SamCam giving up her job....

[DecorHate]

What do you think - letting the side down or a sensible approach?

I don't blame her on a personal level. It's sensible. But DC makes my skin crawl. Middle class women with rich husbands who picked them for their English rose complexions get to stay home with their family and put their family first. Mothers who for whatever reason (inc the ones whose husbands deslected them and reselected) don't have the support of a wealthy husband are mocked for their 'sense of entitlement'.

Very true, Toomany. Different rules. it's so bizzare that there's a double standard.

God on her I say. I would do the same thing if I got the opportunity.

Love Hulababy's post

Good on her

Who the fuck cares? Isn't feminism and the struggle for equality about letting women have choices?

What an idiotic OP.

"Who the fuck cares? Isn't feminism and the struggle for equality about letting women have choices?"

No. It's about freeing all women from gender-based oppression.

So in this case the issue is Sam publicly defering to her husband, by assuming the role of first lady, in a way that he would never defer to her.
SO some feminists would say giving up work to concentrate on raising children could be okay for women, because feminism supports pregnancy and motherhood, but publicly declaring your a role as a "support-act" to your husband in the form of first lady is anti-feminist.

I think it's harsh to suggest that Cherie Booth has no moral compass. She's an employment lawyer and has been involved in a number of anti discrimination cases, presumably because she is against discrimination. That to me suggests that she does have a sense of morality, although I would agree that she has made a number of mistakes.

Re Sam Cam, I hope that she isn't giving up work just so that she can dutifully follow her husband around. That for me isn't a valid role.

I'm also disappointed in the fact that the public for some reason seems to expect to get "two for one" with the wife coming free to do good works. It means it's even more difficult for a woman to be a successful politician because as Sakura says, there aren't many men prepared to play the dutiful husband role.

I agree with your last bit Sakura, and I share the sentiment. I haven't read the Daily Mail or wherever this was reported but, I find the lambasting of women juggling responsibilities pretty anti-feminist, meself. And I do understand the point about freeing women from oppression. But I not sure I buy the notion that all women are suffering some sort of false consciousness if they don't 'feel' oppressed. Clearly some women are, and the ideologies of domestic duty support that, but in SamCam's case?

Has she said she is deferring to her husband's position? This is a woman who previously worked with three children, and is carrying on some of her previous role I think.

I see feminism as about freeing women to run their own lives and make their own choices. If Samantha or anyone else chooses to go part time, work full time, or be the primary carer at home, fair enough. All equally valid feminist choices IMO.

When I was little, my father worked away all week, while my mother was very well known in our village thanks to paid and voluntary work. When Dad turned up to events at weekends, he was often introduced as my mother's husband because people knew her first or knew of her.

Years later after we'd moved elsewhere (for his job, as it happens) my mother complained that at some work function she was irritated by being 'Mr X's wife' - my Dad pointed out it was merely her turn and she admitted she couldn't really argue with that one!

happysmiley - why does being an employment lawyer involved in discrimination cases provide evidence of a moral compass?

A lot of lawyers I know are some of the most ruthless, ambitious, single-minded and self-interested people out there...

i dont care
should i/

"letting the side down" has to be one of the most useless and ignorant comments I have seen in all my years on MN.

What side exactly?

Good grief

It's been suggested before, tongue in cheek, but really if DC were a new man, he'd do a job share with NC.

NC would do Thursday afternoon to Sunday evening and DC would do Monday to Thursday lunchtime. Then they could swap shifts every six months. Thereby their wives would also be able to carry on their careers. It's the obvious answer ...

I think they might have needed to make the job share thing explicit in the manifesto. Not sure the electorate could cope with that appearing as part of the coalition deal...

bonsoir, she does this because it is something she cares about it, she thinks discrimination is wrong. She also works as a human rights lawyer. If you care only about money and power, employment law and human rights law aren't your best choices of career. She also actively campaigns for a number of charities mostly focused on women, children and human rights.

The only thing I can think of to suggest any immorality on her behalf is that she was friends with Peter Foster, who was a convicted conman. However, I'm not sure you can judge a woman on one of her connections.

You may not like her, and no one says you have to, but to say that she lacks morality is unfair and as far as I can tell untrue.

Cheerie Blair has so much money in the bank that she could afford to do her lawyer work for free. She doesn't.

Lots of people don't work for free. It doesn't mean they are immoral.

The Blairs are about as lacking in moral fibre as you can get. What about TB's conversion to Catholicism? PR stunt or last ditch attempt at salvation? Both as bad as one another...

Am I the only one who couldn't care less what she does?

I wouldn't be able to remain married to someone who started illegal crusades wars.

So if you convert to another religion that makes you immoral? Not sure I see the logic there.

Certainly don't see how your husband converting to another religion would make you immoral.

Well he couldn't become a Catholic whilst PM because that isn't allowed. He put his power hungry ways before his faith, which, is fairly weird.

The war on Iraq was wrong and I can see an argument for questioning Tony Blair's morality but I don't think you can transfer that to his wife.