Sam Cam and the politics of being Mrs PM

This is a guest post by Amy Kavanagh. You can follow her on twitter at twitter.com/BlondeHistorian.

While indulging in some guilty pleasure Daily Mail procrastination activity I came across the intellectually demanding feature, ‘Trick of the light? Samantha Cameron has ‘lollipop head’ look at charity event’. However it was one of the comments underneath this umpteenth article about SamCam’s weight / face / clothes which caught my attention and provoked a general grievance.

‘She’s trying too hard. We don’t want a celebrity PM wife. She should get into charitable work like the Duchess of Cambridge… all this “look at me me me” is boring.’ – Susanna Smith, Newmarket, 01/3/2012 22:52

Sixteen individuals have ‘disliked’ Susanna Smith’s comment. No likes so far for the Newmarket radical. So what does Britain want from the PM’s Mrs, and how important is Mrs Cameron’s image to Britain?

At a recent celebtastic event SamCam donned an appropriately overpriced outfit, which also received the praise and scathing criticism of the FeMail readers, (get it FEmail? Oh how we all giggled into our skinny lattes and got distracted by small fluffy things). Mrs C was the Downing Street host for the London Fashion Week party, and allegedly celebrated British designers along with fashionista dragon matriarch Anna Wintour. Now I’m all for British innovation, even if that innovation focuses on different bits of chiffon, but it disturbs me on many levels that SamCam has so firmly located herself in this camp. My issues with Fashion Week are a whole other kettle of feminist fish. However most of all I do not think it is appropriate for Samantha Cameron to endorse the objectification party.

My issues with the body dismorphic, child exploiting and materialistic joke that London Fashion Week represents aside. The fundamental problem with SamCam is that she is, as Susanna Smith of Newmarket so accurately pointed out, a celebrity PM wife.

Let’s deal with the wife bit first. Now obviously there is a deeply loving and affectionate connection between Sam and Dave which while difficult to understand must be accepted. Samantha has chosen to support her valiant husband in his premiership and frankly that’s fine. She loves him, they have spawned offspring together, and it would be odd if she didn’t occasionally get snapped by the paparazzi. Some have celebrity thrust upon them, agreed. But SamCam has created, or potentially lets be fair been encouraged to create, a specific wifely celeb role.

Unlike the U.S there is no official ‘first lady’ or ‘FLOTUS’ title for the Mrs of the PM. It is therefore somewhat flexible for the woman who finds herself in the role. As a feminist I believe in a woman’s right to choose. There is nothing wrong with being a ‘stay at home mum’. My own Mother made that choice for a considerable period of my childhood. However I believe Samantha Cameron is exploiting an increasingly celebrity role to forward a certain wifely ideal.

Let’s consider some other examples. The Labour spouses have played their part in shaping the role of the PM’s Mrs. Cherie Blair, notorious dressing gown wearer, legal eagle, politically outspoken and financially shady. Sarah Brown, twitter goddess and husband hero worshipper. Mrs Brown like Mrs Cameron gave up a successful career and devoted herself to political campaigning. Whereas we all know that Mrs Blair retained her professional status and maiden name in her formidable capacity as Cherie Booth QC.

Miriam González Durántez, Nick Clegg’s wife, when being interviewed around the time of the election stated: ‘I’ve said from the beginning that I was delighted to help Nick and the party, but that I wasn’t going to compromise my own life as a working mother.”[1] Ms Durántez has consistently remained out of the public eye.

Likewise Justine Thornton, also a barrister, has made a bit of a departure from the public roles utilised by her predecessors. She has allegedly been overwhelmed by media attention and unlike SamCam has continued her work, and does not have a team of aides:

‘Whereas Labour party conferences have come to expect the politician’s wife to be up on the stage after, and even before, the speech – when the leadership result was announced it was noticeable that Thornton kept well back’.[2]

One of the most suspicious developments has been the recent Miliband marriage. I qualify this by insisting that I have no problem with marriage, and Ed has mentioned that it was always potentially on the cards. However this relatively sudden and excessively private affair must surely be symptomatic of the model family ideal perpetuated by the Camerons. Marriage tax breaks and child benefit cuts seem to demonstrate that Mr Cameron has a very old fashioned idea of the modern British woman’s life. This perception of the Cameron gender agenda isn’t helped by Samantha doing very little in the public eye apart from turning up in a suitable outfit to fashion and charity events and schmoozing with celebs.

In a recent interview with The House Yvette Cooper, wife of Ed Balls, said ‘I think David Cameron is completely out of touch with the pressures that a lot of women face. Some of it I think is a blind spot, some of it is also they just fundamentally don’t understand how important aspects of the public sector can be for working women.’[3] Cooper is currently tipped to be the next Labour leader, which would be thoroughly refreshing. The Guardian has suggested a Lasagna plot, the latest in a series of culinary political maneuvers.[4] Apparently Balls and Cooper are charming the party over this Italian specialty. Cooper declined to comment on the plot in the interview, but found the fascination with Ed’s cooking skills amusing. I have it on good authority that the lasagna is ‘mediocre at best’.

I’m not proposing Mrs C run for office, something which turned out to be quite the miscalculation for Mrs Blair. Neither am I demanding she instantly resumes her vital work designing expensive stationary. She, like the other political spouses, does her fair share of charitable and philanthropic stuff, which is perfectly commendable. Sarah Brown shaped her identity around supporting numerous family focused charities, her husband, and being a mother, perfectly valid, but there was just something more realistic about Mrs Brown. Of course she encountered the occasional actor, soldier, or monarch, but unlike SamCam she seemed to represent a particular life choice and was therefore relatable.

With the Baird report looming and expected to show the severely detrimental effects of the Coalition’s cuts on the lives of British women, surely SamCam image and lifestyle is inappropriate for a 21^st century PM’s Mrs?

The most concerning thing about Samantha Cameron is that she is setting a precedent. Cherie Blair, while not my favourite person, tested the water with balancing a working life, motherhood, spousal duties and a political identity. Mrs Brown, González Durántez, Thornton and Cooper all battle with the delicate balance that their various roles entail. Not one is perfect, but that is sort of the point. They are just women occupying a precarious position in a political establishment. Whereas SamCam is a passive increasingly thinner clothes horse who is rapidly achieving celebrity status. I fear that when Cooper or Thornton are thrust further into the limelight SamCam may have done considerable damage. I just hope the future Mrs Prime Minister’s won’t be expected to sit on the front row at Fashion Week and not face criticism if they choose careers, independent thoughts and reasonably priced clothes?