/
    Skip to main content
    Advertisement

    As Jeremy Corbyn was anointed leader, not one female voice was heard

    Suzanne Moore
    Suzanne Moore
    The new brocialism cares deeply about women’s issues of course – just not enough to elect an actual woman
    Tom Watson and Jeremy Corbyn
    Tom Watson, deputy Labour leader, and Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA
    Welcome to the future comrades. To the brotherhood that will sweep to power with its true and pure socialism. Women, know your limits! Don’t fret: you can help. You may already have helped. You may have been a caretaker for the party like Harriet Harman and have received a sparse smattering of applause from the brothers today. Well done.
    You may have stood for leader or deputy leader and lost. Again: well done, ladies. Jeremy Corbyn will include you, and consult you on equality. He is a feminist. Let joy be unconfined.
    The new brocialism cares deeply about women’s issues of course – just not enough to elect an actual woman. They don’t need to, because good lefties speak for all us. They don’t even notice gender. This can be the only explanation for that gobsmacking meeting today in which Jeremy Corbyn was anointed leader and not one woman’s voice was heard. Not even in that retro “Here’s my lovely assistant” way. No woman announced anything. Men announced the result – Iain McNicol, Labour’s general secretary, and Jim Kennedy, chair of Labour’s national executive committee – and that result was that men had won.
    It’s Dismaland alright. The excitement of hearing what some more middle-aged white guys think the future entails means I shan’t be guzzling beta-blockers after all. I think my blood pressure will be just fine. Sadiq Khan at least breaks that mould. What remains mortifying mortifying, though, is the way that Labour now appear to have dispensed with even the token woman. Banging on about gender parity, or even trying to look like those you represent, has been consigned to the same bin as Blairism. It’s been taken care of by those who care deeply in theory. Just not in practice.
    The breath of fresh air that blew through the general election debates, when Natalie Bennett, Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon took to the stage, seemed to signal something radical. Now, in England, every major party apart from the Greens is led by a bloke. The message is clear. The result, even on the left, is tone deafness, with daft discussions on women-only carriages or Burnham’s meanderings about the mythical time, in some far-off future, when a woman may finally lead Labour.
    Those for whom Corbyn represents an unprecedented and radical part of the left pushing itself to the fore may feel comfortable enough in all-male company not to challenge this monoculture. For, indeed, it might mean that some guys – good guys – would have to step aside. The prize – socialism, any time soon – is so big that we cannot focus on single issues like “women”. Labour people have told me this repeatedly. I don’t see pay, education, caring, health, violence, and representation in all its forms, as a single issue, but then I am just a girl of course.
    Not one woman’s voice was heard today. Not one. So congratulate yourselves, guys, on this new era, on this new way of doing politics. Some of us, unfortunately, are still waiting …

    comments (414)

    Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
    This discussion is closed for comments.
    We’re doing some maintenance right now. You can still read comments, but please come back later to add your own.
    Commenting has been disabled for this account (why?)
    1 2 3 4 … 13 next
    Loading comments… Trouble loading?
    • 1 2
      You do not speak for me Suzanne and you are completley wrong! My voice was very much heard today in a labour party that has the potential to actually represent my views at last. I voted for JC and not for any of the women standing because they do not represent my values I wanted a socialist principled leader not some power mad tory lite who only cares about her own job in westminster.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      The problem is Labour promoted female neoliberals. People are rejecting neoliberal dogma.
      I'm sure principled Labour supporters are out there who are women and they'll get a chance fight for a seat in Parliament.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      A new low even for Suzanne Moore. A disgrace to feminism.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      And still the Guardian continues its anti-Corbyn rant...Corbyn appealed to male & female voters hence he won with a huge majority. It is not his fault that the two female candidates didn't appeal to the electorate (male or female) - between them only got 21% of the vote
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      It does annoy me when people crow about there being no *insert whoever there's a lack of here* in any situation.
      In this case, if a female had been a credible and popular choice then the female would've been elected. Clearly, neither of the women in the Labour leadership race were deemed right for the party by the party.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      The excitement of hearing what some more middle-aged white guys think...
      Maybe if you dropped the use of skin colour (and age and gender) as a criticism, people might be more interested in what you have to say.
      Have a look at how well the BNP's doing (clue; they consist of a handful of saddoes) and ask yourself how interesting is it, in 2015, to judge people adversely based on their skin colour?
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      I found in life that women are very money orientated and this is not compatible with left views....they are gatherers and do want excess...
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      There were plenty of women on the ballot paper. None of them got enough votes to win.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      I don't actually think the results were significantly influenced by the presence or otherwise of willies... I mean, unless you're arguing that classical socialism is a function of the Y chromosome.
      Reply |
    • 4 5
      Now you're just looking for something to get all indignant about, aren't you Suzanne? Big fucking yaaaaawn from me -- one of your worst yet.
      Reply |
    • 3 4
      The worst kind of blinkered tokenism. Where were the socialist candidates on the ballot, Suzanne?
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      Patriarchal conspiracy, innit.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      More women support Corbyn than do men. Tragically, many women voted for Thatcher in the '80s (while most men voted for Labour, even in radical '83) - is this what Moore is advocating, vote for a woman even if she's a right-wing Tory? Bizarre...
      Reply |
    • This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
    • 2 3
      Suzanne, this is a ridiculous argument. There were two women in the leadership race and they lost because they didn't get enough votes. That said, I'm a woman and JC's flirting with radical Islam scares me. It really is misguided, ignorant BS and this paper has been doing it for years.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      So Thatcher was a more progressive and liberal politician than Tony Benn because she had a vagina. It doesn't matter what the candidates stand for, what their policies are...it only matters they look good on some liberal wet-dream campaign poster.
      This is feeble.
      Reply |
    • 4 5
      This article is superficial nonsense. Were any of the candidates offering a return to genuine Labour values of social justice and equality, were, for example, a Katy Clark actually on the ballot rather than two female Blairites, we might be looking at a different result.
      Despite Yvette Cooper's shallow claims, being a woman in and of itself does not make you a radical. Margaret Thatcher is the best proof of this.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      For the record, I would love to have had the opportunity to vote for Barbara Castle, and it's a shame Glenda Jackson has never sought higher office.
      Reply |
    • 3 4
      Pathetic special pleading used to attack Corbyn once again. He is going to appoint 50% women to the Cabinet. He'll ensure more women are selected as MPs. Harriet Harman has just been caretaker leader of the party. The BBC interviewed about 6 people at the end of their results programme, all New Labour critics of Corbyn, two women including Yvette Cooper. People voted for policies, not gender. Women who stood on a radical agenda would do well. Watson was chosen as a strong pair of hands to keep a fractious party together. I voted for Eagle, for what it's worth. As for white - an Asian has been elected as London mayor, and 90% of the population are white. As for middle-aged, ageism is illegal in employment, or is the Guardian for discriminating against older workers? As for middle class, most politicians are, as are the media and Ms Moore. Pots and kettles...
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      You can't simply give the job to one of the women available simply because they exist, and especially not when the female candidates policies didn't match up with the wants of the public. What use is electing a female leader that no one wants? just to say you have a female leader? that worked out so well for Thatcher. You saw the opinion results after various debates, the women performed abysmally along with Burnham. Also - "daft discussions on women-only carriages " that were brought up by women! Corbyn merely stated he would discuss/consider it.
      We have a queen who is staunchly silent on womens issues, what makes you think a political leader would fair any better? Hilary Clinton has a terrible record with women's issues despite the work she tries to do, tries to push as progressive - yet a lot of people think she's the best one for the job when she's even more conservative than Obama!
      Sadly the only women worthy of party leadership or prime minister are involved with the Green Party, and sadly I don't think we'll ever see Caroline Lucas given the chance she deserves.
      Corbyn, right now, is the right one for the job.
      Reply |
    • 6 7
      The women that stood were shit. The membership, including lots of women, voted for the two least-shit candidates.
      Get over yourself.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      Suzanne Moore conveniently ignores the fact that amongst Corbyn's campaign pledges was a commitment to appoint a 50% female shadow cabinet. Perhaps she can't decide whether that would be progress or patronage? No doubt she will let us know when the names emerge. And what does she say to the many thousands of women who voted for Corbyn and Watson (or any of the other male candidates)?
      Reply |
    • 3 4
      Suzanna writes as though men were locking women out of an all-male club, as though women were not members of the Labour party or did not have an equal vote with men. If these women had voted for the female candidates in sufficient numbers, at least one of them would have been elected. But actually, men and women are not locked in some mortal combat with each other, and women, just like men, vote using their brains rather than tribally on gender or other lines. I'm a gay man, but I didn't vote for Ben Bradshaw. See how that works? I didn't give my first preference to any of the women candidates, but that is because I disagree with their politics, or, in the case of Tom Watson, I thought he was the best candidate. That's democracy, Suzanne, you should look it up.
      One candidate who positively turned me off was Yvette Cooper, who referred to public transport as "boys toys", as though only men use it, and invited people to vote for her because she is a woman, as though that alone automatically made her the best candidate. That is so insulting to 100+ years of the feminist struggle for women to be valued on their individual merits rather than judged on their gender; a struggle to which Cooper's contribution could be written on the back of a postage stamp.Did Obama tell people to vote for him because he is black and it's time America had a black president? No, he allowed people to judge him on his merits as a person and a politician, and even predominantly white Iowa voted for him.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      I am usually quick off the mark to call out male dominance, but I have to say that if you have two women in the running, and both are heavily favoured in the party with plenty of political muscle supporting them, then it's a bit much to complain if they don't win. I'm also concerned that you've not really listened to Jeremy Corbyn's position on feminism. He's right on, sister, he really is. His position on women's pay, their vulnerability to violence from partners, the burden of unpaid work they undertake in society, was laid out early in his campaign and in clear, unambiguous language. I trust him to forward feminist cause more than I trust Cooper, who seemed to afraid to take a firm position, and certainly more than Kendall, who is too young and too privileged to really see feminism clearly. (To be fair, I'm assuming that last one, and I'm happy to back down if someone wants to prove me wrong). The railway carriage thing is a total furphy and you should check that source. He does not agree with it, he put it forward as a number of suggestions women have made to him. Yup, would have been nice to see a Labour party with some women on the stage, but Corbyn is about as feminist as you can get. Now let's get behind him.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      ...when Natalie Bennett, Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon took to the stage, seemed to signal something radical. Now, in England, every major party apart from the Greens is led by a bloke.
      What do you mean 'now' Natale Bennet never was the laeder of a major party and neither Leanne Wood or Nicola Sturgeon were ever leaders of a party in England.
      Reply |
    1 2 3 4 … 13 next
     
    SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
    SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
    desktop
    0%
     
    10%
     
    20%
     
    30%
     
    40%
     
    50%
     
    60%
     
    70%
     
    80%
     
    90%
     
    100%