December 14, 2012
In January of this year, a British MP from the Conservative Party proposed legislation that can only be described as a HUGE step backwards. Nadine Dorries put forward a bill that would require schools to teach girls BUT NOT BOYS the value of abstaining from sex. I was appalled by this but fortunately, for my sanity, the bill was withdrawn and common sense has prevailed. The very fact that the bill was viewed as highly controversial gave me some hope that Britain is moving towards more gender equality, and also becoming a little bit more sexually positive with respect to education as well.
And then on 16 October, Ms. Dorries told a committee of MPs responsible for allocating business in the main chamber of parliament that she would be seeking a full Commons debate on abortion law in 2013, in addition to the Westminster Hall debate which took place on October 31. MPs will debate whether the abortion time limit should be cut from 24 to 20 weeks, after an application from Tory MP Nadine Dorries was successful in a Commons ballot.
They lady in question has been courting the public rather emphatically, having given an interview to the Huffington Post where she told them:
“I’m very much a feminist. I’m very pro-women… I’m the mother of three daughters.”
Really? Pro-women? How can a woman be anything other? But what on earth do her actions state other than a shocking lack of agreement to the slow steps to equality that have occurred over the years. Cutting the time limit for abortion is one thing if seen in isolation, but taken in the context of her earlier motion to teach abstinence to girls only it takes a sinister turn. What exactly is she trying to achieve? Are the young women of Britain (including her own daughters) to be sacrificed on the altar of her political ambitions?
From the looks of it, deserting her constituents made Ms. Dorrie very, very happy.
Having raised the topic of my concern around her motives recently with some of my more mainstream friends, it appears her prostitution to media attention is far worse than I knew. Some televised reality show which keeps “celebrities” in the Australian outdoors and films them eating Kangaroo testicles was also blessed with her appearance and ranting lunacy.
As an individual who doesn’t own a TV let alone watch reality shows, I am informed she was the first contestant voted off and is now waiting to know if the Conservative party will allow her to return after she was suspended due to flying to Australia during Parliament.
So we have a woman who: 1) proposed one radical bill on teaching abstinence to girls only, before hurriedly withdrawing it due to popular opinion rising against it; 2) introduced another bill on a safer, yet still controversial topic of women’s rights; 3) gives sound bites to press on “pro-women” issues; 4) left her constituents without a parliamentary representative for weeks, when she took an unapproved leave from her job; and 5) is now courting public support to be reinstated to her post – one she voluntary abandoned to fly off to another country for a television appearance – to prevent an “all-male parliament.”
How dare she? How dare this attention seeking harpy use her gender to push for re-admittance into parliament when her actions are nothing but self-serving?
~~~ and breathe ~~~
In conclusion, to our British readers – I ask you to keep your eyes on this one. She’s a worry. And to our foreign friends – take heart that all governments have their crazies.