Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
Comment: More women in Cabinet will reduce men's group think failings
Submitted by Mastodon on Tue, 2014-07-15 21:35
Article here. Excerpt:
'In 2008, Tory leader David Cameron pledged to give a third of ministerial places to women by the end of his first parliament. Back then, 2015 must have seemed like a long way off. But here we are, 50 months into his 60 month fixed-term tenure and that target is a long way from being met. Before this shake-up, women make up just a fifth of the total ministerial list and a paltry 14% of those in Cabinet.
...
However, despite the importance of this short-term improvement, it is crucial that all parties continue to scrutinise and take firm action to improve the status of women in their own ranks, and to challenge and address the wider culture in both Westminster and the media that puts women off entering, and staying in the profession.
A report published on Monday by the APPG on Women in Parliament once again highlights the many hurdles women face when entering elected office – from discrimination at the selection process (where a survey of 144 sitting and former MPs found a whopping 67% faced discrimination during their selection process) to un-family friendly sitting hours and the deeply sexist culture that continues to pervade the Westminster bubble.'
- Log in to post comments
Comments
Has anything changed since women have...
... entered Congress and the pres'l cabinet in unprecedented numbers?
No. Did Hillary out-do any of her male predecessors? Hardly. But a quite competent female Sec'y of State did precede her not too long ago in the person Madeleine Albright. So yes, it's entirely possible to find highly capable female candidates for high offices. But one shouldn't pass over better-qualified male ones just to satisfy the feminist lobby. Unfortunately, seems to be happening more and more and with the lesser-qualified candidate getting the job over a more-qualified one, both of whom are ready to accept the job, who loses? Not just the male candidate who has been unfairly rejected but also the taxpayer. As I've said before, we're paying a lot for these people. We ought to be getting our money's worth.