Behind every great man…

Mar 15 • Featured • 756 Views • 11 Comments on Behind every great man…

Have you ever voted for someone because you liked their partner? No? Me either.

Which is why it’s beyond me why Samantha Cameron, Sarah Brown and Miriam Gonzalez Durantez (Mrs Clegg) are being touted as the ‘secret weapons’ of the main political party leaders.

Personally I’m getting fed up with the way they’ve decided that we can be manipulated into voting for the men if we identify with their wives and see more of the 'real men' they're married to. It's beyond patronising. Their husbands and their colleagues know mums are important in this election – but for the life of them they can’t work out how to make us vote for them.

I don’t care how messy the party leaders are at home, or how devoted they are to their families. Because it’s still policies that matter, not taste in music or their lack of domesticity. The idea we would vote for any of the three main political party leaders because we identify with their partners is laughably quaint and woefully misguided. It’s like saying President Obama was elected because his wife wore some rather stylish wrap dresses.

Unless they’re putting something through on expenses we should know about, personally I’d prefer it if MPs’ partners stayed in the background. They’re trying to distract us from the real issues with smoke and mirrors at the moment. They forget we’re smarter than that.

written by Liz Jarvis


Related Posts

11 Responses to Behind every great man…

  1. Natalie says:

    Amen! Well said! It’s incredibly patronising this whole ‘behind every man’ type campaign. This is not a vote to see who should be family man of the year in Heat/OK/or whatever magazine – it’s a general election. The whole thing creeps me out. It’s incredibly contrived and is yet another example of them making dumb assumptions about women because I’m pretty sure that none of this idiocy is aimed at men. ‘Secret weapons’ – I think the missiles have been turned back on themselves.

  2. TheMadHouse says:

    I am going to do a post about this, as it is making me so angry that any poletician could even think that I was so shallow. Arggggggggggggggg

  3. Brit In Bosnia says:

    BabyRambles did a post on this today as well – I wrote a long comment there. But the summary was something along the lines of ‘stop patronising me, just because I’m a mother does not mean that I can’t see beyond the issues that effect parents – most of the policies politicians have effect me, and I can’t stand that they don’t seem to know that I know that.’ Couldn’t give a **** about their wives. Really couldn’t. Oh starting to get quite cross now. Need to go and make myself a cup of tea.

  4. Emily O says:

    Good post, I agree. I was going to mention the wivesin my post too but decided it was already long enough. I was reading about this yesterday, I don’t identify with the wives because I know that the image they portray to the public is a very carefully constructed one put together by PRs and spin doctors. And I’d much rather see a woman leading a political party than some wife wheeled out at election time.

  5. sam says:

    I absolutely agree – what makes them think that their voters are quite so fickle?? Borders on offensive…

  6. Vic @ says:

    I really don’t care what these politicians wives look like or how much of a family man each is. They’re aiming to run the country, not father my children (thank god!). It would be great if the parties could focus on the issues at hand instead of trying to win our votes with irrelevant matters but I guess half of this is a popularity campaign and not necessarily and argument as to the greatest policies. It’s difficult to see through all the sparkles they’re dressing themselves up with but we’re going to have to do it!

  7. Expat Mum says:

    Hmmm. Not sure it bothers me, although at the end of the day it’s policies and strategies that count. Having just weathered the last US election, I was quite interested in what Michelle Obama had to say because I was sick and tired of Laura Bush not being totally disgusted at what her husband was up to. Perhaps more importantly where spouses are concerned, is the damage they can do. John Kerry lost his chance in part, it is alleged, because his wife Teresa Heinz, was seen as a loose canon. (She was just being European and speaking her mind, but Americans didn’t like that. Or perhaps it was the Eurpean part.)

  8. YummyNo1 says:

    I was working on a similar post myself – but you have managed to put it much more eloquently than I could ever hope to! I honestly couldn’t agree more – great post x

  9. Trackback from uberVU – social comments Social comments and analytics for this post

  10. Bev says:

    I’m in total agreement in the ‘behind every great man etc’ but I just don’t need to see it. And in most case the ‘woman’ behind the ‘great man’ quietly gets on with it without the help of stylists and PR gurus etc. Everyone can put on a happy front for the camera and great, show a bit of background – just for those interested of course! – but why can’t they just get on with the job in hand – as said by everyone, we want to know what they are going to do to lift our country not what they do on weekends etc. Get on with it guys, leave the family out of your politics – give the rest of the female population the same importance you put upon the way your own wife is presented, rant rant

  11. grit says:

    yeah. i need to see samcam for real before i sit up and take notice – like shouting at the kids, picking her nose, and choosing yesterday’s knickers from the laundry basket.


« »