Angela Rayner and Misogyny

 I am writing this because I am appalled, yet somehow not surprised. As I write this, the Mail On Sunday released proof of Angela Rayner lying about her taxes. I do not wish to focus on this matter as it has already been widely discussed. I condone what she did, but this isn't the focus of this article. 

Instead, I would prefer to focus on the response to this on social media (Twitter, specifically). I have only been scrolling for a few minutes and I have already seen multiple tweets, demeaning and dehumanising her, having their sole motivation be that she is a woman. Honestly, I'm revolted, and the idea that when I go into a career in Government, I will be subject to this treatment if I displease people is demotivating.

The first post I saw in this vein (on this issue alone), is this one. I would censor the username, but if the poster is confident enough to post this, they should be confident enough for it to be recorded in the long term. 

While the tweet itself is disgusting, the more concerning thing is the support it has. No-one in the replies feels that maybe, just maybe, they shouldn't resort to misogynistic jokes when a female MP acts incorrectly. Not only this, people feel it is appropriate to insinuate she should be killed, as seen in the following screenshot, suggesting she should have pins put in her, killing her inflatable self. 

I feel it should be self-explanatory why you shouldn't make such posts about someone, but apparently, that common sense doesn't apply to some people. Overall, replies to this are very revealing about the UK's hidden misogyny, resorting to dehumanising women for their mistakes, in ways they wouldn't to their male counterparts. No-one reduced Peter Viggers to his biology when he wrote off a duck-house on his expenses? Did they?

Another thing I have noticed, is that a specific demographic engages in this.

It is quite easy to guess who; the self-proclaimed "alpha males". This is a new subculture that values prejudiced traditional values and toxic behaviour. This group is easily identified through their idolisation of Patrick Bateman, the protagonist in the book and movie "American Psycho" (although I doubt those who idolise him have ever read this book or any others). Ironically enough, American Psycho was written satirically as a critique of the things these people push (capitalism, being one of them). I hope you can understand the "vast intellect" of these individuals now.

Here is one of them, replying to the original post with a GIF of Patrick Bateman nodding in approval. 

Some of these tweets really bewilder me. Not only because they are disproportionate, but also because they miss the point of the entire scandal regarding Rayner's tax affairs. From some tweets, such as the following one, you'd think she was involved in a sleaze scandal - like the one earlier this week regarding William Wragg. I haven't seen anyone posting caricatures referring to him in a sexualised way?

I am sure that anyone with a conscience can see the issue with this tweet, however, I know not everyone does, which is why I have been subjected to seeing these posts and having to write about them. The idea that it is perfectly socially acceptable to respond to Rayner with misogynistic images and innuendos, such as the one seen below, is a disgrace. It is beyond me how one can be so shameless, yet confident. 

The double-standard in how Rayner is being treated compared to MPs who had genuine sexual scandals is extremely obvious. In my view, this draws attention to the issue of covert misogyny in British society, especially in the way that people can so quickly switch to misogyny when given an excuse to.

Even before this new article came out, similar comments were made, focusing on Rayner as a sexual object, rather than a political figure.  

 

The amount of engagements these posts get shows the scale of the issue, and how the male part of the public views women in society. The amount of likes compared to replies shows this blatantly. Misogyny is covert until a woman commits a misdeed many men have before her. 

Not only does this tweet show the objectification of female politicians, but it also shows the infantilisation of them by the right-wing. Here, as right-wing men often do, he speaks about her in a demeaning way, calling her "Ange". His insistence on calling her a nickname rather than by her surname, as you would any male politician, also shows the issue of women being systematically undermined by men in political spaces. The fact this is perfectly socially acceptable in our society is shameful.

The only bright side of this one tweet is that a large portion of the replies are pointing out the sexist approach to this situation. Even so, this is disproportionate to the amount of people liking (and presumably agreeing) with this tweet. 

Overall, the double-standard in treatment of men and women in politics is perfectly shown through this situation. It displays Britain's covert misogyny and perception of female politicians as inferior to their male counterparts. I hope that people begin to notice this behaviour and condemn it. If not, my career in politics may be quite bleak. 

Thank you for reading.

- A

An Overview ✎

 Who am I?    

At the moment, as I write this, I do not plan giving my full name out, so I will go by my first initial, "A". 

As I am writing this, I am a first year sixth form student in Kingston Upon Hull. I am studying Politics, Sociology and Economics. I joined Labour last year as I am interested in pursuing a career in politics, however I do not agree with Starmer in the slightest and I feel he has watered down Labour and taken away the only party that truly stood up for the working class. 

Myself, I am a second-generation immigrant and my parents came here from Poland, shortly after the UK opened the border to EU migrants. I am (as my username suggests) a girl, however I would like to clarify that when I say this, it is not in a "demeaning" way, but in an "evading responsibility for my actions" way! I am and will be "just a girl" as long as I live. (This is a joke, please don't take it seriously.)

On a serious note, I am a radical-leaning feminist. By this I mean, I am anti-porn, anti-sex-work and anti-kink-culture. I am not attacking people who work in the porn/sex-work industry as I feel they are victims of the patriarchy. In the same vein, I am also not attacking people who engage in kink-culture, but I am against it becoming mainstream as it is a gateway to domestic abuse becoming socially accepted under the guise of consent. 

While I may be an immigrant, I do not support free migration. I understand the UK government does not presently have the resources to support large amounts of migrants and must prioritise it's current citizens. I also do not support the Rwanda policy as while it could be a deterrent (although there's little evidence of this), it is unworkable and is fundamentally inhumane. 

On the topic of Israel/Palestine, I am in full support of Palestine and I personally, do not feel that a two-state solution is a good plan. It was tried for 70+ years since the formation of Israel and it has failed. Throughout this time, Israel created an apartheid and mistreated the Palestinian people, regularly attacking them on land that was originally theirs. I feel that if the US really wants the state of Israel to exist so badly, then they should put it somewhere in the US. They have enough land and since they are the main supporters of Israel's existence, they should keep it somewhere over there, not impacting the Palestinian people. 

I am indifferent on religion and I feel that viewing this conflict as one between Jews and Muslims is irrational. Palestine is a religiously diverse zone with Christian populations and to say that it is a religion-based conflict is untrue. I believe in the separation of Zionism and Judaism as they are not the same thing. They may overlap in some areas, however they are fundamentally different. To say that Zionism is the same thing as Judaism and to say that being against Zionism is antisemitism is a lie. It is conflating two different ideas and saying they are the same thing. It is the same as saying that the Crusaders represent the entirety of Christianity, when obviously, they do not. 

I apologise for speaking in such depth on my view of this, however I feel it is important to clarify this as with current presentation of this issue in the media, it would be easy to say I am an antisemitic, when this is untrue. 

Moving from this issue, I do support the LGBT. I myself would say I am part of the LGBT, however I prefer to remain unlabelled as this is easier for me. I support same-sex marriage and adoption, however these issues are not very significant in the UK currently, so I will not go into detail on them. The more significant issue currently, is transgender people. I do support transgender people, however I feel it is a very niche issue that should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. On the issue of transgender women in women's bathrooms, I feel that the safest choice is to use the bathroom of the gender which you physically appear as (i.e. if you pass as female, use the women's, if you do not, use the men's). This same logic applies to transgender men too. I feel that the issue of men pretending to be transgender to gain access to vulnerable women is very over-stated. Of course, there are the outliers, as there are in any demographic. However, to say that all transgender women are predators is fundamentally untrue. Overall, as this is a niche issue, it is better to look on a case-by-case basis, rather than a general rule. 

This will be it from me for now and I will share more of my views in future uploads. I cannot include everything so I included that which is most controversial currently.

Thank you for reading this far. It is appreciated! I will post on this blog on issues of the day, however I cannot promise consistent uploads as I am in college and will find it difficult to constantly update on every single issue. 

- A