My eyes glazed over as she spoke the words .”I’ve got “man-flu””. That is how the female leader of the Democratic Unionist Party started off. Well there goes any pretence at femininity , I thought to myself. Freeze that image! What a start indeed? Did she deliberately say the word “man” to strip herself of any last vestiges of femininity ,before setting out her stall ,or was she trying to tell a lame ,self-deprecating, back-handed joke that is usually aimed at the sniffling male of the species? Who would ever know? She wasn’t going to answer any questions at the end so no-one would be able to ask…
It is an unfortunate quirk of genetics and DNA that the Democratic Unionist Party leader could never be considered a remotely conventionally attractive female beauty , but then neither are there many males in the same party who are “lookers” either . There aren’t too many Brad Pitts or George Clooneys knocking about to wheel out . It is just one of those quirks of fate but it not exactly an asset for a public figure. It might not be important in a politician but it …and every little bit …helps.In public performance attractive people can get away with ….well , murder, I suppose. That is simply the way the world works.That is how mates are chosen throughout humanity and so on; that is why film stars are film stars ; that is what makes the world go around and it is why the fashion and beauty industries flourish. In any case the DUP leader immediately levelled the ground by inadvertently referring to herself as just one of the “men”….one of the boys with her brand new manifesto .That was fine and dandy until it was realised that it wasn’t a new manifesto at all but was instead it was an old one ; a re-fried regurgitated rant of considerable paranoia and fear about the possibility of unionism being consumed by Sinn Fein and all those wee crocodile republicans and nationalists. Far from preparing the troops that some day there is the distinct possibility that unionism might stand in the shadow of nationalism, she proceeded to sow the seeds of fear as if the very sword of Damocles was about to fell them
If anyone ever seemed insecure in their shoes , it was this somewhat asexual person making that speech. There was no mention of corruption, scandals, cronyism and mismanagement in government in any of the many words ,but Gerry Adams and Sinn Fein featured many times.All these previously- mentioned delinquencies are what brought the previous administration to an end ; all these things were the issues that finished her tenure as First Minister, yet here she was , basically telling the party faithful that it was all Sinn Fein’s fault .It was hardly credible at all and seemed deluded in the extreme. She was pushing the same old Bogeyman Buttons that had brought unionism out to the voting booths since the days of “Home Rule Is Rome Rule”.Here she was with a 21st Century version of that same tired mantra. It’s a hard fact in Norneverland politics that when hard- right unionism talks about democracy what they really mean is… “We will fight and we will be right”, no matter the political aspirations of others beyond their narrow tribe.
This was her way to white-out the past twelve months and some twenty years previous from the political slate .She wanted everyone to forget all those trivialities like that huge half- a- billion pound pile of wasted RHI money and concentrate once again on what unionism was really all about behind the game- playing at politics.That is because politics , like law -and- order is only something that hard -right unionism has only ever paid lip-service to .When it suits , they’ll embrace the war- drums and bring the mobs and guns back into the mix. To do this they need a Bogeyman and if there is none immediately available , they’ll invent one.Here they are doing it again in real-time , right before our eyes only weeks since the First Minister was sacked. Is it any wonder that they want no questions asked? How would they ever be able to answer them with even a modicum of truth?
It was Lord Randolph Churchill who had originally sowed the seeds of sedition in the unionist hearts.To hell with politics and scandal…this was life and death was the cry!! Lord Churchill was fundamentally opposed to Home Rule for Ireland and on 23rd February 1886 when he came over and spoke in the Ulster Hall in Belfast to the faithful of the Orange Order he got a stunning reception . He was anxious to undermine Gladstone and was prepared to support the Orange Order who were already prepped to “resist it by any means”.He was determined to play that “Orange Card” , as he called it and hope thta it wasn’t simply a joker he’d drawn from the pack. To have a Lord on their side was a great revitalising feather in the unionist and Orange Order cap and it was there that he gave them their rallying cry of “Ulster will fight and Ulster will be right” at which they naturally cheered loudly .It was at this point that the close association between the Conservative Party and unionism in Ireland really began. The DUP are still cultivating that relationship today.It was the same relationship which led to the UVF gun-running scandal of 1914 that really brought the gun into Irish politics on a large scale and it is the same relationship which allows them to speak now of giving “our security forces” special dispensation when it comes to the letter and the upholding of the law.They want “their” security forces to be above the letter of the law.
So this is the new mantra for hard -right unionism .Forget about the Cash for Ash, the Soot for Loot,the Glow for Dough and all those other little financial trivialities such as the RHI scandal. They’re the price you have to pay To Keep Sinn Fein At Bay. Vote Arlene While She Makes Hay!
The last time she made a threat to SF, in December last, she thought she could cower them into desist ing about asking for her to step aside, after all hadn’t the DUP , as Simon Hamilton was keen to boast, been running rings round SF, so she said she was keen on an election. Then just to rub SFs nose in it they did the dirty on Liofa.
Seeming not to remember what happened last time, I see she again threatened SF that if they thought they were going to bring items to the negotiating table post election, then she had her own long list of demands.
I wonder what was on the list? Bring back internment for republicans; all references to RHI be stricken from the history of NI; AF be made Queen for life;Dup be permanently in Government and…….
It will,indeed, be very interesting to see this proportional list that the DUPlicitious have threatened to bring to the table. All OTR letters withdrawn,number of RUC stalwarts doubled, UDR brought back, no investment west of the Bann except Fermanagh, obligatory oath for a Civil Service job, tax relief on donations to OO,UU andDUP, no tricklers,no Gaelic anywhere, Sinn Féin banned, union flags on all buildings. In other words turn the clock back to the 20’s. We live in interesting times.
It will,indeed, be very interesting to see this proportional list that the DUPlicitious have threatened to bring to the table. All OTR letters withdrawn,number of RUC stalwarts doubled, UDR brought back, no investment west of the Bann except Fermanagh, obligatory oath for a Civil Service job, tax relief on donations to OO,UU andDUP, no tricklers,no Gaelic anywhere, Sinn Féin banned, union flags on all buildings. In other words turn the clock back to the 20’s. We live in interesting times.
This site used to block duplicate comments. But read it twice, anyway.
So good you said it twice , fiosrach …NooYawk ! Noo Yawk!….
“New York, New York, a wonderful town
The Bronx is up and the Battery’s down
The people ride in a hole in the ground
New York, New York, it’s a wonderful town! ”
….just popped into my head there….i can just see Gene Kelly and Frankie dancing…!
(their security forces)most on heres as well you left out.
Huh?
Huh?
Appalling misogyny in this article.
Perhaps if Foster bleached her hair and slapped on the make-up like her counterpart, Harry would be less inclined to comment on her physical appearance?
“Misogny”…No ..I don’t see it myself. “Misandry”…now that’s another kettle of pickled fish. really. …but anyway …don’t let the wife and daughters catch you mentioning misogny when the conversation is really about about aesthetics and beauty , MT…
paddy
None of us get to choose the face we are born with.
It is a cheap shot,and invites more of the same
I have to look at posters of caral ni chuilin every day!
There you go ,gio!….and your point is?
My point is…obvious I would have thought.
Gio…you just said..”I have to look at posters of caral ni chuilin every day!”.
.So are you being judgemental in an aesthetic way… or are you not? By the way, you should have realised by now that this is not a discussion about misogny, but rather an appreciation of of some rational physical facts.of life.The person’s sex has little to do with her political competence or otherwise but we all instinctively do make judgements based on our own standards of what male or female beauty might be in the world.As fiosrach has pointed out that may not be the same thing for each one of us but we do, as human beings, tend to agree on some specific standards.’ of what beauty might be at a specific moment in time(It does change throughout the ages admittedly,but there is still an appreciation of harmony and proportion), which is why “film stars are actually film stars”.They are film stars because they fit a specific idea as to what we profess to be beautiful. They might be lousy actors or otherwise , but that does not change their iconic momentary….even transient beauty.The phrase that “beauty is only skin deep” is also open to at least two interpretations.
If you accept that something like politics as an adjunct to a sort of show-business, where people are on public display and have to “perform”,you can see why the current Prime Minister Ms May is very much au fait with her appearance and you can also see that the media attach great significance to it and her own personal presentation. Should I mention her leather trousers? In the case of Arlene Foster , she does what we all do and uses whatever is available to buff the image. She would not be considered conventionally pretty but she will be dressed and presented for public consumption …like i say she will never achieve conventional standards of “beauty” but she was able to man-herself up …or if you like “masculinise” herself on this occasion by referring to her “man-flu” and actually making herself more masculine -looking by wearing trousers.Are we not supposed to notice any of this or is it done deliberately so that we will notice it and remember?
paddy
Of course we make judgements on peoples appearance.That is human nature.
But it should be irrelevant to how we vote.
Why even mention it in that regard?
It does tend to be the female candidates who get appraised in this way, perhaps because so many commenters here are male. Just saying it is not misogyny does not mean it aint.
So I don’t like it because it tends towards the msogynistic and it is irrelevant.
Did anyone vote for Martin McGuinness on the basis of how handsome or not,he was?
Will you be passing your eye over all the candidates?
I await your aesthetic appraisal of Caral and Catriona Ruane, Martina Anderson, etc
So gio …you are saying it is not misognistic for you to say …
“paddy
None of us get to choose the face we are born with.
It is a cheap shot,and invites more of the same”
( and then as if to prove that very point …you add some of what you appear to think is the “same” by saying)…
“I have to look at posters of caral ni chuilin every day!”
Well ..Is it or isn’t it misogynistic for you to say that?
From my perspective that is your honest view, hurtful or otherwise ,that it may be, but not misogynistic because you are not saying she can or cannot do her job because she is the wrong sex(ie not male). It has nothing to do with her political capabilility for a specific job but it does seem to make a difference to you on purely aesthetic grounds ….is that it ,or not?.
In respect to my own view ,it is neither “male” focused or “female” focused, but based on empirical truths of harmony in nature.
I did say that (in respect to her male companions who had chosen her for this role )…,
” but then neither are there many males in the same party who are “lookers” either . There aren’t too many Brad Pitts or George Clooneys knocking about to wheel out . It is just one of those quirks of fate but it not exactly an asset for a public figure.”…
…which can hardly be construed as being both misogynistic and misandrist at the very same time now can it? It is simple observation . It is not actually to do with whether they are male or female or from one political party or another at all or whether their sex makes them incapable in my view of doing a specific job. The same initial observation could be made by yourself. Do you really think that appearances have no sway in everyday life? Who do you initially focus on in a room full of strangers?Is it what you consider the most”attractive ” person (in your eyes)or not?
The very strange thing, from my perspective is that in response ,our various commentators have focussed soley on the scene-setting and the oddness of the entire “performance” , albeit with a few personal insults ,rather than the absurdity and omissions in the actual content of the speech.
As for the other candidates male ,female or otherwise, gio .If there is an observation to make at any time I will always try to cast a cold artistic eye rather than glamourise something that isn’t actually there.
paddy
Quite obviously I made the remark about Caral to illustrate how your comments open the door to similar stuff, and yes it was not very nice but I did refrain from saying what I actually thought of her picture.
You have singled out Arlene and assessed her physical appearance for no obvious reason and such silliness only encourages the male dominated political sphere to hold women to different standards
Perhaps it is yourself you should be taking a good look at!
Let’s get something straight here, gio .Everyone in politics is fair game .I am not a misogynist and have never been one. How could I be with four sisters and three daughters ? I know what women have to deal with and I also know what men have to deal with too.I know the tricks that both male and females use in their lives and the different ways they are treated by each other . All things being equal we have two leaders of the top two parties here who are females so they have done very well. They have managed to get to the very top.They have crashed through that glass ceiling and are as good and sometimes better than their male counterparts in that field.So bully for them! By the look of things they can look after themselves and in that respect are great female role -models. Be under no illusion that they are being scrutinised by both males and more especially by females , for any little flaws.That is the way people are.
I’m the kind of guy who would support the suffragettes, an equality agenda for all ,no matter race , colour ,creed , sex or any damn thing, but if I draw or paint a picture or write a story ,I am inclined to look at real life.It is what is in front of me.If some woman-hating or man -hating individual wants to do otherwise it is their own black business and it is nothing to do with me .It is their own misunderstanding of reality. To me it is only relevant as to whether the individual is capable of the job or not. If the deluded macho-men out there think it is not a woman’s place for women to be in armies, in industry, even in armies, I say catch yourself on!
That said , if you are telling me that I can’t comment on Edwin Poot’s ears , a little white spot on Colum Eastwood’s beard that I find distracting , Arlene’s sour -looking eyes , or even the fact that the new Sinn Fein leader Michelle O’Neill could be a bit more subtle with the make-up box, then forget it . I write what I want to .In that respect politics is exactly like show-business and every politician is only as good as their last performance.Again …if men and women are to be judged as equals , they have to be prepared to take the same criticisms across the board and be strong enough to deal with it.I really think that the satirical programme “Spitting Images ” ,should make a comeback.It is the perfect time.
paddy
Even misogynists have Mums you know.
I don’t really think you are misogynist though, I think you are just not quite as enlightened as me!
The point is you didn’t discuss Edwins ears or any male figure ,you felt it relevant to discuss Arlene’s appearance.
Spitting image had a go at all politicians regardless of gender.
Of course you can write what you want but I presume you are putting it up there to be commented on, so I will comment on it as I please.
Oh I bow to your enlightened truths gio but i do believe that I have also discussed Mr Poots ears in past narratives , but there are about 400 plus of those assorted stories to wade through to find the references. I’ve certainly mentioned “The Beard” before now .In fact there is the distinct possibility that it got an entire whole story of its own , such adistraction was it ……oh did I mention my two lovely little grand-daughters?
I don’t think Little Pengally was hit with the ugly stick either.
Pengelley
You should have gone to Specsavers!
Beauty is skin deep MT, Arlene’s true ugliness is on the inside
Yep Jessica , I think MT missed the subtlety there too ..
She did bleach her hair,(or color it at least), and the makeup sits thick MT, with little effect as can be seen. Just as a matter of interest, did the blogger not denigrate men even more than women in this blog? Misogyny, really?
You’ve got it ,Gearoid…!!! You get the five star prize for understanding what you read and not something that you only think you read …good lad.
Gearóid
He made avery general comment about men in the DUP but he specifically detailed Arlene’s shortcomings.
Now I don’t really think paddy is mysoginist, as he seems quite nice mostly, but describing someone as asexual and as stripping herself of ‘any last vestiges of femininity’ is not nice and irrelevant and unnecessary.
But no doubt paddy will turn his withering satire on some other candidates in the next few days.
Truth is that Harry would be a misogynist if he was allowed. Me,myself,personally,like, I’m very fond of the rugged pioneer type. I don’t care if she looks like 1970’s Linda Ronstadt, she is still arrogant,anti republican and unreconstructedly bigoted. And that’s before I start on her politics.
You’d enjoy Robert Crumb’s favourite type then, fiosrach…
Had to google Robert Crumb. Not big into the comic cuts, y’see. LR and the Stone Poneys does it for me.
Yes fiosrach , Mr Crumb liked his women to be strong and have a little substance to them.Linda and the Stone Poneys was fine but Emmylou was more to my taste..
Roll on March fourth.
2037
I thought Paul Clark went extremely easy on her last night.
Paddy
Are you having some kind of episode?
No Dominic.I’m simply trying to explain what real “misogny” really entails. There seems to be some confusion between the idea of misogny and the idea empirical truth in relation to Arlene Foster ….I know ….mad or what?!!!
It’s strange to comment on a person’s appearance in a political context when you should be commenting on his/her mindset. Unless you’re a comedy sketch writer for some satirical show.
…and you don’t think that we are ….and have been…. in the middle of an absurdist comedy for years , Dominic? Take a hard look at how politics are played out in front of our eyes here.We’re only getting to the latest chapter It’s all grist for the mill ,surely?
I don’t see the humour in it, just the bloody waste of opportunities to make this place better for all and the lack of maturity in our politics which is maddening.
Well if you didn’t develop a strong sense of humour and of the absurd you’d go mad in this place, Dominic.It is the only way to survive in the face of it.I find the humour in the darkest of corners. It is my version of whistling past the political graveyard.
Don’t antagonise him,Harry, or he’ll take you for one of his take away specials. You know,what he calls humour.
I not that cheap fiosrach, in my politics or my fare
Just in your attempts at toilet humour. Not sure what your politics are …. SDLP?