Margaret Wente, in her article, ‘Belinda as an oppressed minority?’, traces the flopped political career graph of Ms Belinda Stronach. Through responding to a woman’s denouncement on CBC of the shabby manner in which the news media treats women in politics, the author puts forth an argument that politics is a man’s game and after all Ms Belinda really is a misfit as a politician despite the money and fame she possesses. Instead of stating her opinion in a straightforward way, the writer uses sarcasm wrapped in humour to make her point. Once the readers finish the article they get an impression that just money, fame or glamour are not enough for a person to accomplish success in a political career; instead, it takes the grit of experience and hard work to be effective in public service. It stands to the credit of the writer that she pulls the readers to her story and makes them listen to it, and she does this with a certain degree of panache through a narrative that flows well but almost borders on risquĂ©.
Margaret employs sarcasm to effectively argue her point that Belinda cannot be seen as a member of the oppressed minority when she writes, “I confess that the idea of Belinda as an oppressed minority was an eye-opener to me.” (Wente, 2007). The lines that follow further accentuate the irony in terming Belinda as such. The tone the author uses also compliments the narrative style which is specked with liberal doses of humour. Rather than using a rigid formal style, the author employs conversational language using contractions and slang to create an impact of mockery. Her musing, “But what do I know?” (Wente, 2007), leaves the readers with a smile on their faces, relishing the paradoxical interrogation.
Margaret further argues that people “like to see that their elected representatives get just a teensy bit of political experience before they gun for the top job.” (Wente, 2007). This is a relevant criticism against Ms Belinda as people are aware that her only qualifications were her father’s money and power and these are the only elements that promoted her. Even she doesn’t herself seem to be much convinced about her political career as evident from the writer’s observation that “she privately confessed that flying around, visiting cities is not her vision of a good life. The author gives more evidence to argue that Bilenda’s father’s money rather than her own ability is the driving force behind her elevation into various offices, by citing the example when she was made the CEO of a company that her father controlled. Thus it becomes apparent Margaret supports her arguments with concrete evidence. Similarly, she also mocks overenthusiastic feminists when she states that “She (Belinda) surrounded herself with male advisers, who scripted her every word and stoked her high opinion of herself.” (Wente, 2007). As the final nail on the lid, the author states that Belinda cannot become a role model by suggesting that she is sans the qualities that could make her a role model and argues that Canadian politics won’t become any poorer because of her departure.
Though the writing is interesting and the writer has used evidence and examples to support her theories at places it seems biased. For example, Margaret could have made some references to any good qualities that Belinda possessed or an act of goodwill that she did. Similarly, the author seems to blindly state that women are not capable of handling political offices. This seems to be an arbitrary stand and she doesn’t state any definitive examples to support her theory. On the other hand, there are countries like India and Sri Lanka where women leaders have held the offices of Prime Ministers for more than one term and set examples that women could be effective and efficient political heads of a nation.
Works Cited
Wente, Margaret. Belinda as oppressed minority? The Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: 2007.