of politicians! Do agree to a degree, but how else do you influence matters?

Maybe technology will be the answer and we'll be able to massively widen participation through online forums and internet voting

bless you dara

Who exactly listens to Radio 4 during the day? Surely as there are more SAHM's then it would be more women than men? In NZ the Radio 4 equivalent is National Radio. It covers topics of general interest all day without needing to slot in a special hour for women. To apportion women one hour seems bizarre and belittling to me.

It's the kind of thinking that leads to discussions about breastfeeding in the house whenever more women in politics comes up. In NZ we had the breastfeeding in the house issue come up about 25 years ago. Now most of the top posts are held by women - in politics and in some of the top companies. I think it has been much easier to change there because it is not so steeped in history and class control. Of course things are still far from perfect but there seems to be more freedom to just be.

I wonder if the need to secure your position financially because you cannot rely on your partner to share the financial responsibilities and be there for the duration means you have just as little choice as those who stay home under some alleged "conditioning".

Xenia - I'm so glad to hear you take a bus occasionally to remember what it was like - because your children may become dynamic world leaders and hopefully there will be a planet in a fit state to lead.

PA a good list. I still think many women don?t really choose to stay home but are conditioned to it.

Brummie? ?Women won't get involved in politics while politics doesn't focus on the issues of interest and importance to them? My heart sinks at the sexism of that. Issues of interest and importance to women should be serious financial and political issues not brands of soap powder or flexible working. Why aren?t these women supposedly interested in topics essential to the nation? Are they too thick to take them on board or are they conditioned to think ? economics male issue and I won?t bother my fluffy little head about it because my world, my topics are home and hearth?

A lot of politicians do it for good actually. Also I think women who succeed economically and financially can make a better world, have more money to give away etc so working can be morally acceptable. Issue kind of is are you better doing the church flowers for nothing or being the next Bill Gates trying to eradicate malaria throughout the world?

Pp, yes, NZ good country, women in power done well etc. I said below I?m not any of us really choose anything very much, we just follow how our genes and family and influences have programmed us, me as much as anyone. I chose to marry someone who would earn less. I think that was choice. It?s a rare choice. Most women marry someone who earns more. So I wonder why some of us depart from that norm when all those other hosts of women ? about 4 in 5 target the higher earners? And don?t tell me the 4 in 5 is random chance.

Nigerians? 2003 anyway...
"A new study of more than 65 countries published in the UK's New Scientist magazine suggests that the happiest people in the world live in Nigeria - and the least happy, in Romania.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3157570.stm

xenia - I completely agree about "women's issues". I also like to think that if there were more female economists then we'd have a fairer world. maybe not though.

I think the media has done a lot to degrade politics; politicians need to play the game by the medias rules which puts the media and not our elected representatives at the helm. That pisses me off a lot.

Stats show that the happiest societies aren't necessarily the richest (the US is one of the most unhappy where in some places the average life expectancy of men is below that of sub saharan Africa) but where the gap between social strata's is smallest.

Xenia, it isn't sexist to suggest that - in addition to current topic of political debate - there are issues important to women that are not debated because of lack of female input into the agenda. (I'd argue you're being sexist by assuming that 'female issues' are all concerned with facile, superficial topics).

And, yes, someone's going to jump in and say "there's no such thing as women's issues...they affect everyone". But you can't deny there are issues affecting women more than men.

And I want to clearly make the point that it's not just about "women's issues", "issues important to women" or however you term it. It's about having a different (equally valid) viewpoint or handling of ANY issue in the political domain. But if you don't play you don't get a say.

Oh that is disingenuous nonsense Xenia and you know it. For a start you have created a fantasy world of women as 'glorified prostitutes' 'serving their husband's sexual needs' and men as 'glorified servants' sorting out their partner's 'knicker drawers' which you obviously do NOT think is noble or to be respected in any way. Then you pretend that people live like this, and when they protest that their lives bear no resemblance whatsoever to your horrible cartoon of subservience, you ignore that, and instead start with this rubbish that you think your cartoon fantasy is some model of Christ-like nobility. I know you only do it to annoy, but fail to see exactly what you get out of deliberately insulting people and annoying them, unless, of course, your life is a great deal less satisfying than you claim, and you are not as happy as you pretend.

I should also have mentioned that ime Nigerians are skilful liars. They'll always tell you want they think you want to hear, which probably accounts for the survey results.

no, I do still think that the very idea of "women's issues" is sexist. what are men's issues then? economics, education and health policy presumably.

Admitedly, more men than women I know belong to the "lock em up" school of crime and punishment theory, but that doesn't make the whole topic a male one.

also I do agree that the media have far too much power - specifically Paul Dacre and Rebekah Wade (so some female input then)

so you don't agree that there are issues that are of more relevance to women than men? That's not to say of NO relevance to men, just not as pressing a concern. Like travelling 2 hours to a maternity hospital with contractions (note that current debate on NHS 'reforms' has focused almost exclusively on A&E and not maternity services). Like getting funding for your new business at an equivalent bank rate.

I honestly believe that the subjects on this site, and the angle taken by participants on this site, are almost certainly different to those that would appear on an equivalent bloke-centred site.

Our lives are different, particularly after childbirth, how can our agenda not be different? That doesn't mean that there aren't agenda topics that affect everyone and that we shouldn't / aren't interested. But I do believe our response to them might be different...take the example of the alcohol/rape thread. That doesn't correspond to the line taken by much of the media.

I disagree that current NHS debate is centred on A&E - maternity services have featured whenever I've read about it. and why is getting funding for your new business a female issue?

also, the fact there are (ignored) issues that are of more relevance to women does not = all the other topics are men's issues.

I do agree that some issues are more important to women as it happens, but I don't think that that "explains" why women are less likely to be involved in politics (if indeed they are). Nor do I think those issues (maternity leave, child support issues etc) are particularly underlooked by the political agenda-setters.

I did a specific search for stories on the nationwide downgrading of maternity services in the Indie, Times and Telegraph and came up with bugger all. And almost everything on the BBC site was local news coverage. Maybe the searches missed published stories, but that's an awful lot of misses.

On business finance, recent research showed women entrepreneurs were being offered higher interest rates by banks than male entrepreneurs. In spite of research than women have fewer business failures. There are multiple reasons for the funding disparity, but it's been reported and debated...nowhere.

Well, it's all very well saying there should be no issues of more pressing interesting to women, but of course there are. They are the things that more women are interested in and actually make a big difference to their lives. Women ARE more interested in maternity services, but also schools & the health service. Of course those issues are vital to everyone but women TEND to rank them higher. Probably because women are more involved in schools and the health service. Personally, I think we should argue that men should care more about these matters rather dismiss them as are inherently trivial. I think that's what bothers me about this sort of conversation. There is an assumption that if something is more important to men, then it is very important indeed, whereas if it matters more to women, that instantly makes it trivial and stupid.
I think most normal women don't want to be politicians because most politicians are ghastly people and the house of commons is a playground, where behaviour that would not be tolerated in any workplace in the world (booing, jeering, shouting, insults) is positively encouraged. And that has nothing to do with 'the media'.

I remember when I was a child some people said that if women ruled the world we wouldn't have wars. Then Margaret Thatcher came to power. So much for that theory. However, I do feel that a greater influx of female MPs has gone along with a less aggressive attitude ... yes I know, don't all shout Iraq at once, but the warmongers in power all seem to be male, and Clare Short isn't.

Thatcher had to be more male than the males to get where she did. She wouldn't have been accepted otherwise.

If 95% of your colleagues are baying men, capable of ridiculing you in public and sabotaging your career, their confidence strengthened by sheer numbers, I'm sure you quickly learn to keep your mouth shut and play the game.

Having said that, I didn't find that in the male-dominated tech sectors i worked in.

ok, well I read the guardian, private eye and bbc website. I've seen just as much stuff about maternity services as a&e (but more about stupid decisions generally).

dara - nobody has said that there should be no issues of more pressing interest to women, just that there is no such thing as "women's issues". I was also arguing that the things that are generally of more pressing interest to women generally do get discussed anyway - though this has improved in the last 15 years.

Women are interested in maternity issues for a fairly short period of their lives and I know a lot of men whose wives are pregnant who have similar interests.
I agree women are more interested in some topics than others (sadly a load of vacuous rubbish if you look at many of their threads on line) but often it is because of their conditioning that makes a certain topic their interest or a "woman's issue". They allow sexism at home and refuse to stand up as people and say to their husband - we have a child. We need to arrange child care which in this house sure as hell will not be a woman's issue or my responsibility mate.... You do it or let's do it together. Instead they force themselves down there as the one who deals with these issues. They have only themselves to blame most of the time.