Christine Rankin’s personal life and dress sense…does it really matter?

Here we have another perfect example of NZ society/media blowing a small, and in this case insignificant, thing totally out of proportion.

While the rest of the world is waiting to hear the next bit of news about the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, NZ sits on the edge of there seat to find out about how short Christine Rankin’s skirt is, how dangly her earrings are and the intimate details of her marriage.

This issue is rather irrelevant. We are not talking about a fashion personality, nor are we talking about some Hollywood drama, we are talking about the new Families commissioner, thus, what she is wearing has nothing to do with how well she can perform her job. Perhaps there would be an issue if she was wearing T-shirts that said “I put the sensual back in non-consensual” or not wearing clothing at all. However, when the issue is her earrings are dangly and she wears shoulder pads I hardly see the problem. How will this affect her ability to do her job?

Somehow this non-news has turned dangly earrings into the headline dinner table conversation over the past few weeks, frankly I’m sick of it.

I would have to agree with this quote from Paul Holmes’ Blog What is so wrong with Christine rankin?: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10572726

It has come from the left, of course, from Labour, who saw to her earlier destruction as the chief executive of Work and Income NZ for no fathomable reason apart from what appeared to be their leader's contempt for her short skirts and an eclectic taste in earrings.Christine Rankin is seen as a threat to Labour and the Greens because she is non-PC and speaks her own mind.

She has been labled an ‘anti-establishment feminist’…someone didn’t get their facts right before they said that. This is an excerpt from an interview with Christine Rankin in which it would be hard to call her a feminist.

I worry about New Zealand men. I went through the feminist movement. Today's women in their 20s and early 30s have it easier. They expect too much of their men, and take things for granted."If you look at many family breakdowns, it's often because of men's confusion about their role. I believe women become wise at 50. Young women need to be sensible about what they expect. Men are supposed to earn big bucks, be macho and still be in touch with their feminine side. It's too difficult.

I am a Labour supported myself but find it audacious that an attack like this is simply because she does not fit the mould of the fat cats in parliament. It seems some what petty that the agenda setting of the media has been focused on her dress sense. Despite my defense I don’t actually care about weather or not she is the right person for the job, I just feel the rest of the world must be laughing at us with our tops stories being such ridiculous topics! Who decides what is news worthy in New Zealand? I think they flew right off the mark. This is the stuff they put in trashy woman’s magazines, not on the 6 o’clock news! Gutlung and Ruge must be turning in their graves. I can understand the queries over her marital status, but since when has a CV or job description required you to state the number of relationships you’ve been in. I guarantee if this was the case, half of the country would be unemployed. If she performs the job well, then gives flying fart about her marriages.

This article http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10572760 is a fantastic example of what I mentioned before about trashy woman’s magazines. I’m sure I have read similar stories about Brad and Angela. On a more positive note however, by now, she must know her stuff:"People give up too easily in relationships. I did. I asserted myself: 'I will not do this and that'. It's the one precious thing that you can give a child - a mum and dad that love each other. It's hard but it's achievable.

"Relationships are hard enough to maintain, and you have to put time into them. What are we doing to our people? If people are working from 6am to 7pm then something is wrong".

Still, my previous feelings stand: When these topics become the highlight of the 6 o’clock news, one has to wonder what sort of values we hold as a country. We are more concerned over Christine Rankin’s marriages than the possible on set of nuclear war. Well done New Zealand, get your priorities in the right order next time. I also believe that using the word ‘insensitive’ is a relative term, thus some what redundant in a true news story. So, I’m going to turn off New Zealand news until some one tells me there’s something newsworthy to watch! Until then, I’ll say hello to BBC for some global perspective!

If you want to read the whole Christine Rankin interview, follow this link: http://blogs.nzherald.co.nz/blog/inspired-people/2008/2/11/blog-an-interview-with-christine-rankin/?c_id=3

Wanganui or Whanganui?... Isn’t there something better to talk about?

What is happening in the world right now? There is are a number of wars going on, there is a global recession; there have been bombings, famine, Fiji is practically at a stand still and bits and pieces of the states are up in flames, but there one hot topic to trump them all in New Zealand: Is it Wanganui or Whanganui?

Honestly, who really cares? What it is about New Zealand that gives us an inability to asses the importance of local topics verses global topics? Or on a smaller scale local irrelevant topics verses local relevant topics. In comparison to the rest of the world we are less than a pin prick and the trivial details of a spelling mistake made over 150years ago doesn’t even make a blip on the radar of news worthy importance when Lithuania are on the verge of having their first female president. Even when our own police officers were being gunned down, remnants of this minor story were still being heard in the headlines of the 6 o’clock news.

The debate of this west coast town’s name is somewhat inconsequential to the greater good of the world, New Zealand and even the town itself. However, to change the name would mean that everything that uses the word would need to be changed. So, buildings, books, maps, website and so on will need an abrupt change, which would no doubt cause more confusion than anything else.

The issue lies in that “the Geographic Board said Wanganui was incorrectly spelled and was not an official place name” as well as Tangata Whenua feel the correct spelling should be respected. A basic outline of the story can be found at http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/central-north-island/2303067/Laws-to-fight-putting-an-h-in-Wanganui. Can someone how this will impact on the world? Have lives been endangered, are basic human rights being violated? Will this spark a war? I highly doubt it. The way the New Zealand media has made it out you would think president Obama had shot a small Afghani child because of his religious persuasion.

This comment came from the blog @ my wits end; The great ‘h’ debate at http://mywitsend.co.nz/wanganui/580

WHanganui:
Im student at Wanganui high school and i think that the conflict between the’H’ being put back in the name is stupid and mind-less, there are an equal amount of points made and all are well thought of. HOWEVER, the name change should not be separating the Maoris and Pakehas.
1 April 2009, 8:56 am

(sic)

My thoughts exactly: mindless. This blogs go on to say that the ‘h’ debate is a huge race relations issues that has distorted the democratic process. Sorry, but when there is an 80% push for a referendum, I hardly see how that can be called a distortion of the democratic process. What is more “stupid” is the media hype. The hype suggests that the ‘h’ debate has affected the lives of everyone involved… in this case all of New Zealand. I asked around and as it turns out not many people care about this issue. One person from the 25 asked felt affected by this, let alone even cared about the issue. This suggest that 4 percent of people are affected by this; now gage that against the world. The total number of people affected by this is rather minute.

So in comparison to the rest of the world, we have a slightly warped view of importance and relevance in New Zealand. This could be partly due to our level of isolation to the rest of the world, or to our level of ignorance and over developed sense of self importance, who knows. Either way this has made its way into my pick of one of the “great” dilemma of the 21st century.