This female Societarian is frankly disgusted by the poor treatment of South African runner Semenya. It seems this poor woman’s public show trial by the IAAF is like a throw back to some by gone age. If a man sets new standards like Mathew Phelps or Usain Bolt or badly like Eddie the Eel no one questions his gender. But if a woman breaks down barriers her sexuality and gender become questioned. Semenya is just another in a long line women who have been vulgarly slurred for nothing more than their achievements. Take for example, female boxers who have recently seen their sport criticised and described as “unfeminine” despite the rave reviews it has seen for its sheer tactical innovations. Or the furore that followed the entry of the first female golfer at the British Open Michelle Wie.
Dame Kelly homes was described as “un-lady-like” when she won gold due to her toned torso, and Dame Ellen MacArthur for her sailing achievements was described as “manly” by some paper columnists.
This is not the first time that female achievement in a certain field has been derided with male chauvinistic criticism. It sadly is nothing new, take the early embers of the women’s movement or leading feminists writers such as Germaine Greer having their sexual orientation brought into question. Derision is the first act of a male insecurity, but the absence of a single female personality to step out on the public stage to defend this poor women – let alone any signs of a vocal feminist uproar – unfortunately highlights the current neutering of the modern feminist movement.
However, back to Semenya, this is for you: hold your head high girl as the more vocal the abuse the greater your achievements on the field scare your male detractors! KEEP RUNNING!
This Societarian had a job as a wee nipper as a paper delivery boy, and I always recall how those customers who either had the Guardian delivered from Monday-Saturday would never ask for the Observer, but always asked for no paper at all or for another Sunday paper to be delivered instead. The Observer has always seemed to me to be rather more to the right than the Guardian, at least in the living memory of this twenty something. I don’t know if it had anything to do with the offers other Sunday papers would run ( such as weekly TV guides or free DVDs). But in my own opinion, and that of many likewise Societarians who purchase the Guardian on a regular basis but do not so the Observer, it has always been that the Sunday edition from the GMG corporation, in its Comment sections and the general editorial guidelines, appears to permeate a rather more centre-right-leaning spiel than the on any other day of the week.
employed kindly subsidised the journey for the others amongst us who are part of the graduate unemployment rate in this country. But what we were deep in conversation about while we were there (apart from where best to apply to for a job) was the debate sparked by Tony Blair’s and David Cameron’s favourite think-tank Demos about the future of the Labour party.
The Societarian hasn’t commented much on the whole expenses scandal mainly due to the wealth of commentary analysis on the subject and also out of the naive belief that it would be wise to wait and provide a summary of it in its entirety. Unfortunately the latter would require a PHD in blogging and the answer to the age old question; How long is a piece of string? Plus it wouldn’t do justice to the analysis of a pretty unjust system by attempting it in a one off post. Over the last few weeks the words of a 
