Tuesday 30 July 2013

Why Katie Hopkins shouldn't just be laughed at...

Anyone who knows me at all will know that I tend to have very strong opinions about most things and usually I don't keep them to myself. In the past, this trait has been known to get me into trouble but I can't stand the thought of keeping quiet about things that make my blood boil or my heart lurch. I spend so much of my time launching into arguments about, well, anything that matters, I thought I might as well turn it into something productive. So here it is- my first ever blog post and a chance for me to blow off some steam about something that has really, really got to me.

Katie Hopkins. The name alone seems to be enough to provoke a reaction in most people. After her infamous appearance on This Morning, the video of the former Apprentice contestant being slammed by Holly Willoughby went viral, gaining over 3 million views in two days. Hopkins herself gained thousands of Twitter followers and used the opportunity to publish a book on baby names. Whether she truly believes in the vile message she is portraying or whether, as some suggest, the whole thing is merely a desperate publicity stunt (she did have a stint in the jungle for I'm a Celeb, don't forget) it is undeniable that Katie Hopkins has caught Britain's attention.

However, although for the most part people seem to agree that Hopkins is an 'insufferable snob' (as fellow This Morning guest Anna May Mangan branded her), for me this isn't enough. I think she's more dangerous than that, and I really don't think we can simply laugh and ignore her. The message she is promoting is too powerful for that. The crux of the matter is that Hopkins is telling children that they are bound by their names, or essentially, their class. According to Hopkins, if you are called Tyler or Chantelle or one of any number of names she expressed distaste for, your future is already mapped out for you. After all, 'there's a whole set of things that go with children like that', including being late, disruptive and never doing homework.

As a Jodie, I fall well within the category Hopkins has established. She undoubtedly wouldn't want her children to associate with me, I have no prospects and I am probably part of a 'quagmire of underachieving children' that may drag her own precious children down. A quick Google search of my name revealed shockingly similar attitudes, the first article to appear listing Jodie as a ''Chav' name feared by teachers'. So there we have it. I should probably disregard my ambition of securing a university place in August, then.

In an article written for the Daily Mail, Hopkins wrote of how she is 'acutely aware of the benefits of meeting children from like-minded, high achieving families.' Of course, it would be utterly ridiculous to suggest that a child with a name like Tyler could be from a 'high achieving family'. Nor could he possibly be bright or ambitious, or even well-behaved.

It would be incredibly easy to laugh at Hopkins' deluded, old-fashioned ideas and even easier to brand her a snob and be done. But I am angrier than that. Angry that she can promote such a belittling, discouraging and frankly humiliating attitude with such a smug expression plastered across her face. Because if Hopkins believes that children's names and class dictate their prospects, and is willing to share this with millions, what on earth is there to stop a child from believing it too? The problem of self-fulfilling prophecies is not made up and surely attitudes like Hopkins' can only serve to exacerbate it.

I am fiercely proud to be a Jodie and I wouldn't even contemplate letting Katie Hopkins' dated ideas hold me back from doing what I want and achieving what I want. But if there's a chance that somewhere, even one single child could miss out on reaching their potential or fulfilling their ambition because of an ignorant, restrictive set of views, then Hopkins shouldn't even be allowed air-time.