Tag: politics

Why I think an EU referendum is a bad idea

I’m not a political person. I don’t know enough about it, nor do I have any desire to become more involved. That might seem like a terrible attitude about something that is so important to the future of our country and the people in it, but there you go. It’s too confusing. I also think that I’m too much of a little fish in a big pond to make a difference. I appreciate that if everyone thought that way we’d be screwed, but it is what it is. So shoot me.

The trouble with politics is that you’re never going to agree with everything a party stands for, and so you’re immediately setting yourself up for disappointment. They will always agree with/vote for/pass law upon something you don’t like. Don’t get me wrong, I do exercise my right to vote, but it’s probably fair to say that I don’t look into it enough to fully understand everything I’m voting for. Because then I would talk myself into and out of multiple political parties and go round in circles. Ain’t nobody got time for that when there’s holidays to be planned and sales to be shopped.

What I do have a strong opinion on is the upcoming referendum. Not the outcome. I haven’t looked into that enough (surprise!) But the actual handing over of a momentous decision to the great British public.

EU referendum

The public are generally pretty rubbish. We vote for dogs to win Britain’s Got Talent. We watch the Brits (which by all accounts was rubbish, I wouldn’t know as I went to the pub) purely to moan about it on social media. We allow the Daily Fail to exist as an actual news delivering vehicle. None of these things are the behaviour of sensible, well rounded, intelligent beings. How then are we expected to know whether staying in the EU is a good or bad idea?!

Removing my tongue from my cheek for a moment, my concern is that people will be voting for (or against) people because of their feelings towards those people, without understanding the consequences or the bigger picture. There’s a lot of hatred for David Cameron, so there will be people who vote to leave the EU purely because he wants us to stay. “I hate David Cameron therefore I will vote the opposite to what he thinks”. Boris Johnson has a following of people who think he’s a great chap, so perhaps they will vote to leave because that’s what he’s campaigning for. “Boris is fun and he was brilliant on Have I Got News For You, so let’s agree with him” There are those small minded people who think our borders are being overrun by illegal immigrants claiming benefits or stealing “British” jobs, and will therefore vote to leave as an act of British defiance. “It’s our country and we need to regain control before the terrorists take over”. I appreciate that not everyone will vote so frivolously, and some people will actually understand the implications of our involvement in Europe and make an informed decision, but the fact remains that a chunk of people have the power to influence Britain’s future in a huge way, without the knowledge that such power requires.

I understand that there needs to be a referendum, and that the only fair way to do it is hand over the decision to the people who will be affected. It’s not a decision that the Prime Minister or his political party can make – there would be uproar.

But I do think there needs to be a helluva lot more education of Joe Public so that we’re all informed on what it means for us. Perhaps employers need to take some responsibility and explain how an in or out decision will affect their company and job roles, so people understand from a real lifescenario what it mayor may not mean for them.

Or perhaps we need to introduce IQ tests prior to issuing a ballot paper. Weed out the stupid ones so we have a chance of the right result (whatever that may be).

Thanks, as always, for reading! x

The refugee crisis

Such an emotive and upsetting topic. Highly political, which is terrible when we’re talking about real people with real emotions and real issues. This is not a vote winner or loser. This is real life.

Migrants and refugeesWhen did we become so desensitised at pictures of dead people who have drowned in a desperate bid to get to safety?

When did we lose our compassion?

When did we become so inhuman?

I saw a post on Facebook today which resonated with me and would, I’m sure, with a lot of people. The crux from the person posting was that she had her life’s necessities and some life luxuries and that she wanted to donate the “spare” money that she had to help those in need. She also acknowledged that these thoughts will pass, as they do, because we’re not living and breathing the situation.

How many of us look at a photograph and it pulls our heartstrings, but 5 minutes later we’re bemoaning how long it is until lunchtime or that it’s raining outside? I know I’m guilty.

We’ve been indoctrinated for so long against immigrants and their loose morals and their job stealing, benefit scrounging ways that we no longer see people as people. They’re just an enemy who will be a drain on our resources. They’re just pictures in the press. They’re just statistics that increase in numbers and displease the government because they’ve missed a target.

They’re none of those things. They’re human beings.

If you would like to help, Dawn O’Porter is raising money and accepting donations via an Amazon wishlist which she is helping to co-ordinate and send to the refugee camps in Calais. You can read more about it and find links to donate here

As Dawn says: “We don’t believe that any human beings should have to live that way, so we want to help them. No matter where you sit politically, we believe that we have an obligation to at least keep other people dry and fed.”

Sexism? It’s alive and well in British politics…

Just when I think I can get on with posting frivolous things like what I’ve been buying and wearing, along comes another public matter that I just have to have my say on! Damn being so opinionated!

There are two things that have caught my eye (pardon the pun, in relation to the first one).

Sexism

MP Alison McGovern has released a letter that she received, presumably from a member of the public, following an appearance on Channel 4 news earlier this year, which criticises her for displaying cleavage.

You can read it in full here.

To summarise, the letter accuses her of using her feminine form to attract attention to herself as a Labour Party spokesperson, suggests that it’s a “strategy”, and mentions that her “prominent cleavage” distracted male viewers from hearing what she was saying.

Say what?

Firstly, she wasn’t dressed in any way inappropriately, or courting attention. She was wearing a more than respectable top, under a blazer, all in very sombre colours. Quite fitting of a politician, some would say dull.

Newsflash – women have boobs. 2nd newsflash – we don’t live in a Middle Eastern country where we have to hide our flesh.

Secondly, as an educated woman and member of the shadow cabinet who one would assume is in the role due to her own merits (and I don’t mean tits), suggesting that she would use a strategy is really very insulting to both her and the person who appointed her.

Thirdly, who are these male viewers who become deaf when any hint of a woman’s curve is on show? You’d hope that they’re watching the news for an insight into the world. It’s Channel 4, not bloody Babestation. Last time I heard, your ears don’t become full of cotton wool because you can visualise what’s under a woman’s top.

Gah!

Issue 2 is the news that Labour Leader candidate Jeremy Corbyn would support the idea of female only train transport if women thought it was of benefit.

How about you jolly well sod off, and instead implement tougher laws and punishments for the dirty dogs who think it’s ok to make women feel vulnerable on trains?

Here’s the deal – both of these cases clearly intimate that men can’t control themselves. Alison McGovern, in not wearing a Victorian blouse up to the neck, has invited all of these poor defenceless men to sit and leer over her, and in doing so the poor souls have missed out on all the important intellectual stuff she was talking about.

Such a shame for them.

Jeremy Corbyn, rather than punishing men, realises that they’re weak and can’t help themselves when in a public place with women they don’t know and so he is protecting them from themselves by segregating the genders.

My heart bleeds for their torturous existence.

How about, instead of the fault lying with women, we look at the situation for what it really is. Because, for the most part, men are pretty OK. They don’t generally go around perving and blaming other people. I know a lot of men who are respectful and non pervy. You know, normal men. And those men are probably pretty pissed off that they’re being lumped into a big ol’ sleazy can’t-control-themselves category. And rightly so!

For all the progress we’ve made with women’s rights, we seem to be going backwards. Did Emeline Pankhurst burn her bra for nothing?

I suppose she was just trying to show off her bangers.

Same sex marriage – the Irish referendum

5 Comments

I don’t often get political on the blog, usually because I’m too self centred talking about me and my life, but I’m compelled to talk about the gay marriage referendum in Ireland. I was shocked to read that ex pats aren’t allowed to vote unless they’re in the country. Bearing in mind that the majority of people who have left Ireland are likely to be younger and therefore open to the idea of gay marriage and equality, and older people still in the Emerald Isle are perhaps more traditional (a sweeping generalisation I know, and of course there will be exceptions), this smacks of the powers that be trying to influence the result.

All hail then the people who are travelling #home to vote, which is trending on Twitter. People who realise the importance of being part of history, of exercising their individual power, and of not being controlled by the politician’s who are trying to dissuade them from getting involved. Not just those who want to vote yes (although, as is obvious, that’s what I believe the result should be). But, even for those who are voting no, it’s wrong to try and silence the voters’ voice by changing the rules and insisting on physical geographical voting. It is giving the message that you’re not really Irish unless you’re in the country, and that your voice shouldn’t be heard if you’ve dared to leave the homeland.

The vote is ground breaking as it’s the first time the issue of gay marriage has been voted publicly. Whatever the result, there will be outcry from the “losing” side. Ultimately some people are going to be upset. I suppose its the most democratic way of deciding (certainly better than politicians making the rules) but, ultimately, why should it be down to a vote at all? Why should it even be up for debate?

The truth is that all adults should have the same human rights. If two people are in love and want to express that love by committing to each other – publicly, privately, whatever – then who are other people to judge? What gives anyone the right to exert power over another group and decide what they can and can’t do when it comes to loving someone? We’re not talking taboo like incest or bestiality. We’re talking consenting adults who want to spend their lives together.

Most people are horrified and appalled by the thought of apartheid and black people being segregated and treated as second class citizens as they once were. Preventing gay marriage is such a similar thing. It’s treating people differently because of who they are; something they can’t even control. Black people don’t choose to be black. Gay people don’t choose to be gay.

Love is love, and love is beautiful.

And, to prove it, here are some photos from Gay Pride in Los Angeles 5 years ago – such a fun day full of laughter, good energy, and acceptance.

FB_IMG_1432291712276

FB_IMG_1432291719099

FB_IMG_1432291729120