You don't have to be like Harriet Harman to be a politically-conscious woman

I’d like to draw the attention of my readers to another blog,  ‘CONSERVATIVE WOMAN’ (I’ve done it in block capitals, as they do,  because I suspect they are trying to avoid calling it ‘Conservative Woman’ in case they put off too many conservatives, whereas ‘conservative woman’ would just look odd).

 

As always, this recommendation doesn’t imply total agreement – for instance,  this interesting piece http://conservativewoman.co.uk/2014/04/drugs-are-illegal-because-they-are-dangerous-not-dangerous-because-they-are-illegal/ about the effects of soft drug laws in the ‘draconian’ USA relies too heavily on the British Crime Survey,  and seems to assume that the drug laws in this country are in fact more effective than they are.

 

But the interesting group of women who are writing and editing this blog have set out to demonstrate a very important thing, that to be female, and interested in politics, is not automatically to be a social revolutionary.

 

Those who campaign for ‘more women in politics/the law/ boardrooms/the media etc. etc.’ don’t actually mean what they say. They only want the sort of woman who believes in the social, moral and cultural revolution. And of course socially conservative women tend to stay off the career ladder because, by their nature, they prefer using their education to perform that crucial and much-despised task, the raising of the next generation.

 

And while they weren’t looking even formerly conservative bodies which used to defend that position have been quietly taken over by the ultra-feminists.