Friday 5 June 2015


So... yesterday the press was alive and crawling with criticism of Alex Salmond's "behave, woman" comment directed at a Tory minister during his speech in the Commons. 

This despite the fact that it is a perfectly normal thing to say in certain parts of Scotland, and could equally have been  "behave, man", had Anna Sourface not been female.

Now, it's fair to say that Eck probably should restrict himself to speaking the Queen's English when he's in the English parliament, because Scottish expressions are likely to be misunderstood by the main stream London media. However much we are a part of this union, they don't speak our languages and they don't understand the way we say things. We should rememebr too that they a gie easy offendit!
We, however, do understand theirs, and these comments could be interpreted as anti Scottish, even if they were said in jest. 

They are not offensive to me because, honestly, even if I put a great deal of effort into it, I simply couldnt find a tiny part of me that gives a stuff about what some stuck up Tory woman from South Cambridgeshire thinks of us.  Still it's hardly the way to show respect for fellow countrymen, which is presumably what she considers us to be.

I look forward to the press making as much of that as they did with Alex.

I wonder too if, given today's announcement, following the post mortem, that Charles Kennedy's untimely and sad death was caused by haemorrhaging which in turn was brought about by long term over-consumption of alcohol, that those people who took to Twitter to blame the SNP for 'killing him', would like to issue apologies, or at least retract their tweets, and consider looking for careers outside of criminal pathology at which they are clearly not very good.


  1. I thought her 'dig' at Clement Freud was pretty woeful too. Have female Conservatives being taking lessons from Ann Coulter? Or her understudies over here?

    1. She was overall pretty woeful.

      Not a maiden speech to go down in history.

  2. Hello Tris.I don't think she does consider us to be her fellow countrymen. I doubt if some of these English tory MP's even consider ordinary English people to be their fellow countrymen. In fact, their sneering arrogance and contempt seems to cover just about the whole human race. Except of course the Americans, the big boy on the block, to whom they grovel shamelessly.

    John H.

  3. "I don't think she does consider us to be her fellow countrymen"

    Thank God for that, I wouldn't want to be associated with people like her we do have standards to uphold dontchaknow?

    1. LOL Albeit pretty low ones (given the march in Glasgow today).

  4. This slave wouldn't mind serving her though.:-)

    1. There's always one who lowers the tone :)

  5. No time for the Tory woman, but I'm going to play Devil's advocate.

    What if it was a Tory MP (eg Cameron, he has history) saying the same comment to an SNP MP? You can bet there would be a few comments! (Unless it was Mhairi Black, I think she would give back good as she got.)

    Re Charles Kennedy, the Daily Bavarian (sorry, Mail) is noting that Charles Kennedy was subject to abuse during the election campaign. So were politicians from all parties, There are always toerags sitting behind a keyboard who will attack anyone. The SNP receive as much abuse as the others, so why is this not also reported?

    There should be zero tolerance for social media abuse.

    1. Appreciate your Devil's Advocate role. I think that when Cameron said 'Calm down dear' to a Labour woman, it was supposed to be a patronising put down. I don't think that Salmond meant it like that, because it's fairly common terminology here. I wish I'd a pound for every time that I've heard "Hud yer tounge", or "wheest", or "you should be ashamed of yersel" followed by "man" or "woman". It never seems to me to be patronising... but maybe it's just where I come from.

      You're right about abuse. It would be nice if we lived in a world where people neither handed out nor deserved abuse...

      But we don't and every politician gets it.

      It may be becasue, as Mr Bruce says, they are all liars. It may be because many of them are cheats and thieves. It could be because many of them think they are "Erchy", and that they are better than us, whereas in fact every one of them is our servant!

      But the public by and large don't like and don't trust politicians.

      It's strange that, if Kennedy, who had been in politics for 30 years adn was pretty hardened, was getting more abuse than he would have expected, he didn't make any mention of it. In fact Charlie, like most politicians, had a very thick skin adn I don;t remember seeing one single slur against him, except when he asked for campaign funds becasue he said his opponent was a high flying Edinburgh lawyer with post of money... and that wasn't quite true.

      In any case, as I know from family experience, a haemorrhage of this sort, doesn't come on because someone is upset. It's the result of substance abuse over a very very long period, when the body just can;t take any more.

  6. I get that "behave......" has a less aggressive, less patronising and sort of funny meaning in scotland. Even in scotland, still a sexist culture, "behave woman" doesn't sound the same to me as "behave man".

    tho it's not as bad as "calm down dear"

    Salmond, in public, can come over as talking down to men and women - it'd be hard not to, he's a combatitive person working in a combatitive world, and he must know he's usually the sharpest and most verbally able person in the room.

    Some of this is about his total lack of the cringe. In England and in unionist Scotland he's often seen as more combatitive and patronising because they can't fkn bear it that a lower middle class scottish person is better at all this than they are, and because when he speaks to them like he expects to be treated as an equal, and like he knows his stuff, they see this as aggression and getting above himself. It drives them nuts, and he can't hide he enjoys this.

    Overall it's still more socially acceptable for a man to talk down to and dismissively to a woman.
    Everyone I know uses some kind of sexist language, Salmond will too sometimes. Nobody in WM will be given such a hard time over things like this as Salmond, so whataboutery over WM jockophobia and double standards is relevant.

    But WM politics is so male dominated, calling out any level of sexism is needed. I wish it was done with more honesty, but that's not going to happen in the UK

    1. Hi Kathleen.

      It is probably personal perceptions. I can;t see any difference between using the term "man" or "woman", but as I say, I guess it is down to who you hear saying it, and to who they are saying it.

      I think it would have been better had he not said it, and stuck to using their language. The parliament is in their country after all. We can't expect English people to understand our quirks and we should do them the courtesy of speaking their language . So he was wrong.

      I've often wondered why WM politics is so male dominated. People sometimes suggest that it's because it is so aggressive and competitive... but my experience says that women are just as aggressive and competitive as men... in other words, some are, and some aren't. I'd like to see a more representative parliament... but for all that I disapprove of positive discrimination for women, minority ethnic, disabled, different sexual orientations, religions, etc, etc.

      I'm not sure what the answer is to it.

      Perhaps we could start with stopping the old boys Eton Debating Society shouting and roaring adn introduce a little polite applause.


    2. In a sexist culture the words "man" and "woman" are loaded down with different crap, so when "man" or "woman" is used in a mild put down they'll give it different meanings.We're all doing this stuff all the time, not just with sexism. We're more likely to notice it when it affects us. I feel sick when I think of all the words we used a few decades ago, but that didn't make us bad people. In the pro Indy media that i've read, more women than men are saying it was a bit sexist. That doesn't mean we have to be right, just it's worth a think about.

      yes, women can be as aggressive and competitive as men - maybe most girls are trained to go about it in a different way.

      Just as there's double standards over what's acceptable behaviour for an english or unionist mp and an snp mp, there's double standards over what's acceptable behaviour in a man and a woman. Not many women communicate like Salmond or like Cameron. A woman who communicated the way Salmond or even like Cameron does wouldn't do too well in WM, but that's what " works" in WM. That's the set up. (Thatcher doesn't count, she was playing at being a certain kind of man)

      When I watched the GE counts, in one after another constituency all the candidates were men or there was just one woman. Those men are not all there on merit. There was no TV or other media comment on this. If there had been 4,5, or 6 women standing on the stages at all these counts, it would have been getting talked about.

      All kinds of things have been tried. We know treating everyone equally doesn't result in equality. Lots of what is done to enable equality could be framed as a kind of positive discrimination. Paying for hearing loops and the extra cost of rural services out of the big pot means difficult decision on if we can fund other needs, but it's the right thing to do. But all woman lists feels different, challenges us in a whole different way.

      I get the argument that at the moment many men are not being selected on merit, and temporary all women short lists can create the changes that will mean that if my female or male friends want to stand for election in future, they'll all have a more realistic chance of being selected on merit. But it still somehow makes me uncomfy - I can't know how much of that is internalised sexism.

      yes more clapping less bawlin at WM would be good. On the other hand, they're making our case for us

    3. shit - that post above from Ann was from Kathleen. In the real world I get called about 7 different names, and I don't mind, long as I know they mean me, but when I've not had my coffee, I get fuddled.

    4. Like, I think, many other subjects in political discussions, there is no firm answer.

      I think perhaps the point that you made above "We know treating everyone equally doesn't result in equality", is true above all because people are not equal.

      At least not if you equate equal with "being the same".

      I'm always uncomfortable with any kind of discrimination... adn I'm not even sure that there is such a thing as "positive discrimination" becasue what is positive to someone is negative to someone else.

      We need to make sure that all kinds of people... young/old, white/black, male/female, gay/straight, abled/disabled have a voice in our joke of a democracy, adn in doing that we need to be aware that people are not all the same, or indeed equal.

      Don't worry about the name. I often have no idea what day it is... Fortunately Munguin keeps me right!


  7. I emailed Lucy Frazer yesterday calling her out for her disrespectful comments on "Scots". This morning I received a reply "Thank you very much for taking the time to email me. I am ver sorry for offending you and others. I did not mean to cause any offence. I am extremely sorry for doing so. I am grateful to you for emailing me to let m know how you feel. I have a great regard for the Scots and I am sorry to have caused any upset. Kind regards, Lucy"

    1. Thanks for letting us know that Clive.

      That was nice of her.

      I'm not convinced she means it... otherwise she might have not said it. But her polite reply does suggest that, even if she thought it before, when might be a little more careful about expressing it in the future.

      Maybe Salmond would like to dress a similar apology to that Tory woman he called a woman.

  8. Juteman.
    She does have a sort of "Miss Whiplash" attractiveness about her. :-)

    John H.

    1. If only the cameras were at floor level.
      I bet she was wearing a very tight skirt, and very sharp 5" stilletos.
      I better go and have a lie down! :-)

    2. OK OK... that will do. Cold shower, Juteman.

  9. Sending the Scots into slavery on plantations is the answer to the West Lothian question? Jesus, it's deeply scary that (I assume) normal voters in England elected an 18th century mindset like this, and her guffawing colleagues behind her, to represent them.

    INDEPENDENCE is the only answer to the West Lothian question. I used to live in West Lothian, and the only question around at the time for voters in his seat was "Is that Tam Dalyell? I thought he wis deid" having seen neither hide nor hair of him since the previous election.

    I have never watched a Tory member's maiden speech before, so thanks for that. Have suddenly realised I'm missing out on a whole new comedic oeuvre.

    1. LOL Humerous... I take it Mr Dalyell was one of these MPs who thought himself a bit above having anything to do with the Hoi Polloi.

      Of course I agree that the answer to these problems is undoubtedly a two state solution. But I fear we can't expect the Tories to see it that way.

      I have to sway I've never watched a Tory maiden speech before either, so we are in the same boat. Better than a Carry On film.

  10. tris and others who fell compelled to act as apologists for the snp

    What Alex was wrong sexist and an insult . Now to consider someone else's
    insult as justification is just plain wrong although straight out of the snp cybernat
    playbook . Still it got the nats a majority in two Parliaments so why should any one
    complain even if it stinks to high heaven.

    1. Ach, belt up Niko, ya big girls blouse.

    2. I think the Tories have a majority in the English parliament Niko.

  11. If you could get that huge chip off your shoulder, you might just realise that Salmond is toxic to your cause. Just saying.

    1. He's a marmite politician.

      You'd have to be mad to think that we didn't get right up people's noses. Maybe partly for the reasons offered above by Kathleen. He's smug, no doubt... and sometimes he says stupid things. I don;t really think this was one of these times, but I know that many differ on that.

      He is also an effective communicator with a sharp intellect and he has done some great things for the country.

      So like most other politicians, he is both an asset and a liability to ...whatever cause it is you are talking about.

    2. Ah yes, Alex Salmond, the first ever SNP First Minister of Scotland, who led his party to the first outright majority in a system designed to discourage them, the man who led the largest number of elected MSPs of any party since the reconvening of parliament, who led the cause of independence from a third of the vote to 45% in a referendum, who has never lost an election in over 30 years of politics, is "toxic" to the cause. Aye, quite the liability...

      Then again, I suppose you could be forgive for thinking that the SNP went from 6 to 56 MPs and the largest percentage share of any party in Scotland's history *because* he stepped down, but these things don't happen in a vacuum.

      He isn't perfect, just like any other human being - but a liability? Pull the other one.

    3. Good points.

      On the whole I'd much rather have had him on our side than that he was on theirs.

      He may have his detractors but, let's be honest, he beats the hell out of most of the opposition.