There aren't enough women attracted to politics to make this a fair question.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Though that could explain why politicians currently get so little done, of course...

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Got it in one. ;-}

(Truthfully, I think it has to do with "primary caregiver" status defaulting to mostly mothers and the fact that a career in politics assumes that you have someone looking after the homefront while you gallivant off into the sunset to schmooze)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Is it that they are not attracted to it, or that it is too much of an old boy's club?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Both. It's not set up to be attractive for women, unless they don't have children, or young children at any rate. The media gets more personal with women's lives, the hours are ridiculous, the power politics aren't for the faint of heart.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I look forward to the days of two mothers being Prime Minister on a time-share basis. They could even be from opposing parties, it'd be ace!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Not gonna happen, unless we kick your sorry masculine behinds to the global curb.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I liked your journal a lot more when it had content in it.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Alas, I fear the "Age of Content" of my journal may be over.

I don't think I have anything left I want to say, only ways to say it.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

man, if content were required to keep a journal, I'd have zero readers! you know, instead of the four I have now.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Now is the winter of our dis-content.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Shouldn't this be number 3?

Shoot, I still have to get that recipe for you.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

As I explained to joranj the other day, it's not that sort of series.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

What, you expect me to read all the comments?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

If there's any good stuff on my journal these days, that's where you'll find it, in the repartee. As has already been pointed out today, actively nutritional content is no longer provided.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

So are you indexing these entries, by Fibonacci numbers or something?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Grr, I thought it would take until at least #5 or #8 for someone to spot it. You've ruined everything.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Oh, and I here I was thinking that you had just mis-numbered your second post and decided to start numbering normally from there.

I don't suppose you've read The Curious Incident of the Dog during the Night-time?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I have indeed. It confirmed many of my prejudices against the mathematical brain...

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

We're not all autistic you know! Just the majority of us...

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

False. In politics if you want anything, don't ask.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

But I've been not asking for all sorts of cool stuff for years now - where is it?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Have you been doing it in politics?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Everything we do is politics. ESPECIALLY apathy.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I misspoke. I meant to say "Have you been not doing it in politics?". Of course, if everything that we don't do is also politics, then politics just got a whole heap more interesting.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I hereby quote William Jefferson Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States: "I did not have sex with that woman." If he can be not doing it in politics, so can I.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Work through it, you'll be fine.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I am trying to make a sequitur out of this.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Will you be chalant when you do?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Verlaine: speaking sense on the internet since 2002.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

verlaine? speaking sense? I was unaware the snowball fight in hell had escalated to such an extent.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

There were glaringly missing "nons" in the first two posts of this thread; I couldn't possibly comment on the third.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Consider that the source of the quote was a woman famed for doing quite a lot, but not what people asked her to do...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I think it's a bloody disgrace when Conservatives actually do things. Surely their role - there's a clue to this in their party name - is just to shuffle paper around in such a way that everything stays exactly the same as it ever was, and pay themselves handsomely for their time and effort.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Sometimes you have to be revolutionary to keep things staying the same.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Of course the nature of a "revolution" is that once it's over things should have come 360 degrees back round to the point where they started from. Or that's my understanding of the word anyway.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I'd go with false. In politics, if you want something done you don't ask anyone, you bribe someone who's in a position to get it done. And that's not often a woman, is it?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Hmm, but perhaps the bribee is only bribable because he's got a wife indoors who's been badgering him for a new set of curtains. I mean, most politicians make a great show of their marriages, don't they? I think they only *became* politicians because of those marriages. Why would a carefree bachelor spend all day in a sweaty parliament building being jeered at when he could be out having fun instead?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

It sounds good but doesn't stand up to much analysis.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Not unlike Thatcher herself, it might be said.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

on the basis of my experience I would say that its true.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

although that doesn't mean that getting something done is always a good thing....

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)