When I grow up I want to be…….

At the beginning of the week in which we celebrated the second birthday of my daughter Emily, it was perhaps not surprising that I should be drawn to an article that ran with the byline “Young women desperately need role models – and what the media gives them is heiresses, sex objects, surgery addicts and emotional wrecks” www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/oct/31/role-models-for-young-women.

This intelligent article by Kira Cochrane reminded me, not for the first time, of the importance of the foundation stones that we lay for our children when they are very young and the huge responsibility that is if you care for their well-being on so many levels.

The article also took me to the campaign website “PinkStinks” www.pinkstinks.co.uk that proclaims “Pinkstinks is a campaign and social enterprise that challenges the culture of pink which invades every aspect of girls' lives” and is illustrated with a contribution from a father of two small girls, aged 3 years and 8 months who says he is frustrated by his “constant struggle to find toys and, more importantly, literature, beyond the realms of princesses and fairies (all of whom seem only interested in finding a prince, wearing dresses and getting married)”. Burrow down a bit further and you’ll find aims that are less alarmist and ones that broadly speaking I’m happy to subscribe to:

· Inspire, motivate and enthuse girls about the possibilities and opportunities open to them

· Improve girls’ self esteem and confidence, raise their ambitions and ultimately improve their life chances

· To challenge the 'culture of pink' which is based on beauty over brains and to provide an alternative

I say that Pinkstinks’ headlines are alarmist not to be dismissive – I recognise that the cultural manifestation of “pink” in this context exists and should be challenged but based on my experience of two-years of fatherhood I don’t consider that my daughters life has been invaded yet nor do I find it a struggle to find toys or books that provide her with a variety of perspectives that stimulate her rapidly developing imagination. Pink is not banned in our household, nor are princesses - though they seldom visit in person. Occasionally I wear a pink shirt to work although I have only developed the confidence to do this in the last ten years. One of my daughter’s favourite TV programmes is “Peppa Pig” who, as with most pigs in storyland, happens to be pink. Peppa inhabits a complex world that on the face of it is stereotypical – her father works and drives the car and her Grandma bakes cookies but scratch the surface a bit and there are more reassuring anomalies -Grandpa Pig occasionally takes his turn in the kitchen to bake potatoes (although he tends to overdo it a bit) and don’t get me started on Miss Rabbit who in this age of austerity manages to occupy at least 12 jobs including bus driver, dental nurse, museum attendant and helicopter pilot . Allow me to remove my tongue from my cheek….

When my wife was expecting my daughter we set about decorating the spare room ready for its new inhabitant. We had chosen not to know the sex of our baby out of a strange mixture of fear and excitement and opted to paint the room a neutral colour. This decision was as much influenced by design gurus who suggest your house is easier to sell if it’s painted neutrally (although I doubt we’ll be looking to sell our house before Emily leaves school and probably only then to pay for her university education).

Before Emily was born we became addicted to Winnie The Pooh – safe, neutral, good old Pooh Bear of universal appeal (despite the fact that he is implicitly male as is his owner Christopher Robin and Piglet (Pink again) and all of his friends in the 100 Acre Wood except Kanga) but the original stories are harmless surely – oh wait, I’ve just seen a posting on Facebook that reads “Winnie The Pooh was based on psychological problems - Winnie had an eating disorder, Piglet had generalized anxiety, Eeyore had major depression, & Tigger had ADHD" – what have we done? Ok, I’m drifting into facetiousness, a place I didn’t intend to go but my point is that blanket bans are not necessary if you introduce balance. Peppa Pig’s daddy may drive the car but Emily knows that her daddy doesn’t but he makes up for it by cooking damn fine curries, stews and roast dinners (mummy can do these things too but our domestic life is constructed on a division of labour that clearly plays to our respective strengths).

At the age of two my daughter is not lacking in confidence, she instinctively shies away from the unknown whilst embracing with gusto and enthusiasm the familiar and friendly. She clearly aims to wrap her daddy around each of her fingers as she learns to count them but she doesn’t always get her own way and she doesn’t always like that. Emily will always know that she is a beautiful person but hopefully she will always know that applies to her as a whole person and has nothing to do with the colour of her hair or the clothes that she wears. In her playtime she has a dolls house that is visited by a farmer and his or her tractor and she will sit and feed her babies only to jump up and roar like a lion and walk like a hyena. Balanced and bonny or damaged and damned? The former I hope.

I have no doubt that as my daughter gets older the challenge of providing her with a balanced diet of social and cultural influences will increase. I worry about peer pressure kicking in and do not relish having to deal with the “I wants” and having to explain why she can’t have (this phenomenon to date has been restricted to demands for cherries, ice cream and repeat showings of “The Lion King” – oh well, Hakuna Matata!). In terms of role models I am in the fortunate position of having to look no further than my niece Cherie who is also Emily’s godmother, chief babysitter, and friend. Cherie is industrious, the first member of my family to go to university, someone who spurns credit and saves for the things she wants in life, generous of spirit and there when we need her, she can dress to impress but is striking because of her caring and compassionate nature. If a fraction of this rubs off on Emily I will be a happy man. But my daughter will need more and so I will think carefully not about what we ban from her young life but about the things, the people and the places we introduce her to as she gets older.

When I began this narrative I wrote the words “When I grow up I want to be” largely as a stimulus to myself. I cannot begin to think how my daughter will finish that sentence as she progresses through her childhood but I hope to be able to inform her ambitions by stimulating her imagination and encouraging her education. My mother used to say to me that my parents allowed us to make our own minds up, to make our own choices, and to make our own mistakes. I’m all for freedom but I can’t help thinking that can all too easily become a cop out. I want my daughter to be brave, courageous and adventurous but not reckless or foolhardy. I don’t want to stand in her way but I want to be by her side. I spent much of my preteens as a member of the Woodcraft Folk www.woodcraft.org.uk and I still remember the creed “For these things shall I strive: A keen eye, A seeing hand, A body that fails not, An arm that is strong and willing to serve, A mind that yearns to understand, A spirit that searches for truth and loves the silent places, A heart that is courageous and that bears goodwill to all men”. I heard, although I don’t know if it’s true that the creed was dropped or replaced as it wasn’t seen to be inclusive but the words served me well (and didn’t promote a non-inclusive attitude) and I hope that thirst for life and love for life is something I can encourage in Emily as she grows up.

I do hope that at a point when it will mean something to her Emily will have more life enriching choices or influences paraded to her by media than the uber rich bean pole x-factored trash that fortunately hasn’t yet infiltrated CBeebies or Milkshake. If those choices aren’t there then I accept the responsibility for working with her to discover where they are hidden. Good role models, male and female, are a scarcity – especially living ones. Before I’d read Kira Cochrane’s article I hadn’t given it that much conscious thought and I appreciated the prod. I think I’m less likely to signpost her to the Pinkstinks website and more inclined to suggest she visits the website of The Ellen MacArthur Foundation www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org that encourages young people to re-think, to re-design and build a sustainable future. I might mention Justice Williams the youngest black woman in Britain to get an MBE for her voluntary work in Birmingham where she is involved in social enterprise businesses that aims to help young people and the fact is that I almost certainly wouldn’t have given articles on either of these much attention or consideration if I hadn’t of had the kick in the consciousness from Kira. Thank you.

Love your neighbour – unless they’re Fascists

"On 7 July 2005, four men carrying rucksacks full of explosives parted at London's King's Cross station and headed off in a different direction to wreak devastation on London's transport network. The result was 52 morning commuters dead and more than 700 injured, many seriously. In the five years since, there has been no public inquiry, nor inquest. Until now…"

For many people this week’s news headlines will have brought back myriad memories and mixed emotions. Like 9/11 in the USA, 7/7 will always strike in me a chord of sadness, anger, fear and love and hope.

“Er, what?” you say “Love and hope – where’d that come from?” Well my point is without love and hope, without working towards love and hope, we are left with bitterness and hatred and these are the foundation stones on which acts of atrocity like 7/7 and 9/11 are built.

On Monday a friend posted a link to the BBC news report into the 7/7 inquest. Within minutes one of his associates had posted a comment that began with the words “Bloody Islamic religious fanatic scum”. Do I understand why people respond with such venom? Yes. Do I condone it? No, and the reason why is the issue of fairness. It was not fair or just that hundreds and thousands of people died or were injured in 9/11 or 7/7 but nor is it fair that whole countries, communities or groups and individuals should be singled out and demonized because of the cowardly acts of a few.

I felt equally incensed when, in response to a posting about the tragic death of UK aid worker Linda Norgrove in Afghanistan, a comrade’s comment read she “may have been killed by her American 'rescuers'???!! Those f******* trigger-happy Yanks have struck again. How can a nation so dangerous - even to its 'friends' - be allowed to wield so much power?”. Such comments strike like a hammer on wedges of division and unfairly label all Americans as bad.

Am I innocent of such intolerance and prejudice? Honestly? No, of course I’m not. I will put my hands up to ranting “Bloody Tories” or “Damned Fib Dems” that in this context is just as bad. I could defend myself and say that, when I single out Conservatives or Liberals I’m actually attacking their ideology rather than individuals but, although there is some truth in that, it’s a bit of a weaselly way to try and wriggle out of my own behaviour. The fact is that from a psychological perspective our social structure and upbringing places us in “in-groups” with others with whom we identify and feel comfortable and from that cosy position we are inclined to view with distain those in other groups. For some, and I would argue a great many, it is easy for distain to spill over and become fear and loathing. But here’s the rub, recognizing this is step one towards doing something constructive about it. We are malleable human beings, particularly in our youth and you can teach old dogs new ways of behaviour too.

The Bible tells us to love our neighbours and also to love our enemies and without getting into a big theological debate, there’s something important that comes through to me in this – it’s more profitable in terms of soul enrichment to love than it is to hate. That doesn’t mean it’s easy, but who said life was easy?

As an internationalist I appreciate the diverse cultures in the world. One of the founding fathers of the USA, Thomas Paine said “My country is the world, all men are my brethren and my religion is to do good" and I would echo that. So are there any exceptions? Are there any people who live and breathe that I would not recognise as “my brethren”? Yes, they go by many names but whatever they call themselves they are Fascists. They believe in the total annihilation of whole communities, freedoms and democratic rights. They promote racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, homophobia and the vilification of refugees and asylum seekers. They aim to expel their neighbours on the basis of race or colour, to destroy trade unions, to promote violence and hatred and to eliminate basic democratic rights. I can strive to love my neighbour, I can even work to tolerate Tories despite my ideological differences, and on a social level aim to treat everybody with the respect and tolerance that a civil society depends upon, but I’m afraid that Fascism should be resisted wherever and whenever it raises its ugly head.

For that reason I’m joining with Union leaders, MPs and campaigners in supporting the national demonstration against racism, fascism and Islamophobia on Saturday 6 November in central London. You can too – visit http://uaf.org.uk/2010/09/add-your-support-for-6-nov-antiracist-demo/ Love and hope is a powerful weapon against hatred and fear.

Albert Einstein said “The world is a dangerous place to live in; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

Cruel Conservatism - the thin edge of the wedge

So the Conservative Conference is over and what have we seen? A foretaste of the vicious cuts that will be inflicted on the country later this month. They had nothing to celebrate – their Election victory was a hollow one and for the country it is already proving harmful.

So what did they do? They announced the beginning of the dismantling of the welfare state and universal benefits starting, naturally if you’re a Conservative, with the weakest and most vulnerable in society – our children.

Yvette Cooper MP, Labour's Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, summed things up nicely when she said: “Instead of boosting jobs and growth, the government is making families with children pay more.

“We support child benefit for all children and all families. Of course there are difficult choices to make and we need more welfare reform, but it's better to get the economy growing faster and raise more tax from the banks than to cut support for children in middle income families.

"Whatever people's income, it is families with children who are paying most -- through cuts in child tax credit, maternity allowance, child benefit and housing benefit. So much for David Cameron's promise of the most family friendly government ever: instead they are hitting hard at families who want to get on."

The deficit is huge and needs to be tackled, there’s no denying that but it needs to be put into context. The recklessness of the banks put us on the verge of a full blown depression and the responsible actions of the Labour Government prevented us tipping over into the abyss. That left the country with major debts but the alternative (unless you’re David Cameron) was unthinkable. It’s the biggest deficit since World War II and there in lies a tale. The deficit we built up by the end of World War II was finally paid off in 2006 – more than 50 years later. During that time we built a National Health Service which, until starved of cash by Thatcher, used to be the envy of the world; we built New Towns and communities; we put computers into schools and ok, maybe the trains didn’t always run on time (and sometimes they didn’t run at all!) but our world kept on turning. So, the Conservatives' rush to clear the deficit is ignorant of history and surely driven by ideology rather than necessity.

I have to be honest I think Labour’s plans to halve the deficit in 5 years are over ambitious with our economy so precarious. For me, short term investment for long term gain is the name of the game. Look at housing for example – in Harlow where I live there are over 6,000 people on the waiting list with about 380 properties let to new tenants a year. On that basis, if the list stayed static and no new homes were built it would take over 16 years to clear. So a programme of new house building would make economic and social sense, it’s worked before and it can again. I’m reluctant to see the green open spaces in and around my town diminish but if it’s a choice between that and my neighbours going homeless and hungry – well, what would you do?

In 3 years time my daughter will start school. If the ConDem coalition and its draconian approach lasts, what kind of schooling awaits her? These are real concerns that I know I am not alone in sharing. I fear that Child Benefit will be the thin edge of a very large wedge; “Building for Schools” has already been scrapped and Sure Start is under threat. During the election when Labour predicted such things the Tories said we were lying and scaremongering – we were not, we were desperately trying to remind people that Tory ideology prevents them from doing anything other than looking after themselves and the capitalist system on which they depend.

We are witnessing Cruel Conservatism at its worse but there is an alternative – join the Labour Party and fight for the future – visit www.labour.org.uk.

Thanks for reading.