Maragret Thatcher...

[bluflamingo]

Died this morning of a stroke. She was kind of a big deal in UK politics - first (and thus far only) women Prime Minister, hated right-wing figure by the left - so people have a lot of opinions on her being dead, unsurprisingly.

For the record though: if you're posting that you're glad she's dead, or that you're having a party to celebrate, or that you've signed a petition for her not to have a state funeral (all of which I've seen this afternoon) - can you unfriend me until you're done with that please? (Not saying that any of you would, but then I wouldn't have said that some of the people on my facebook wall would either - consider this a universal 'you')

I'm not saying everyone has to like her, or like her policies, or think they were a good idea. I don't. But she was a person, and she was a powerful woman, and it wouldn't hurt to treat her death with a little respect and a little less glee. She hasn't been in power for decades, she's not controlling politics now, and she wasn't kicking babies and puppies when she was. I'm not saying she was doing good and not hurting anyone, but she's being compared to Mussolini and Hitler who, you know, actually had hundreds of people killed.

I'm a little hesitant to say it's because she was a woman in power, specifically, and not because of her policies, but I can't help thinking that's part of it - that somehow what she did was worse because she was a woman and should have been softer or warmer or fuzzier or whatever.

As a woman leader in the 80s. Good luck with that.

You don't have to like her, but enough with the glee already. I can't stand David Cameron. I hate what he's doing to welfare rights, I hate his cuts, I hate his attitude and his face, I hate his man of the people what private school? speeches, and I hate that his coalition gets such good press. He's actually still in power and actually still having a negative impact on people. I still wouldn't wish him dead and yes I'd like him out of power, but through an election defeat, not through his death, and I wouldn't be happy if he was dead.

Margaret Thatcher, for whatever she did wrong, was someone I knew about when I was a kid. I knew that she was a woman who'd run my country and that meant something when I was a little girl. That was *rare* when I was a little girl, and is still rare know, and that she achieved that was worth something and still should be. Whatever she achieved once she got there.

In case it's not obvious: please can we keep the glee at her death out of the comments; criticism of her and her policies is fine, but no dancing on her not-yet-existing grave please.

Comments

[siria]

I'm not saying she was doing good and not hurting anyone, but she's being compared to Mussolini and Hitler who, you know, actually had hundreds of people killed.

Except that Thatcher did authorise extra-judicial killings (her 'shoot on sight' policy), was a key determining factor in what happened at Long Kesh, actively supported Pinochet, Saddam Hussein and Suharto, denounced Nelson Mandela and the ANC, and destroyed working class communities and livelihoods to the extent that there were people in the north of England left starving. People did die and suffer because of her policies. She was a woman in power, but she was no role model for other women because she walked on other women's backs to get to where she did. Thatcher did nothing for other women; she called feminism "poison" and said she hated it.

I didn't wish her dead, and I didn't wish her long battle with Alzheimer's (I would wish that on no one), but yes, my first reaction on hearing the announcement on the radio was satisfaction and relief. Yes, I think it's odious that she's being given the honour of a state funeral. She is to receive that great honour when her political legacy (which is potent, even though she hasn't been in power for a long time) is still causing such damage. I don't think it's a moral failing to criticise the dead and to say that in the final reckoning, they did more bad than good. If you wish to defriend me for thinking that, so be it.

[bluflamingo]

I don't think it's a moral failing to criticise the dead and to say that in the final reckoning, they did more bad than good

Neither do I, and in fact I'm pretty sure I specifically said that I have no problem with people criticising her - I criticise her, it'd be pretty hypocritical to object to others doing so.

I said, I don't think it's OK to be so gleeful as some people are at her death. Assess her, criticise her, fine, but glee? She was still a person. And I don't think that satisfaction and relief are the same, or even close, to glee.

>Thatcher did nothing for other women; she called feminism "poison" and said she hated it

I know. She wasn't a feminist at all as far as I can tell, and she wasn't, as you say, a role model as a person. I meant more that, to me, it mattered to see a woman in power - not necessarily that particular woman, but a woman who was as high as it's possible to go in this country. I'm not championing the way she got there or what she did when she was there but also - male politicians trample on woman to get where they are, and undermine women when they get into power. did she really do anything different, other than be a woman while she did it? And if not, is it fair to expect more of her than any of them?

Those aren't meant to suggest that's what you're implying or what you believe, or to say that makes it ok, I'm just pondering, I suppose.

I don't want to defriend you for what you say - your response wasn't the kind I was thinking of when I said that, though I'm not sure how well I've articulated what I did mean.

[siria]

I said, I don't think it's OK to be so gleeful as some people are at her death. Assess her, criticise her, fine, but glee?

Well, but she hurt a lot of people. I can't claim that my family was directly impacted by what she did, but I have a lot of close friends whose families suffered a lot thanks to her policies. Sure, there are some people who are just dog-piling out of short-lived clicktivism, but I think there are a lot of people who are reacting with 'glee', or however you want to term it, who lost their livelihoods or family members to her policies. For them, this moment is undoubtedly cathartic: Thatcher's effect on their lives was an unqualified negative, and I think asking them to somehow deny their feelings makes me uneasy. They were the ones who were hurt, and she was the one who did the hurting.

I'm not championing the way she got there or what she did when she was there but also - male politicians trample on woman to get where they are, and undermine women when they get into power. did she really do anything different, other than be a woman while she did it? And if not, is it fair to expect more of her than any of them?

I think this is a little bit of a strawman argument. The fact that other people engage in equally unethical behaviour doesn't excuse what she did—anymore than I think that the fact there are lots of sexist male right-wing activists excuses what Phyllis Schlafly does for a living. I equally don't think that framing it as 'is it fair to expect more of her' is right when the standard being applied is 'did this person act like a decent human being?'

For three quarters of my life, my country's had female presidents (Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese), and we've had two female Tánaistí (Mary Harney and Mary Coughlan, and I swear, not every Irish female politician is called Mary). Robinson was a wonderful president, McAleese I was rather lukewarm towards, and both Harney and Coughlan helped preside over the current tanking of the Irish economy and social infrastructure. It does matter to see a woman in power, but I think it matters even more to see a woman exercise power, and how.

[bluflamingo]

I was going to say that I'm not asking people to deny their feelings, but I suppose that actually I sort of am, which isn't a great thing to be doing - thank you pointing that out.

It does matter to see a woman in power, but I think it matters even more to see a woman exercise power, and how

Yes, but also when I was 12 and living in a small town, firtly I was too young to think about how she exercised her power, and secondly, there wasn't anyone else to see being a woman in power. Obviously, now it's different, but back then, Thatcher was it for me - she was someone who grew up like I did in some ways, and got to be powerful, which was about the sum total of what I knew about her. I don't know.

[sian1359]

Thank you for this. Never have I felt my generational divide from folks I know through fandom stronger than this morning because of what I have read of this. Love her or hate her, publicly celebrating that she's dead is not something I want to be involved in, even peripherally. If not for my own humanity, then out of respect for the people and family who are in true mourning right now at her loss.

[bluflamingo]

Yeah, that's kind of what I was trying to say. Publicly criticise her, fine; say that she left a negative legacy, fine; be glad, even, that he legacy has come to a close. But she's still a person, and in the latter years of her life, she was an ill, confused person - I just have trouble getting behind celebrating that she's dead like she was the Wicked Witch of the West or something.

[havocthecat]

but she's being compared to Mussolini and Hitler who, you know, actually had hundreds of people killed.

In the case of Hitler, at least 12 million people, not counting all those dead in WWII on any side. Mussolini you could probably accurately place numbers in the thousands, though I haven't the faintest clue what the actual total would be. Margaret Thatcher may not have had politics I would have agreed with, but she's not able to be compared to Hitler or Mussolini.

I always feel weird when people express joy over someone's death, no matter what they may have done or not.

[bluflamingo]

I always feel weird when people express joy over someone's death, no matter what they may have done or not

Same. A person's still a person, and I think the joy feels like something out of a story - like the evil king is dead or whatever, and the dead person stops being a person and starts being just a representation of their ideas or whatever.

[tesserae]

I celebrated Ronald Reagan's death, I will celebrate George Bush's. And many people are still as angry at Thatcher as I am at Reagan, on grounds that are just as personally valid. I suspect their glee comes from the sense of profound frustration they felt at seeing so much that they loved turned to rusting heaps of metal and ruined lives - I know mine does...

[bluflamingo]

Yeah. I just struggle with the idea of celebrating a person's death, no matter what they did. Almost like it's a punishment for the wrong things they did - and she did many wrong things, I'm not arguing that - especially when she wasn't in a position to hurt people by the end of her life. I don't know.

[medie]

I commented on this on Twitter, actually. I believe that if someone is out and out gleeful about someone's death, then that says more about them than it does the person they're talking about.

[bluflamingo]

I kind of do as well. I kind of understand being glad, maybe - thinking about some of the abused women I worked with, maybe, as a way of making it make sense to myself - but I just feel like glee is kind of... I don't know, reserved for movie villains not real people, maybe

[lazar_grrl]

Yeah, I have a problem with that too. There's something about people being openly joyful at another person's death which is disgusting. This is not a game where killing your enemy is a win. This is real life. Someone's wife and mother is dead and you are telling them it is a good thing, a joyful thing that someone they love is gone. Hating a person so virulently that you have a party when they're dead hurts you, hurts the people they left behind, and does nothing to that person. It makes you smaller and meaner and crueler, and frankly, there's enough of that going around.