Rake’s Progress.
Nu-Labour’s desire to infiltrate every last bastion of your private life continues unabated.
The Family and Parenting Institute, yet another government funded quango, is to be headed by the ferociously feminist Dr Katherine Rake.
Dr Rake, who will take over from the Institute’s founding chief executive Mary MacLeod, has long declared her intention is not to support parents as they are, but to revolutionise their lives.
‘We want to change not just what childcare the state provides, but who changes the nappies at home.’
Dr Rake added: ‘It is only when men are ready to share caring and work responsibilities with women that we will be able to fulfil our true potential to form equal partnerships in which we have respect, autonomy and dignity.’
Dr Rake is on record of disapproving of state support for marriage – and is now appointed – at £60,000 per year to support ‘parents and children’ by Ed Balls (note the careful avoidance of the word marriage in their mission statement).
What business is it of the state to organise who takes which role within your household? This government has a mandate from barely 5% of the population, how dare they so openly campaign against the institution of marriage which is supported by a far higher percentage of the UK population, which funds their daft agenda.
It is none of their business.
-
1
June 13, 2009 at 2:33 pm -
The culture of ‘we know best’ continues. Don’t they understand that what’s best for one isn’t necessarily best for everyone.
It’s nobodies business especially not appointees of a corrupt and unelected cabinet.
I am counting down the days to a General ‘garbage’ Collection when we can finally say goodbye to these Jack’s of one trade and Masters of none.
-
2
June 13, 2009 at 3:24 pm -
She’s very scary looking and what’s with the hair and those clothes? Yuk.
I’m so glad my kids are adults or I’d have probably been arrested by now for being a “dissident mother.”
I’d have told the multitude of “righteous” to seriously f*ck off by now!
-
3
June 13, 2009 at 3:47 pm -
‘Ang on a bit squire. What happens if the bloke is working 12 hours a day, travels for two, and arrives home totally whacked? And he needs to to keep a job and pay the bills. Turn it round, if the missus is doing the same, and he is at home, OK, he does the domestic bit. The trouble is that in reality too many couples are working too many hours to pay the bills, and the homemaking part has all gone out of the window. The Government calls this social progress and economic growth.
-
4
June 13, 2009 at 4:03 pm -
5
June 13, 2009 at 4:50 pm -
I do wish the Lefties would just stop it.
All of it.
5-a-day
Sneeze into your elbow
1 glass of wine = 4 fish fingers
Micro-chip my wheelie bin
RIPA for school catchment enforcement
CCTV
ANPR
ID cardsand on and on. At what point will they just fuck off out of our lives – well right now it feels like never.
Roll on the GE.
-
6
June 13, 2009 at 4:57 pm -
I am a man of the sixties (from 64 to 72 I was in my teens) and I saw the start of the women’s liberation movement, well renowned as ‘women’s lib.’ I was enthralled by it, burning bra’s and all that but it wasn’t till later in life that I became aware that ‘women’s lib’ had a lot more to do with their subjugation than mere breasts. I fear, these days, that a ‘militant tendency’ has taken over and does not take into account women who are satisfied with their lives in relation to men.
I have been married now for 38 years and my wife, although not a feminist in the true sense of the word, always stood up and shouted from the rafters for women not to be bullied or made subservient to people in power, men or women, either in the workplace or the home.
Wives like mine are the unsung hero’s for womens rights, not these overpaid, bigoted ‘anti men’ harridans who have gotten into power. (Yes, married women can be anti men!)
And yes, my in built bigotry got the better of me, I thought she was a lesbian too.
-
7
June 13, 2009 at 5:10 pm -
You can tell they’re pretty comfortable financially. My (ex) husband had the potential to earn more than I did, any of the jobs that I had came second place, naturally! He was on shift work most of the time so he was constantly tired and helped out when he could.
Just another example of people with so much money coming in that they lose touch!
-
8
June 13, 2009 at 5:52 pm -
Anna Raccoon,
You make reference to Dr. Rake’s opposition to state approval of marriages as if it is a bad thing. As a libertarian, you should be one of the first to back this notion. Libertarians seek to privatise as many things as feasibly possible and marriage (essentially a private, religious contract between two individuals) should follow suit – what business is such a private matter of the Government?
-
9
June 13, 2009 at 6:11 pm -
10
June 13, 2009 at 7:40 pm -
Now look, I’ve just spent an interminable amount of time topping and tailing the gooseberries from the garden for a lovely, scrummy pudding. I am in no mood to suffer fools gladly (not that I do anyway) so, who the fuck is this woman to tell me anything? Will she come and sort the next lot of gooseberries?? I doubt it!! Fuck off!
-
11
June 13, 2009 at 8:14 pm -
It’s all about Strategic Partnerships, though, isn’t it?
-
12
June 13, 2009 at 11:07 pm -
This, coupled with the attack on Home Schooling (see Times Online – ScgoolGate june 11, 2009 for more information), show that the present regime in power is trying to produce a generation of brainwashed dumb people that will do as they are told. Any independence of thought and will is something they see as rebellion and must be suppressed at all cost. Gordon and his non elected cabinet are trying to complete the communist/socialist agenda no matter what.
-
13
June 13, 2009 at 11:09 pm -
14
June 13, 2009 at 11:16 pm -
‘It is none of their business.’
i sort of agree but if some people hadn’t made some things their business would women have the vote now ? i don’t know, maybe i’m missing the point of this post.
i’ve just read this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/feb/02/gender.comment
i can’t fault it atm. -
15
June 13, 2009 at 11:36 pm -
16
June 14, 2009 at 12:08 am -
yes anna, but the quote you cite
‘‘We want to change not just what childcare the state provides, but who changes the nappies at home.’
is in relation to what she said about fawcett not about her new job. is the problem you see more to do with her being a feminist ? or that such a job exists ? because i do agree the government is messing far to much in peoples lives.
-
17
June 14, 2009 at 12:22 am -
18
June 14, 2009 at 7:05 am -
Anna
Agree entirely. Jobsworths – all is jobsworths……
Just heard how university students are going to be offered help on ‘how to look after themselves’….tra la la
I am today going to hopefully do some research into the machinations of the State. I’m off the Fawley Court which is in Foy. It is a garden, open for one day only, as part of the National Garden Scheme. Whilst there, I have been before to Foy, I will be finding out exactly what links our great and noble erm Secretary of State, First Secretary of the Proletariat, First Umpire of the Test Match, Undoubtedly Intelligent One of the So-Called Government has there.
Now, it’s not my main aim for the day, hell, I do want to enjoy myself but I’ll see what I can uncover.
ps the gooseberry crumble was truly marvellous, the scratches and scars have healed, I’ve got over the boredom and I still don’t need Katherine Rake…..although, hang on a minute, rake, garden…hmmm!
-
19
June 14, 2009 at 10:32 am -
John H Baker (F2C)
“And yes, my in built bigotry got the better of me, I thought she was a lesbian too.”Ah, but it’s not bigotry if evidence can persuade you otherwise: it’s prejudice.
Prejudice is good – it allows you to understand things quicker where a particular prejudice applies because you already have a working plan in your mind about a given subject.
It’s also called ‘wisdom.’Prejudice and discrimination are maligned by liberals and much of the Left because these habits of mind are essentially conservative on the one hand, and free from Leftist thought control (all immigration debates are racist) on the other.
Discovering that La Rake is married doesn’t in any way disprove our prejudice from her appearance and that she is a doctrinaire and humourless social Marxist feminista, as her words bear out.
-
20
June 14, 2009 at 10:46 am -
found this, and you just gotta laugh:
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/06/william-hague-on-archbishop-mandelson.html
enjoy
-
21
June 14, 2009 at 12:54 pm -
It seems to me, just another way for government to squirrel away our money, spending it on ‘wages’ for mickey mouse positions on these commitees.
Wasting money on more ‘info-mercials’ via banners in our streets,
‘eat more veg’ , ‘we’ve replaced 2000 council house windows’ ,
‘husbands help your wives’ . . . .
What utter wastes of space, they are like church fete commitees, only with bigger budgets but who actually achieve less. -
22
June 14, 2009 at 1:12 pm -
23
June 14, 2009 at 1:46 pm -
Anna you couldn’t be more right if you tried. It is not the business of government to tell me how my household should be organised. This woman wants to interfere in our private relations . she is a fascist feminazi control freak. She also says that she wants a new role for men. Men and women should decide for themselves what role they should play in society and no woman has a right to tell men how they should behave in the same way that no man should decide how women should behave.
-
24
June 15, 2009 at 11:19 am -
She looks like a nasty piece of work indeed – reminds me of the mad bitches who turned up in this ‘documentary’ that was on Pravda a while back :
Odious creeps like her may seem like a joke but these insidious marxist scum have successfully managed to get their hands on the reins of power in the last 30 years.
They need to be stopped.
-
25
June 18, 2009 at 12:09 am -
Er, yeah, the quote about ‘we want to change who changes the nappies’ relates to her work at the Fawcett Society.
Yes, people should be free to do as they wish. So why do women still get stuck with the bulk of the childcare and housework?
What’s so wrong with trying to change that?
No-one is actually going to come around and force men at gun to do their share, you know.And so you *are*, I take it, in favour of bias towards married couples by the state?
Why is it any of their business? Get the damn state out of our private lives! -
26
June 18, 2009 at 12:51 am -
I think you are preaching to the converted.
Instead of being “confrontational” read the post.
{ 26 comments… read them below or add one }