Now We Are 28: On Feminism and Being Angry

Less than two weeks ago a man who hated women killed six people. Every single day since then I have seen a man on the internet telling people (normally women) that misogyny doesn't exist. Every. Single. Day.

Three weeks ago I went to a work conference and spent an evening explaining to a bunch of otherwise lovely and very clever people why feminism is important and relevant in the 21st Century.

I would love for the battle to achieve equal rights for women to be over, I really would. When I was a child I read about the suffragettes, women's battles for the vote and the fight for equal pay and I really thought that the war had been won, that women were considered equal. Then I grew up. 

In school, the girls were always judged on their appearance - I was considered "ugly" so I always came in for particularly nasty bullying both in school and out. As I got older my friends and I considered it par for the course that we would get felt up without our consent in pubs and clubs. When I waitressed the chefs physically and verbally harassed every woman who came into the kitchen. A senior male colleague once thought it appropriate to complain to my manager about my "very short" skirt (it was knee-length) and told me that laughing at things was inappropriate because I sounded like a giggling schoolgirl. The (male) sales assistant who sold me my new, painstakingly chosen bike spent all his time talking to my boyfriend. The other week a man cycled behind me for over a mile so he could look at my bum. And, like virtually every woman I know, I've been shouted at in the street by random men more times than I can count. 

You know what the worst thing about that list is? That I feel lucky to have got off so lightly. That I am extremely privileged to experience society as a middle-class, thin, able-bodied straight, cis, white woman and thus will never have to endure the hardships that many women face just trying to exist as equal members of society. Most women will endure far worse verbal, physical or sexual abuse than I have ever encountered and this will be accepted by the world. Their experiences will be dismissed or ignored or never even shared. And when a man kills a woman it will be considered an "isolated incident" or the work of a "lone madman" rather than the product of a society which is profoundly unequal. 

I am so angry. I get more angry every day as I see women's concerns about ingrained sexism, rape culture and violence against women being dismissed and belittled. I'm angry that young women today grow up in a world where their right to equality is less understood than it was twenty years ago. I'm angry that women continue to be defined by whether or not they've popped out a baby but at the same time they're likely to get discriminated against because of it. I'm angry that young men continue to be taught that expressing their emotions is weakness and that hurting others is strength.

I have no idea how we fix this. I grew up believing that women were equal because they'd fought and won so many battles. Now I struggle to believe that genuine equality will be achieved in my lifetime. So yes, feminism matters. 

Now We Are 28: On Beauty and Bravery

This week on the internet women taking pictures of themselves without makeup on has been a bit of a thing. It's supposedly in aid of cancer awareness and the associated donations have raised more than £2 million for Cancer Research UK. Millions of pounds in under a week from one-off donations and goodness knows how much more over the long term from people deciding to commit to regular donations to combat a disease which kills people indiscriminately and whose cure often leaves people maimed and forever changed is pretty incredible. So surely an internet campaign that not only raises awareness of cancer but also funding for research into a cure for cancer is good, right?

Apparently not... I've seen a significant amount of criticism of the campaign for various reasons: people taking photographs without donating, which to a certain extent is fair enough, although given the outcome I can't see how this is a legitimate complaint; and the word "brave" being applied to both bare-faced women and cancer sufferers. Taking a photograph of yourself without cosmetic enhancement is seen somehow as a fluffy, ethereal thing and not worthy of sharing an adjective with people suffering from a life-threatening disease. Whilst I agree that taking a photograph and fighting cancer are clearly not the same thing I really object to the belittlement of people making a genuine gesture for a cause they believe in - particularly in light of the outcome. 

The undertone to a lot of the criticism I've seen is also extremely patronising - silly little girls thinking they are brave for putting a photograph of their naked face on the internet, they obviously don't understand what it means to be really brave. However, for a huge number of women in our hyper-sexualised, image obsessed society, going without makeup or appearing in any way less than "perfect" is a genuinely courageous thing to do. Standing up and saying "here I am, with all my flaws and imperfections naked to the world" is a very hard thing for women to do because we are told constantly that being ourselves is just not good enough. As women we are constantly told we need to be thinner, curvier, prettier, fitter, quieter, happier, sexier, more natural, less demanding, more demanding and so on, ad infinitum. To challenge that in any way, however minor, is an act of defiance. It doesn't make cancer sufferers any less brave, it simply demonstrates a willingness to challenge yourself in support of a greater cause.

Now We Are 28: On Nationalism

I'm not a big fan of rampant nationalism or of nationalist politics. The Nigel Farages and Alex Salmonds of this world, with their clarion cries about the greatness of the nation-state, leave me cold. Nationalism values people because of where they come from rather than who they are or who they might become which is pretty much anathema to everything I believe in.

You see, in the words of Scroobius Pip, I'm from a little place called Great Britain but I don't know if I love or hate Britain. There are lots of things that make being British wonderful - incredible landscapes; the national obsession with tea; the amazing diversity of our language and culture; the prevalence of social liberalism; our rich sweep of history; and Doctor Who to name but a few. But then there are lots of things that make Britain absolutely awful - our political system; ingrained sexism; casual racism; the M6; the bloody weather; the ability of the England cricket team to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory; flags on cars during football tournaments; the Daily Mail; the EDL... You get the idea. There are days I love living in the UK and days I loathe it but I'd never really say I'm proud of being British. How can you be proud of something that's an accident of fate? It's like saying I'm proud of having green eyes - I had absolutely no say in the matter!

People are though, aren't they? Proud of their little strip of land, of their English (or Welsh or Scottish or Irish) descent and scathing about anyone who isn't from these shores. Given that the UK is essentially an island of incomers this always seems to me a rather hypocritical position to take but whatever. I don't get it, how does love for one's country become hatred for other countries and other people? Surely you can have affection for the place you were born or where you live without using your nationality as a weapon to oppress others? And if your strip of land is that great why don't you want to share it with people and attract people from all over the world who can add to it's greatness? After all, this island would be pretty empty if it weren't for immigrants...

Now We Are 28: On Remembrance

Remembrance Day seems to be increasingly controversial - there's been lots of debate this year over the wearing of poppies and the upcoming centenary of the outbreak of the First World War. The wearing of poppies becomes more and more of a fraught issue every year - does their ubiquity take away their meaningfulness, should the BBC insist on people wearing them, is it hypocritical for politicians who have sent troops to war to wear them?

I have stood in the battlefields of Northern France, now so still and peaceful, bearing few signs of the slaughter that took place there nearly a century ago. As a fourteen-year old to stand in the Commonwealth War Graves was one of the most profound and sobering experiences of my life - particularly when I saw the grave of a boy my own age. That experience is why Remembrance Sunday is important to me - the first hand understanding I gained of all those who died so that I could be free is one of the most significant things I have ever learnt. It is why I buy a poppy and watch the Remembrance Ceremony at the Cenotaph whenever possible - not because I feel I have to but because, to me, it is important.

The First World War was a mess, a pointless war caused by rampant imperialism, but that does not mean we should ignore or make less of the sacrifices a generation of men and women made as part of that conflict. The Second World War was perhaps a more just war but I have always questioned whether, without the First World War, Hitler would have had either the motivation or the opportunity to rise to power in 1930s Germany. Rampant nationalism and the need to protect one's perceived interests at home or abroad have caused wars beyond counting throughout human history - the so-called "war to end all wars" was nothing of the sort. War is futile, it solves nothing and almost always promotes further conflict and instability.

Condemn war all you want but don't condemn those who remember, however they choose to do so. Wearing a poppy isn't just a visible symbol of commemoration but an opportunity to support a very worthwhile charity, The Royal British Legion. Equally, however, the wearing of a poppy should never be something that we compel - gestures of this kind ought to come from the heart not as part of a PR campaign. Wearing a poppy, observing a Remembrance Sunday silence or laying a wreath at a war memorial aren't acts that rejoice in war or of national pride - they are a reflection of shared grief, dulled but not lessened by the passage of time.

As the First World War and Second World Wars become history rather than memory it is more important than ever not only to remember but to understand these conflicts in the hope that one day we might move beyond military force and the death of countless human beings as a way of resolving our differences. The saying "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" is as true today is it ever was.

"In Flanders fields the poppies blow

      Between the crosses, row on row,

   That mark our place; and in the sky

   The larks, still bravely singing, fly

Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago

We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,

   Loved and were loved, and now we lie

         In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:

To you from failing hands we throw

   The torch; be yours to hold it high.

   If ye break faith with us who die

We shall not sleep, though poppies grow

         In Flanders fields."

                                            John McCrae

Now We Are 28: On Cycling

I wasn't quite sure where to start with this project however I've had one particular piece in my head for a while. As anyone who follows me on Twitter might be aware since we moved to Nottingham in May I've taken up cycling to work. This is primarily because the traffic in Nottingham is abysmal - it can take up to an hour and a half to drive the nine miles from my house to where I work! But it's also been a good way of keeping fit and not spending too much of my already overcommitted salary on bus fares...

I'm a reasonably fit person so cycling 18 or so miles in a day wasn't too much of a shock to the system. The first time I made the journey however I stubbornly insisted on taking my ancient, very heavy mountain bike which meant I arrived home half dead. My boyfriend then insisted I take his much lighter and very swanky road bike which has significantly improved both the experience and my time - I can do the journey in about 50 minutes now. I'm not particularly an expert cyclist but I can see a distinct improvement in my stamina as well as in my leg muscles!

I haven't cycled very much since I was a teenager and I've got a lot more cautious since I was last on a bike, probably because I've spent so much time as a driver over the past five years. I understand how fast traffic moves and how little drivers seem to pay attention, even to other cars, let alone to breakable things like cyclists and pedestrians. I was, therefore, unenthusiastic about the prospect of entangling myself with rush hour traffic with nothing but a helmet, spiky pedals and some borrowed Lycra to protect myself. Luckily Nottingham is a really cycle-friendly place and there's a National Cycle Network route which runs virtually from my house to where I work which keeps me off the main roads.

One of the things about this whole cycling experience that has really surprised me is the rudeness of other cyclists. Whilst I'm not a particularly committed cyclist I have a lot of friends who are - both in real life and through twitter - and they are some of the nicest people I know. I was therefore expecting more in the way of camaraderie from the many other cyclists I've encountered on my travels but honestly apart from a slightly pervy man saying hello and a couple of awkward conversations whilst locking my bike up at work the solidarity has been non-existent. In fact I've come closer to being knocked off my bike by other cyclists than I ever have by a car, particularly of note was the man who cycled through a red light at a pedestrian crossing last week and nearly sent me flying.

The other unexpected aspect of cycling, particularly on the route I take which is at least 50% on the pavement, has been the ignorance of pedestrians. I like to think I'm a pretty considerate and patient person but cycling has tested this quite severely! I just do not understand why, when a cycle route is clearly marked, a person would choose to walk down the middle of it and then glare angrily at any cyclist who dares to try and use the cycle path. Also, now the schools have started back, I spend most of my morning commute facing down the mouthy teenagers who wander aimlessly about the pavement. Irksome...

I've been almost pleasantly surprised that no-one in a car has yet made a serious attempt to run me over - I was really expecting to have to spend a lot more time avoiding bad drivers. There are still plenty of people who drive a bit too close but I've not really had any close calls. I think being a driver makes me a more aware cyclist, I'm used to having to anticipate potentially dangerous situations well in advance - something which is much more important as a vulnerable cyclist. I'd also like to think being a cyclist has improved my driving, at least in terms of being aware of other road users.

I'd be interested to hear other people's experiences of "urban" cycling - is the lack of sympathy for your fellow cyclist a problem particular to Nottingham?!

Feminism's New Entry Policy

This blog post has been brewing for a while - ever since the Guardian published an article on Tory feminism several weeks ago in fact - and I discovered the hitherto little known "fact" that you could only be a feminist if you hated the Conservative Party.

I've described myself as a feminist from a very early age. I remember reading about the suffragette movement whilst I was still in primary school and being shocked that women hadn't always been allowed to do the same things as men. Equality has always been one of the most important principles in my life - and not just for women - I believe passionately that all human beings are equal regardless of race, sex, sexuality, religion or any other descriminating factor that anyone cares to think of. All feminism has ever been for me is the belief that women are equal to anyone and anything. 

However, according to people like Suzanne Moore, the fact that I voted for David Cameron negates my right to believe this. Because Margaret Thatcher wasn't a feminist, because the Conservative Party have on occasion acted like the the worst kind of right wing dinosaurs you can only be a feminist if you are "left-wing" (I put left wing in inverted commas here because there is no mainstream political party in the UK whose policies are remotely left of centre). Why? Why in 2012 when no major political figure would deny female equality or the power of the feminist movement can I as a feminist not make a decision to support a political party based on my own beliefs and priorities? In 2015 I may well vote for a different political party (hell, I may even set up my own political party to avoid the dilemma of having to vote for any of the uninspiring choices currently on offer) but in 2010 I voted for the Conservative Party (the reasons for which are explained here). I am technically a Conservative Feminist and thus cannot possibly exist.

So again I'm back to the question of why? Surely it's a good thing that women are represented across the political spectrum and are fighting in different ways for issues important to them! I don't particularly like Louise Mensch or Nadine Dorries but I can't deny that they stand up and fight for the issues which they feel are important. I may fundamentally disagree with Dorries' stance on abortion but hell I fundamentally disagree with every word which comes out of Laurie Penny's mouth as well - and I deny neither of them the right to be a feminist. I may not like the way they do it - dictate what I can do with my uterus or what type of cake I am allowed to eat at your peril - but the most important thing is that they are women standing up and being counted.

So my message to the sisterhood is pretty much just this: respect my right to say and be something, even if you don't like what I'm saying or what I represent. Women aren't all the same, just as all human beings aren't the same. If you don't like my stance on something politically challenge me, I'll debate anything with anyone - I have even been known to change my opinion if given a decent enough reason to do so.  But never ever deny my right to call myself a feminist because of what political party I support.

Caitlin Moran manages to sum up what I'm trying to say far more eloquently than I'm ever going to be able to:

"The purpose of feminism isn't to make a particular type of woman. The idea that there are inherently wrong and inherently right 'types' of women is what's screwed feminism for so long... What is feminism? Simply the belief that women should be as free as men, however nuts, dim, deluded, badly dressed, fat, receding, lazy and smug they might be."

(Seriously if you haven't read How To Be A Woman yet - do it! Even if you're a man, it's fine...)

Thoughts about the Riots...

So we've had three days of riots across England - mostly London-based but spreading to Birmingham and Manchester over the past few days. Things have started to calm down now but that just means people are increasingly casting around for someone to blame and to try, in a largely reactionary way, to suggest ways to deal with the aftermath. I don't have any kind of solution for this particular brand of lunacy but just wanted to get a couple of things off my chest.

Ken Livingstone yesterday referred to the rioters as protestors. Well they're not. I'm sorry but that's the long and the short of it. Protest implies you're protesting against something rather than just stealing plasma TVs and designer clothes "because it's free innit". This whole episode may have begun with a protest (against the shooting by police of Mark Duggan in Tottenham) but it seems clear that this legitimate protest was soon hijacked by those looking for trouble - as per the student protests last Autumn. I'm not saying there aren't serious underlying social issues at work behind this violence but these are long term factors created by decades of social mismanagement by politicians of all stripes. The fervid media attitude towards cuts in public spending combined with a resurgence of global economic problems has made the world feel a less secure place. In my opinion you can't say that an austerity programme less than 9 months old and only marginally more severe than the programme of cuts proposed by the previous government is a genuine factor here. Both the rhetoric and the growing reality of public expenditure cuts is a potential trigger factor but not a root cause.

It has also been suggested that abolition of the Education Maintainance Allowance caused young people to riot. Well in one way that's true. EMA is simply a symptom of a culture of entitlement that can be seen throughout society. When I was a teenager (and it's not that long ago) I had no need of EMA to encourage me to go on to further education - I knew that was what I had to do to improve my chances in life. I had supportive parents and teachers to help me on my way but I knew that to get on in life I had to help myself as well. I got my first job when I was 13 and have been lucky enough not to be out of work since. Very few of my early jobs were glamorous - I was a paper girl then a waitress - but I learnt social skills and earnt my own money long before I had any qualifications to my name. I wasn't unusual - all my friends and classmates had part-time and Saturday jobs. It was just what we did to earn the money for driving lessons, nights out and new clothes. It is tougher to find a job now than it was in 2001 but there are still hundreds of migrant workers doing the jobs that British people won't do. There's a large Polish community in the town I come from many of whom have university level qualifications but are doing relatively menial jobs because they'd rather work than be unemployed. I get the overwhelming sense that for a considerable section of British society they'd rather be unemployed/on benefits than do a job which is more menial.

So what are the answers? Well, I don't have any. My instinctive argument is in favour of a small state and a balanced budget but dogma is no use here. People make a country not politicians - surely the very essence of any kind of big society - and if the policiticians of this country continue to fail her people then things will only get worse. Austerity protects our economy in some ways, preventing massive interest rises on government borrowing and shielding us from some market forces but it makes growth more difficult especially in a time of continued global financial turmoil. If the Eurozone is falling apart and America has its credit rating lowered how can we possibly expect our economy to grow at anything like the pace required? This isn't the government's fault particularly - as a country recovering slowly from recession and with a big burden of debt there's only so much that can be done to improve matters. A fiscal stimulus like a VAT cut may well increase consumer confidence but then again it may not and runs the risk of market disapprobation.

Meanwhile what do we do about social problems? How can we teach kids to aspire to something more than a life on benefits when it's all they and their parents have ever known? How do we encourage children to get an education in order to get a great job when the costs associated with gaining a degree are spiralling and the job market is so challenging? I was lucky - my family all had jobs and my parents encouraged me to try and earn some money of my own. It was just obvious to me that I would have to work for a living and if I worked really hard then one day I would be lucky enough to do a job I really enjoyed. I wholeheartedly believe in a meritocracy but I can see how soul-destroying it must be not to have that vision, not to believe in your own ability to get on in life. To see things getting more expensive and politicians talking about tightening your belts when you and your family couldn't afford the things you needed or wanted even when the UK economy was booming. Perhaps that's why people jumped on the bandwagon of the riots. It's not an apology or an excuse but it's a reason.

So I ask again, how do we solve this? We could ask our politicians to stop becoming entrenched in the dogma that didn't win an election and work together to look at how we can be fiscally responsible and encourage growth. It's not an easy circle to square but surely if MPs stop arguing with one another and start thinking constructively they might just be able to do something productive on our behalf. At the same time we need to look at what we can do with resources other than money to encourage aspiration. If 13 years of a Labour government throwing money at every public service it could think of should have taught us anything it is that social problems can't be solved with investment alone. We need to encourage people to work together within and across communities to help kids realise that they can do anything they want - the only limit is their aspirations. We need to help people who got involved in violence over the past three days put it behind them and use this experience as a catalyst to do something useful.What this situations doesn't need is kneejerk reactions like reducing civil liberties or removing benefit. Yes the actions of those rioting, looting and in some cases killing and injuring people are deplorable but some of the reactions I've seen in the media and on twitter/facebook have been equally so - you don't solve a crisis by suggesting mass murder, you just don't. People convicted over this should feel the full force of the law, no-one should be disputing that, but it is just as important that they receive compassion, help and support to help them realise that there is more to life than a free flatscreen TV and that this country does have more to offer them than violence and poverty.

30 Day Music Challenge: Day Twenty

Day 20: A Song That You Listen To When You're Angry

Interestingly yesterday's song would probably have worked just as well for today's post - I do quite like to listen to Slipknot loudly whilst driving fast when I'm raging at the world! However choosing a metal song for this question strikes me as somewhat of a cliche so I'm going to go in completely the other direction... The Dixie Chicks aren't exactly the sort of band you'd associate with unbridled rage but Not Ready To Make Nice is a song they wrote in response to the criticism they received from the US media after stating publicly they disagreed with the Iraq War. I've never heard a song so full of pure anger which makes it the perfect song for listening to when I'm really cross about something. Not just upset or pissed off but genuinely filled with blood boiling rage. It doesn't happen all that often but when I feel that way this song suits me perfectly. 

"Forgive, sounds good
Forget, I’m not sure I could
They say time heals everything
But I’m still waiting

I’m through with doubt
There’s nothing left for me to figure out
I’ve paid a price
And I’ll keep paying

I’m not ready to make nice
I’m not ready to back down
I’m still mad as hell and
I don’t have time to go round and round and round
It’s too late to make it right
I probably wouldn’t if I could
‘Cause I’m mad as hell
Can’t bring myself to do what it is you think I should

I know you said
Can’t you just get over it
It turned my whole world around
And I kind of like it

I made my bed and I sleep like a baby
With no regrets and I don’t mind sayin’
It’s a sad sad story when a mother will teach her
Daughter that she ought to hate a perfect stranger
And how in the world can the words that I said
Send somebody so over the edge
That they’d write me a letter
Sayin’ that I better shut up and sing
Or my life will be over

I’m not ready to make nice
I’m not ready to back down
I’m still mad as hell and
I don’t have time to go round and round and round
It’s too late to make it right
I probably wouldn’t if I could
‘Cause I’m mad as hell
Can’t bring myself to do what it is you think I should

I’m not ready to make nice
I’m not ready to back down
I’m still mad as hell and
I don’t have time to go round and round and round
It’s too late to make it right
I probably wouldn’t if I could
‘Cause I’m mad as hell
Can’t bring myself to do what it is you think I should
What it is you think I should

Forgive, sounds good
Forget, I’m not sure I could
They say time heals everything
But I’m still waiting"

30 Day Music Challenge: Day Twelve

Day Twelve: A Song From A Band You Hate

Aha! This is probably the easiest question on the list and it provides me with an opportunity for a rant. Brilliant! Unlike most people I know I have spent a lot of my life disliking The Smiths - they are one of those bands that a lot of people talk about like they' re the second coming and, whilst I quite like their music, I've never quite got it.  Maybe it's because misery isn't my default setting, maybe it's because I quite like Margaret Thatcher, maybe it's because I'm contrary - who knows?! Personally, I think Morrisey is an arrogant, pretentious moron - for a start who waves a bloody bunch of flowers about on stage, really?! Johnny Marr's not much better - trying to dictate who can and can't like his music like someone died and made him king of the flaming world. Just because NME thinks you're God doesn't mean you actually are. 

Having said all about a million times and at varying levels of loudness - just don't ask me about Morrisey when I'm drunk, for the sake of your eardrums - I increasingly find myself liking their music. I primarily blame the film 500 Days of Summer which has left me with a desire to steal Zooey Deschanel's hair and a sneaky fondness for listening to The Smiths. So here you go - have a little bit of How Soon Is Now from the band I love to hate...

"I am the son
and the heir
Of a shyness that is criminally vulgar
I am the son and heir
Of nothing in particular

You shut your mouth
How can you say
I go about things the wrong way
I am human and I need to be loved
Just like everybody else does "

30 Day Music Challenge: Day Two

Goodness, two posts in two days - let's see how long I can keep this up! I am quite enjoying this music challenge idea although if you're expecting superior critical analysis and musical taste this list probably isn't the one for you... Anyway, here goes:

Day Two: A Song You Hate
This was much easier to choose a song for than yesterday's challenge - although hate is a word I tend not to use that much when I'm talking about music. I'm not particularly a musical snob - I like a bit of Lady GaGa as much as the next person - and generally will listen to anything once. There are genres of music I'm not that fond of - I've never been a dance music girl and I'm not really clever enough to understand classical music - but it's pretty rare that even the autotuned rubbish that Radio 1 seems to play these days actually stirs me to seething hatred. Having said all that I knew which song I would choose for this question almost as soon as I saw the list - Everyday I Love You Less and Less by The Kaiser Chiefs.

It's odd because generally I quite like the Kaiser Chiefs - they write relatively bouncy northern songs and whilst I was at university they were probably one of my favourite bands. I also used to have a small soft spot for Ricky Wilson after seeing him on Shooting Stars. I haven't listened to much of their stuff in years however I do still have Employment on my ipod so occasionally this song will turn up on shuffle at which juncture I'll press skip as fast as I can... On the surface it's not that offensive, just chirpy lyrics about some bird he doesn't fancy anymore, but every time I listen to the words I want to punch the bastard in the face. I'm not sure whether I'm projecting - I was once in a relationship where the guy I was with found it very difficult to hide his contempt for me which automatically puts me on the side of the girl who is being sung about! However I'm sure I disliked the song before that - I simply don't understand why people continue relationships when they're making one another miserable, let alone why you'd write a pop song about it...

"Everyday I love you less and less
I can't believe once you and me did sex
It makes me sick to think of you undressed
Since everyday I love you less and less
And everyday I love you less and less
You're turning into something I detest
And everybody says that your a mess
Since everyday I love you less and less"

The Curious Case of David Laws

Whilst not in any way condoning David Laws' misclaiming of expenses there are several things that have really angered me about the "revelations" of the past few days.

The first is the Telegraph's choice of timing, something which becomes even more questionable having seen their apparent headline for tomorrow about Danny Alexander. After all, the Telegraph first exposed what it claimed was the whole expenses scandal - albeit drip by drip - last summer. If the abuse of the rules made by David Laws was so deeply venal and shocking that it deserved his resignation then surely this should have been exposed then? And if the Telegraph genuinely felt it needed to play party politics with the story, rather than act "in the public interest", then surely it had the perfect opportunity to do so during the election campaign. This approach, whilst it would have been pretty grubby, would have effectively torpedoed the Liberal Democrats claim to the moral high ground. As the most right wing of the broadsheets and the traditional mouthpiece of the Tory right such an action would have been in their interest, bringing the election nearer to a normal two-way fight between Labour and the Conservatives - much more likely to deliver a Conservative majority. However, the fact that the Telegraph have sat on this until now suggests something more subtle going on. This is clearly an attempt to weaken the coalition, to work towards bringing down the government whilst the economic pain is still fresh and before it has a chance to enact any really radical social reform. A general election under these circumstances would only benefit one party - and it's not the Conservatives.

The other thing that upsets me about David Laws' situation is that he clearly got caught between obeying the rules and exposing his personal circumstances. Britain tends to see itself as a liberal (small L) society but attitudes to homosexuality are mixed at best. Given that consensual gay sex was only legalised in 1967 and the distinction between straight and gay relationships was only removed in law in 2004 this is I suppose hardly surprising. It is therefore possible to understand why a man such as David Laws would choose to keep his sexual orientation a secret and why to protect the public persona he had created he would make an error of judgement such as this. It's very easy to scoff and say "well this isn't about his sexuality - he cheated the taxpayer" but I can imagine very well the circumstances in which you would do anything to protect the people you love from pain. Of all the expenses stories that have circulated feverishly over the past year this is the one I find it genuinely hard to be indignant about - but ironically the one that may ultimately have the biggest impact on the country over the coming months and years.

Judgements

I originally intended this blog to be a place for me to sound off about politics - and maybe it mostly will be - but something has really shaken my view of the world so I thought I'd share.

A female colleague of mine took me aside yesterday and, in a well meaning way, basically told me that the way I dressed and the colour of my hair were likely to affect my career prospects. More to the point, that my ultimate boss - who is a man - was unlikely to take me seriously because of my appearance. Whilst the comments on my personal appearance are upsetting for a number of reasons the thought that a senior male colleague, whom I like and respect, would think less of me for something I wear or the colour of my hair appals me. 

To a certain extent I can understand the comments on my dress sense - I err on the funkier side of business wear... However, there are a number of mitigating factors - for a start I work at a University which, for obvious reasons, doesn't have a strictly defined dress code and I have a relatively junior role. I also think I have a reasonable grasp of what is appropriate for different occasions - for example I would never not wear a suit when I'm at an external event or meeting a client.

However the idea that my hair or my clothes would be make a man think less of me in the workplace does truly shock me. I've never been a militant feminist - I'm lucky enough to be born into a generation where I've always thought I never needed to be. Perhaps I'm just naive but I've never felt that my being a woman has ever really made a big impact on how people perceive me professionally - I always strive to do the best I can whatever I'm doing and I've always felt that my teachers, lecturers and line managers (male and female) have respected me for my ability. 

I don't think that a man in my job, or indeed in any job, would ever find themselves in this situation. And if it had been a man who had made these comments to me people would be recommending I sue them. Women are really lucky, even in comparision with 20 years ago, that we have legislation that protects our right to be treated and paid equally. But evidently the battle for equality isn't over... 

Appearance matters but evidently in women it matters more - there was outrage this week about the dearth of women in the new coalition cabinet but women in the public eye get scrutinised and judged on their appearance far more than any man. I don't think I've ever seen a media article on a male politician's choice of footwear but Theresa May and Sarah Brown have both had their shoe taste scrutinised. Millions of magazines are sold every week poring over the appearance of various celebrities - in at least 9 out of 10 cases the victims of this scrutiny are women. The worst thing is that we tend just to accept this - that the rest of the world will judge a woman on her hair, her clothes, her makeup (or lack of) - without comment or question. 

So maybe that's the next frontier, hopefully in another 20 years this will be even less of an issue... As for me - well conforming to expectations would certainly be the easiest thing to do but just accepting the status quo never changed anything did it?