Feminists

Morgase

Count Duckula wrote: »

Also, Margaret Thatcher was villified by the British press for being a woman, and in particular being a woman displaying "male" characteristics (ie, the ability to lead). Where a man would have been lauded for his strong style of leadership, Thatcher was called a "ballbreaker". The list goes on... for every aspect of her personality that would have been either ignored or praised in a man, she was torn apart. But of course, if she had displayed traditionally feminine facets to her personality, she would have been told she was utterly unsuitable to lead.

That goes not just for our political representatives but also in the work environment.

I used to work for an engineering company whose board of directors was almost all male. The youngest director was female and a real go-getter.

But you wouldn't believe the vitriol directed at her (behind her back of course) because she acted like a boss - she didn't put up with any nonsense, she got things done. You know, just like a director should be.

Many of my co-workers made such nasty comments about her personal appearance aswell, even though many of her male counterparts looked far less appealing.

You'd never hear any of them bitching about the male directors for acting like a boss would, or for carrying a bit of weight, but it was ok to say it about the woman.

Morgase

I agree that both Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese have done great things before holding the presidency and during, but it's more that they've made the most of the positions they hold. As has been pointed out, they are not lawmakers.

Morag

They are not law makers but as president they sign bills into law and they can send it back to be redrafted, or to have it's constitutionality checked or they can veto it. The office of president is the last set of checks and balances which is why it is important.

TaraFoxglove

Sharrow wrote: »

They are not law makers but as president they sign bills into law and they can send it back to be redrafted, or to have it's constitutionality checked or they can veto it. The office of president is the last set of checks and balances which is why it is important.

I know, but generally, they don't really do that, they just sign.

Morgase

Sharrow wrote: »

They are not law makers but as president they sign bills into law and they can send it back to be redrafted, or to have it's constitutionality checked or they can veto it. The office of president is the last set of checks and balances which is why it is important.

I genuinely thought that was more of a formality than anything else. Has it ever happened that the president does send a bill back?

TaraFoxglove

Morgase wrote: »

I genuinely thought that was more of a formality than anything else. Has it ever happened that the president does send a bill back?

It is pretty much is a formality.

Morag

It is not just a formality, it is function of the office. Yes the president has sent bills back to the supreme court for clarification on them. Even if a bill has never been sent back it is important that the option is there and that is a part of the process.

Micky Dolenz

And regardless of what people think of the office. The Mary's have used it to open doors which would have remained closed otherwise.

beeftotheheels

Sharrow wrote: »

It is not just a formality, it is function of the office. Yes the president has sent bills back to the supreme court for clarification on them. Even if a bill has never been sent back it is important that the option is there and that is a part of the process.

Not to mention that if you look at the stats in terms of numbers of bills referred to the council of State/ Supreme Court prior to the president signing them, this aspect of the role of the president was pretty much of a formality until one particular female lawyer got her grubby little mitts on the seal of office, and her successor followed her lead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_State_(Ireland)

I know that the source is wiki but I know I have seen official stats on the number of bills referred to the Council of State by the president and the number jumped hugely under Mary I and stayed relatively high under Mary II.

If anything those two women changed the office of the president making it more meaningful than it was previously, and have changed our expectation of that office as no longer just being somewhere elderly statesmen go to retire.

liah

Is the president in Ireland elected or appointed?

Micky Dolenz

liah wrote: »

Is the president in Ireland elected or appointed?

Elected by the people.

liah

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Elected by the people.

And what is the length of term?

Micky Dolenz

liah wrote: »

And what is the length of term?

7 years. 2 terms allowed.

Morag

beeftotheheels wrote: »

Not to mention that if you look at the stats in terms of numbers of bills referred to the council of State/ Supreme Court prior to the president signing them, this aspect of the role of the president was pretty much of a formality until one particular female lawyer got her grubby little mitts on the seal of office, and her successor followed her lead.

Grubby?

beeftotheheels wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_State_(Ireland)

I know that the source is wiki but I know I have seen official stats on the number of bills referred to the Council of State by the president and the number jumped hugely under Mary I and stayed relatively high under Mary II.

If anything those two women changed the office of the president making it more meaningful than it was previously, and have changed our expectation of that office as no longer just being somewhere elderly statesmen go to retire.

Given that Mary Robinson was not just a lawyer but a constitutional lawyer and that we have been over the last 30 years under go a lot of law reforum, and yes she did get her hands dirty being about change from going on the contraception train to women workers rights, to Sen. David Norris' challenge on the criminality of homosexuality.
I don't see how she was making up work or changing the role of the office you very own wiki llink shows that those who held the office before her also held and rejected bills.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_State_%28Ireland%29#Referring_of_bills


Liah the president is elected by the people, every 7 years and can only hold the office for two terms.

Count Duckula

Sharrow wrote: »

Grubby?

...

Given that Mary Robinson was not just a lawyer but a constitutional lawyer and that we have been over the last 30 years under go a lot of law reforum, and yes she did get her hands dirty being about change from going on the contraception train to women workers rights, to Sen. David Norris' challenge on the criminality of homosexuality.
I don't see how she was making up work or changing the role of the office you very own wiki llink shows that those who held the office before her also held and rejected bills.

I think you've missed the tone of beeftotheheels' post. I believe they are trying to make the point that actually your two female presidents have made great strides in taking the position of president away from a merely formal one into one of genuine relevance and importance in Irish politics - which can surely be nothing but a good thing.

beeftotheheels

Sharrow wrote: »

Grubby?
I don't see how she was making up work or changing the role of the office you very own wiki llink shows that those who held the office before her also held and rejected bills.

It was intended as praise, not criticism. The office was a rubber stamp. A human rights lawyer who had taken on the government several times as you noted was elected by the people, and changed the office by taking her obligation of protecting the constitution seriously by refusing to rubber stamp. This is a good thing, not a bad.

Grubby was a light hearted reference to her willingness to take on the "status quo", not a criticism at all.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Links234

Going back to the authors again, I'm currently reading an absolutely brilliant book by Norah Vincent called Self Made Man, where she spends a year disguised as a man. it's incredibly insightful and quite funny at times.



Only half way through it yet, but I'm definitely going to get her more recent book, Voluntary Madness.

might be of interest to some folks here

diddlybit

Cheers Links234. Read a load of reviews on that years ago, intended to buy it and then completely forgot about it! Since you brought it back into my sights, I much give it a go.

On an Irish slant and in the spirit of the thread, I'd recommend the following. Both are really good and reflect what can be acheived when women and men come together with a shared goal and achieve something.

Firstly: Nell MCafferty, A Woman to Blame: The Kerry Babies Case

And: Susan McCabe, Without Fear: 25 Years of the Rape Crisis Centre

Warning, they are both really depressing reads, but on the upside, it's also nice to see how far the country as come on women's rights.

Ambersky

In the spirit of the day and the spirit of the thread.

This is what a feminist looks like



Garret Fitzgerald a man who loved women, loved his wife and children most of all and contributed greatly to the liberalization of Ireland and the freedom of women.

"Prior to the defeat of a referendum on divorce in 1986 - a bill which FitzGerald supported, the sale of contraceptives to adults was legalised under the then government.

FitzGerald called for liberalisation of the legislation on divorce, abortion, and contraception, but it was never implemented because of traditionalist opposition. Still though, he brought us out of the dark ages and did the young people of Ireland a massive favour at the time."

mprgst78

diddlybit wrote: »

Cheers Links234. Read a load of reviews on that years ago, intended to buy it and then completely forgot about it! Since you brought it back into my sights, I much give it a go.

On an Irish slant and in the spirit of the thread, I'd recommend the following. Both are really good and reflect what can be acheived when women and men come together with a shared goal and achieve something.

Firstly: Nell MCafferty, A Woman to Blame: The Kerry Babies Case

And: Susan McCabe, Without Fear: 25 Years of the Rape Crisis Centre

Warning, they are both really depressing reads, but on the upside, it's also nice to see how far the country as come on women's rights.

I'm always careful about reading books written by authors that depend on the government for their funding. In my experience, they tend to inflate the severity of the problem in order to extract more funding.