LJ, do me a favor? Please?
Jun. 23rd, 2010 03:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
harborshoreI swear, my cup runneth over. Apparently it's crappy sexism week!
So in order to make me a little less mad, would you help me out? It involves going to a Swedish website and voting. The website in question is Dagens Nyheter, which is our biggest daily newspaper. They currently have a poll up that asks why readers believe Sweden hasn't yet had a female prime minister. The three options to choose from are, from left to right: Diskriminering (discrimination), Tillfälligheter (coincidence), and Brist på kompetens (Lack of competence).
Currently the last one is winning. By a lot. Right, obviously it's because no female politician is qualified enough that our parties have had something like three or four female leaders through the years (if you discount the Green Party, because they have it written into their rules that they have to be led by a man and a woman) and that the Social Democrats haven't had one until now, and the Moderates (the biggest conservative party) never have. Obviously that's because the women aren't qualified enough.
In order to provide a little more context, the leader of the Social Democrats has been through all manners of hell because she's a woman. I can't even tell you how many fucking articles has been written about her handbag and her lack of firm leadership and--okay, breathing.
So if you would, go to the website above, scroll down just a little bit until you see the radio buttons, and clicking on the one to the left. I mean, if you're willing to take my word for it that discrimination is most likely the primary cause of this. There's no submit button or anything, just click on the radio button and your vote will get tallied. I don't expect that I have a big enough readership to actually win, but perhaps we could even out the numbers? I would really appreciate it.
PS: I know it's just an internet poll. But it's at a major newspaper and it's kind of reflective of how many people in my country seem to not think women are qualified enough to lead us. It's been a tiresome election year.
So in order to make me a little less mad, would you help me out? It involves going to a Swedish website and voting. The website in question is Dagens Nyheter, which is our biggest daily newspaper. They currently have a poll up that asks why readers believe Sweden hasn't yet had a female prime minister. The three options to choose from are, from left to right: Diskriminering (discrimination), Tillfälligheter (coincidence), and Brist på kompetens (Lack of competence).
Currently the last one is winning. By a lot. Right, obviously it's because no female politician is qualified enough that our parties have had something like three or four female leaders through the years (if you discount the Green Party, because they have it written into their rules that they have to be led by a man and a woman) and that the Social Democrats haven't had one until now, and the Moderates (the biggest conservative party) never have. Obviously that's because the women aren't qualified enough.
In order to provide a little more context, the leader of the Social Democrats has been through all manners of hell because she's a woman. I can't even tell you how many fucking articles has been written about her handbag and her lack of firm leadership and--okay, breathing.
So if you would, go to the website above, scroll down just a little bit until you see the radio buttons, and clicking on the one to the left. I mean, if you're willing to take my word for it that discrimination is most likely the primary cause of this. There's no submit button or anything, just click on the radio button and your vote will get tallied. I don't expect that I have a big enough readership to actually win, but perhaps we could even out the numbers? I would really appreciate it.
PS: I know it's just an internet poll. But it's at a major newspaper and it's kind of reflective of how many people in my country seem to not think women are qualified enough to lead us. It's been a tiresome election year.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 01:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 02:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 02:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 02:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 01:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 02:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 02:22 pm (UTC)brb liking my entire flist to this!
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 03:01 pm (UTC)<333333333333333 times a million.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 06:20 pm (UTC)<3333333333333333333 times infinity.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 08:04 pm (UTC)the numbers make me SO UNHAPPY. who ARE THESE IDIOTS?
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 08:45 pm (UTC)THEY ARE MOTHERFUCKING MORONS, THAT'S WHO! Errr. PARDON MY UNCONTROLLABLE RAGE.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 02:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 03:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 04:11 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 04:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 04:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 05:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 06:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 08:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 06:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 08:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 07:47 pm (UTC)That is a good rule to have!
I'll vote. >.<. If only because someone should be encouraged towards having a female PM. I wondered (out loud, that was my mistake) why there were no women running for PM this election over here? My friends - who are all guys - just looked and me and said, "Because none of the party leaders are women." *facepalm* So not the point, guys. (And yet, I guess it kind of was, but not in the way they meant it.) And one of the smart-mouths decided to add that the candidates hadn't been announced yet, so how did I know there weren't going to be any independent female runners?
I'm pretty sure there weren't any.
I've heard that people don't want another femal PM because Thatcher was the last one. Yeah, well, Thatcher was also the last (at least, significant) Conservative PM, and guess what we have right now? -__-'
I kind of really wish our major newspapers did stuff like this. But then, our major newspapers are owned by Rupert Murdoch, and you do not want to know what The Sun ran the day before the election...
♥
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 08:07 pm (UTC)But dude, at least you've HAD a female PM. We never have. Ever.
...wait, do you? It's a fucking sexist poll, I wouldn't wish that on anyone else. The one semi-decent thing they've done is finally running an article on why we haven't had a female PM--but they've also spent MONTHS talking about how people don't think she's enough of a strong leader. THANKS MUCH, DOUCHEBAGS.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 08:55 pm (UTC)It's more like...I wish they would acknowledge that there is even a POSSIBILITY of a woman doing well in politics (Harriet Harman does not count, for various reasons), aside from "Iron Maggie" (if you live anywhere in the UK except Scotland /o\). Which, I realise this paper isn't either? But I think the fact you and I are talking about it, in separate countries - on the other side of the sea, even - proves that it's got people talking, even if only in small quantities.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-24 07:16 am (UTC)No, man, I totally get that Thatcher's not who you'd want. For sure. It's just that none of our more conservative parties seem to have even contemplated a female leader, which is tiresome. The Centrist party has one, and she's fabulous, but the Moderates and the Christian Democrats never have. ETA: And I wouldn't vote for them ANYWAY, but the Social Democrats have also never had a female leader before.
Well, they sort of have to acknowledge that there's a possibility of a woman doing well, since she's been chosen to be the leader of the Social Democrats and they're the biggest party--it's basically a result of a party-internal election that went something like: "oh well we're in trouble we can try having a woman leader now"--but the majority of the coverage on her is like "People think Sahlin is a weak leader" "oooh look at her purse" etc. Which, this poll is very unfortunately phrased. And par for the course. I realize I explained it badly--essentially the debate is about her, because of her position.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 10:01 pm (UTC)I'm shamefully uninformed about Finnish politics, but I think our second female prime minister, Mari Kiviniemi, was appointed to the position two days ago and that makes me a little bit proud of this country right now.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-24 07:18 am (UTC)Yes she was! And I think that's awesome. Plus, it's your second one. Also, you beat us by like fourteen years in the whole votes for women thing. *nods*
(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-23 11:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-24 09:45 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-24 01:43 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-06-24 09:46 am (UTC)