Beauty pageants are they sexist and outdated?

/

For as long as I can remember beauty pageants have been under scrutiny. Critics have told us that it degraded, objectified and sexualised women. That there was no place for them in modern society, that women should be treated as equals. Those who opposed such views were branded sexist, old-fashioned and ignorant amongst other things.

I for one never understood this and maybe it is because I am a man.  Surely the young women who participated in these contests were consenting adults who were making a conscious choice to do so?  Why should their opinion carry any less weight?  Why should anyone deem them incapable of making their own decisions?  And even more worryingly why should a group of pretty young ladies parading themselves in different outfits offend anyone? The idiom ‘live and let live’ instantly came to mind.

I will acknowledge though that modern society is obsessed with beauty and glamour.  It is a fact and something that simply cannot be ignored, but this is a worldwide fad and certainly not unique to pageants as such. 

As a father to both a girl and a boy I must admit that I wouldn’t want either of my children to ever enter any of these contests, especially not the girl.  I do understand though that at the end of the day it’s their choice and not mine.  If my daughter for example decided she wanted to be ogled and rated on her looks alone then so be it, it’s her choice after all.  I guess there are far worse things that she could decide to do.

Anti-pageant crusaders usually refer to beauty pageants as meaningless, disturbing, cattle auctions, which send a poisonous message.  Now I am aware that these people have as much of a right to express their views as anyone else, even it does mean targeting and lambasting a specific sector of our society.  But if pageants send out a ‘poisonous’ message what kind of message do these same people send out when they knowingly choose to stereotype all beauty pageant contestants and refer to them as mere cattle?  Not a great one that’s for sure.  How do you think these young women would feel if they ever came across or heard such comments and saw their efforts/accomplishments ridiculed and belittled in such a blatant manner?  Far from empowered I guess.   

This past Saturday during our annual beauty pageant, Maroua Kharbouch the 2013 winner made an impassionate speech whilst handing down her crown highlighting how her tenure had, had a very positive impact on her life.  It was something that I was glad to hear especially after seeing so many negative pageant related comments on social media.  There stood an intelligent, young woman telling everyone who was willing to listen about her enjoyable reign, which had helped her develop as an individual.  Kaine Aldorino another native and previous winner who even went on to take the Miss World crown a few years ago would surely agree with such a notion, she is now our deputy Mayor!

 People tend to forget that for many of these contestants it is not only about competing but also about socialising, gaining confidence and encouraging personal growth.  There is much more to a beauty pageant than meets the eye, pardon the pun.

 Additionally many of these ‘queens’ usually get heavily involved with a number of different charities and do their fair share for their respective communities.  Visiting schools, inspiring young girls and raising awareness on a number of issues which would have never, have gotten as much publicity if it were not for their efforts.  Whether such actions are part of the Pageant Queen persona or not is irrelevant in my opinion as at the end of the day the good deeds get done and that is what really counts.   

I doubt it’s just me who fails to see the irony behind the demeaning comments usually spewed by those who frown upon such competitions.  Those who in their infinite wisdom profess to know what’s best for the world’s female population yet refuse to take into account the democratic wishes of those who choose to partake in such events.  I guess the fact that pageant competitors are real people with real feelings does little to discourage some.

As a good friend of mine once said, I don't know what's worse rating someone on their beauty or insulting them when they win. That's someone’s daughter.

Why is Gibraltar British?

/

The answer may be quite simple: because it is under United Kingdom’s jurisdiction. So it is English by law and military law, and not colonized by Spain as the case of Ceuta and Melilla, many Spanish have the feeling that Gibraltar is something that belongs to them, something that another country has unfairly obtained. But what few know is the reason why the Rock of Gibraltar switched from Spanish to British hands.

Gibraltar (Jabal Tarik)

In November 1st of 1700, Charles II of Austria, called the Bewitched, died without a successor. With it, the Spanish branch of Austria lost the crown of Spain and began one of the greatest conflicts in Europe’s inheritance history.

Just a year before the death of Charles II died Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria, the successor agreed by him and his wife, Mariana of Neuburg, which, days before his death, forced Charles II to rewrite his will, appointing at Louis XIV of France grandson as his successor, Philip of Anjou, in total opposition to his wife and regent who supported the Archduke Charles of Austria.

Louis XIV accepted the will of Charles II in favour of his grandson as news of death of the Spanish monarch in Versailles came. A few weeks later, Louis IV undertakes with Philip V of Spain a trip to Madrid where he’ll submit, in January 22nd of 1701, the new monarch to the Spanish.

This new alliance between the French and Spanish was not well seen in the rest of Europe, forming a few months after the Hague Grand Alliance, uniting the interests of Great Britain, United Provinces of the Netherlands and Roman Empire. The growing tension in May 1702 made this alliance declare war to Spain and France, supported by the Spanish loyal to Archduke Charles and other related realms, thus beginning the War of Spanish Succession.

Philip V of Spain

The war spread over the next 12 years, and the many agreements and battles prevents me from excessive descriptions here, so I will focus on the only fact that matters today, which took place in August 1704: The siege and the taking of Gibraltar.

On August 1st 1704, Anglo-Dutch fleet with Admiral George Rooke in command reached the coast of Gibraltar. The target of the attack was to impose fidelity to Archduke Charles in the Plaza of Gibraltar. This placed a total of 61 fully equipped ships with over 30,000 sailors in the Bay of Algeciras, in front of the Gibraltar port.

Gibraltar at that time had only a medieval fortification reconstructed over 100 years ago by the Berber Tariq ibn Ziyad, the founder of Gibraltar (Jebl Tariq), and a population of only 5,000, of which only 100 were military. While regions such as Catalonia and Balearic defended the sovereignty of Archduke Charles of Austria, Gibraltar and most of southern Andalusia had already begun to show their loyalty to Philip V.

Sergeant Diego de Salinas, as soon as he spotted the great army the coast of Gibraltar, gathered the few military commanders to devise the most effective way to defend the place. He managed to gather a total of 470 men who were divided into different defensive positions in early hours of that day.

The Taking of Gibraltar

That day artillery loads began by the British ships, followed by a descent of more than 3,000 infantry in Punta Mala (the current Puente Mayorga), where they established the camp. That same day the campers sent two letters, one signed by the Prince of Hesse-Darmstadt, who accompanied the attackers and one letter signed by the Archduke Charles, asking in both the immediate surrender and recognition as the legitimate king of Spain.

The surrender did not take place, which is why the next day 1,800 soldiers stood at the isthmus, outside the walls of Gibraltar, while the fleet was doing the same against the coastal wall. A day later, the battle began. In just a day of fierce battle, Gibraltar ended up falling into British hands, but its population did not yield to the hands of the Archduke, so in August 6th, just two days after the fall of the city, virtually all the inhabitants fled to nearby villages, only 70 people staying in Gibraltar, mostly the religious and the wounded.

But once occupation has been settled, Admiral Rooke decided to name the rock under the sovereignty of Queen Anne of England, instead of Archduke Charles which he come to defend. This entailed that during the following nine years, Spanish and French troops tried to unsuccessfully recover Berber territory.

The hostilities ended in 1713, with the signing of the Treaty of Utrecht and so legally Spain ceded the Berber Rock to the British flag.

The Gibraltar flag

During the nearly 300 years that have passed since the capture of Gibraltar, Spain has tried to retake it by diplomatic means, always with unsuccessful results. With the advent of decolonization, many countries strongly criticized the colonial character of the enclave, something to which the British responded by the issue of Ceuta and Melilla, the latest land colonized by Spain until today.

Is Spain waging a cyber war against Gibraltar

/

Recently Julie Girling a British MEP was insulted and harassed via social media sites by Spanish trolls for standing up for the people of Gibraltar. In a world where the lines between reality and cyber reality blur and are hard to distinguish at times, such threats should not be taken lightly. The internet is a powerful tool people are able to distribute information whether factual or not with the simple click of a mouse. Intelligence agencies across the world are aware of this and use the technology appropriately. Elements of these aforementioned agencies are easily able to masquerade as “normal” users whilst successfully spewing their propaganda of choice across the globe whilst not suffering any repercussions as such.

The increasing tensions between Spain and the UK have set off the Spanish Anti-Gibraltar propaganda machine on permanent over drive. An avalanche of misinformation in regards to Gibraltar has been circulating all over the web as of late. For example Spain claims that Gibraltar is a tax haven and a fiscal paradise yet it is white listed by the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). Something it would not be if this were a fact. Such lies are spread continuously and via all means possible including major social media networks such as Facebook and Twitter. It very much seems like Spain’s propaganda machinery has opted to employ Nazi Germany’s ideology of “if you tell a lie big enough and often enough, people will eventually come to believe it”.

I think it is worth noting that the Centro Nacional De Inteligencia (National Centre of Intelligence), once a military dominated agency known as CESID (Centro Superior de Informacion de la Defensa) now directly reports to the Vice president of the Spanish state. Additionally one of José María Aznar's (Prime minister of Spain 1996-2004) key objectives was to gain access to US technologies for espionage. He wove this objective into the negotiations for the review of the 1988 bi-lateral defence agreement with the US. Many believe that this objective was indeed achieved and once this technology was understood it would have probably been used for collection purposes rather than counter-terrorism.

In my opinion the very existence of the Gibraltarian entity angers Spain’s right wing ruling party and if they could they would obliterate them from the face of the earth. Its main objective is to attack the pillars of Gibraltar’s economy and thus force a political capitulation. It is purposely and aggressively targeting Gibraltar and it may even be getting assistance from the most unlikely of sources.

Graham Watson a liberal democrat MEP has always staunchly defended Gibraltar. Unfortunately his colleague Andrew Duff has been far from supportive. He has launched his very own cyber-assault on Gibraltar’s reputation via his twitter page and called us a fiscal paradise (a la Spain) amongst other things. It is hard to understand how two MEPS’ from the same party can have such opposing views on the same subject. Duff might perceive Gibraltar as a stumbling block in his crusade to create the United State of Europe. Duff loves the “we are one” EU notion and vehemently fights for such a cause. That he is quite paly with Raül Romeva i Rueda (a Spanish Green MEP) does not bode well for Gibraltar either.

There are many factors that need to be taken into account and even those who spread blatant lies behind the cloak of anonymity should not be underestimated. Such is the case of Emilio Esteban a self-proclaimed “friend of Gibraltar” whose website friendsofbritishgibraltar.weebly.com was responsible for posting the faces of Guardia Civil guards on the internet. These actions predictably portrayed Gibraltar in a negative light and were even given air time by the Spanish TV channel Tele Cinco. Emilio uses both Twitter and Facebook to attack the inhabitants of the rock whilst falsely claiming he supports a British Gibraltar, when in reality all he does is instigate hate and deceive. He even goes as far as infiltrating social media groups in an attempt to coerce Gibraltarians into providing him with information and photographs. Recently he lambasted the Gibraltar Government for being ‘Anti British’ and claimed that Spanish flags were being flown around the rock. This could not be further from the truth as the people of Gibraltar are proud to be British and in 2002 over 98% of the population voted in favour of remaining British.

People must be educated to understand that not all that they read on the internet is true and that the detrimental effects of cyber intelligence and war fare should be acknowledged and respected. Especially when those using it to their advantage are fully aware of what can be achieved by such means.