Ian Duncan Smith suggests having a family makes for a better leader

[squeezed]

I know that I might be reading too much into this given my excessive consumption of the news in the last few weeks. IDS has stated that he supports Andrea Leadsom because "I believe that Andrea's strong family background, business experience, compassion, commitment to social justice and dedication will make her a great prime minister for the UK," link Is this suggesting that Theresa May is less capable because she doesn't have children? There does seem to be judgement on people who are not parents, particularly women, and their abilities due to not having children. By the way I don't support the Conservative party, so it is merely an observation.

Not sure he's "proven" anything powershower .

Stated his manly opinion perhaps.

Of course it's your fault Buffy! You just aren't grateful enough.

Going back to the being a parent thing. Why, out of many other qualities and experiences such as the ones Iced mentioned, is being a parent singled out for this special reverence (wrong word but you know what I mean!)?

Surely, for example, working outside of politics would bring a whole raft of experiences some politicians have never had. Or have experienced some form of discrimination or poverty as Iced mentioned? They would all bring different and important perspectives to the table. Why single out being a parent?

I don't think if Teresa May had kids she would be a better leader, it would be nice if she had a soul though.

Oddly, Grim didn't see WEP as such a positive thing on a previous post about it. Must just use some women as a stick to beat women he thinks should STFU on the internet with then eh?

If women have "got there on merit" does that mean that there aren't enough women who merit being in Parliament to make it 50/50? Or a single woman in the last 100 year who merited being Chancellor? Why do women merit roles in education, health, the regions etc, but very rarely the big jobs? What, as a pp said does got there on merit even mean?

And yes Buffy, sorry, you do control us all. We are in your thrall and incapable of thinking without your say so on which direction our thoughts should tend because we're obviously far too stupid to think for ourselves.

thanks for the earlier explanation, iced- I still don't agree but you clarified that it isn't just 'mother knows best', which is how I had originally read it.

as for grim's highly unusual diversion into telling feminists what we're doing wrong, which I personally can't ever get enough of... sadly I'm not allowed to comment on that until buffy has told me what I think...

Merit is so subjective and often superficial. I suspect merit in this case means they behave like their male counterparts (but without all the sleaziness obviously as women couldn't actually get away with that) and buy into the patriarchy therefore they must be qualified.

Oops, ps to my post above- I have actually learnt a lot from some of buffy's well articulated posts on here- she is one of many eloquent and intelligent posters who I respect a lot. but I do my own thinking too, and the more I reflect on that the more insulted I am that that's called into question by a GF.

I wonder how she would fair in the press if her husband was a dutiful stay at home parent?

I agree Buffy

Well said Buffy

But I agree it is all about conforming to the patriarchal allowances(mother being one of those). And 'merit' is one of those boxes too. I don't think it is a coincidence that has been our right wing party who (potentially) have had the two female leaders. There is so much more conforming to patriarchal standards in right wing politics anyway so women who are successful in that world have already ticked the correct boxes.

The left on the other hand make a show of equality etc but underneath they really do need those patriarchal boxes ticking just like the right - but the women (and other oppressed groups) haven't done that box-ticking exercise as effectively.

Well that's my rambling theory and I'm sticking to it .

Changing tack- do you think if Andrea Leadsom was a man people would be so keen to ask if she was overselling herself and intimating that she really just made the tea and did the photocopying, or whatever. Probably- as in politics it seems that you just use any ammunition you can find.
Just a bit ironic- we're always being told that women need to be more like men in the "fake it till you make it" stakes and just apply for jobs even if they don't have all the qualifications/ experience requested in the ad and talk themselves up more. Now a woman is getting hammered for (allegedly) doing just that.
Is this analagous to the "women don't ask for payrises often enough/ women who ask for payrises are pushy bitches" catch 22?

Finally got the time to read that New Statesman article - I thought it was excellent, it really articulated the issue.

I thought of this thread today when I was listening to a podcast - it's called Revisionist History and is hosted by Malcolm Gladwell ( link here ). The first episode, called "The Lady Vanishes" was an interesting one on this topic. It looked at the phenomenon of "moral licensing", and how that has impacted women and positions of power across history. The theory goes that once a woman has been elected into high office, like say Julia Gillard who was interviewed at wonderful length on the podcast, rather than making it easier for women, it actually makes it harder because it enables an entrenchment of sexism by people going "see, we elected a woman, what more do you want? We're done". Merit is gained by the election of a token, and it's not that the individual woman necessarily pulls up the ladder behind her (as Margaret Thatcher was accused of sometimes, including by me), but that the structure sort of folds shut behind them. It's not the breakthrough it seems, because business very soon returns to normal.

Thatcher left office in 1990 - if that had truly paved the way for women, why did it take 26 years for another woman to get within sniffing distance? Could it be moral licensing? The UK is far, far from being the only country who has had only one female leader to date. Interesting theory, I thought.

Changing tack- do you think if Andrea Leadsom was a man people would be so keen to ask if she was overselling herself and intimating that she really just made the tea and did the photocopying, or whatever

If he were promoting himself on the basis of vast experience in the financial sector, yes I think you would.

To be honest in the case of Leadsom I don't care- anything that makes her the loser of this contest is fine.

Miffer

Today's Times front page reports that Anderea Leadsome believes she would be a better PM than May because she has children link Leadsome has denied this but The Times are sticking to it. So perhaps not just the thoughts of those around her such as IDS but part of what she believes. The article reports that Leadsom has said that being a mother makes her a better choice for prime minister than Theresa May because it means that she has “a very real stake” in the future of Britain.
I do hope that Leadsome has been misreported in this article. Unfortunately it is not surprising if the male dominated press focus on the mother role. But it would be very disappointing if Leadsome did the same.

Newsnight last night had a very odd interview with Norman Tebbit talking up Leadsom and talking down May. It would have been okay if they had another Tory grandee doing it the other way round (Heseltine for example)

The more I hear about Leadsom the more I don't like her.

Squeezed how about starting a new thread on this, maybe even in Chat? I came on her looking for one, and yours is all I've found. Did you hear John Humphries interviewing about it?

Tory MPs attack Andrea Leadsom over ‘vile’ and ‘insulting’ comments on Theresa May’s childlessness | UK Politics | News | The Independent
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-mps-attack-andrea-leadsom-over-vile-and-insulting-comments-on-may-s-childlessness-a7128311.html

It's hard to see how she was misinterpreted. May is so obviously the better candidate but who knows. Labour members picked a leader from the 80s. I fear Conservative members will do the same.

Good idea finder link here

She definitely said it, Lass, given the transcript, though the Times framed it in a way that gave it a lot more weight than she wanted, hence Leadsom trying the 'exact opposite of what i said' line...