As the case of Merkel proves nicely, it matters who shows what kind of emotion, and how frequent the display is.
As somebody known for a cool head and pragmatism, Merkel’s tears indeed came as a surprise, making it credible that they weren’t a trick or strategy. Other politicians who regularly act irrationally or throw choleric fits (a few contemporary examples would come to mind) cannot rely on such an “authentic emotion” excuse …
Then again, Churchill also cried regularly, but it was known he was easily moved, so his contemporaries didn’t view it as a trick either.
The only female ruler getting away with angry outbursts (rather than silent tears) of genuine expression I can think of is Elizabeth I. Any more recent examples?
I can't think of any. Perhaps women are a little more cautious with this. The example of Elizabeth I is telling. Her enemies always accused her of having supposedly female traits like indecision and emotionality.
WSC was notorious for blubbing, mind you he was dealing with an actual existential crisis too (for a time). I wonder if the impact has been amplified by the visibility of her distress? I don’t think we should glibly dismiss it. She had just seen a coach and horses driven through her tax and spending plans. One could of course argue that Starmer, Kendall, and Timms made a bad job of drafting the bill; they should have predicted the opposition. Good read Katja
Well and we still don't know if it was a private matter or an argument with the speaker. In both cases, it would probably have been best for her not to have to sit behind Starmer like that during PMQs.
You do a great job, Katya, of always bringing out the humanity in our world. Humanity is often scoffed at , which seems to connect with our devastating dismissiveness of nature.
No Adie, I’m not. I think we have had 30yrs of the most dreadful politicians the country has had for - probably - 250yrs.
Reeves snivelling on the front bench - and then Starmer saying he hadn’t noticed - is symbolic of the whole shit-show.
I wonder what previous Labour Chancellor Dennis Healey would have made of it. A man who served in WWII 1941-45……..fighting in North Africa, the invasion of Sicily and then through the whole of the Italy Campaign.
As the case of Merkel proves nicely, it matters who shows what kind of emotion, and how frequent the display is.
As somebody known for a cool head and pragmatism, Merkel’s tears indeed came as a surprise, making it credible that they weren’t a trick or strategy. Other politicians who regularly act irrationally or throw choleric fits (a few contemporary examples would come to mind) cannot rely on such an “authentic emotion” excuse …
Then again, Churchill also cried regularly, but it was known he was easily moved, so his contemporaries didn’t view it as a trick either.
The only female ruler getting away with angry outbursts (rather than silent tears) of genuine expression I can think of is Elizabeth I. Any more recent examples?
I can't think of any. Perhaps women are a little more cautious with this. The example of Elizabeth I is telling. Her enemies always accused her of having supposedly female traits like indecision and emotionality.
WSC was notorious for blubbing, mind you he was dealing with an actual existential crisis too (for a time). I wonder if the impact has been amplified by the visibility of her distress? I don’t think we should glibly dismiss it. She had just seen a coach and horses driven through her tax and spending plans. One could of course argue that Starmer, Kendall, and Timms made a bad job of drafting the bill; they should have predicted the opposition. Good read Katja
Well and we still don't know if it was a private matter or an argument with the speaker. In both cases, it would probably have been best for her not to have to sit behind Starmer like that during PMQs.
You do a great job, Katya, of always bringing out the humanity in our world. Humanity is often scoffed at , which seems to connect with our devastating dismissiveness of nature.
We should NEVER feel sorry for any politician…….and one like Reeves in particular.
She gained office dishonestly, and has discharged her duties to the great detriment of the country - heartlessly.
She knows that that our civil servants have a strategy of ‘de-growing’ the economy…….and has done nothing to halt it.
Did she feel sorry for the children who had to leave their private schools and their friendships, and endure mockery and bullying in the local comp?
She’s been a full-time politician for half her life…….lies, deceit and pretence are her core values.
This seems besides the point. I was arguing that politicians' tears always have consequences, not that we should feel sorry for them.
Yes, my comment was not connected to your main point.
As I said to Adie Bond……..’we used to have people of substance in politics’.
Not a fan then ..
No Adie, I’m not. I think we have had 30yrs of the most dreadful politicians the country has had for - probably - 250yrs.
Reeves snivelling on the front bench - and then Starmer saying he hadn’t noticed - is symbolic of the whole shit-show.
I wonder what previous Labour Chancellor Dennis Healey would have made of it. A man who served in WWII 1941-45……..fighting in North Africa, the invasion of Sicily and then through the whole of the Italy Campaign.
We used to have people of substance in politics.