In other news from Auckland, our own Julie was elected to Puketapapa Community Board. Congratulations!** Here are some cupcakes to celebrate:
Talking of awesome feminists - Sandra Coney was elected to the new Auckland City Council.
Consider this a thread to talk about the awesomeness of Julie, or the local body elections round the country, whichever takes your fancy.
* I would have been tempted to vote for Len Brown myself if I lived in Auckland, and lose all my radical cred, because I find free swimming pools just that exciting.
** When discussing Julie's victory David Farrar not only spells her name wrong, but only mentions it in the context of her marital status. Sexism alive, well and kicking round the blogosphere.
19 comments:
Congratulations!
- To be fair to Farrar I don't think it's sexist. The public has a right to know about any potential conflicts of interests and secret alliances and being married to someone is pretty much a secret alliance to the voting public
oops, just took down my post cos i didn't see yours maia. yes, congratulations julie!!
I've no idea what Farrar's point was - although I doubt it was about secret alliances - since that's ridiculous even for him. But the way he expressed it was sexist.
Stargazer - I was just coming to take mine down, because I'd seen the same thing!
ha, but your post is much more intelligent & informed than mine!! so i'm glad i got in first.
and also, congratulations to julie hardaker, our new mayor of hamilton. we have two wards in the city, east & west. at this stage, east has 3 women councillors & 3 mails. west ward has 1 woman and 5 men. the west may change as there's only one vote between places 6 & 7.
wonder how other places are doing in terms of a gender split.
Yay for Julie! *happy claps*
Of course it's sexist. A woman is an individual in every way, and to class her identity as "X's wife" and her politics aligned with her husbands is negating her individuality.
Great to have Mayor Bob back, and there's a wonderful feminist on the ChCh council in Sue Wells.
Hurrah for Julie! That's brilliant, Julie. I'm thrilled for you.
Julie, brilliant! So glad to see you were voted in.
Plenty for us to celebrate in this election.
Good on you, Julia (sic)!
Congratulations Julie!
Congrats Julie!! You are amazing!
Congratulations.
If I got Julie's name mis-spelt, then it is a typo - there were a lot of results to get through.
I would not normally refer to who someone's partner is, but as he got elected to the same board I think is is news worthy.
I did actually consider describing Michael as Julie's husband, as I half thought someone would get worked up about it. But as Michael topped the poll, I referred to him first.
How about referring to someone as a completely individual entity?
Husbands exist apart from wives and husbands, wives exist apart from husbands and wives. Shocking, I know.
Well done Julie.
I'd say I hope it doesn't cut into your blogging time, but I don't think anybody could blame you if you made the community board a priority.
I'm very disappointed that Parker got back in - not because I think Anderton would have done a much better job (or indeed any better a job) but because it's sad that the people of Christchurch seem to have changed their minds due to such a superficial event.
And a further congratulations to my former Social Studies teacher, David Ayers, who's now Mayor of Waimakariri. (Norman Kirk's old job!)
"I would not normally refer to who someone's partner is, but as he got elected to the same board I think is is news worthy."
- Why was it news worthy?
Wow, thanks so much everyone, I am really very humbled by your enthusiasm! It was a big surprise to be successful - and a tribute to the good campaign run locally by our ticket rather than any especial effort on my part I think. We only got two out of the six spots, but it still constitutes our best result ever, for the centre-left, in the area, and I am really excited about the opportunity.
On the issue of how Farrar reported it, I do find it disappointing that I'm listed in a way that reads like I'm an appendage. David, you clearly thought about how you were going to word it, from your comment here, and I find it puzzling that you thought putting Michael was my husband might create some angst, but doing the reverse, to a feminist blogger, would not? Seems a bit disingenuous to me. Pat makes a good point about asking why it is newsworthy at all.
In terms of spelling my name wrong, typos happen, although usually to my last name! I'd note that you spelt the name of the board wrong too (as did Maia, I've fixed it in the post). Pesky things, typos. I make them a lot when operating from my ipod.
As for being in a relationship constituting a "secret alliance." I rather think being on the same ticket showed quite publicly that we were in an alliance. That's actually more significant that the personal relationship imho, as it shows your politics. Being in a relationship doesn't mean you share a hive mind. My partner and I both stood for Parliament in 2002 and 2005, for different parties. Had we been elected I imagine we would have voted along party lines first and foremost.
(And a reminder to that first Anon, please respect our request for a handle, as per all that wording directly above the comment box).
Congrats, Julie!
On the "and his wife, too!" matter, without wanting to ascribe any opinions or assumptions to Farrar himself I have to wonder to what extent it's notable/newsworthy/considered An Issue that the two of you were elected because you have different surnames. Which is obviously a choice you made to deceive the innocent voting public, or at least proof of your Hatred Of Family Values.
"Which is obviously a choice you made to deceive the innocent voting public, or at least proof of your Hatred Of Family Values."
Because like Gillard she's #wastingpreciousbreedingtime
...oh wait...
Damn Julie, you are a machine :D
I’m in on the "you rock" accolades Julie.
Well done, congrats, and best of luck!
I laughed when I saw David had referred to you as Michael's wife... I knew that would cause a minor (I say minor because it’s not that widely read) storm.
D’s first question when he heard you were both in was “how are they going to cope at home after the first votes on a topic?”
The assumption being (correctly) that you are two individual political beings (as are we)!
Congrats again for being such a great role model for “women who want it all.”
Post a Comment