Comment Central - Times Online - WBLG

Top 100 most powerful women in the world

Another list worthy of your attention - Forbes Magazine's 100 most powerful women in the world. You can see the whole list here, but the top 10 are:

1. Angela Merkel: Chancellor, Germany
2. Wu Yi: Vice Premier, China
3. Ho Ching: Chief executive, Temasek Holdings (Singapore)
4. Condoleezza Rice: US Secretary of State
5. Indra K. Nooyi: Chairman, chief executive, PepsiCo
6. Sonia Gandhi: President of Congress Party (India)
7. Cynthia Carroll: Chief executive, Anglo American (UK)
8. Patricia A. Woertz: Chairman, Archer Daniels Midland
9. Irene Rosenfeld: Chairman, chief executive, Kraft Foods
10. Patricia Russo: Chief executive, Alcatel-Lucent

By my count there are 7 Brits in the list. And the Queen (23rd) comes in higher than Hillary Clinton (25th). Maybe not for long though.

Murad Ahmed

Abortion: finding the right words

Cardinal Keith O'Brien in his sermon against abortion and politicians who collude with the "evil trade" has sinned against the rules of politics: he's used "inflammatory" language. Worse still, the words he used carry actual meaning rather than being the stuff of Punch-&-Judy political rhetoric.

Jeremy Purvis, a Lib Dem MSP, whimpered that:

I think it’s very unfortunate that he has chosen to use extreme and provocative language, and a hectoring and bullying tone against MSPs and MPs who every day balance their own consciences against what they think are the best interests of their constituents

What does Mr Purvis think that the Cardinal should have said?

Instead of:

I urge politicians to have no truck with the evil trade of abortion. For those at Westminster this means finding means of overthrowing the legislation, which makes the killing possible. For those at Holyrood that means refusing to allow our health services to participate in the wanton killing of the innocent

Perhaps this?

The termination of foetuses is a challenging issue for all stakeholders, particularly to the womb-dependent community, and we need a partnership-based strategy to work towards the reduction of this form of inappropriate population management

If you regard abortion as murder, then it is preposterous to use the sort of milk-and-water language that one might use to attack Gordon Brown's Tax Credits to denounce abortion. It would be crazy for the Cardinal not to use black-and-white, uncompromising language to remind the members of his flock what the Church's teaching is.   

Any Catholic MP or MSP knows the Church's position on abortion, so the Cardinal's words can hardly be regarded as "hectoring". Nor can the Cardinal be said to "bullying" Catholic politicians with excommunication because those politicians should already know that, according to long-established canon law, they will have excommunicated themselves if they support pro-abortion laws. This article in First Things clearly explains the position. Go read it.

Robbie Millen

Did Margaret Thatcher bring harmony or discord?

Last night, I debated Margaret Thatcher on Newsnight with Norman Lamont and Nick Pearce, former Labour adviser and now director of the IPPR. I mention it only because Nick made a rather interesting observation.

He started by saying that Labour had taken on board many of Lady Thatcher's ideas. But then he said that on the day she took office she had stood on the steps of Number 10 and promised to bring harmony where there was discord. She had, Nick argued, failed to do that.

I have heard this argument many times before and it involves a classic error.

It is not always possible to end discord by being nice to everybody. Sometimes being nice can indeed bring harmony, but sometimes it merely makes the situation worse. In order to bring harmony you often have to face down difficult people, make clear that certain types of behaviour will not be tolerated and so on.

I think that Margaret Thatcher did bring harmony where there was discord, by taking on the vested interests and pressure groups of the left.

Is this important for any other reason than getting the history books in order? Absolutely.

The idea that being nice is the only way of producing harmony is one of the major themes of the foreign affairs debate. Whether it is correct or not could hardly matter more.

Camille Paglia on Anna Nicole Smith

How can you not warm to a woman who described Gwyneth Paltrow as:

a preening, pampered princess who's been foisted on the public by a bicoastal media cabal

Well, my favourite self-described "bisexual feminist egomaniac" (for it is Camille Paglia) is back in the blogosphere. She returns to Salon with a monthly column for her thoughts/meanderings. She can be hit and miss, but when she's good she's very good on pop culture.

Here's her take on Anna Nicole Smith:

The real problem was that the broad, Technicolor comedic films in which Smith might have thrived are no longer made - except in Bollywood. The declining, glamorous studio system that created Monroe and her imitator Mansfield is long gone. Smith had genuine talent but no place to put it. Oddly, with her aimless hejira over, she has attained permanent star status in the pictorial dynasty of doomed blond sex symbols. We're sure to go mad with the dogged omnipresence of her story, but Anna Nicole is here to stay.

Robbie Millen

Given the chance, the voters choose women. Really?

Politicalbetting.com has a novel reason for predicting a Royal victory in the French Presidential elections. He says that her gender may be critical:

Just looking at the countries of the world that have had women leaders, the UK, Germany, Ireland, New Zealand, Iceland, Sri Lanka - to name but a few, the female contenders have won the first time their electorates have had the chance of voting for a woman.

What about Kim Campbell?

Keeping a family together means committing to marriage

Iain Duncan Smith argues that cohabitation is associated with greater family breakdown. This morning I argued that he was correct.

But there are many who doubt the causality. Perhaps those couples more prone to break-up don't get married. If these less committed couples got betrothed it might increase the divorce rate, but it wouldn't reduce the rate of family breakdown.

I think this argument is wrong. There is every reason to believe that for couples of a given level of commitment, the average duration of the relationship would be increased by the act of marriage.

Why? Because of consistency and commitment.

On cereal packets, you will find competitions with a tie break answer. "I like Cereal X because..." Ever think why they do this?

The Chinese used to make prisoners of war write confessions and express support for the communist regime. Once prisoners had committed this thought to paper, they were highly likely to stick with it. Weight loss programmes use the same technique - getting clients to publicly announce their goal weight and their progress toward it.

The public announcement of commitment makes people more committed. It is one of the reasons that marriage works.

Sign of the times

We must make a bonfire of oppressive road signs. That was my conclusion after reading Thomas Catan's fascinating report into modern Spain:

In Fuenlabrada, a commuter town on the outskirts of Madrid, authorities are taking aim at other perceived symbols of male domination. The town council has decreed that half of the street signs should show a recognisably female figure. New signs at pedestrian crossings show a stick figure with a skirt and a pony tail, rather than the traditional striding man. “The idea is to change the male signs for female ones as they deteriorate,” said Rosalina Guijarro, the town’s traffic and safety councillor. “That way we will end the sexism that has existed in traffic signs.”

I wonder, though, whether the stick figure will have a shopping basket too?

Robbie Millen