Margaret Thatcher - Feminist Icon?

[OnlyANinja]

The Guardian asks a number of influential women (apparently) but I'd rather ask MNers.

Her government had a right go at single mothers - never fathers, of course. Strangely she never fessed up that she was Denis's second wife. I don't think he had any children, but she behaved as if divorce was a dirty word - highly hypocritical.

How can a woman who has lead quite a privaledge life, that was famous to handing out the economic medicine. Taking away the tax benefits of pension funds and removing the restrictions of movement of money out of the uk. Thus making it harder for the working class in the uk making life alot harder for us working mums be seen as our icon?

What I find puzzling is that both men and women who are not feminists often say, "feminists don't want equality, they actually want to be better / have more / be superior to men". And we feminists always say it is not about women being better, it is always only about equality.

But Margaret Thatcher challenges that assertion because she was a woman who proved herself the equal of men....in going to war, being traditionally tough, sending servicemen into danger, promoting men based on them being men, sidelining women etc etc etc.

And yet, I cannot bring myself to describe her a feminist icon. And yet, she proved women are equal to men in leadership.

It has really made me think about what I do mean by feminism. I think now that it is not about pure equality but also about prioritising women's issues and needs.

Knew this would happen. They make a Hollywood film to glorify and a past Tory leader in order to bring some shine to the new Tory government in a time when their popularity may be waning.

I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron commissioned the damn thing.

She was quite evil imo...feminist icon my arse...

It's funny how the caring, sharing left are always so compassionate towards those who don't share their views 100 per cent

Some might argue that she was a psychopath as she felt no remorse or guilt.

Just a correction - it was Gordon Brown who removed the tax benefits of pension funds by abolishing the tax credit on dividend income, thus reducing pension fund income by 25%.

Also in the final days of the Callaghan govt, not only were bins unemptied, the dead unburied, there was also a tanker drivers' strike. Filling up a car with petrol was damn-near impossible unless you were known at the garage. Also bakers' strikes, and every economic decision ostensibly taken by the government had to be agreed with the IMF first.

tb - and it was Nigel Lawson who allowed employers to stop paying into pension funds at all. Calling it 'pension holidays'. On the grounds that pension funds had far too much money to meet their future obligations. Looks as if he got his maths a bit wrong now, doesn't it? Oddly enough none of the ministers or actuaries or industry figures involved are offering to put back the money that's missing...

I grew up with a Thathcher government, she was elected the year I was born. Never once in my childhood did I doubt what a woman can achieve. What she did while in government will always be a hot topic for debate but the fact she got where she did shows women can be equal to men in the workplace - which has surely got to be a big step forward for women. So even though she'd probably hate to be called a feminist icon in my opinion she is.

Just catching up with this thread.

LDNmummy - did you see the film yet? I saw it at the weekend - I didn't think it did glorify her, quite the opposite. The trailers that have been on TV are a bit misleading I think.

Several posters have remarked that she was bankrolled by a rich man. Yes. Unfortunately, so were and are many others in politics, including on the left. In the same vein many successful businesswomen got a start because they were bankrolled in some way too, even if they've now paid the money back and are standing on their own two feet.

To take another example many successful female authors/journalists or indeed film directors (thinking of the film which has inspired this thread) are or have been supported or bankrolled by their other halves in some way too.

(By the same coin) a 'roll back the state'-type Tory might point to women on maternity leave and claim they are being bankrolled by the state

I say all this not as support for Margaret Thatcher but to point out, as others have, that some of what has been said here is not really Maggie-specific.

mrs thatcher is not a feminist icon in my opinion. she got ahead due to working hard and having a rich husband to support her. she disliked most of the people in this country. she would have little sympathy for you if you or a member of your family were ill, so i am not bothered if someone mocks/comments on her current illness.

her part in the closing down of heavy industry in this country is one of the reasons why we now have no manufacturing base.

there is supposed to be 500 years worth of coal in the mines of this country. i heard that not only did she close the pits/coal industry, but that she had the mines flooded so that they could not be easily opened again.

she was a dose of bad medicine that the country needed, i.e. pulling the unions into line. but too much of a strong medicine can be poisonous, which is what is was.

with hindsight, her invasion of the Falklands was the right thing to do as it stopped the fascists in Argentina using the islands as offshore prisons to abuse their oponents.

i agree with the poster who said that she, like David Cameron, was moved by spite towards large numbers of the population.

www.bakewelltoday.co.uk/news/local/thatcher_film_underfire_from_tuc_s_veteran_women_1_4126323

Says it all really.

I don't think not having the Falklands to use stopped the junta from committing appalling human rights abuse.

Which the leads me neatly to her long friendship with Augusto Pinochet.

Disgusting.

Falklands conveniently covered up her lousing up everything at home.

yep, never happier than when we are waving flags.

no, i agree that the lack of the Falklands did not stop human rights abuses, but it seems that the war did help to bring down the regime whereas letting Argentina keep the islands would have bolstered the regime allowing its violence and arrogance to grow.

I think being feminist is not necessarily about becoming a strong leader- i don't think of Elizabeth I as a feminist particularly. For me it's fundamentally about the attitudes to women- why women workers are paid less than men for similar work, for instance; or why women who have children are marginalised in the workplace, either directly which is becoming more rare) or indirectly- becasue for instance they work part time or flexibly. women constitute an army of unpaid workers, they are more likely to volunteer, far more likely to be the domestic lynchpins in any household, they do more of the childcare- yet all these are trivialised and undervalued because they are not the concerns of men. Being a strong war leader is not the point- it's not about 'being as good as men' (ha!) it's about the everyday expereinces of women having equal importance as those of men.
Helen Suzman, South African MP and campaigner against apartheid, when a fellow (male) MP told her that he admired her because 'she had the mind of a man': "i had to laugh; his was not a mind i admired."

(sorry for typos)

Think you're right, Creighton as it definitely undermined themilitary regime and they went back to a democratically elected government not long after, but let's face it that wasn't why Thatcher started the war..!

Purely on a point of accuracy. Thatcher did not start the war.

"The Falklands War began on Friday 2 April 1982, when Argentine forces invaded and occupied the Falkland Islands and South Georgia." Source: Wikipedia (or any other historical site).

Yeah, but she took the decision to withdraw (or cut, can't remember which) the British garrison to save money, despite being warned the Argentinian dictator would take that as nod that it was OK for his country to occupy the Falklands. Then, having caused the war, she had the cheek to pose as a victorious leader, fighting to defend British interests!

Ah, but invasion is a precipitant of War, but if Thatcher hadn't sent the troops there would have been no war iyswim, so actually in a way she did start it.

Interesting all of this, but it's little know that there were repeated warnings before invasion that Galtieri was plotting to try and take the Islands back. All of which we ignored. That's a failure in itself, but it also allowed the Argentinians to think we wouldn't oppose them if they invaded, so they did. After they landed, there was no real diplomatic effort to resolve the crisis. Thatcher quickly decided we alone could solve it by force. She was right of course, but over 900 people lost their lives.