Labour's pink bus

[Robert Poste's Child]

Who are they targeting - six-year-old girls? I cannot, cannot believe how patronising this is. Well done for alienating existing female voters. Poor old Harperson.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31376622

[Otta]

Why exactly is it patronising?

Is this patronising?

http://imgs.tuts.dragoart.com/how-to-draw-a-cancer-ribbon-breast-cancer-ribbon_1_000000009676_3.jpg

[Louisa]

The current Labour shadow cabinet is a complete shower. They are becoming more desperate as each week passes in this election campaign. I've been shaking my head at each gaff made by Miliband and crew, in what should be an open goal election for them to win. They are the football equivalent of England Vs Germany in a penalty shoot out. They've been 4 - 0 up for most of the match, they then lost their bottle in final third allowing the opposition to equalise by full time and then will be probably be hammered in the shoot out. It's embarrasing. This coalition has been totally useless and the junior partners votes should have been a clean sweep for Labour, but no, the greens have swept those votes up.

Louisa.

[Loz]

Even the Guardian have dubbed it the 'Barbie Bus' and when the Guardian criticises Labour, you know they've done something wrong. As I said on another thread, I can't believe someone with Mad Hattie's experience signed off on this amazingly dumb idea.

[Otta]

But what EXACTLY is the problem with it? Is it simply that it's pink?

[Robert Poste's Child]

Put it this way, Otta, if you were a non-voter yourself, would a bus covered in Bob the Builder stickers convince you that Labour were taking you seriously?

[Louisa]

Or if you were a non-voter and a religious minority, would a bus covered in Christian, Islamic, Jewish symbolism encourage you to vote for them? It's just barrel scraping.

Louisa.

[Robert Poste's Child]

To answer your question more directly, as I understand it the bus is aiming to engage women who don't currently vote and, specifically, to convince them to vote Labour.

However, bright pink is overwhelmingly associated with little girls these days, so using it implies an infantilised and trivialising view of adult women, which is reductive and undermines the value of our opinions - and ultimately our claim to a right to vote, frankly.

You have to ask yourself whether the PR behind it has a hidden agenda. Either they're secretly a UKIP voter or Wallace is trying to shore up his own chances by holing Harman's career below the waterline.

[Loz]

And if the pink bus wasn't bad enough, the fact that it filled with 'kitchen tables' pretty much completes the dreadful picture. Hey, why not stick a few ironing boards in a well? With a few fruit-based drinks on hand.

Mind you, in a neat attempt to offend everyone, apparently Labour had a long discussion as to whether they would even allow a man to drive the bus.

[Robert Poste's Child]

And in a classic move, they are trying to get around it by claiming the bus isn't pink - it's magenta. Yes, because that works, doesn't it - we're so stupid we believe you when you say, it's not pink actually, it's a shade of pink that isn't called pink.

I also deeply resent the fact that when politicians talk about women voters, they immediately mention childcare policies, as though that's what defines women. Why are men never defined in terms of whether they've produced children? Why aren't children seen to be the responsibility of men and women equally? Why hasn't this attitude moved on in thirty years? Half the women in the country aren't married and a fifth don't have children. Keep up.

Urgh.

[????]

Harperson in being clueless again shocker

[Otta]

Have you ever considered that it's not people like you that they're aiming for?

Little girls only wear so much pink because they have mum's (and dad'd) who dress them in it...

[Loz]

Otta Wrote:

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

> Little girls only wear so much pink because they have mum's (and dad'd) who dress them in it...

I always thought that, but I've noticed that my friends who have daughters have all gone through the 'pink stage', even though the parents discouraged it. Like anything, it's a fashion - other little girls wear pink, so they want to as well.

[Otta]

Yes that is undoubtedly true, things like Disney don't help, but there are plenty of people out there who will do the whole pink for girls and blue for boys thing, and that isn't peer pressure. The peer pressure comes later once the kids who aren't wearing the pink go to preschool and get told that pink is for girls.

[Loz]

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

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

> I also deeply resent the fact that when politicians talk about women voters, they

> immediately mention childcare policies, as though that's what defines women.

But surely also the outdated view that only women can talk to women about such serious matters? Most people can have an equally political conversation with a member of either sex. I can understand that you would want a good showing by female MPs as a way to show role models of women in politics, but a blanket ban on any men is pretty offensive to both genders.

> Why are men never defined in terms of whether they've produced children? Why aren't children seen to be the

> responsibility of men and women equally? Why hasn't this attitude moved on in thirty years?

In the same week, Ed M has announced a good policy in increasing paternity leave, so it's a bit one step forward, two steps back going on with Labour.

> Half the women in the country aren't married and a fifth don't have children. Keep up.

80% of adult women have had children? Is it really that high?

[Loz]

???? Wrote:

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

> Harperson in being clueless again shocker

For all of Mad Hattie being a sexist old 70's dinosaur, she's actually a pretty shrewd political operator. I am really rather surprised she is involved with this. Her attempts to describe the colour as 'magenta' suggests she may not have quite been completely on board with the idea.

[Blah Blah]

I'm guessing it's mostly men posting above?

Lot's of manufacturers make things in pink aimed at women, and you know what? It sells!

I don't think women are bothered by this at all. My wife certainly isn't. A pink bus does stand out though, and if you are trying to grab attention, that's the way to do it. No such thing as bad publicity and all that.

In reply to your point RPC about women and childcare etc, whether we like it or not it is still predominently women who cook, clean, and bring up children. London may be full of metrosexual modern men but that isn't anywhere being the norm nationally. By your own comments, 80% of women still do have children and 35% of them are not married (so single mums in there too). Childcare is a major issue for women wanting to return to work, so why wouldn't politicians go after something that affects so many women? Children do not impose on us men, or our careers in anything like the same way. Politicians are simply recognising that.

[Otta]

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> Lot's of manufacturers make things in pink aimed

> at women, and you know what? It sells!

EXACTLY!

Sure Ellen might quite rightly mock the bic lady pens, and we all laugh. But other people are buying that shit.

[Loz]

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> Lot's of manufacturers make things in pink aimed at women, and you know what? It sells!

So does sex, but using it in a political campaign will - quite rightly - see a lot of crap dumped on you from a very great height.

Labour is going to get a LOT of bad press about this. The damage will be much greater than the any perceived selling advantage.

[StraferJack]

it's not QUITE as bad as vans telling peolpe to go back home tho is it?

I can't say the buses make me do anything other than shrug. People getting het up about it might be better served looking at issues rather than window dressing not aimed at them

[Blah Blah]

Are you seriously saying people will change who they vote for because of the colour of a bus? That's like saying I don't vote Tory because I hate the colour blue!

Sex may sell but it's hardly the same as a pink hairdyer, or pink pen is it?

There does seem to be a tendancy for the media to jump on any little inconsequntial thing it can (usually to do with image) when what it should really be focussing on is policy.

So I prefer to hear the message from the bus, than be influeced by it's colour and what kind of tables it has inside.

[Loz]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> it's not QUITE as bad as vans telling peolpe to go back home tho is it?

Well, no. There is a bad idea, a terrible idea, an awful idea and then that.

The Barbie Bus is more like Kinnock in 1992, arriving in a helicopter. Not a big thing on paper, but potentially it is seriously election affecting.

[Robert Poste's Child]

Loz Wrote:

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

> Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I also deeply resent the fact that when

> politicians talk about women voters, they

> > immediately mention childcare policies, as

> though that's what defines women.

>

> But surely also the outdated view that only women

> can talk to women about such serious matters?

I know, I know, don't get me started.

> Most people can have an equally political conversation

> with a member of either sex. I can understand that

> you would want a good showing by female MPs as a

> way to show role models of women in politics, but

> a blanket ban on any men is pretty offensive to

> both genders.

I acknowledge your right to be offended. (Thanks for not saying a man can be a feminist; now would not be the moment.)

> > Why are men never defined in terms of whether

> they've produced children? Why aren't children

> seen to be the

> > responsibility of men and women equally? Why

> hasn't this attitude moved on in thirty years?

>

> In the same week, Ed M has announced a good policy

> in increasing paternity leave, so it's a bit one

> step forward, two steps back going on with

> Labour.

Ed. The same man who's going to put an end to offshore tax havens. He can say anything he likes but in six months time he'll be out of a job.

> > Half the women in the country aren't married and

> a fifth don't have children. Keep up.

>

> 80% of adult women have had children? Is it

> really that high?

According to the ONS (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/fertility-analysis/cohort-fertility--england-and-wales/2011/sty-1-in-5-women-are-childless-at-45.html) unless the red mist was so strong I misread it.

[Robert Poste's Child]

Otta Wrote:

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

> Have you ever considered that it's not people like

> you that they're aiming for?

Of course I realise, but my point is they're talking down to the converted at the same time, which is just stupid.

> Little girls only wear so much pink because they

> have mum's (and dad'd) who dress them in it...

Someone close to me is married to another woman and they have two children, a boy and a girl. Despite the fact that the entire house is blue or black and made of cotton the girl is STILL going through the pink stage. They get out blue clothes for her and she'll say no, I need to wear this one because I look pretty in it.

The difference is that these days parents give into to pester power. I'm sure I'd have had everything pink when I was that age but it wasn't my decision.

[Robert Poste's Child]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> it's not QUITE as bad as vans telling peolpe to go

> back home tho is it?

>

> I can't say the buses make me do anything other

> than shrug. People getting het up about it might

> be better served looking at issues rather than

> window dressing not aimed at them

A man patronising a woman for being offended. Nice.