Misogyny in politics: here we go again
Westminster condemns misogyny towards Angela Rayner, but will it make any difference? Plus: there's only 4 days left to Crowdfund Issue 5!
Good morning paranters!
It’s sub-editor Felice here again, bringing you a quick download of the story going around Westminster this week and asking: misogynists in parliament? Surely not!
Plus, we’re wrapping up our Crowdfunding, so we have a favour to ask you…
Have a wonderful Thursday, and we hope you enjoy the piece.
All hands on deck!
We've got just 4 days left to meet our target on our Crowdfunder project.
Since April 2021, Paranting Magazine has given underrepresented parents a voice in the UK media and beyond.
Just this week, supporters of disability publication, The Unwritten, helped it to achieve its goals and proved that Crowdfunding works.
You can make it happen again, by supporting us so that we can create the magazine that LGBT+ parents deserve.
Whether named or anonymous, we appreciate every single pledge so much.
You can read more about our aims for Issue 5, and see a full list of rewards available when you pledge on the Crowdfunder project page.
Please consider pledging your support so that we can keep making Paranting as a magazine.
Misogyny in politics: here we go again
Westminster condemns misogyny towards Angela Rayner, but will it make any difference?
Words: Felice Southwell. Images: As stated.
Once again, misogyny and classism in politics—both within parliament and the wider lobby of media and public relations—has become headline news.
Deputy Labour Party Leader, Angela Rayner, has accused the Conservatives of spreading "desperate, perverted smears" against her.
A report in the Mail on Sunday this weekend claimed she tried to “distract” the Prime Minister in the Commons during Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) by crossing and uncrossing her legs—“Basic Instinct” style.
We want to take you through the details of the Mail on Sunday’s story, the reaction from political figures and the row over misogyny in the aftermath of the story.
The report
The story printed in the Mail on Sunday newspaper quoted unnamed Conservative MPs claiming that Rayner attempts to distract Boris Johnson when he is at the Dispatch Box by crossing and uncrossing her legs.
The report, only available online behind a paywall to Mail Plus, also mocked Rayner for her lack of Oxford University debate training.
The sources suggested she attempted to put Johnson “off his stride” as she “knows she can’t compete” with him during debates.
Rayner gave an interview to Lorraine Kelly on ITV on Tuesday 26 April that was widely shared on social media in which she said the article “wasn’t just about me as a woman, it was also steeped in classism and about where I come from, where I grew up”.
For those paranters who didn’t read it—and will not give the Mail on Sunday any money—we’re sure you get the sickening, bigoted, degrading picture.
The reaction
On Twitter, Rayner said:
“"I stand accused of a “ploy” to “distract” the helpless PM – by being a woman, having legs and wearing clothes. I am conspiring to “put him off his stride."”
Johnson condemned the article on Twitter:
Rayner received supportive comments on social media from Labour Leader Keir Starmer, Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, and Conservative MPs including Caroline Nokes.
She has since thanked people for their outpouring of support, adding women deserve "so much better".
The reaction in the press from journalists and political commentators has broadly supported the disgust at the misogyny in the article.
Calls that the article was simply a report on the anonymous Conservatives’ information in the public interest were rebuked, with authors pointing out how the story was framed as gossip rather than a thoughtful or considered report about misogyny and classism.
That the public see women politicians vilified in the media so often is a sign of an exclusive admittance into parliament.
Less women, including working class, disabled, queer and BAME women, will feel safe or encouraged to participate in politics, which ultimately harms democracy if the only people participating are not representative of everyone.
Others mentioned that the humour defence for the article (that Rayner would laugh at such an article) was unacceptable.
Women are often forced into situations where they have to laugh along at misogynistic jokes—not because they are funny, but because the women are not safe.
It seems that the reaction to this story is at least showing how there is less “debate” among politicians and correspondents that these articles are misogynistic and unacceptable.
The question is: who’s going to address the elephant in the room? The misogyny of the anonymous sources themselves.
The aftermath…
Even if no one is criticising the sources, the misogyny of the editorial leadership which allowed the article has at least come under fire.
The Speaker of the House of Commons, Lindsay Hoyle told MPs: "[Media freedom] is one of the building blocks of our democracy. However I share the views expressed by a wide range of members, including I believe the prime minister, that yesterday's article was reporting unsubstantiated claims that were misogynistic and offensive."
Hoyle had summoned the newspaper's editor, David Dillon, to discuss the paper’s decision to publish the story but Dillon refused to attend.
Writing in the Daily Mail, Dillon responded that he would “not take instruction from officials of the House of Commons, however august they may be” and that “journalists must be free to report what they are told by MPs about conversations which take place in the House of Commons”.
There are calls for the reporter who wrote the story to lose his parliamentary pass.
Hoyle has dismissed calls for reporters to lose their passes in previous situations, but hasn’t confirmed either way his position on this story.
What’s next?
Yesterday in PMQs, the party leaders made assurances to voters before the local elections next week, but the misogyny row was still tangible inside the Commons.
The balance of women in local councils is just as bad as in parliament, with the data even more opaque and inaccessible.
Particularly well-timed, the Green MP Caroline Lucas secured an agreement from the Prime Minister that sexual harassment is a sackable offence.
There’s no sign of a meaningful commitment to addressing the pervasive culture of misogyny, classism and bias in Westminster yet.
With every sexist article published, and with every woman dissuaded from entering parliament, progressive politics is one step further away because power will continue to be guarded by an elite few.
The Paranting Conclusion
When writing a dissertation on how women in politics are perceived by the media back in 2019, I didn’t realise how little would have changed since the #MeToo movement.
Every time an article focuses on a politician as a seductress, or the pet of male politician or as a hyper-masculinised ‘iron lady’, we undermine the competence of that politician.
It normalises how we look at women as less natural politicians, and it excludes women from power.
It’s right to call out misogyny wherever we find it, and for everyone screaming “the women are complaining again” — damn right!
One last time!
In case you didn’t catch it at the top of this email, this is the last week of our Crowdfunder.
We really want to produce more content like this on LGBTQ+ parenting stories:
To do this and continue our independent approach to journalism, our small team needs your help.
You can pledge to donate anywhere from £5 to £100 to our Crowdfunder, and you’ll be ensuring the next Issue of Paranting makes it to print.
If we don’t reach our target, we get none of the money—so we’re asking for your help one last time.
If you’ve made it to the end of our newsletter this week, we’d love it if you go and comment any flower emoji on our latest Instagram post…!