Jump to content

Recommended Posts

During the late 1980's I knew a lot of women who had gained entry to university courses after following Access courses which became more widespread during the '80s. Also there was an expansion of Adult Education especially in Literacy, Numeracy and courses like Book-keeping and women filled the classes in the main. The children were looked after in creches for 2 hours for a 10p fee. If I recall the classes were linked to the Docklands redevelopment at the time and run by Southwark council staff.

SHe was a pioneer, but she appears to have had to sacrifice her role as a mother in order to develop her career. She had balls.

Many women that have historically done well such as Barbara Castle and Teresa May had/have no children.


I ask myself- would I want to be an MP? no . Would I support any women friends that did? yes absolutely- but you def need a loyal partner who is prepared to support you and be the main carer for children.

look at all the women she made part of her cabinet -ok, just the one


what about all the Tory women standing up in parliament today to say a few words? - umm ok, not such a good example either


A pioneer would suggest she took a lot of the pain, but advanced the cause. That doesn't really appear to have happened


Jury is in on Castle and Thatcher as "doing well" but as for Theresa May I'd say it's too early to say she has "done well"


(I'm guessing you mean Theresa the MP, and not Teresa May the glamour model. Ahem)

oops ;) yes, Theresa.

I think Thatcher was a pioneer in that she showed a woman could be PM. SHe showed it was possible.She did sacrifice her role as a mother.

Like many woman of that age, they did not make things any easier for women that followed them. They had the attitude " I have sacrificed a lot to get here, so must you".

I think maybe things are better now, but there is the fear of "tokenism" . I speak as someone offered a job by the ex GLC as a token woman in the early 80's.

It is much more acceptable for women - and men-to work parttime/ flexi, than it was 25 years ago.

Why do you say she sacrificed her role as a mother? I'm not saying you are wrong (I have no idea) I just don't know why you are saying so.


womanofdulwich Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> oops ;) yes, Theresa.

> I think Thatcher was a pioneer in that she showed

> a woman could be PM. SHe showed it was

> possible.She did sacrifice her role as a mother.

> Like many woman of that age, they did not make

> things any easier for women that followed them.

> They had the attitude " I have sacrificed a lot to

> get here, so must you".

> I think maybe things are better now, but there is

> the fear of "tokenism" . I speak as someone

> offered a job by the ex GLC as a token woman in

> the early 80's.

> It is much more acceptable for women - and men-to

> work parttime/ flexi, than it was 25 years ago.

I am basing it on the coverage in the Times which covered it, various tv docu-dramas , and the fact that she was a driven woman, which in my experience means that you cannot give your children as much as other mothers might.

However it is true that there are a whole set of upper middle class/ upper class people who have had nannies who raised children,and they were " brought down " to see their parents just before they went to bed.

Maybe that is fine and I am wrong to say she " sacrificed" her role. Its just my personal opinion. I cannot imagine how it must be to have been brought up like this, anyone out there in East Dulwich brought up like this?

I see. I think its always funny how this discussion is always framed. Successful men make just as many personal sacrifices as concerns family life etc. Many are very torn about it. Marriages fall apart because of it. However, no one ever seems to find it relevant when it comes to men...
Yes, fair enough. I think it ties in though. Those who celebrate her do it because she exudes certain traits often not associated with being maternal. A public woman being assessed by aspects of herself other than her role as mother was actually part of the legacy that I thought was positive. However, I have to think if that's really true given how much press coverage WomanofDulwich has seen on the subject.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...