Conference turris::womannotes-v3

        I think she was a great Prime Minister.
        
        Dan

    
    i thought they'd have to carry her out.
    
    i think it's a shame labour is such a bunch of flakes.
    
    i don't suppose john major has a chance.
    

    Could some one tell me, in 20 words or less, why she resigned?  I'm
    just not politically aware in a big way....
    
    -Jody
    
    -Jody

    
    in a parliamentary system, the prime minister is the leader of the
    party with the most seats in the parliament. the conservative party
    is currently the party with the most seats in the house of commons,
    so the leader of the conservatives is prime minister. last week, the
    conservatives had a party meeting to select their leader. usually,
    this would be a rubber-stamp for the sitting leader unless s/he
    wished to leave office. in this case, however, because of thatcher's
    growing unpopularity (on a number of issues, including the european
    community, the 'community charge' and, yes, her personality) she was
    challenged for party leadership by ex-minister michael heseltine. she 
    won a majority of votes, but not enough to win by conservative party 
    rules. rather than face a possible long drawn-out battle, that might
    have jeapordized conservative party chances at the next election, she 
    resigned. the conservatives will now elect a new leader who will become 
    prime minister. 
    

    I really liked the grace and humor with which she handled her
    appearance just prior to her resignation, before Parliament.
    
    I thought that many of us could learn from her -- that we needn't
    crumble or get defensive before opposition, and we won't afterall break
    under verbal onslaughts.
    
    Do you know if she often showed such grace & humor before Parliament?
    
    Briana
    

    It gave me the difference between Communism and Democracy.
    
    Margaret Thatcher could resigned for the best benefit of her party and
    the Country, but Prime Minister of PRC WON'T...
    
    Too bad...
    
    
    

    She didn't resign soon enough!!
    
    In less than 20 words: Margaret Thatcher resigned because she did
    not want to face the imminent affrontary of being voted out of office
    by her own party.  (okay it's slightly more than 20 words)
    
    Doesn't this show, as well as the resignation by certain members
    of her cabinet, the lack of faith her followers have/had in her.
    
    She has done absolutely nothing for Scotland except for bring most
    families down nearer the poverty line.  In my town alot of businesses
    that have been ongoing since my mother was a little girl have recently
    closed, why? - because they now cannot afford to pay the poll tax
    for their businesses.
    
    You ask any young person in Scotland who they would vote for in
    the next general election and guaranteed it won't be the Tories
    - they'd rather vote SNP, Labour or even Monster Raving Looney party
    before even thinking about anything else.
    
    It's the best thing she has ever done for us.
    
    Tracy
    
    (p.s. Sorry if I raved on a bit - but this happens to be a touchy
    subject this side of the border)
                                    

    
    Thoughts on her resignation?
    About time too!
    
    She had to go if the Conservatives were to have a chance of winning the
    next election. She was not a popular leader towards the end.
    
    The second ballot is today. 
    Place your bets now! 
    Major, Heseltine or Hurd?
    
    'gail

    <--(.9)
    
    I'll have to transcribe "Wha'll tak the ball fae Maggie Thatcher".
    
    						=therealmaggie

    And another thing.. Maggie screwed up the Ireland situation!
    
    REK
    
    Pull the brits out and let them settle it themselves...

    The "Ireland situation" as you so delightfully phrase it has been
    running for several hundred years and I fear that the last eleven are
    about par for the course. I don't think that you could blame Maggie for
    that one.

    Your suggestion to "Pull the brits out" is an interesting one and I am
    surprised that no one has ever thought it up before.

    One question, do you know who insisted that the British Army be brought
    into the mess in the first place?

    Jamie.

    I felt uncomfortable when I read the title of this topic
    and realized that it concerned Margaret Thatcher.  Labelling
    this "the Maggie note" seems belittling to a mature woman who
    is head of state of a major nation.  Whether you love her or hate
    her, there is no question that Mrs Thatcher has acquired and used
    great power.  In the United States, powerful persons are not usually 
    called only by a nickname unless the author intends a put-down, or 
    the person is an entertainer.
    
    I believe that it is fair comment for an individual noter to
    use any label or nickname for a politician.   Free speech and
    all that.  I notice however, that recent topics referred to John 
    Silber, and Victor Kiam, not Johnny and Vic.  George Bush has been 
    called many things recently in this file, but not Georgie.  I ask 
    myself, is this another example of not taking a woman quite as 
    seriously as a man.
    
    Besides, I was greatly disappointed to find out that the topic
    was not about our very own Maggie, Ms Tarbet!
    
    Pat

    You should hear what they call her opposite number Neil Kinnock.

    In the UK the gutter press has nick names for all the politicians and
    most of the minor royalty. As this hits both sexes equally I do not see
    it in any way sexist.

    Jamie.

     Re:13 DOn;t you think its time for the Brits to get out and let the
    Irish finish it one way or another?
    
    REK
    
    No, I don't know who put the English there in the first place but I
    will remember who pulled them out....

    
    RE .14
    
    Margaret Thatcher has been referred to as "Maggie", "the Iron Lady",
    and other such nicknames so frequently and for so long by the
    press, media and other famous British politicians that they
    have lost (at least for me) any belittling flavour. 
    
    I have just as much respect for "Maggie" as I do for "Mrs/Margaret 
    Thatcher"....
    
    'gail

    Re .14 - Would you prefer us calling her Herr Thatchler ? or the
    Maggon ?
    
    Making fun of politicians is an age old ( well since the advent of
    Punch 100+ yrs ago anyway ) UK tradition. The UK has a tradition of 
    being irreverent with its own quite unique brand of humour. For example, 
    calling the Queen "Brenda" is not likely to get you the order of the boot,
    let alone a handbagging. She might crown you tho'
    

    -Shantanu 

    
    .14 -
    
    Couldn't agree more. I too, when I saw the title, thought this was
    going to be about one of our moderators!
    
    But then, women in the public eye are always being referred to by their
    first names, or nicknames. 'Cause they're perceived kind of the way
    children are, you know, and one can simply assume that sort of intimacy
    with them... It's a way, as you say, of not taking them as seriously as
    one would if they were, say, men.
    
    Maybe we should be thankful she's not called "Muggsie"? 
    
    Or is she,
    
    Dorie   ;-)

    .14
    
    I agree.  It's so commonplace to nickname women; I'm thinking of
    the EV! buttons that were distributed while Evelyn Murphy was running
    for government.  Did those buttons help or hurt her image?
    
    At any rate, I heard that one reason she resigned is that she was
    'with Bush' on this war thing with Iraq ('war thing' -- what a nice
    way to state it); and 'decided to resign' ; ie. figured out it would
    be better for her to get out of the Iraqi mess...
    
    Maia
    

    re .19, and .20 -
    
    Well, you're welcome to believe what you like, but in this case, its
    got nothing to do with treating women as children. Like I've said,
    there are other pejorative names for her, as there are for other
    politicians, which use any humourous link available. E.G. - Neil
    Kinnock is known as Pinnochio, as Pillock.
    Jim Callaghan was known as Sunny Jim... and so on.
    
    Are you guys persuaded now ?
    
    -Shantanu
                                              

    
    RE .19, .20
    
    I take your point regarding the way that the use of a wmn's christian
    name, or a nickname, is often used to reduce the status or the value
    of the achievements of the wmn referred to.
    
    However, regarding Maggie, that honestly isn't the case.
    We Brits do it to all our politicians/PMs/public figures.
    
    Re: The Queen (Ma'am)
    "Brenda"? Nah. 'Liz, maybe....
    
    And Buckingham Palace = "Buck House"
    And Prince Charles = "Charlie-boy", "that royal loonie"
    And the Princess Royal = "the horsey one ("isn't she divorced yet?
                              Oops, sorry - that's Margaret")"
    And Phillip = "a.k.a. The Greek"
    Mark Phillips = "Fog" (his old nickname at school)
    
    'gail
    

    
    It just occured to me that maybe women are nicknamed because they are
    perceived as more accessible.
    
    CQ

    
    Every senior British politician since Cromwell has had at least two
    nicknames (one used by supporters, one by denigrators).
    
    The longer they stay in office the more nicknames they acquire.
    
    The Rt. Hon Maggie has been in office longer than most...
    
    /. Ian .\ 

    
    I agree that men and women are equally likely to get nick names (both
    affectionate and pejorative), but it strikes me that we (the public)
    and the media are more likely to use the informal address for women
    even in formal settings than we are for men.  In the Mass. governor's
    race, for example, candidates adressed John Silber as "Dr. Silber" 
    (He's a PHD, not an MD), and they called (Lt. Gov.) Evelyn Murphy, 
    "Evelyn" (when the appropriate title is actually "Governor," I believe.  
    I think we are more likely to use men's last names and women's first names,
    and I think it both stems from and perpetuates the way in which we take 
    women less seriously than men.  I do it myself quite a lot, and I appreciate
    it when folks see it and point it out to me.
    
    Justine

    
    ah, ethnicity -- now I understand.
    
    This might be what happens in the colonies, but here in Britain
    politicians nicknames and even given names are only used in the most
    informal of circumstances and - for example - no TV interviewer would
    dream of calling the Rt. Hon. Margaret T. anything but "Prime Minister"
    when speaking to her or refering to her asymptotically in a news
    broadcast.
    
    Yes the popular press - usually those rags espousing the opposition -
    use the nickname, but then again they would do so regardless of who, or
    what sex, the person in power was.
    
    /. Ian .\

>    Re: The Queen (Ma'am)
>    "Brenda"? Nah. 'Liz, maybe....
    
    Calling her Brenda has been around for at least 10 years. See countless
    back issues of "Private Eye". Perhaps its only anti-royalists ( all 2 of
    them :-) ) who take a perverse delight in mocking the monarch is such a
    manner.
    
    -Shantanu

    
    Shantanu - I can honestly say this is the first time I've seen Her
    Majesty referred to in such a disgustingly improper manner...
    
    Brenda indeed!
    
    /. Ian .\

    RE: .26
    
    	I agree. Unfortunately I catch myself doing it too.
    
    	But the flip side of it can also be said - Men are perceived as 
    	being less 'human' and less approachable than women. Men are more
    	likely to be called big bad tyrant "Herr Doktor" and women a
    	friendlier, 'one of us' types of names.
    
    	Not sure which is better. The people I respect I tend to use
    	nice friendly names for. Otherwise I push the formal, sometimes
    	even to an insult, ie, Herr Doktor this and Herr Doktor that.
    
    	-Erik

    
    RE .28
    
    Shantanu...
    Of *course* one knows that's from the Eye.
    However, one doesn't need to lead one's U.S. colleagues to the very
    lowest common denominator, does one?
    In our opinion, 'Liz is quite irreverent enough...
    ;-)
    
    'gail
    (And yes, that's the Royal "we" we've reverted to here ;-) ;-)
    (And yes, I know there are lower denominators than P.E., but really!)
    
    

    er....care to educate a poor, backwoods colonist?
    
    	Why "Brenda"?
    
    E Grace

    
    .23 -
    
    "christian name"?
    
    er, um, sorry, but...which "ism" is this?!
    
    D.
    
    

    
    "Christian Name" - a forename given in the Christian service of
    baptism.
    
    Both the Rt. Hon. Margaret H. Thatcher and Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth
    II are indisputedly Christian and received their names in Christian
    Baptism.
    
    Names so given in Britain are protected by law and may not be changed
    or relinquished, whether by choice or by "deed poll", though you may
    freely change your family name (surname).
    
    /. Ian .\ 

    
    There are a number of instances of the Christian religion being
    protected by law, but since the disestablishment of the Church it is
    not strictly speaking a State Religion.
    
    Moslems would apparently like to see a repeal of the blasphemy law
    (which technically makes the Koran blasphemous since it denies the
    deity-status of Christ) however - of course - no muslem has yet been
    prosecuted for blasphemy for possessing a Koran.
    
    Most of the laws (apart from the Blasphemy law) that protect Christian
    values are rather quaint hangovers from the past. One law intended to
    be pro-Christian - the Lord's Day Observance Act - is actually so
    phrased that all religions benefit (it requires shops to shut on their
    owner's weekly religious day, but doesn;t specify what day that must
    be).
        
    /. Ian .\

Ian -

Do you know, off hand, just what the WitchCraft Laws of england were?

They were finally repealed many years ago, but I think I remember someone trying
to get them reinstated recently.

Grins,

clark.

ps - from what I've heard/gathered, these laws were far from "Quaint"...

    re:  .14
    
    You say:
    
    "In the United States, powerful persons are not usually called only by
    a nickname unless the author intends a put-down, . . ."
    
    What about:
    
    IKE
    JFK (and John-John)
    LBJ (and Lady Bird)
    
    Of course there was Tricky-Dicky and Ronnie Rayguns but that's a
    different story . . . 
    

    re: The Irish view of Margaret Thatcher and England in general.
    
    dunno why but I have the lyrics to "Black Boys on Mopeds" running
    around in my head...
    
    "Margaret Thatcher on TV,
    shocked by the deaths in Beijing,
    I don't know why she should be offended,
    the same orders are given by her..."
    
    and
    
    "England's the mythical land of Madam Geoge and roses,
    It's the home of police who kill black boys on mopeds..."
                                                                   
    (I have absolutely no opinions on the subject.)
    
    D!

    If this is the Thatcher note, as opposed to the Northern Ireland note,
    or the nicknames for public figures note, then it seems as good a place
    as any for an expatriate Brit to state an opinion:
    
    Not having to observe her callous policies at close quarters for the
    second half of her time as PM has been one of the best things about
    being out of the UK.
    
    	Andrew.

    .35 -
    
    "Christian name - a forename given in the Christian service of baptism"
    - no doubt this is accurate. However, I have a problem with the use of
    the term to mean "first name" in the generic sense, as I believe was
    the case here and as I have heard elsewhere (and as my dictionary comes
    very close to giving as an alternate definition -- "a name given at
    birth or baptism").
    
    Suppose one isn't a Christian? Then it could be just a mite irritating to 
    have one's first name called one's "Christian name"!
    
    D.
         

    Calling someone by their first name, actually can mean two different
    things depending on context (U.S. culture at least).
    
    Mrs. Thatcher denotes high status and power but also distance.
    Maggie denotes low status and power but also intimacy.
    
    It is true that, in the U.S. at least, male power figures are almost never
    refered to by first name unless they are being put down.  Initials like
    LBJ, and JFK don't carry the connotation of a put down.  Ike is an
    exception.  Probably because that its how his "men" refered to him
    in the army and it stuck.  In this case it meant he was approachable
    and liked.  A derogatory term for your CO would be "old man".
    
    Mary
    

    
>    Mrs. Thatcher denotes high status and power but also distance.
>    Maggie denotes low status and power but also intimacy.
    
 
	This may be the case in the US, but not in the UK.

	The power and status is with the individual, not in the name.

	Maggie is definately a powerful individual.

	Big_H

The "Christian name" string refered to The Rt. Hon M.H. Thatcher, and Her 
Majesty Queen Elizabeth II - both of whom *are* Christians.

I am quite aware of the difference between "Christian Name" and "First Name" 
(also of course the wrong phrase - it should be forename, since one can only 
have 1 first name)

I have two Christian names: 'Ian' and 'Frederic'

My wife has one Christian name ('Ann' - she adopted it at baptism), plus a 
Thai forename ('Usa' meaning dawn) and a Mandarin Chinese name meaning 'fragrant 
blossum' which off hand I cannot remember how to spell (its on her birth 
certificate but she doesn't use it).

If you want to play semantics, at least pick on somebody who doesn't live with
the reality on a daily basis.

---

In Britain political figures almost always are known familiarly by the 
appelations used when they were at school. Now it is the practice to refer to
public (ie fee paying) schoolboys by their surname (as in 'Heseltine'), and
public schoolgirls by their first name (as in Margaret or a diminutive 
thereof). Mr. Major is a difficult one since he went to a plebeian grammar 
school, where he was probably known as Jack or something totally arcane...

---

As for the witchcraft laws: yes somewhere at home I do have a listing - I know 
the "practice of the religion knwon as "The Old Religion"" was illegal - which
could have gotten me into deep trouble at one time. Certain specific practices
were illegal also...

/. Ian .\

    On a personal note,
    
    just last week I was waiting to see my doctor who is one of the
    chief internists and an assistant professor of medicine at UMASS
    Medical.  When I told the receptionist that I was there to see
    Dr. F., she said, 'oh well, I'll see if Nancy is ready for you yet.'
    Nancy?
    
    grr.
    Maia
    

    
    .45
    
    Far be it from me to pick on you. However, if you will look back at the
    reply in this string in which the term "christian name" was used (.23), 
    you will see that it was in a totally generic sense. I only point it
    out as a way of illustrating how different types of chauvinism - in
    this case, religious chauvinism - get so embedded in our language we 
    don't even question them.
    
    Dorian (Pagan name  ;-)  )
    

    Ian:
    was Benjamin the 'christian' name or the 'given' name for 
    Disraeli (sp?)?
    

>    I only point it
>    out as a way of illustrating how different types of chauvinism - in
>    this case, religious chauvinism - get so embedded in our language we 
>    don't even question them.
    
    I dunno Dorian; I think that's only true for certain names.  I think
    a lot of people would question statements like "His Christian name is
    Mohammed" or "His Christian name is Shlomo".

	Sharon (a given name, but Hebrew in origin).

    .49 -
    
    Well, good! The more questioning, the better... 
    
    Speaking for myself, this is just the sort of thing I've spent most of
    my life *not* questioning. (E.g., when I learned in school that "the
    masculine pronoun includes women as well as men"  I just thought, oh well, 
    fine, why not?) Now that I'm in my cronehood and questioning everything, 
    I'm getting into a lot of trouble it seems...   :-)
    
    D.          
    

    This title change from Maggie to Thatcher reminds me of a joke. Seems that 
    the local populace complained to the CO about the British soldiers 
    patrolling Fortress Falklands. Apparently the squaddies were calling
    the populace "Bennies", which the Falklanders took umbrage at. Having
    understood why "Bennies" was objectionable  ( Benny was the name of a
    dim-witted character from a well-known UK soap ), the CO issued an
    edict banning the use of "Benny" forthwith...
    
    So the squaddies took to using the term "Stills". The rationale :
    
    Even if they couldn't call them Bennies, they were _still_ Bennies.
    
    -Shantanu  

    
    re .48:
    
    Since Benjamin Disraeli was the well known first of a non-Christian MP
    (and as such could not take the oath on a Christian Bible - it took a
    change in the law to allow him to take his seat) it is obvious that his
    forename is a given or registered forename.
    
    Incidentally I merely picked up on the fact that at the point of
    objection the examples being quoted were of British women with
    baptismal names with the legally protected status of "Christian Names"
    - not everybody in Britain is a Christian and not all forenames in
    Britain are Christain names...
    
    /. Eaoin .\
    (original given name - not a Christain name...)

    
    Shantanu ... very droll.
    
    Re the Rt. Hon. Margaret H. Thatcher...
    
    Using the appellation "Maggie" is not entirely polite, but "Mrs.
    Thatcher" is quite simply *wrong* - reasoning: 'Mrs' is a title (or
    more accurately a 'style'- actually of course a modern form of the
    original 'mistress', but that form hasn't been used since Shakespeare's
    day). However as a former member of the Privy Council she has another
    style -- 'Right Honourable', and this takes precedence over 'mrs' hence
    using the lesser style is *more* of an insult than using a friendly
    diminutive of her first name...
    
    /. Ian .\