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.

'Could it be that "youth workers interviewed on TV and Gordon Brown and just about every decision maker and think tank in the country" are mostly men?'

Good point. I will google, but I am sure that Thatcher, Widdecombe, Edwina Currie, Sarah Palin and probably even Diane Abbott may have said the same things.

Of course there are (elite) women saying the same stuff. But who has the power to dictate the terms of the debate? Women? Mothers? This is basic feminist stuff, picking apart the dominant discourses to see how they uphold the status quo and keep women down.

'During parliamentary questions to the Home Office Diane argued:

?As well as ensuring that we have effective policing and the right sentence tariff, the Government need to do more to deal with family breakdown and educational under-achievement, which are partly at the root of the issue.?

www.dianeabbott.org.uk/news/press/news.aspx?p=102203

saf, I don't think Diane Abbott is being patriarchal. I think these politicians really believe it, they think they are helping families and children and solving the gang crime, knife crime, drug crime problems of society.

I think you'll need to look outside of what politicians are saying for a critical view. They wouldn't be where they are if they were radical, would they? It's no good quoting a load of politicians to prove the correctness of your view because "they would say that, wouldn't they"?

I am not saying my view is correct and yours is incorrect. I am showing that what I have said is what all the politicians and youth workers on these estates and think tanks and bigwigs of every stripe and hue are saying and have said for years, and that they are not slagging single mothers off. Instead they are slagging off the feckless fathers,

yep-tottally agree Hagocrat.
hang on....if these people are helping...why are people just about to get evicted from theyre homes?
a lot of these will be single mothers and this will cause further breakdown in some familys!

Yes, I agree with that. I think these evictions are wrong. Also reading the report of the eviction, it is possible that this may be applied much more widely i.e. any one who commits a crime e.g. shoplifting may break the terms of these written tenancies. I hope that won't happen, but who knows?

yep-it is worrying isnt it.
it would just divide society more wouldnt it...for all sorts of reasons.
one being..someone in social housing that does wrong gets evicted and someone else who owns theyre home does wrong but dont get evicted.
i think it will happen Claig-its been coming and some in power have just been looking for the right time.

'Under housing rules his mother ? as the tenant ? can be evicted from their two-bedroom flat in Battersea if anyone living there is involved in criminality.'

and Ed Miliband said

'Labour leader Ed Miliband, in Hackney, added: 'When council tenants sign agreements they sign up to agreements about behaviour, and local authorities have powers to deal with those things.
'What local authorities need to do is weigh up the decisions that they are making. If they think there are ways in which we can encourage parental responsibly then they should make those right decisions but they should always do so in a way that is actually going to help local communities and not harm them.'

In theory this policy could include many criminal acts, even minor ones. I hope that is not intended. But one never knows.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2024605/UK-riots-Daniel-Sartain-Clarkes-family-evicted-Wandsworth-Council.html

sparky680, I am beginning to think that it may be planned. It is very worrying for thousands of families and for all of society, as it is difficult to know what the effects might be.

yes-this is exactly what im thinking Claig.
come on-they was told that something was going to kick off and they go on holiday!!!
the lot was already planned[i feel]

considering that someone says"boo"in another country and we re there like a shot-and yet somethings occuring in this country and everyone grabs theyre beach towels.......interesting isnt it.

Yes. There was a woman in the audience on Question Time, who said it was deliberate. The rest of the audience were all shocked and said no.

Agree, it seems like madness

I repeat this from earlier:

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.

Now undoubtedly this can be easier to achieve with two parents, but it's perfectly possible to achieve it as a single parent.

In the same way, two married parents who parent badly or model bad relationships can do a lot more damage than one single mother.

Every way is valid and no one way is better than another.

I am horrified by what's happening with this eviction. Hopefully it's a backlash political reaction and will be thrown out once it reaches the court stage. The damage to perception of people dependent on social housing will remain though.

Could I just throw into the mix re. single parents. Sweden and the other Scandinavian countries have a high percentage of single parents yet suffer relatively little violence (recent horror notwithstanding). Single parents are supported there with welfare and family friendly work policies.

It's the relative poverty and low social status of our single parents that can lead to social problems for their children (plus the way that low social status interacts with concepts of masculinity) not single parenthood in itself.