The London Riots: The Elephant in the Room

[smugaboo]

I am probably being too quick off the mark in posting this as people are still digesting what is happening in London and Birmingham. I have seen references on here to police "shutting down the internet" and "shooting protesters" (rubber bullets, so that's okay). Let's hope that's the shock talking. But when the dust settles and people start analysing the root causes of the riots (i.e. social problems, poverty, unemployment, cultural concerns) one thing that will inevitably be overlooked, or at least not given enough attention, is the fact that this is gendered violence. It hardly needs to be said that very few women are involved in the actual rioting although I don't doubt that there are quite a number involved in looting. The same can be said in most similar situations anywhere in the world.

So I guess what I'm interested in exploring is whether or not this is actually gendered violence as such. Are the wives, mothers and sisters of the protestors sitting at home cheering them on? Is the only reason they don't join in fear for personal safety? Or do they feel fundamentally differently? I mean, would they ever be the ones to precipitate the violence? Do the males feel more disaffected - or are they actually more disaffected (I hardly think so!). Or, controversially, does this opportunity stir up some innate desire in males to simply be violent?

I've got to disappear but I'd love to hear what you think.

'but they are looking in the wrong direction and denigrating single mothers in the process.'

But where are they denigrating single mothers? Everybody knows how tough it is for single mothers on those estates. The problem is the men, they are the majority of looters and gang members and they are not currently acting as good role models. Everybody knows that. The question is how can they be encouraged to change, so that future young men don't end up doing the same and don't end up dying on the streets or spending years in prisons.

Well said SAF

What if parenting was actually something that was valued in this country? Something reflected in state support for families - be they married ones or single parent ones - either through tax breaks or greater benefit allowances?

As education and money are the key factors influencing children's outcomes - (NOT the relationship status of the mother), value parenting and put your money where your mouth is and you'll surely see a decrease in deviant youth behaviour (from ALL levels of society and from all family set-ups).

We don't value parenting. SAHMs are often referred to as 'living off their partners' or 'living off the state'. We are quick to blame parents when we see the results of bad parenting but as a society we seem unprepared to actually support good parenting.

My DS has no family male role model (what ones there are are good but the nearest is 350 miles away and the other two are on a different continent). His nursery workers are female, his CM female, his soon-to-be teacher female, all my friends female. My boss is male and a wonderful male role model but they only see each other occasionally. His father OTOH is an absolutely awful role model. Am I worried about any of this? No. As long as he has GOOD role models it does not matter what gender they are. My son's gender is only one small part of his make-up. His personality, likes, dislikes, values, attitudes, talents, strengths, weaknesses are all far more important than his gender. As long as he understands what makes a good human being he won't go far wrong. It doesn't take a 'man' to show him how a good parent behaves, how a responsible citizen behaves, how a nice person behaves. It just takes a good parent, a responsible citizen and nice person.

I agree, there needs to be far more support for families.

Tory MP David Davies was brought up by a single mother as have millions of other good citizens. No one is saying that single mothers don't do an excellent job. But in gang-infested estates, some young boys, without strong male role models, join gangs at a young impressionable age. Most of the youth workers who work on these estates believe that good male role models and men caring for their children would help to prevent this. That's why they try to create male role model teachers etc.

'His father OTOH is an absolutely awful role model.'

yes, awful male role models are no good at all. But I believe that the men on these estates are not all a lost generation. I believe things can be changed and they can be encouraged to be better role models. I think these ex-gang member youth workers are excellent male role models as they show the young boys a different way. Men need to be made to be responsible and to take part and play a role in offering a good example to young boys.

Agree. The good male models can only be created by men coming forward and showing interest and participating rather than opting out. It is a slow process, but government initiatives try to promote it. I have been tremendously impressed by the excellent youth workers we have seen on TV recently. These people are real members of the community and are representative of the community, not like the so many Oxbridge MPs who represent these seats.

Yes, it has nothing to do with feminisation and women, which is why I used the examples of Margaret Thatcher, Anne Widdecombe and Sarah Palin. All of the policies that we have are created by politicians. They are ultimately responsible for the state of society and the lack of adequate help, support and intervention in certain areas.

I don't think a lot of absent fathers can be made to shape up TBH. It's not an inherent biological trait and individual men may 'see the light' and change, but in the main I think the current generation of absent fathers will not change. It's rare for people to go from being complete tossers to model members of society, even with support and sanctions in place.

That doesn't mean I'm not hopeful for the fathers of the future, but fathers like my XP are a lost cause, and it's time we stopped demonising women for recognising this and acting on it. How dare ANYONE tell me I am a bad mother for PROTECTING my DC from a man like him. This is a man who has fathered 5 children now. He has never paid a penny for any of them as yet, he sees only my 2 and that's supervised contact only at a rate of once every 6 weeks or so (his choice - I told him he could see them as often as he liked if he was prepared to organise a contact centre). This is a man who plays the benefits system when he's not playing at being self-employed and fiddling the books that way. A man who regularly beats up women (but only has two police reports on file about it - one of which is mine and the other was dropped due to him pressuring her). A man who has hurt my DS (hence the supervised contact - although I have no proof of this BTW and if he'd had the gumption to challenge it I would probably have been made to give him unrestricted, unsupervised access).

I am PROTECTING my child by limiting his contact with his father. And I think you'll find that a lot of women who stop/limit contact are doing so for similar reasons (just because the father doesn't have a criminal record doesn't mean they aren't doing these things - violence towards women and children being notoriously under-resported).

And in cases where the man doesn't want to be involved? What does a man with such a cavalier attitude toward his own child seriously have to offer that child? How to behave as a decent human being? Really? I'd say the child is better off knowing who he is and leaving it at that TBH.

People cannot be made to be responsible. Suggesting that they do runs the risk of pigeon-holing women into the role of caretakers of the relationship and that every relationship would work better/men would be better fathers if the women would only work harder at it.

All you can do is increase opportunity to do the right thing and punish the illegal, but you cannot make bad men step up to the plate, with the possible exception of maintenance, which should IMO carry a prison sentence for non-payment completely irrespective of whether the child sees the father or not.

'maleness is being constructed as selfishness and greed an that is being reflected by their absence in frontline important work with young people and it is maleness that needs to change.'

yes I agree with that. That's why future generation of young men need good male role models in order to change the perception of what it is to be a man in society and communities and to teach them responsibility.

I agree that many of the men in the current generation are a lost cause. They can't change overnight. But what can be done is to educate the next generation, part of which is to do with role models, so that the next generation will not grow up in the same manner.

Would there be less riots if there was more out-of-school provision in the long summer holidays. Orginally summer holidays wss for kids to help with the harvest. Do they make sense nowadays? What about more summer camps as in the US?

Yes, annbang. I think it will partly help and I think things like that will eventually be done. But unfortunately, it is only for the summer. When summer has ended, children will be back in their normal environment and the gangs will still rule.

i think another elephant in the room is....money and power.
i think we need to go back to basics and i think that as human beings we are quite nuts.
the buisnessman giving himself a heart attack for getting a bigger buissness/more money and more power.....
the buissnesswoman doing the same and the pair of them not seeing theyre children much because theyre too busy.....but giving themselves more stress to pay for a nanny or good school/boarding school.
but this is all ok-as them got a big house in a good area to be unhappy in.
[and theyre too tired and stressed to enjoy it]
and they can get more stressed by having big holidays a couple of times a year in another country.
the bling on the fingers look good aswell them think-but they too scared to walk out wearing it-so they hide it indoors then worry someone gonna steal it.if they dont keep going in this ludicras cycle-them lose face with theyre friends/society and they lose theyre power.[they think]....so gotta keep going with this stupidity.
then.........at the other end of society....we are told that cos we havent got good home in good area/good possessions and big holiday....we deprived and we dont aspire to much[at this point im scratching my head]!!
yep-i havent got much but im happy with what ive got but im not happy for being slagged off all the time for it!
then jolly ol social worker comes along and tells me i need watching over as im poor so this must mean im thick and have no morals......but in the meantime social worker is getting stressed out cos he needs to keep hes job to keep the home that keeps him away from me and he is getting shafted all round anyway.....
im actually wondering who it is who needs the help!!
we need to stop this stupidity and get back to basics!
we ve forgotton how to be human beings.

Yes, that's human nature. That's how people behave. There was a leader who used the phrase 'Back to Basics'. It was the Right Honourable Sir John Major.

I think it is human nature for people to be acquisitive and competitive and to want more. People collect stamps and other things, they wish to acquire possessions. The looters wanted to acquire more possessions. Most people want that, not because they have been taught to, but because these possessions do useful things. There is nothing wrong with wanting more.

I am not naturalising inequality and I believe things can change, which is why I believe in the importance of good male role models for young boys rather than the bad male role models of gangster life and gangsta rap. I believe it is the fault of the men, not the single mothers, because the men are not acting as good role models.

excellent posts Saf and Sunshine.
im a bit pissed off that we are continuissly being told"we need good male rolemodels"yet single mothers are being slagged off.
societys way of thinking needs to change.
we need to get away from the thought that males are the be all and end all.
also-people are saying"look at the good male rolemodels that are youth leaders ect"-well yes-good for them but.......
what about the boys that are trying to turn theyre lives around and finding it hard...because in society if youve done wrong..youve got no chance.
once youve got a crimmanal record youre fucked.no one will give you a chance.and its not too helpful then looking up to a youth leader is it.
what do we suggest they do-all become youth leaders telling others how they turned theyre life around?[i dont mean none of this to be unkind btw]

'its not too helpful then looking up to a youth leader is it.
what do we suggest they do-all become youth leaders telling others how they turned theyre life around?'

I think it is helpful to look up to a youth leader. Yes it is inspirational to see young men like Shaun Bailey, who has turned his life round, and appears on TV debating with Ken Livingstone and making far more sense than Livingstone. I am sure that many young black boys and gang members like seeing role models like Shaun Bailey making more sense than Livingstone. It offers hope. I think these youth leaders should end up as MPs and represent their areas instead of the Oxbridge MPs. They show young black gang members that there is hope, there is a way out and a way to succeed in society and be represented in parliament. Some of these youth workers also had criminal records, but they have turned their lives around.

I'm not pissed off by good male role models. I think we need thousands more of them instead of the bling obsessed gangsta rappers.

The best role model ever is Obama, President of the United States of America. What an inspiration. Can you forget the tears in the eyes of so many male and female voters who stayed up late and held candles aloft. They never believed that day would ever come. You couldn't fail to see what it meant to them. It meant hope, it proved that faith will win in the end.

Imagine if the excellent youth workers on our screens are given greater roles in our politics. People say they won't make any change, what use will it be, we can't change lives with good role models. I'm with Obama, I say "Yes we can".

yes-i agree that its inspirational Claig but youve got to have more than insperation.if someone gets inspired-obviously its a good thing but if you cant get a job/still written off-what do you do?
im not saying im pissed off with good male rolemodels-im saying im pissed off with people talking about good male rolemodels yet slagging single mothers.
anyway-if we talk about good male rolemodels but slag single mothers-doesnt this emancipate single mothers further-a lot that are trying to do a good job.