Vitriol poured on Carrie and Priti is pure misogyny
IT seems so long ago that Theresa May was prime minister. I wonder if you can remember all those coruscating headlines about her husband, Philip? “No 10 braces for an ‘explosive stunt’ after ‘Prince Nut Nuts’ gives coup de grace.” The “mad King will destroy the court”. “Theresa’s man trouble”. Philip’s skill in “inflaming the PM’s passions” has directly influenced policy at No 10.
You don’t remember them? Of course you don’t, because none of them are real.
No one ever suggested that Philip was somehow out of control, or an unelected, unaccountable consort who was the real power behind the throne.
But versions of all those headlines, with a small but vital change, were indeed published. The difference was in the gender – because they were based on those written about Carrie Symonds, the Prime Minister’s fiancée.
According to the reports, Ms Symonds is a domineering shrew who is running amok.
“Dominic Cummings’ friends say the ‘mad Queen will destroy the court”’, runs one headline, alongside versions of the others already quoted.
“How Boris’s… ‘lad gang’ clashed with Carrie and her well-heeled inner-circle in Downing Street’s brutal civil war”, is also there, along with “Boris’s women trouble” about the supposed girl gang causing mayhem, led by Ms Symonds.
ONE big name columnist has portrayed Boris Johnson as under the cosh from his domineering partner, manipulating him into doing her bidding, “firing his mates and shaping his policies in order to pacify his fiancée”.
Even the esteemed Financial Times has been at it, with one writer informing readers that Carrie’s skill in “inflaming the PM’s passions” has led to her influence over government policy. On Saturday, one newspaper headlined its “latest revelations” with the inevitable pun: “Carrie On Plotting.”
Let’s be clear what this is: misogyny, pure and simple. It’s an age-old story, and it’s alive and kicking today: the Lady Macbeth figure who pushes their weak husband around.
And it is always based solely on hearsay.
It’s back with a vengeance this week, as we are told that the scheming Ms Symonds has attacked two senior civil servants to whom she has taken a dislike for standing in her way.
And, of course, those civil servants are both women – because the story is so much the better when it’s a cat fight.
These reports have been around since Ms Symonds moved in to No 10, and are all variations on the same theme: that she is a pushy, strident harridan with strong views who abuses her position to impose her will on her fiancé. Sometimes that means determining policy, sometimes hiring her buddies and firing advisers who aren’t in her gang.
The reason Ms Symonds has attracted such vitriol is that she clearly does have her own views and her own competence, having been a highly placed political adviser and the Conservative Party’s head of press before her relationship with Mr Johnson, as well as an accomplished conservationist.
And to Neanderthal minds, a strong woman is, by definition, up to no good – especially one engaged to the Prime Minister.
QUITE apart from the deep-seated misogyny at work here, it’s also a ludicrous portrayal of the PM – as if he is some pathetic, weak fool with no ideas of his own.
I don’t know what Mr Johnson and Ms Symonds talk about, but it would be bizarre if they didn’t talk shop. And why wouldn’t they, like any couple – all the more so given her background? The idea this is some terrible scandal and that it means she is running the show is no more than the product of deeply sexist thinking.
But it’s not just Ms Symonds who is subjected to such bilge. Any powerful woman faces the same sniping.Take Priti Patel.
The Home Secretary has one of the most difficult jobs in government.
Unlike her recent predecessors, Ms Patel is determined to speak for the silent majority who are fed up with the status quo, and who see criminals, malefactors and the anti-social repeatedly cocking a snook at the rest of society. That alone would guarantee a mauling from the chattering classes.
But her gender adds an entirely new dimension, with the Home Secretary attacked as shrill, aggressive, and – yes – stupid, because she is a strong woman with views that aren’t seen as acceptable by some.
It is all so depressing. As a society we have made huge strides towards equality on so many levels. But every so often, what has been buried erupts. And the victims are always women.
‘The idea it means she runs the show is no more than deeply sexist thinking’