Naked Model poster

As a techie type I spent a great deal of my work life in workshops and engineering 'circuit rooms' which, as was the norm those days, being a totally male preserve meant that the pin ups and posters adorned lockers and walls.

Later, having move up the ladder (literally and figuratively) I found myself inhabiting a world where such images were frowned upon and then we became 'sensitive' to the feelings of those around us and women stopped being sex objects and became 'mates'. We had female techies, the Air Training Corps allowed girls to join (1983) and the world became a different place.

The problem that I have is that people don't realise that stereotyping and sexism is quite subtle and that there are such extremes taken that, as an example, if one entered a room with nine men and one woman in it, the correct greeting is "good morning all." I encounter a number of people who come in and say something like, "Good morning gentlemen, and lady,: and they aren't aware that this is considered sexist and infringes the rules of sexist behaviour in the workplace. Taking things too far? I couldn't possibly say (or should I?)

Anything that draws attention to a person because they are different is regarded as being wrong and in today's military setting, this behaviour is both frowned, and acted, upon. The same is true within many of the other public service settings (in fact, as a quad-service Equality and Diversity Advisor, I have to say that this is supposed to be true for all military and civil service settings) such that nicknames are taboo and drawing attention to any personal, physical or other discernible characteristic is a 'no no'. That said, when on a course with a number of dog-collars, I ended up with the label 'Dutch' to identity me from 'Scots Chaplain' and 'tall chaplain' (the other was just called 'chaplain'). Was I offended? No! But some are sensitive and so even though it added an element of sun to the proceedings, technically it was wrong!

I have mixed feelings about the Body Shop posters which speak of the ridiculous figures on some of the children's dolls, the 'ideal' (yet generally impossible) 'perfect woman as seen by those on the catwalks and points out that few women are built like them. I like the campaigns that call for 'real women' to be models as should it work I might find myself less burdened by women who struggle over they way they look (Size eight is enormous - just look at . . . .). My problem is that although the point being made is valid, the image it presents is one that surely makes the female figure a sex-object and therefore wins a point and yet loses one (or even two) in the doing so!

At the end of the day, it is clever advertising because everyone will stop and look at it. Most will agree but in doing so, are we not perhaps just creating a new stereotype rather than applauding a point?

I think there is much dialogue to be had over this whole issue, for their is a marked degree of immaturity and misunderstanding, personal hangup and very conditional assessment involved. For some it will set them free, for others it will increase their bondage - but that's life (I hear you say), so why do I have a slight feeling of unease?

Pax

AV - Getting some perspective

So it's over and done and won't be back for another ten years or so (hallelujah). They didn't need to count the second choice votes as:

a.There weren't any, and

b. They weren't needed anyway!

So those who managed to turn out and exercise their democratic rights voted to maintain the status quo, which is the only success from the whole sad and sorry (did I mention costly?) episode. The only thing sadder than the vote was the fact that Clegg has developed and 'anti-Midas' touch in that whatever he appears to be touching is turning to something of much less worth than gold! I think that is a sadder than the fact that many of the Lib Dem types, not realising that they are at least in power (which is a minor miracle considering they're really only a 'protest and lobby group' within parliament at best) are now muttering about 'wicked' Tories and making the coalition struggle. Do that and they'll realise that not only aren't they fit to govern but they'll prove it in a splendid way such that the next election will make last week's polls look like a vote of confidence!

So, we move on and rather than engage in clever mathematical exercises or mutter about 'majorities' and point to 51% we need people to understand that the person who receives the most votes is the popular choice. What we need to do is look at how we can raise the turnout such that the percentage of the population who votes are the 80's and 90's.

We also need to see the parties stand for something other than all stand on the same bit of popular policy ground and claim imaginary differences based on historic traits. After all, Labour is no more the working man's party that the Conservatives these day, it's only the moronic masses who haven't realised that who keep voting because of the 'working class' fallacies! Tories aren't all monied 'yahoo henry' types with loadsamoney either. Liberals (or whatever they're called this week) are always the middle ground party who claim to support 'whatever the others don't' and oppose 'whatever the other support' and they'll raise the taxes!

How about some credible parties with some real policies such that people want to get out and support them. The weird and wonderful parties out there, like the Greens and others, stand for what they stand for and as a result they get people who believe in them vote for them, just isn't enough of them to make a difference! But it's a lesson the others might learn.

Pax