Sometimes, it's just a cigar

This is our truth, tell us yours

Fire up the bandwagon

Come on people, this is urgent. It must be. Caroline whatsherface says so….

I know, I shouldn’t mock, but it’s hard not to. Caroline Criado-Perez has noticed that marriage certificates aren’t representative of all the people who might be interested in the wedding, and she’s spotted that someone else has started a campaign. That someone else not being a New Statesman journo means Caroline feels it’s her duty to set herself at the head of the campaign, and she’s off and running.

Remember dear reader, our rule that the plural of anecdote is not data. However, if you’re tracking the practice of a political activist it is more than reasonable to look at their behaviour and seek out patterns.

Banknotes feminism was a curious moment in time that said, bluntly, that irrespective of the fact that women get paid less than men, and have less secure work than men, and less representation and power in the workplace, what matters is whose face appears on banknotes.

Now we have Caroline endorsing the idea that what matters about marriage is not forced marriage, or unbalanced power relationships in the divorce process, or domestic violence, but whose names are on the marriage certificate.

I will let you into a secret dear reader. I was once married. It was not, by any standards, a conventional marriage. Conventional wisdom has it, I’m told, that the marriage is effectively over if you have sex with your wife’s best mate. Since both myself and my wife had sex with her best mate on our wedding night, and managed to stay wed for some time longer, it’s safe to assume it wasn’t a conventional marriage. However, having said that it’s safe to say that in some other aspects it was an average marriage; one of its features was that, when we came to get divorced, neither of us knew where the marriage certificate was. The other keepsakes of the day – the photos, the ribbons, her frock, my jacket, her best friend’s white lace strap on harness, all of those were accounted for, but the certificate vanished into the mists of time. We had to arrange fora replacement to enable the divorce process. I remember the jokey, good humoured registrar who told me that we were far from unique, and that her office would often be a battle ground as soon to be divorced couples argued about who would pay the fee for the replacement paperwork.

CC-P’s practice is nothing short of excellent. It’s a crowded marketplace out there for women who aspire to be political faces, known for their opinions and their activism. It’s not easy getting yourself on Radio 4’s radar, or getting yourself promoted as a talking head who can one day step up to the big league of the Newsnight review of the week or a regular CiF slot. Caroline doesn’t appear to fancy, either, the hard graft of working in a trade union or a party political environment, and, to be honest you can see her point of view. There are formidable activists out there like Frances O’Grady and Heather Wakefield who’ve pretty much got the ‘getting to be a national political figure by actually campaigning on things that change women workers lives like equal pay’ market sewn up. Given that CC-P either doesn’t sympathize with such campaigns, or doesn’t fancy being a follower rather than a leader, you can sense her dilemma.

CC-Ps trademark is the capture of the incidents of the periphery, the small scale symbolic issues that don’t change much, and which government can actually change really easily. Better still, they’re issues that aren’t structural as such; inheritance rules will not change if Caroline gets her way and her mother’s name appears on a marriage certificate. Not a single forced marriage will be prevented by it, and there won’t be celebration parties in the domestic violence co-ordinator’s office. All that will happen is that the stationers will phase in some new paperwork, and the registrars will change their scripts, and marriage as an institution will totter on its way, an old institution being re-invented by conspicuous consumption as a status event.

I’ll save for another day the much longer blog about naming conventions, and the way in which we could all, if we chose,change our names to reflect who we are, not just the naming conventions of registrars and priests. On that glorious day, I will rush to the barricades clutching my name change deed stating that I am to be called, thenceforth, Carter The Blogger, and I will force my bank to change my debit card and the Borders Agency to change my passport, and, like Elton Hercules John, who managed to get the name of Steptoe and Sons horse on both his marriage certificates, but not his mother’s, I’ll find the world hasn’t changed one iota just because I’ve changed the label applied to me.

 

12 comments on “Fire up the bandwagon

  1. Sula
    May 3, 2014

    Yes, yes and thrice times yes! Can’t stand the bloody woman or her cohorts. No doubt she’ll be in Westminster by the time she’s 40, not sure at this point for which party, whoever offers a safe seat probably. That lot blather on about ‘capitalism and neo-liberalism’ as if they really do want to effect structural change but it’s all bollocks; capitalism can accommodate career feminism very nicely thank you, it fits very well with individual-effort, non-collectivist parasites like Perez.

    • jemima2013
      May 4, 2014

      I think the most telling thing re standing for parliament is I could imagine her standing for any of the three main parties, says a lot doesnt it?

  2. Anne
    May 3, 2014

    Sorry, what evidence have you got for the claim that CCP thinks “that what matters about marriage is not forced marriage, or unbalanced power relationships in the divorce process, or domestic violence, but whose names are on the marriage certificate”?

    Are you unaware of the fact that people can care about several issues at the same time? And can even do so while thinking that some of these issues are more serious than the others, and yet the less serious ones are still important, and merit change?

    Secondly, what evidence do you have that Caroline doesn’t engage in other forms of political activism? What knowledge do you have of what else she campaigns on?

    Sorry to let my request for facts and evidence get in the way of your personal vendetta….

    • cartertheblogger
      May 3, 2014

      I’ll let Caroline speak for herself. Let her tell me which union she’s a member of, whether she’s a steward, which party she’s a member of….

  3. Nina
    May 3, 2014

    Well done dude. You sure put that uppity woman in her place! Thank god for men like you, shutting up women who dare to think they’ve got a right to opinions. Amirite??

    • cartertheblogger
      May 3, 2014

      Nina,
      No, you’re not. This is a political debate about leadership and programmes. I’m conducting it in a polemical way partly because it’s personal – Caroline never has apologized for calling me an abuser, but it’s also polemical because I want to win the argument, that Caroline’s method is one of accommodation, of pursuing the pointless while ignoring the important.

    • Sula
      May 4, 2014

      Because if a man disagrees with a woman he’s automatically being an oppressive, misogynistic bully? Nonsense. Dangerous, anti-feminist nonsense at that.

      In a similar vein, when several people called out Karen Ingala Smith the other day for using Ann McGuire’s death as part of a pattern of ‘male’ violence a number of Ann’s ex pupils objected to the tragedy being reduced, so soon after the fact, to support an agenda. This was characterised as yet another example of ‘misogyny’ by those who dared disagree with Karen and before long Perez et al were on board to agree with her.

      Some of the Tweets were predictably offensive from the usual knee jerk twitter twunts, but many weren’t. Funny that it was only the offensive ones that made it into Karen’s Storify the next day, but everyone who had disagreed was characterised as obnoxious and unreasonable. This doesn’t help women to be taken seriously: quite the opposite.

      • jemima2013
        May 4, 2014

        I didnt know that, KIS blocked my for my support of trans women many moons ago, but i was seriously offended by firstly her lack of humanity and compassion in appropriating the murder and secondly her hypocrisy in treating a 15 yr old boy as an adult with full agency when she denies that right to 15 yr old girls.
        The mainstream feminists of this country have turned feminims into a joke, petty tinkering and pearl clutching if anyone disagrees, thats when they are not telling trans women they are men or sex workers they deserve to be raped. I wonder what would happen if we storified every abusive tweet we got?

        • Sula
          May 5, 2014

          I don’t dare join Twitter, just see what’s going on on friend’s phones etc: don’t trust myself to be civil to these people and I’d just hate to be responsible for hurting their delicate sensibilities.

  4. Pingback: The Sunday Sermon; A Whitsun Wedding? | Sometimes, it's just a cigar

  5. Pingback: A victory for Daily Mail Feminism | Sometimes, it's just a cigar

  6. Pingback: Picking the low hanging fruit | Sometimes, it's just a cigar

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Information

This entry was posted on May 3, 2014 by in Uncategorized.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,911 other followers

%d bloggers like this: