does anyone else find the spectacle of world leaders bringing wives to London and the laying on of a special dinner deeply disturbing?

[hatwoman]

it's like the 1950s ffs. even putting aside the huge issue as to why so many of the world leaders are men how come they need a fecking spousal hand to hold? how come these woman haven;t got better stuff to do? when was the last time anyone on here had their partner come with them when they travel for business? or accompany their partner when he/she travels? it's just weird.

zazen, you argue your point eloquently. However, we're aware of these facts, that the women are networking while the men talk business. Are you really happy with a state of affairs where wives network, and then influence their husbands, thus determining world policy?

Where does that leave Angela Merkel?

Also, previous summits have included coverage of wives' shopping trips. If they didnt shop this time, it can only have been a nod to the recession.
Opera visits, visits to exclusive schools (yes its a state school - try getting your child in there), charity visits to cancer hospitals - this is all just a big socialising jamboree.
Someone will say "but the cancer hospital benefitted" No it didnt. This is 2009, not 1919 - it's Jade Goody who raises cancer awareness these days, not visits by First Ladies or royalty. It must surely be a peculiarly british view, that hospitals cant get along without royalty (or equivalent) visiting. There are plenty of cancer hospitals in Germany who never get visits by royalty (or Angela Merkel's dh!), and they get along just fine.

Couture is part of the package, and Im sure every wife there gives it due consideration.
Yes, they are all intelligent and interesting women Im sure - its the organisation of the summit that puts them in the position of tagging along to socialise. They may not be WAGs, but they have certainly been playing that role this week. Which, frankly in some cases, is like watching a grand national winner giving rides on Blackpool beach.

good post nighbynight. and perfect metaphor. you clearly get where I'm coming from. I'd add that it's like watching a random half of grand national winners giving donkey rides (the brown ones, say) while the other half gets on with their racing and training.

I can't see anything remotely morally wrong in going shopping when you visit a foreign country. In general.

What grates me is that in these cases the shopping trip has been organized as a huge picture opportunity, validating the same old, same old stereotype that women loooove shopping.

Good post NbN & i agree with Hatwoman & Franca too

It's all the stereotypes they use, making tea, playing 'florence nightingale', shopping, etc.

Didn't they visit a girls school, why not a mixed one, would the men only visit boys schools?

BTW, I like to see what they're wearing, just as i like to look at the Oscar red carpet dresses, to see what people who know they are going to they are going to in the world's public eye decide to wear.

They are in a tougher position as they have to be seen not to spend too much money but at the same time not be too boring, frumpy or shock horror, wear the same thing more than once

I just don't like how it can take up 'proper' news time/inches.

I must say that I've no idea how they are dressed. I don't watch the telly (I'm in Italy, I try to boycott berlusconi ) and the newspaper I read yesterday didn't report on their fashion sense (the same newspaper did report some time back on the furore caused by Michelle's naked arms and the vile names she's been called in some extreme right wing blogs in the usa )

Yes, but I think holding up this rather superficial interest in the leader's wives as some kind of indicator of social attitudes to a wife's role in the larger society is artificial. Politics and politicians are one part substance, one part illusion/PR. The 'wives' part is all part of the PR. Like in the US, I think they vote for the individual over what party he/she represents (religion/morality etc) and the "wife/family" is part of that. When they voted for Obama, they voted for Michelle too, and all she entails.

And do you know what? If my husband was prime minister and I really believed in what he and his party were trying to achieve, I would stand there in my inside-out cardigan and have cups of tea with the Queen too. Yes, I have a career of my own.

So, maybe we should be asking where the male partners are. Not applauding their absence. Therese Rein (sp?), Kevin Rudd's wife (Oz), is a very successful business owner (very rich) and would presumably would have taken leave of that to attend the G20.

Oh, and shouldn't we be more pissed off by the way the media insulted these women by calling them WAGS in the first place?

Actually, I don't think the lack of a shopping trip is a "nod to the recession". I think it's part of the (slow) process of everyone realising that these women are not just there to look pretty.

Frankly, as long as we keep electing men, then yes I will have to be happy with influencing policy from the sidelines. You can't blame these women that they're not more powerful, blame the electorate and our overall society for continuing to encourage men to take these positions.

And I think smugaboo has a good point - where are the men? If I was a world leader in London for a major major event, first of it's kind, very stressful etc - I'd want DH to be there. I'd want his advice and his support.

As a general rule, I don't take DH on business trips, but there are the odd, particularly major occasion where it's appropriate and preferred. And then yes, I expect him to turn up - he's dreading the next one as it will be the first time he'll be meeting my new boss who he loathes from a distance! but he will turn up and be polite. Similarly, I go to various events of his and be supportive in an appropriate way while avoiding punching people on the nose for their complete lack of interest in me as a person because I work in an industry they have no interest in.

Yes, smugaboo, I agree. Though I can't help wondering why this role is still depicted in the same 1950s way.

Now, I can I see this inside out cardi?

id be very happy if michelle or sarah had influence over the world leaders over dinner - but the chances of it are extremely small. And as someone said, they are not elected in any way so it seems old-fashioned to have them there.

You can support your partner without being in the media. These are world leaders - they are good at self confidence. Of course its lovely to have your partner with you, and kids too, but this costs the countries a fortune - which we dont seem to have at the moment. Its not the individuals fault - it is expected of them - I just think it will change over time - and they will be able to get on with their own high-flying careers.

Oh my word. The WAG comparisons to continue to abound FFS
They're going to a frikkin' NATO conference and there's all this "oooh, Carla vs Michelle, who's going to win" like it's expected they're going to have some major catfight over gucci shoes.

Hatwoman - totally agree with your OP - appalling that this still happens in this day & age. At least Carla Bruni had the nous to stay away. And so much for Michelle Obama breaking any moulds - she is just like the rest of them with their snouts in the trough - terrible shame when she had a big oppiortunity to cut all this crap and now she has blown it...

I totally agree with bleh.
I have seen far too many sexist and insulting articles about these various women - from many "respectable" papers too. Not just the usual suspects.
Stunned that they are allowed to go to print.
In all the excitement of the G20, have the editors forgotten that many of their paying customers are also women with brains and that many of the men out there have enough sense to realise that these candyfloss articles are pointless, demeaning and very outdated?

I have no issue with their partners attending and networking. Many of them are well educated, influential people in their own right with lots of links with various charities and organisations. However, being portrayed as WAGs by the media and belittled to such a degree is appalling. I am suprised so many of them allowed themselves to be put in such awful set up scenarios. However, I doubt they were all in total control of their schedule while in London..

nice to see Zoe Williams write about something other than her baby

Thanks for the link Hatwoman, i quite like that article

Almost wish the 2 male-spouses had come to see what happened!

Hasn't all this 'shopping trips and what first ladies are wearing' got more to do with the hungry magazine reading public and the media than with the DH's of these women? Politicians (and the media, for that matter) play the game they think we want (we being the public). Should we be pointing these accusing fingers at ourselves and taking action to show we really want to see these women for who they are and not for what they are wearing ? Like that's ever going to happen in the age of the cult of celebrity...
On a secondary point I agree with all the posts about supporting DH's (and I think it should be the other way round too). Friends in the military have said they'd even dare a war zone if only they could have more time with their spouse - not practical for them though.

What are their wives supposed to do? MOst of these women head up many charities and they raise a lot of money and awareness at these do's. Many others are business women and company board members, but when's the last time the media were interetsed in them, male or female?