tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-43688068487086152392024-03-14T01:24:24.195+00:00Versatile IdentitiesNotes from a small OtherHelenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-20059668387588918442012-07-27T19:43:00.000+01:002012-07-27T19:50:58.050+01:00"Don't get raped"? Go to hell.<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><a href="http://vagendamag.blogspot.co.uk/">The Vagenda</a> today caused quite a stir with an article entitled<a href="http://vagendamag.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/dont-get-raped-important-message.html"> <i>'Don't Get Raped' - An important message?</i></a> They were responding to<a href="http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2012/07/policing_blame"> feminist criticism</a> of a recently relaunched West Mercia Police campaign that warned, "Don't let a night full of promise turn into a morning full of regret. Don't leave yourself vulnerable to regretful sex or even rape. Drink sensibly". The campaign was widely perceived as victim-blaming, a stance Vagenda disagreed with. The crux of their argument was "it's just basic safety advice".</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Okay. There is nothing wrong with the police advising young people to drink sensibly. Drinking sensibly is almost always an excellent idea. Having a clear head and a sober disposition can enable you to better navigate yourself away from crimes of all types - doubtless that is true. But "safety tips" like this as a means of rape prevention are wrongheaded on two counts. Firstly, they don't work. And secondly, they <i>do</i> encourage victim blaming and encourage self-blaming by victims.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Safety tips to avoid rape do not prevent rape. Most rapes are perpetrated by someone the victim knows; often a boyfriend, husband or partner; often in their own home; often in their own bed. So when I say that there are literally no lengths a woman can go to that will actually prevent her being raped, please understand how true that is. You can be the safest woman in the world and still get raped.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">That is not to say that we should all just give up and go home. But it does mean that we should be highly skeptical of anyone who claims "women should [insert behaviour here], it's just safer".</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The argument is a slippery slope. In this particular case, it goes, "women should drink sensibly, it's just safer". Okay. In the Vagenda piece, the author also strongly advocates that women should always take taxis home at night - it's just safer. But don't forget,<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/14/taxi-rapist-worboys"> taxi</a> <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jail-term-for-taxi-driver-rapist-khalile-maqsood-7643593.html">drivers</a><a href="http://www.bucksherald.co.uk/news/local-news/rapist-taxi-driver-deported-to-pakistan-1-3853550"> can</a> <a href="http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/9682600.Newport_taxi_rapist_may_have_more_victims___police/">be</a> <a href="http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kentonline/news/2012/july/6/unlicensed_taxi_driver_gifford.aspx">rapists</a>, so you should always make sure you have someone with you. It's just safer. And while we're at it, women should carry a rape alarm at all times and hold their keys between their fingers whenever walking outside alone, just in case. It's just safer. And obviously avoid walking anywhere that's dark, it's just safer. Ah, hell, we probably shouldn't go out at all. It's just safer. Wait, what was that about a large proportion of rapes being perpetrated by the victim's partner in her home?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I'm currently reading The Women's Room by Marilyn French. At one point she recounts the sexual politics of 1950s suburban America that keeps one of the characters confined to her home and prevents her from working. Although she'd like to get a job, her husband is too worried that she'll be out in the world - with men! - all day and he wouldn't be there to protect her. He thinks it's too risky, so he insists she must stay at home. It's just safer.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">This example appears ludicrous to us in the 21st century. Of course we don't expect women to try and avoid rape by remaining confined to their home at all times. But the fact that we accept messages like "women should drink sensibly, it's just safer", and not this one, is an arbitrary distinction. Once you decide it's quite right that women should limit and restrict their behaviour in order to try and avoid male violence, it's just a question of where you draw the line. And how on earth will you decide where to draw it? Where does "basic safety advice" end and policing women's behaviour begin?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">And let's not pretend we've come so, so far from the 1950s now. Do you remember that chain email that used to go around in the early 00s that contained safety tips for women? It included handy hints like, "cut your hair short, because an attacker can grab onto long hair!" (<a href="http://relandothompkins.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/10-ways-to-end-rape.jpg?w=490&h=674">Here's a much more constructive list of top tips</a>.)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">It is true, I'm sure, that some rapes (a minority, but some) could have been avoided if the victim had not been drinking. And some people who support the West Mercia campaign will say "if it prevents just one woman being raped, it's worth it". But that is spectacularly missing the point. In the sentence "some rapes could have been avoided if the victim had [x]", x can be almost anything. Cut her hair short. Chosen a different path to go jogging. Not got into a relationship. Stayed at home. Had enough money for a taxi. Worn different shoes. Not fallen asleep at a close friend's house. We neither can nor should campaign for women to limit their behaviour in all these different ways. None of it will actually prevent rape.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">END OF PART ONE.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Not only does the "safety tips" approach not work, but it also encourages victim blaming. Vagenda resolutely asserts that they are not victim blaming, they hate victim blaming, etc. Okay. But let's suppose you're a woman who sees that poster the day after you were raped whilst drunk. Let's read it again. "Don't let a night full of promise turn into a morning full of regret. Don't leave yourself vulnerable to regretful sex or even rape". Yes, you think. My night was full of promise. And I let it turn into a morning full of regret. I left myself vulnerable to rape.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">To reiterate: the message that a police campaign poster wants rape victims to internalise is "<i>I let this happen</i>". That is why the campaign is perceived as victim blaming - because it actively encourages victims to blame themselves.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">As a result of that, they're much less likely to confide in anyone about what happened, or call a rape crisis helpline to talk it through, let alone report it to the police. Indeed, why on earth would they want to report it to a police force that has <i>already told them</i> they brought this upon themselves?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I have been in the unfortunate position of having a friend turn to me after she was raped. She had been drinking and taking drugs with the perpetrator before the attack. She didn't call it rape when she talked to me about it. After all, she'd gone back to his place. She'd kissed him. And she wasn't in a sober state of mind. Not only did she blame herself for what happened, she wasn't even sure if he had done something wrong.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">This self-blame is exactly what campaigns like West Mercia's perpetuate, and that's why I was so, so disappointed to see Vagenda come out in support of it. At one point in their blog post, the author writes, "</span><span style="background-color: #fafafa; line-height: 19px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">If you are raped, it is absolutely not your fault." So </span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I'm </span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">sure they would agree my friend was not to blame and that the only person responsible for her rape was her rapist. But how can they reconcile that message with this one</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">: "</span><span style="background-color: #fafafa; line-height: 19px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">until some men stop raping, we all have a duty to protect ourselves the best we can"? Is it not true that by that logic, my friend failed to do her duty and adequately protect herself? And in that case, how can Vagenda logically maintain that she does not share in the responsibility for her rape?</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The best way I can think to summarise all this is to repeat something I tweeted to Vagenda earlier: <span style="background-color: whitesmoke; line-height: 17.77777862548828px;"><i>"Drink sensibly" = good advice. "Drink sensibly unless you want to get raped" = not helpful.</i> I think it's pretty clear the West Mercia campaign falls into the latter category, and on that basis, I urge Vagenda to reconsider whether this campaign is really as innocuous as it seems.</span></span>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-77573136241272864182012-04-21T11:02:00.000+01:002012-04-21T11:02:51.739+01:00Bricking ItIn the last two weeks, Samantha Brick has become a household name thanks to her fabled <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CFYQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Ffemail%2Farticle-2124246%2FSamantha-Brick-downsides-looking-pretty-Why-women-hate-beautiful.html&ei=xXmST8ORJsqw0AXRhKHkAQ&usg=AFQjCNGUZRv3mwlKY0BhT4VHi-A2XDWbEQ">Daily Mail article</a> on how beautiful she is and how awful it is. At first there seemed to be one resounding reaction from the blogosphere, twitterverse, and real life: you ain't all that, love. Comments focused on the fact that she's not even that pretty and clearly has an inflated sense of self-esteem.<br />
<br />
It wasn't until I read a piece in Grazia (of all places! Probably the magazine most devoted to putting women down!) with a different perspective that I started to question the dominant narrative on Samantha Brick. The piece, a letter from the editor, took the view that most women struggle with deep insecurities over our looks, and if there's a woman out there with the confidence to assert that she is beautiful, then good for her.<br />
<br />
And I agree with that. But then I thought about it. Brick's article wasn't just a paean to her beauty. It was primarily a criticism of the way other women treat her because, allegedly, of her beauty. She did nothing to suggest that other women should feel just as good as she does about her looks, it was all "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWLdsqhYVxM#t=00m040s">you hate me because I'm beautiful, well I don't like you either</a>" bitchy cheerleader bullshit. And I think that's why people have reacted so badly to it. If the angle had been "I'm awesome and stunning, and I wish other women could see themselves the same way" she probably would still have been mocked, but not with the same vitriol. She probably would have even got some applause from the feminist blogosphere.<br />
<br />
At the end of the day, 99% of the world reacted to her article the way they did because the stories she tells about being treated differently due to her beauty don't match up with her appearance. I'm trying not to be yet another voice denigrating her face - as the Grazia editor hypocritically pointed out, we have enough of those already - and it's absolutely true she is a conventionally attractive woman. But it doesn't take a close analytical reading to see that it's her attitude and her behaviour, rather than her appearance, that make women turn their backs on her.<br />
<br />
This wasn't an article about Samantha Brick, this was an article about the evils of all the women in the world who aren't Samantha Brick, and it was never going to go down well with a female audience who already have to put up with that shit 24/7. I'm all for boosting women's self esteem and I'm glad Brick thinks she's gorgeous. If all women had her self-belief, the world could be a happier, more equal place. But being confident in yourself should mean you don't feel the need to tear other people down, and on that front, Brick has a lot to learn.Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-7987944194235070822011-11-26T13:46:00.002+00:002011-12-17T17:42:58.045+00:00(UPDATED) An open letter to Steve Burton, Transport for London's Director of Community Safety, Enforcement and Policing<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">On Tuesday night I was watching tv with a couple of my female housemates. An ad break came on and suddenly we were watching a simulated rape. It was the latest development in Transport for London's victim-blaming Cabwise campaign. The current ad isn't on Youtube yet but it's similar to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Xe7M8aKLRU">previous ads</a>. As the advert finished we all felt disturbed and deeply unhappy that TfL felt that was an appropriate way to spread the message that unlicensed cabs can be dangerous.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Back in October last year, I wrote a <a href="http://versatileidentities.blogspot.com/2010/10/stop-please-no-please-please-stop.html">blog post about the Cabwise campaign</a> in reference to a poster I'd seen, so I almost felt there was no reason to have another go this time around. Then, thanks to being on the TfL mailing list, I received this email:</span><br />
<br />
<blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Dear Ms Jones,<br />
I am writing to remind you that unbooked minicabs picked up off the street are dangerous and put you at risk of sexual assault. The safest way to get a minicab home is to:<br />
Book it - by phone, email or in a minicab office to guarantee your trip is carried out by a licensed, insured driver and vehicle<br />
Check it’s yours - ask the driver to confirm your name and destination before you get in the car, and check the driver’s photo ID<br />
Sit in the back - and carry your mobile in case of an emergency<br />
Our Cabwise text service makes it easier to find and book a licensed minicab or taxi near you. Text CAB to 60835* to receive three local cab numbers.<br />
For further details please visit tfl.gov.uk/cabwise<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Yours sincerely,<br />
Steve Burton<br />
Director of Community Safety, Enforcement and Policing</span></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Since he'd gone to all the trouble of contacting me, I thought I'd let him know what I thought of his handiwork. If you are unhappy with the Cabwise campaign I invite to you contact him at </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; white-space: nowrap;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><a href="mailto:steve.burton@tfl.gov.uk">steve.burton@tfl.gov.uk</a>.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">Dear Steve,</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">Thank you for this timely reminder. After seeing the latest Cabwise television advert last night I had been planning to contact TfL to complain about it.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">I am glad that you recognise how huge and serious a problem it is that large numbers of women are raped by unlicensed cab drivers each year. I understand that Transport for London appears to believe that the best way to combat this horrific reality is to scare women out of taking unlicensed taxi cabs. However, my concern is that this approach is both deeply harmful and utterly unhelpful both for rape survivors and those who will go on to suffer the same fate in the future.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">The advert makes every effort to simulate the experience of a rape. This is no doubt intended to be "hard hitting", to make women stop and think before they make a decision about how to get home. What doesn't appear to have been considered is the effect this advert will have on the millions of women in this country who have survived rape and sexual assault. Without any shadow of a doubt, that advert will force them to relive a deeply traumatic experience and trigger memories they may have struggled for years to put behind them. This approach has been used by Cabwise time and time again. In October 2010 I wrote a blog post about a poster I saw displayed in tube stations (</span><a href="http://versatileidentities.blogspot.com/2010/10/stop-please-no-please-please-stop.html" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #1155cc; font-weight: bold;" target="_blank">http://versatileidentities.<wbr></wbr>blogspot.com/2010/10/stop-<wbr></wbr>please-no-please-please-stop.<wbr></wbr>html</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">). Please note the comment underneath: "My girlfriend has been raped and she relives that awful moment every time she sees this advert on TV."</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">As I wrote then, TfL appears to be of the opinion that creating pain and trauma for rape victims is a necessary price to raise awareness of the dangers of unlicensed cabs. I might find that more convincing if the adverts didn't also actively contribute to a culture of victim blaming that can only serve to hurt future rape victims.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;"><b>Every Cabwise advert I have ever witnessed, both on television and displayed in tube stations, puts the responsibility for rape firmly on the victim. Your latest television ad tells us: "know what you're getting into". The poster I wrote about before read, "whether you approach the driver, or they approach you, there's no record of the journey and you're putting yourself in danger". To reiterate, the message is that if you get raped after taking an unlicensed taxi, it's because<i> </i></b></span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;"><b><i>you</i></b></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;"><b><i> </i>put </b></span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;"><i>yourself</i></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;"> in danger. I can hardly believe I have to say this, but:</span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;"> <i>the only person to blame for rape is the rapist</i></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">. The reason why so many women are raped by unlicensed cab drivers is not that women persist in taking unlicensed cabs, it is that drivers of unlicensed cabs choose to rape women.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">If you genuinely want to help end the rape that is happening on your watch, you need to figure out how to get unlicensed drivers off the streets and how to prevent them posing a danger to women. Your approach will not end rape. What it does is encourages victims to blame themselves and discourages them from coming forward and taking their attacker to justice.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">Please put yourself for a moment into the shoes of a woman who has been raped after taking an unlicensed cab and sees your adverts. The message she receives is that she caused it; she is responsible for it; she is to blame for it. After all, she'll think, she should have "known what she was getting into". It is extremely common for victims of rape and sexual assault to examine their own behaviour and seek any possible wrongdoing on their part so that they can make sense of the attack by blaming themselves. Your ad campaign encourages this.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">This will prevent women reporting their attacker and trying to get a conviction. If she's to blame, why should the police listen to her? Why should a judge take her seriously? She'll probably also be put off seeking support from her friends and family or from professionals, as her experience then becomes a source of shame and guilt for her - when the </span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;"><i>only</i> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">person who should be feeling ashamed and guilty is the rapist.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">It's also extremely harmful to perpetuate the idea that women can prevent being raped by taking safety precautions. The fact is that the vast majority of rape victims do not experience what Ken Clarke earlier this year termed "classic rape". They do not usually suffer at the hands of a stranger who leapt out from behind a bush or grabbed them in the back of his taxi. The vast majority are raped by someone they already know, usually a partner or ex partner, usually in their home or a similar space which is not generally understood to be risky or dangerous. Telling women that they can avoid rape by avoiding unlicensed taxis is fundamentally untrue and unhelpful.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">All the feedback I have seen from rape support and campaigning groups about the Cabwise adverts has been negative, so I'm inclined to believe that you did not consult any such groups in planning this ongoing ad campaign, which, given its content, seems like an inexcusable oversight. I would invite you to consider some of the much more constructive work on rape prevention which has been done in the last few years: for example, Lambeth Council's </span><a href="http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/knowthedifference" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #1155cc; font-weight: bold;" target="_blank">Know the Difference</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;"> campaign or the </span><a href="http://www.notever.co.uk/" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #1155cc; font-weight: bold;" target="_blank">Not Ever</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;"> campaign by Rape Crisis Scotland. These both recognise what Cabwise resolutely fails to: that the only way to stop rape is to stop men from committing it. I also invite you to read some of the anonymous accounts of their experiences rape and sexual assault survivors have written and shared on the collaborative blog </span><a href="http://weretelling.tumblr.com/page/10" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #1155cc; font-weight: bold;" target="_blank">We're Telling</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">. I am happy to recommend further reading which may help you and your team to develop an understanding of the complex issues surrounding rape and sexual assault.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">In the interests of full disclosure I should inform you that I intend to publish this letter on my blog as a follow up from the aforementioned post, as well as any reply I receive from you. I would be happy to enter into ongoing private correspondence to work constructively with TfL and help you to develop more appropriate and less harmful advertising materials in the future.</span><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><br style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;">I look forward to hearing from you.</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222; font-weight: bold;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;">This email was sent on Wednesday the 23rd of November. On the 12th of December I received the following reply:</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<br />
<blockquote><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Dear Helen</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Thank you for your email in which you raised concerns about the latest Cabwise television ad. I am sorry about the delay in replying to you but I have been out of the office</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The ad you refer to is part of this year’s Safer Travel at Night (STAN) campaign which aims to raise awareness of the serious dangers of unbooked minicabs, particularly to women, through hard hitting and thought provoking imagery and messages and provide the public with information on safer travel options including licensed taxis and minicabs. </span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Any minicab journey, even those licensed by TfL, that isn’t booked through a minicab office is illegal and is potentially dangerous. Unbooked minicabs continue to pose a serious risk to the travelling public and can be a cover for some of the most serious crimes in London including sexual violence committed by strangers. Furthermore, these ‘cabs’ are unregulated and uninsured for the purposes of carrying passengers.</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The campaign has been informed by extensive evaluation and pre testing research with focus groups of women who use unbooked minicabs. While it is definitely not our intention to upset or blame women, we are determined to do everything we can to stop Londoners and visitors to London from becoming victims of offences committed by unbooked minicab drivers. Our research has shown that strong hard hitting and thought provoking messaging is the most effective way of raising awareness and persuading women not to use unbooked minicabs, which is why the campaign highlights the risks of getting into unbooked minicabs. </span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">We work closely with the police, the Suzy Lamplugh Trust and other relevant organisations to make sure that the messages in the campaign are effective but not inappropriate or likely to cause unnecessary distress. Furthermore, this element of the campaign is supported by a strong press and communications strategy to raise the profile of enforcement action being taken against perpetrators of cab-related sexual offences and illegal touting.</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The marketing and communications campaign is only one part of the STAN initiative, a partnership between TfL, the Mayor of London and the police which aims to make travelling in the Capital safer at night. STAN also involves enforcement activity (including police action) to crack down on unbooked minicabs, licensing and regulation of the taxi and minicab trade, delivering improved late night travel services (there are now 114 buses running through the night, more than ever before), enhanced travel information and public education. </span></span><span style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="color: black;">TfL works closely with the Metropolitan Police Service and the City of London Police to tackle unbooked minicabs and now funds 68 dedicated cab enforcement officers. The Unit has made almost 8,000 arrests for touting and other cab-related offences since 2003. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color: black;">The Unit’s core activities include evening patrols in the hotspot locations from Wednesday to Saturday, covert anti-touting operations, high </span><span style="color: black;">visibility</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color: black;"> enforcement activities to detect and deter illegal cab drivers, vehicle and licence checks and crime prevention activities. The Unit carries out around 600 additional planned enforcement activities and operations in addition to the core anti-touting patrols every Thursday – Saturday evenings. Operation STAN </span><span style="color: black;">is running across London over three weekends in December when more people are out and about and the demand for late night travel increases. The multi-agency operation aims to deter illegal cab activity and get people home safely during the festive period.<u></u><u></u></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="color: black;"><br />
</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span lang="EN-US" style="color: black;">A proactive sexual offences team has also been established in the Cab Enforcement </span><span style="color: black;">to enhance activity around cab-related sexual offences by targeting sexual predators and minimise the risk of attack. The team works closely with the MPS Serious Crime Directorate, the unit responsible for improving victim care and investigating sexual offences, to identify and apprehend sexual predators.<u></u><u></u></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="color: black;"><br />
</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">STAN has been extremely successful in reducing cab-related sexual offences, a 37% reduction since 2002/3 and reducing the demand for illegal cabs. The latest market research shows that the proportion of women using illegal cabs in London has fallen from 19% in 2003 to 3% in 2011.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Steve</span></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969); color: #222222;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Apparently the ads are not "likely to cause unnecessary distress". Tell that to a rape survivor who's triggered by them. I also noticed he mentions that TfL work with the Suzy Lamplugh Trust and other "relevant organisations" in developing the ads. The Suzy Lamplugh Trust is an organisation which campaigns for better personal safety awareness. Their website states: "</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #222222; line-height: 18px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Personal safety is a life skill that can be learnt." No surprise, then, that they would not challenge TfL's victim-blaming stance. Steve did not mention the involvement of any rape crisis centres or similar organisations supporting survivors of rape, so I can only assume my assumption that none were consulted was correct. Surely that would be the single most relevant organisation that could possibly be involved?</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.917969);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"> If you would like to tell Steve what you think of the campaign, email him at <a href="http://www.blogger.com/goog_960709399">s</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="mailto:teve.burton@tfl.gov.uk">teve.burton@tfl.gov.uk</a>. </span></span></div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com51tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-15519882177234350812011-10-02T19:02:00.001+01:002011-10-02T19:03:50.804+01:00What do we ask of one another when we ask one another to identify as feminist?<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">I recently came across a blog post - which, annoyingly, I can't find now - that reminded me a lot of this well-known discussion of self-identifying as a feminist:</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"><a href="http://tomatonation.com/culture-and-criticism/yes-you-are/"><span style="color: blue;">Yes, You Are</span></a>. It's a fantastic piece and I recommend you read</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">the whole thing but the key message is this:</span><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><blockquote style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">If you believe in, support, look fondly on, hope for, and/or work towards equality of the sexes, you are a feminist.</span></b></blockquote><br />
<blockquote style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"></span></b><b><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> Yes, you are.</span></b></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">In other words, whether you like it or not, whether you agree or not, whether you choose to adopt the label or not, if you believe in gender equality then you are a feminist. This position is one that I've always enthusiastically agreed with, and I try to advocate for wherever possible; I dislike the idea that "feminist" is an exclusive label reserved for those who read Judith Butler, or who march to take back the night, or who use 'Ms' rather than 'Miss'. I still feel this way, and even though there are deep divisions of thought within the broad movement of feminism, I believe there's space for us all around the big, diverse, feminist table.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">But lately I've been thinking. When I know someone self-identifies as a feminist, I tend to expect (or at least hope for) a little more from them than if they didn't. I'm more likely to invite them to a rally or protest, and more likely to feel disappointed if they don't want to come. I'm more likely to start a conversation with them about an issue of gender inequality, and more likely to feel disappointed if I find they don't see it the same way. I expect them not to use sexist language, not to make sexist jokes, rape jokes, or jokes about domestic violence, and not to enable people who do. So there's a conflict here: while on the one hand I want to say that the bar for self-identifying as a feminist is set really low, so low that most people qualify for it, on the other hand when someone does accept that self-definition, suddenly the bar has risen. That seems unfair.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Imagine the following conversation -<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">A: You believe in equality, right? So why don't you call yourself a feminist?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">B: Fair enough. Okay, I am a feminist. Now I'm going to go and watch</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> </span><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"><a href="http://www.richardherring.com/warmingup/?id=2354"><span style="color: blue;">that film with that hilarious attempted rape scene</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">A: What? How can you watch that? I thought you were a feminist!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">See? Problem.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">One of the things that prompted this train of thought was a post from a feminist blogger in the wake of the UK Feminista Summer School earlier this year.</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> </span><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;"><a href="http://madamjmo.blogspot.com/2011/08/what-about-mens.html"><span style="color: blue;">Here</span></a>, Madam J Mo writes:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 15.75pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><blockquote><span style="color: #323232; font-family: Georgia, serif;">... Matt’s Powerpoint display flashed up <a href="http://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=447"><span style="color: #cb0033; text-decoration: none;">the overused image of Bill Bailey wearing Fawcett’s ‘This is what a feminist looks like’ t-shirt</span></a>. This is an image that most people agree has been publicised to death because it’s, like, a funny man, and he’s wearing a feminist t-shirt, titter titter. But shockingly the giggles in the room were fresh – many people seemed not to have seen this photo before. But how could they have missed it? It’s been all over Fawcett’s website for a verrrrrry long time, and it’s all over the internet. The only way they could have missed it was if (gulp) they had never been to the Fawcett website. But they’re feminists. How could they NOT have been to the Fawcett website? (The tailback of implications here is terrifying, considering all of the attendees at the conference were self-identifying feminists.)</span></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5pt;"><span style="color: #323232; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Personally, I don't find it terrifying that someone who identifies as a feminist may never have been on the Fawcett website. I think it's very probable that there are many awesome feminists who don't even know what the Fawcett Society is. But I wonder whether Madam J Mo fell into the same trap I described above - wanting anyone who looks fondly upon gender equality to identify as a feminist, then expecting more of them when they do so. And if I'm wrong about that, I wonder what her criteria for qualifying as a feminist include, apart from visiting the Fawcett website.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5pt;"><span style="color: #323232; font-family: Georgia, serif;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5pt;"><span style="color: #323232; font-family: Georgia, serif;">I guess the conclusion to be drawn here is that perhaps that we should try to be aware of this problem when we talk to other self-identifying feminists, and, if our goal is to ensure that all people who <b>are</b> feminists identify as such, we should try not to expect too much of them. I know that conclusion sounds thoroughly depressing in some ways, but I don't see how it does any good to alienate rather than accommodate those people whose feminism doesn't identically match our own.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5pt;"><span style="color: #323232; font-family: Georgia, serif;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5pt;"><span style="color: #323232; font-family: Georgia, serif;">I find it easier to come to terms with this solution when I think about the development of my own feminism. If I met a self-identifying feminist who spouted the thoughts and ideas that I did at 14, I might feel that her brand of feminism was somehow incomplete or sub-par. I might feel disappointed in her lack of radicalism or her failure to let her feminist principles influence her day-to-day life and relationships. But if, when I was 14, someone I saw as a fellow feminist had condescended to me like that, told me I was doing it wrong, suggested I hadn't earned the title of feminist - well, that could have put me off identifying as one for good, and I never would have ended up where I am now. And I still don't have all the answers; my views are constantly shifting and developing, as I hope most people's are. We aren't entitled to feel disappointed in other people's feminism because there is no single perfect form of feminism for us to unify around. So I suppose, as much as it galls me to say it, you can go off and enjoy that godawful film and still identify as a feminist. Because neither I nor anyone else has the authority to say you can't.</span></div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-40883961448673553432011-08-14T19:26:00.002+01:002011-08-15T17:52:05.775+01:00Brave enough to mobilise, too shy to socialise: reflections on UK Feminista's Summer School 2011<div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Although I’ve self-defined as a feminist for as long as I can remember, it’s only in the last four years or so that I’ve started taking my feminism seriously and made it central to my life – and only in about the last year I’ve done anything that I consider “activism”. I had never volunteered for any kind of feminist cause before October 2010; I had never tried to create anything that would benefit women until <a href="http://www.weretelling.tumblr.com/">We’re Telling</a> in December 2010; the first time I took to the streets over a feminist issue was mere months ago at the London Slutwalk. The way I see it, even if I’ve always been a feminist, I was a pretty crappy feminist until relatively recently (or, to put it the way I did yesterday, I’ve been radicalised by the Tories).</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The UK Feminista Summer School of 2011 marks the first time I have attended any sort of large scale feminist event other than a protest, so it was interesting for me on a number of levels: firstly, and obviously, to see what went on, what kind of debates took place, what everyone was like; and secondly, to see how I would behave in that kind of environment, when I’m more accustomed to being the only feminist in the room.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I’ll talk about the Summer School first. Overall, it was great. I came away from most sessions feeling energised and motivated to go out into the world and act, which is presumably kind of the point. There were some pretty glaring issues around diversity – while the programme contained a high proportion of workshops around the intersectionality of gender and race, the event hadn’t actually attracted that many BME women. Other intersections were essentially ignored – most conspicuous in its absence was anything around sexuality or gender identity, but it would also have been good to see something that dealt with disability, mental health, size privilege, etc. Hopefully the event organisers will take this criticism on board for next year, as it’s one I’ve heard coming from all corners.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I’ll just talk about one workshop – one of the most insightful and thought-provoking ones I attended, <i>Engaging Women in Collective Action: insights from social psychology</i>. Essentially this covered the science of why people get involved in activism, and one of the biggest things I took away was to do with what kind of activism engages people better: promotion (i.e. we are trying to achieve [x] positive thing!) or prevention (i.e. [x] negative thing will happen if we don’t act!). Turns out framing things in terms of prevention has been shown time and again to be more successful than promotion. This was a bit of a surprise to me at first: aren’t we, after all, trying to make the world a better place? In short, no we’re not: we’re trying to prevent the world becoming a shittier place or remaining as shitty a place as it already is. Over the next day and a half it started to sink in that this was absolutely right. One of the big campaigns that saw a lot of attention over the weekend was <a href="http://www.nowomennopeace.org/">No Women, No Peace</a> – prevention. One of the other talks touched on the <a href="http://www.refuge.org.uk/cms_content_refuge/attachments/0803-No%20Recourse-No%20Safety.pdf">No Recourse, No Safety</a> campaign – prevention. What was Slutwalk about? Rejecting victim-blaming – prevention. Why did I attend a Pro-Choice Demo recently? Because there’s an attack on our reproductive rights – prevention. So that kind of blew my mind.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">As far as what the Summer School was like for me, unfortunately I have to say I was largely disappointed in myself. I didn’t dare to go up to any of the speakers or workshop facilitators I found inspirational and tell them so. I did speak to the people around me, but only once gave out any kind of contact details. I was ultimately too anxious to attend the social event arranged for Saturday night and instead shut myself off, hermit-like, in my Birmingham University student accommodation (I did, however, get an amazing night’s sleep for the first time in a long time). I do regret not using this weekend as an opportunity to network and promote <a href="http://www.1in4women.com/">my own work</a> and connect with women who could help me to achieve the things I want to achieve. I keep asking myself, why am I confident enough to go out in public wielding a sign that says “<b>HEY, DORRIES! IF I’M A SLUT, YOU’RE ONE TOO</b>” but not confident enough to go up to someone and tell them they’re awesome? I don’t know – but I know I have to work on that. Maybe next year I’ll be braver.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">On the other hand, participating in the workshops, I was in my element whenever a topic was opened up to discussion. It felt just like being in a university seminar, an environment where I’ve never had trouble speaking my mind. In fact, the whole experience made me think about my own struggle over academic feminism a lot. But that’s a story for another blog post...</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">When the Summer School feedback form asked me what I liked most about the event, my answer was this: being in a community of feminists and amazing, inspirational women. There was so much talk of the power of women this weekend and I honestly feel strengthened by the experience. I intend to make a much bigger effort to go to local feminist groups and events, because if it is possible to feel like I feel right now more often, then why the hell would I pass up that opportunity?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">To round up, for anyone reading this who kind of wishes they had been there: go to Go Feminist or Fem 11, two big feminist events coming up! I’ll probably go to at least one of them so let me know if you want to join me. And if you were at the Summer School, please <a href="http://www.twitter.com/absinthetweets">follow me on Twitter</a> and don’t hold it against me that I was a bit too shy and nervous to talk to you more! <a href="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-EZZDc5vtbj8/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAaA/PiP6qF_ePJ8/photo.jpg?sz=200">This</a> is kind of what I look like, except normally without the wreath of flowers, in case anyone remembers me. Peace out yo!</span></div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-23789357176963087802011-06-10T20:03:00.000+01:002011-06-10T20:03:00.889+01:00In Defence of Slutwalk<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Since the announcement of the<a href="https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=170740926316002"> London Slutwalk</a> I've seen a lot of criticism of the idea and, especially, the name of the event. These have come from the usual corners - right-wing and old-school commentators - but also, in a large part, from feminists. The degree of negative response from feminists has surprised and disappointed me. This is my last-ditch attempt to convince you that, if you care at all about women, if you care at all about stopping rape, you <i style="font-weight: bold;">should </i>join me tomorrow afternoon and (slut)walk along with the other thousands who will attend.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I suppose I must start with the name.</span></u><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></u><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I can't remember any other occasion when the name of an event, institution, or organisation has been analysed as closely as this one - certainly no other occasion on which disagreeing with the name was considered a sufficient condition for boycotting it altogether. I see no more sense in refusing to attend Slutwalk because it contains "slut" and you dislike the word than in refusing, for example, to read <a href="http://www.thefword.org.uk/">The F Word</a> because it intimates a swear word and you dislike swearing. But there it is: for a lot of people, the name is important. I happen to think it is a fantastic name.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Let's talk about sluts. "Slut" is an imaginary concept, not one based in reality. It does not refer to any one single kind of person or any single kind of behaviour. You can qualify as a slut by doing just about anything.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">You cheated on your husband? Slut. You slept with a married man? Slut. You've slept with "too many" men, where "too many" is defined by the subjective terms of someone else? Slut, obviously. You slept with the wrong guy - someone's ex, someone's brother, someone's friend they fancied even though you didn't know that? Slut. You've kissed a lot of guys? Slut. You flirt with a lot of guys? Slut. You choose to dance in a particular way? Slut. You choose to wear certain items of clothing? Slut.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I'm reminded of the scene at the start of High Fidelity, where John Cusak's character is a child with his first girlfriend. She dumps him the next week for someone else. He's out with a friend and they both see her kissing her new boyfriend on the benches, and what does his buddy say to try to make him feel better?<br />
<br />
"Slut."</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">So that's the base line we're talking about. If you kiss one guy, and then later on you kiss another guy, someone can and will call you a slut. So please, for the love of all that is holy, can we stop talking like there is such a thing as a slut and that this is a very bad thing? If anyone's a slut, everyone is a slut. That's how low the bar is set: so low that everyone qualifies.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">That, to me, is what the name "Slutwalk" captures. You want to call some women sluts because they dress in a certain way? You have to answer to all of us. If she's a slut, we're all sluts, and you'd better watch out because the sluts are organising.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Can this reasonably be called "reclaiming" the word "slut"? Maybe. The power of reclaiming, in my opinion, is that it means someone insults you and you defeat them by refusing to take it as an insult. The exchange would be:<br />
"You're a slut."<br />
"Sure I am, what's your point?"</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Now I agree to a certain extent with the writers and commentators who see "slut" as being too hateful to reclaim. I myself can't imagine being called a slut and hearing it neutrally, rather than loaded with bile. My response, as above, would not be "sure I am" but "well, if I am, we all are, including you" - which is rather different. The idea that Slutwalk is <i style="font-weight: bold;">about</i> reclaiming "slut" is, in my opinion, simply wrong, and I've found it frustrating that so many people have decided not to go on the basis that they don't want to support that agenda.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Pulling in the same direction</span></u><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The name has been a major focal point for feminist criticism of Slutwalk, and there has been a lot of feminist criticism: I've seen articles and blog posts aplenty by women explaining why they won't be attending Slutwalk, even though (of course) they agree that no woman is to blame for her rape regardless of what she wears. I despair at this. Here's my take:</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">If we all want the same thing, we need to work together.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
If you and I agree that we need to combat victim-blaming, that "dressing like sluts" has nothing to do with the reality of rape, that we need to protect survivors, not abusers, then we are pulling in the same direction and we need to support each other on that basis. Maybe we don't agree 100% on every issue. Maybe there are legitimate debates to be had over one aspect or another. But if we share the same end goal, we should <i style="font-weight: bold;">not</i> be deliberately dividing ourselves from one another. <b>The only people who should be railing against Slutwalk are the people who do not share its aims.</b> Its primary aim is to combat victim-blaming culture. If you're on board with that, you should be there with us in London tomorrow.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The trouble with us 21st century feminists is we're all so keen to pick at one another. There's so much fighting within the movement we never join together <i style="font-weight: bold;">as</i> a movement. And I'm worried if this trend continues there'll soon be no movement left to speak of. Critique is good. Debate is good. But when we're all pulling in the same direction, we need to be working together.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The comments that started it all</span></u><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></u><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">To move on, one of the more common criticisms of Slutwalk I've heard from non-feminists is that it is a disproportionate response to a very minor incident. The incident, as reported, is that a police officer said the following while addressing a university:</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">"<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; line-height: 18px;">I've been told I'm not supposed to say this - however, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised."</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">One police officer saying one stupid, wrong thing has sparked a worldwide movement. Is that disproportionate? It's not, because his views are replicated across Western society. You know how I know that? By the overwhelming number of people whose response to Slutwalk has been to say "obviously rape is the rapist's fault, <i style="font-weight: bold;">but...</i>"</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I've seen time and again this response - believed to be a moderate, sensible, realistic point of view by the person expressing it - that women need to accept that the way they dress and the way they behave has an impact on the likelihood of them getting raped. That dressing modestly and avoiding excess alcohol are simply sensible anti-rape precautions to take, like locking your door at night. This is what victim-blaming looks like, and it is a source of anger on two levels: because it's fucked up, and because it's factually wrong.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">It's fucked up to tell someone who has been raped that it was her fault. It's fucked up to point to <i style="font-weight: bold;">her</i> behaviour and use it to justify a rapist raping her. It's fucked up to be on the side of the rapist. If you can't agree with that, I have no hope for you.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">It is also factually wrong to suggest that the clothes a woman wears have a direct impact on the likelihood of her getting raped. The vast majority - at least 85% - of women who are raped know their attackers. Rapists are boyfriends, ex-boyfriends, friends, family members, trusted adults. Overwhelmingly they are not evil men lurking in dark alleys waiting to jump out at a scantily-clad woman. Statistically, the biggest risk factor for a woman in terms of experiencing male violence is being in an intimate relationship with a man. Yet people are so desperate to pretend that what a woman wears has a serious impact on rapists. Trust me, it doesn't.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Fundamental misunderstandings</span></u><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Blaming "sluts" for getting raped demonstrates a basic lack of knowledge about how the vast majority of rapes happen. The general public have in their minds only a few pictures of what rape can be. One is the - as Ken Clarke would call it - "classic" rape scenario where a man jumps out at his unsuspecting victim from behind a bush at night. One is the "date rape" scenario, where a woman is plied with drink until her defences are sufficiently down that she cannot resist her attacker. There is very little awareness and understanding of the kind of rape that makes up many women's realities: a trusted partner or friend abuses that trust in the worst possible way.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The same fundamental misunderstanding underpins Nadine Dorries' plans for sex education to compulsorily include teaching girls to say "no". This is a pointless endeavour unless you are simultaneously teaching boys to <i style="font-weight: bold;">listen</i> to "no" - to <i style="font-weight: bold;">care</i> when they hear it. For many boys and men, violent sex is considered normal, sexy even. There are too many accidental rapists who don't even understand that they're doing something wrong, who think that that is just what sex is like. If you want to reform sex education in this country, you should probably start with that.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Sex-positive feminism vs. sexy feminism</span></u><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></u><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">One way in which feminists have endeavoured to address the problem of the accidental rapist is by promoting enthusiastic consent: emphasising "yes means yes" over "no means no". For these feminists, sex itself is no bad thing and we should all be free to participate in as much healthy, consensual sex as we want without being condemned for it. That's your basic definition of a sex-positive feminist. Here lies one of the chasms of division within the feminist movement - for many feminists, sex-positive feminism is interpreted as encouraging promiscuousness and sexual objectification of women, thereby furthering patriarchy. Some of the many criticisms of Slutwalk I read picked up on this aspect - the feminists of Slutwalk were decried as part of a movement to make feminism cool and sexy, stripping the label "feminist" of substance.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">There's a separate post on sex-positive feminism that I'm meaning to write, but for now I just want to say that I don't think there's anything feminist about seeing sex negatively by default. Judging and labelling women who have sex (however much of it they have) should be left to misogynists. Saying that women should be entitled to wear whatever they want without having to bear in mind the preferences of any rapists they might come across is not the same as "making feminism all about shoes" (not a direct quote, but a paraphrase of something I've seen thrown around quite a lot).</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Exclusion and privilege in the Slutwalk movement</span></u><br />
<u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></u><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Another criticism of Slutwalk that's resurfaced in a number of places refers to the fact that its organisers and participants appear to be overwhelmingly the white, middle-class feminists who are well known for dominating feminist discourse throughout history. This is a valid complaint: wherever a feminist group or organisation seems to exclude any marginalised group we have to take that seriously and consider where we are going wrong. I cannot speak for anyone else and postulate the reason why the movement seems to have lacked support from black and minority women (and I really hope this is not the case at Slutwalk London tomorrow), but I will counter the suggestion that it lies in the very purpose of Slutwalk. Rape is not a white girl problem, and neither is victim-blaming. Where the aim of Slutwalk is properly understood as combating victim-blaming, there is no reason to suggest that race or class need play even the tiniest role in deciding whether it's for you or not. This is for all of us. This is something we need to unite for and band together over, so that we can deliver the message in the loudest possible voice: we will not tolerate a victim-blaming culture. Feminists need to unite or die, and if we can't unite over this, the uncontroversial statement that <i style="font-weight: bold;">the only person who should be blamed for rape is a rapist</i>, then frankly, we're screwed. And I don't mean that in a sex-positive way.</span>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-73047290052794344472011-05-22T17:02:00.000+01:002011-05-22T17:02:37.292+01:00The Golden Notebook, a book review; or, The value of reading things you don't agree with<div style="text-align: justify;">Stepping away from my usual vitriol and polemics, today I will be writing a book review, something I haven't done in perhaps ten years. I have just finished the 600-page epic novel <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Harper-Perennial-Modern-Classics-Notebook/dp/0007247206/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1306064227&sr=8-1">The Golden Notebook</a> by Doris Lessing. Given its reputation as a "feminist masterpiece" I thought it might be interesting for my feminist-disposed friends to hear about, if they haven't read it already, or to discuss if they have. I hope the following will also be interesting for those who, given its feminist reputation, would never pick it up.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I should start by saying that I borrowed this book from my mum's bookshelves maybe two or three years ago. I had heard it mentioned in the context of the feminist canon or whatever you want to call it, I saw she had a copy, and I thought I ought to read it. It's the kind of book that, if you're anything like me, you think you ought to read. I was put off actually reading it for a long time - put off by the length and the fact that the synopsis didn't particularly reel me in. Having opened the book I very quickly learned that I was, as they say on the internet, doing it wrong. In the preface (written in 1971, nine years after its original publication), Lessing writes:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">"...this novel was not a trumpet for Women's Liberation... Some books are not read in the right way because they have skipped a stage of opinion... This book was written as if the attitudes that have been created by the Women's Liberation movements already existed."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">"There is only one way to read, which is to browse in libraries and bookshops, picking up books that attract you, reading only those, dropping them when they bore you, skipping the parts that drag - and never, never reading anything because you feel you ought, or because it is part of a trend or movement."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">In other words, I was wrong to believe it was a feminist masterpiece and I was certainly wrong for wanting to read it <i>because</i> it was seen as a feminist masterpiece. By Lessing's account I shouldn't have read it at at all, but of course, I did.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">My reaction to the book isn't straightforward. I'm not going to instantly start listing it as one of my favourites. But it contains so many ideas and concepts and returns to them time and again, lodging them in your brain, making you think about them when you don't mean to. It's what I would call a slow-burner: it's not immediately arresting or gripping, but I expect it to stay with me for a long time, and I expect to have the impulse to reread it in 5 years time or so.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Having said that, it was something of a relief to finish it. It demands a lot of the reader. We have to keep up with a huge cast of characters spanning a number of years, and while the narrative is vaguely chronological, if you fail to keep the portion of the book you've already read in your mind as you continue reading, you miss the point of reading it at all. I am an impatient reader with a tendency to skim rather than to invest in every word (at least that's a quality Lessing might approve of?) and as such it's probably going to take a second reading for me to fully appreciate the work.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">So, is it a feminist masterpiece? What does that question even mean? When we give something that label, are we saying that it comes across as having a feminist agenda, that it promotes an overtly feminist message, or is it just that it tells a story which is honest about women and femaleness, that we can point to and say "look, this is what it's like, this is what needs to change"? The Golden Notebook is categorically not the former; you could argue it has something of the latter.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">It is fundamentally about a woman and her relationships: her relationships with men, with her close female friend Molly, with her daughter Janet, with herself, with her work, with the British Communist Party, with the turning of the world at large. I feel like it does have that quality of honesty, but it feels like honesty about an era that has passed. Lessing's observations about the way women and men are sometimes feel very dated; you don't get the sense of universality that you do with some other books that deal with similar subjects (I would point to The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath and The Rainbow by D.H. Lawrence as examples; neither of these are necessarily feminist masterpieces, but they are two of my favourite novels, and I suspect part of the reason for that is the way they deal with the subject of femaleness).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I think the way that I read it, the state of mind from which I read it, perhaps made it especially interesting to me. At the back of my mind were always the thoughts: people call this a feminist work; its author refutes that label; would I call it feminist, do I think that it is? By the end of the book I had come to a pretty strong conclusion on that point.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">You could call it feminist on the basis that it is female-centric, and concerns a woman who attempts to live an independent, "free" life at a time when it was impossibly difficult for women to do so. I personally am happy to call it a masterpiece, but not a feminist masterpiece. However, I do think it is the kind of book that feminists like me, who tend to seek out "feminist" books, should read.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">This is because I feel like the more open and diverse media becomes, the more we work ourselves into the little niche that we occupy, and the more we reinforce our position in that niche through what we read, what media we ingest. For example: as a vaguely left wing liberal and a feminist, I primarily read the BBC for my news, I enjoy reading the Guardian from time to time, I frequent feminist blogs, and I avoid clicking through to anything from the Daily Mail, the Telegraph, Fox News or similar like the plague. I defriend people on Facebook if they continually write loudly and obnoxiously about political views they hold that I find abhorrent (only when they're people I don't know or like that well in the first place, naturally). The people I follow on Twitter overwhelmingly agree with me on most major issues. I justify all this by saying that there are enough things in the world that make me feel deeply angry and outraged, and seeking out things that will make me even more angry and outraged is pretty bad for my mental health - better surely to choose the media that reflects your views and allow yourself to be happy, on the whole.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I think it's a good justification, and I have no particular intention of drastically changing my approach to how I ingest media. However, I know that to do this - to read only what Cass Sunstein called "the daily Me", for political theory geeks - is problematic. When we pick and choose our media to reflect our existing prejudices, our views are rarely challenged by what we read and the chance of us changing our minds and learning something is decreased. Surely this isn't something we want to endorse, surely there should be some element of the media people ingest that doesn't just tell them what they want to hear.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Which brings me back to The Golden Notebook. Part of the reason I have enjoyed reading it so much is that it <i>wasn't</i> straightforwardly feminist. I never thought "yes, this is exactly how I feel! This is what I try to communicate!" It's ambiguous in its discussions of women and gender relations - there were parts I could approve of and parts I couldn't. But it was interesting to feel that way. We get stuck into only responding to two kinds of things: things we agree with (see above), and things we despise and seek to destroy (see: the Daily Mail). It's too easy to approach everything we meet with either a stamp of approval or a withering glare. We need to appreciate and seek out the middle ground, the grey area, the pieces that we agree with up a point but which then challenge us and make us re-evaluate our position, even if they don't cause us to change our minds.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">That's why I would recommend The Golden Notebook to feminists. Not because it's an obvious feminist masterpiece, but because it isn't.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">It also holds interest for so many other kinds of people than just feminists. The book offers excellent commentary on the state of left-wing politics and British Communism in the 1950s, and the concepts of sanity, madness and "cracking up" are all central to the narrative. It's structurally unusual and engaging, and it's quite fantastically well-written. It's something of a shame it has become so exclusively associated with feminism as I suspect this puts a lot of people off reading it who might enjoy it - or who might at least have something interesting to say about it.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">The next book I plan to read is <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Immortal-Life-Henrietta-Lacks/dp/0330533444/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1306078883&sr=8-1">The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks</a>. Metro calls it "a heartbreaking account of racism and injustice... Moving and magnificent". It looks very good and I've been keenly looking forward to reading it. But I don't expect my views to be challenged by it. Perhaps, after that, the next book I read should be something that drags me back into that ambiguous grey area.</div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-86976434841197446222011-04-26T21:02:00.000+01:002011-04-26T21:02:54.683+01:00Defining Feminism: A Riposte to Some Dude on the Internet<span lang="EN-GB" style="line-height: 115%;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I'm a Twitterer and I follow Margaret Atwood. Margaret Atwood is a fantastic writer who once wrote a book that many consider a feminist masterpiece, The Handmaid's Tale. So when Margaret Atwood retweeted a message from a young man who was promoting a short essay he'd written called "Is Feminism the Opposite of Misogyny?", I was inclined to click through.</span></span><div><span lang="EN-GB" style="line-height: 115%;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
Unfortunately (given that I read it shortly before I planned to go to sleep), the piece left me angry and upset. I felt that the author was well-meaning but had ended up writing something utterly misguided and rather appalling in its own way. I Tweeted the author in question telling him so, and suggested I'd write up a longer response the next day. This blog post contains my response.</span> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span><div><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 13.5pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I'll reproduce the original piece in full for you here, copied from </span></span></span><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://hubpages.com/hub/Is-Feminism-the-Opposite-of-Misogyny"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: blue;">http://www.hubpages.com/hub/Is-Feminism-the-Opposite-of-Misogyny</span></a></span></span></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"></span></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I Googled the term “</span></span></span></span><span lang="EN-GB"><a href="http://hubpages.com/hub/Feminism-WOW-or-How-the-Love-Boat-ruined-my-Poker-Game"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">feminism antonym</span></span></span></span></a></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">” – check this out:</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://s3.hubimg.com/u/4784546_f520.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><img border="0" height="88" src="http://s3.hubimg.com/u/4784546_f520.jpg" width="320" /></span></span></a></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #333333; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10.5pt;"></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Then, I looked up the definition of</span></span></span></span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span></span></span></span></span><span lang="EN-GB"><a href="http://hubpages.com/topics/gender-and-relationships/advice-and-tips-for-women-in-relationships/feminism-and-womens-rights/2142"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">feminism</span></span></span></a></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">:</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://s3.hubimg.com/u/4784550_f520.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><img border="0" height="127" src="http://s3.hubimg.com/u/4784550_f520.jpg" width="320" /></span></span></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;"></span></div><div class="module moduleText color0" id="mod_13489902" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><div class="txtd" id="txtd_13489902" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Let’s speak English – I grew up in the 80’s and 90’s. Most of what I understood of “feminism” growing up was that historically, women were treated as “lesser” than men, (in a variety of ways), and that in recent history the balance was shifted to one of equality by way of the “feminist movement.” Roughly. This was, of course, the impression gleaned from living among adult men and women, and not from historical or sociological study – so the particular cultural events involved and their individual significance is beyond the scope of</span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">this</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> discussion – though not to be denigrated.</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Now, I speak English, and I like to think I understand the language pretty well… I also understand other things, and I like to think my understanding of things, (incomplete though it certainly may be), isn’t terribly inaccurate on matters I’ve sought to understand… If “feminism” is the doctrine of equality among men and women, and “Misogyny” is “hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women” (dictionary.reference.com) – how can the two terms be considered opposite?</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I think the answer is clear – “Feminism” can be considered opposite to “Misogyny” with the help and support of </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">laziness</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">. Other words might include </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">carelessness, ignorance,</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> or even </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">stupidity</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> (a rare case, I’d like to think). Even still, a case can certainly be made for the idea that the actual spirit and thrust behind feminism </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">has been</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> the suppression of masculinity among men and the establishment of femininity in the same role that men had previously occupied. I like to think differently about it though, but hey – why would Google results mislead…?</span></span></span></div></div></div><div class="module moduleText color0" id="mod_13489915" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><div class="txtd" id="txtd_13489915" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Think of the word itself – feminism. The -ism of femininity, right? Doesn’t the word itself sort of </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">clearly</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> suggest an inequality in ovarian-favour? C’mon!</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Now of course, the origin of the word has a great deal more to do with its historical/sociological significance as a movement to counter a typically male-dominated social paradigm than its actual etymology – somehow “equalism” mightn’t’ve had the intended impact – but if feminism seeks to propound </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">equality </span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">between the sexes, (oops, sorry – </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">genders</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> …), then I think equality should be at the heart of the feminist attitude – and while I can’t speak for individuals who consider their equality-based attitudes an aspect of </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">feminism</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> , I certainly can’t fail to notice how weighted both the term </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">and</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> its local effect on social attitudes so often seems to be.</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In this day and age especially, it’s easy to get lazy about correct terms and their correct meanings – in the wake of an </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">allegedly</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> misogynistic-paradigm, it’s understandable that super pro-femininity should be the force driving </span></span></span><a href="http://hubpages.com/topics/gender-and-relationships/1955" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">gender-equality</span></span></span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> – but gender-</span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">equality</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> does not mean </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">feminism</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> (in its etymologically correct sense), any more than a culture tending to place women at home with primarily household and family duties means oppression of “the weaker sex.”</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"></div><h2 class="subtitle" style="font-weight: 400; font: normal normal bold 1.2em/normal Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Real Words with Real Meanings</span></span></span></h2><div class="txtd" id="txtd_13489928" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It’s still a common social-norm that a man striking a woman, regardless of it being initiative </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">or</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> retaliative, is considered taboo. I can’t speak for the reasoning of others, necessarily, but to me, a bruise on a man’s face doesn’t seem as out-of-place or upsetting as one marring the otherwise alluring sight of a woman’s. Which, of course, is not to say that I don’t see a problem with striking other men arbitrarily – and it’s my personal understanding that striking another in anything else but self-defense is abhorrent.</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The antonym of “misogyny” is </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">misandry</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> – simply defined (at reference.dictionary.com) as </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">hatred of males</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> . (It’s curious to note: </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">misogyny</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">doesn’t set off Microsoft Word’s spellchecker, but </span></span></span><a href="http://hubpages.com/hub/Misandry--Media" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">misandry</span></span></span></em></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> does…) I almost wonder whether the concept of misandry might just be too practically inconceivable to so-called “free thinkers” to warrant acknowledgement – but like I say, I prefer to think better of people, even as it becomes clearer that most people don’t prefer to</span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">think better</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> .</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">People call themselves feminists and say that they perceive men and women as equals. Maybe I’m just an annoying stickler for correctness of speech, but nevertheless it is not correct to promote femininity over masculinity in the name of equality – and that does </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">seem</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> to be what feminism does. I know a lot of women who insist on believing themselves equality-minded, while taking as full advantage as they can of whatever privileges they may receive by being considered unequal to the same treatment deserving of men. I know women who declare “sexism” if treating them differently than men is inconvenient for their purposes, but when receiving the </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">same</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> treatment as men is similarly, (or differently) inconvenient, the story changes – “but I’m a </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">girl!</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> ”</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"></div><div class="module moduleText color0" id="mod_13489950" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><div class="txtd" id="txtd_13489950" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Should men consider this the indication of the natural inconstancy of the female mind? Ought we explain it by saying that women are merely fickle, and can’t help it? I think not, because most men (these days anyway), will speak and behave in just the same way. The real reason, I think, is the laziness I mentioned earlier – it’s far easier to let cultural events and social paradigms determine what we nevertheless still call “our” thinking, and seldom do we look further into it than social expectation leads us to.</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I don’t hit women, but I don’t hit men either. However, if a man should attack me, I’ll defend myself by attempting to prevent him from injuring me in whatever way is most effective – yet should a woman attack me I’ll likely be careful about defending myself, so as not to injure her, even if I suffer greater injury as a result. Why? The most obvious reason is because I can reasonably expect a woman to quickly change her act when Police arrive, and if she’s bruised somewhere, I’m in big trouble, even if I’m bleeding. Thankfully, I’ve never been attacked by a woman (physically, that is…), and I don’t expect to. I don’t expect to be attacked by a man either, though adolescent-drunkenry has caused it to happen once or twice.</span></span></span></div></div></div><div class="module moduleText color0" id="mod_13489969" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><h2 class="subtitle" style="font-weight: 400; font: normal normal bold 1.2em/normal Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Girl Power!</span></span></span></h2><div class="txtd" id="txtd_13489969" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The idea that feminism is antonymical to misogyny is absurd. When I looked through the rest of Google’s results for “feminism antonym,” I found a website where the question was posed:</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/953432" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Are you a feminist? What is feminism and what is the antonym of it?</span></span></span></a></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There were three answers (check out the last one and feel my frustration!) and the first was from a woman who described herself as </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">not</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> being a feminist, but being a woman who believed in equal-rights, but also enjoyed the gentlemanly courtesy of opening doors for women, standing when a woman enters a room or stands herself, etc – and she seemed to have an honest and legitimate perspective on what it means to be a woman in the world today (the post was from 2008, btw). But then, she disappointed me, badly. Of course, I cannot believe that she was attempting to seriously treat the </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">term</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> literally when she closed her answer thus:</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As far as the antonym of feminism… could it be slavery?</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">No! No madam, dear madam, it cannot. </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Freedom</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> is the antonym of slavery, and feminism is not synonymous with freedom, though feminism does seem to try</span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">supporting</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> freedom. Might you be representative of an increasingly lazy and inattentive evolution of modern-language? Laziness supports slavery, of course – the more the run of your thoughts is determined by your conditioning and not your deliberate reasoning, the more pliable you are for the forces acting upon you to reshape as they will.</span></span></span></div></div></div><div class="module moduleText color0" id="mod_13489980" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><h2 class="subtitle" style="font-weight: 400; font: normal normal bold 1.2em/normal Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As Polonius to Laertes Said...</span></span></span></h2><div class="txtd" id="txtd_13489980" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It does not do to simply be swept up in the tide of social-consciousness – if we truly be individuals ourselves, and truly bring our individuality to bear in society, then it must be </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">our own</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> reasoning and determination that we bring. Laziness in consideration, understanding and speech too often determines for us what we blindly call our very own selves, and we find ourselves enslaved. The cure for laziness, and indeed the best way to attain to sincere and genuine understanding of whatsoever we seek to understand and convey, is </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">attention</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">.</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As physical beings, we are endowed with the miraculous ability not merely to swallow, we chew, we digest, we absorb and transform what we’ve eaten and we expunge waste – why should our absorption of experience and information be any different? </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Never</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> simply swallow the words and dictums of others, but listen closely to what wisdom might be conveyed by your own discerning reason. To excerpt the admonishment of Polonius to his son Laertes (from Shakespeare’s </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Hamlet</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">):</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">…<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice;<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />Take each man’s censure, but reserve thy judgement.<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />…<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />This above all: to thine ownself be true,<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />And it must follow, as the night the day,<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />Thou canst not then be false to any man.</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><br />
</span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">Now, I feel a certain degree of sympathy for this guy, because I think I understand what he was trying to do, and I don't think he was trying to do something malicious. It seems like he wanted to write a dispassionate, objective linguistic analysis of the term "feminism" and its relation to "misogyny" in order to show that if what we want and strive for is gender equality then we should adopt a word which doesn't appear to have a bias in favour of one sex over another. The author uses "equalism" as a possible alternative.</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><br />
</span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">Unfortunately, I believe the author makes a couple of key mistakes that prevent him from representing the impartiality that he clearly wants his writing to emit. He also strays into some matters that are far from relevant to his mission, which was, as he put it to me on Twitter, "</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">[advocate] literal-thinking"and "define words and antonyms". The piece is misguided in its method and its conclusions (or at least, what I understand to be its conclusions, since none were straightforwardly drawn at the end of the essay, the author preferring a heavy dose of flowery prose and Shakespeare).</span></span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><br />
</span></span></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small; line-height: 19px;">This is where he makes his first major mistake, which is a factual error:</span></span></div><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">in recent history the balance was shifted to one of equality by way of the “feminist movement.”</span></span></span></blockquote></div></div></div><br />
</div></div></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Has the feminist movement sought to bring society from patriarchy to equality? Yes. Has the balance shifted, since the birth of the feminist movement, towards equality? Yes. Have we <i>reached </i>a state of gender equality, as implied by the author? No.</span></span></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I think it must be difficult, sometimes, for men in patriarchal societies to understand the power they have. They don't feel like they have power. They feel like they are treated just as badly as - hell, sometimes worse than! - their female peers. The feminist argument that women continue to be severely disadvantaged from birth does not convince them. Yet it's hard to escape the facts:</span></span></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 5.0pt;"></div><ul><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Despite equal pay legislation, a persistent and significant wage gap (usually estimated at 15-25%) persists between men and women, even when factors like maternity leave and women working part time are accounted for</span></span></li>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Women remain incredibly under-represented in all high-profile professions and in Parliament</span></span></li>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">One in four women will suffer violence at the hands of an intimate partner</span></span></li>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Half of all women will experience an attempted or completed rape or sexual assault</span></span></li>
</ul><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">There is still deep-rooted and significant gender inequality in this country and the West more broadly, and women are still on the receiving end of the vast, vast majority of it.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">His second hurdle is where he states:</span></span></div><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">a</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> case can certainly be made for the idea that the actual spirit and thrust behind feminism </span></span><span style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">has been</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> the suppression of masculinity among men and the establishment of femininity in the same role that men had previously occupied</span></span></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">He claims </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">he</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> doesn't think this way, but given what he goes on to say -</span></span><br />
<br />
<blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Think of the word itself – feminism. The -ism of femininity, right? </span></span></blockquote><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 18px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">it is not correct to promote femininity over masculinity in the name of equality – and that does </span></span></span><em style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">seem</span></span></span></em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> to be what feminism does</span></span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></blockquote><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">- I rather think he does. </span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Feminism does not mean and has never meant the promotion of the feminine over and above the masculine. To suggest that it does paints a picture (and a popular one) of feminists as man-haters, tearing down masculinity to replace it with something they believe to be superior, femininity. This picture is bullshit. The only way I can imagine it being even remotely relevant is in regards to those particular feminists who believe that women have certain special qualities different to men, and that women's perspectives should be valued and appreciated on this basis. But even then, what feminism means isn't properly captured. </span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">What feminism means is the promotion of gender equality. The author clearly has a lot of trouble dealing with this due to the fact that the FEM of FEMininity is in the word FEMinism. However, I would advise him against putting too much stock into the etymology of -isms. Look at Fascism. We know what Fascism means, right? It's a political ideology which promotes authoritarianism, nationalism, the totalitarian state. But by this guy's logic, it means the -ism of fasc. Where did the fasc come from?</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The term </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">fascismo</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> is derived from the </span></span><a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_language" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: none; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #0645ad; text-decoration: none;" title="Latin language"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Latin</span></span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> word </span></span><i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasces" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: none; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #0645ad; text-decoration: none;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">fasces</span></span></a></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">. The fasces, which consisted of a bundle of rods that were tied around an axe, was an </span></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Rome" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: none; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #0645ad; text-decoration: none;" title="Ancient Rome"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">ancient Roman</span></span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> symbol of the authority of the civic </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Magistrates" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: none; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #0645ad; text-decoration: none;" title="Roman Magistrates"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">magistrate</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Etymology"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(Wikipedia)</span></a></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Yeah! It's the -ism of a bundle of rods tied around an axe! ...wait, what?</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">So why is feminism called feminism if what it's really about is "equalism"? As the author rightly ascertains, it's because historically, the balance of power has been in favour of men. What he misses (remember the first mistake) is that overwhelmingly, it still is. A better definition of feminism than "the promotion of gender equality" might be "the promotion of gender equality through the uplifting of women", because that is correct on both levels - it allows for what the author sees as a "bias" in favour of women, while acknowledging that this "bias" is actually what is needed for equality to be achieved.</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Perhaps you are still not convinced, and you think that, since our culture has in many ways bowed to the demand for gender equality, "feminism" is redundant as a term and advocacy of gender equality should be rebranded "equalism". What concerns me about this argument is where you would draw the line. In Somalia, 95% of women still experience genital mutilation in childhood. Are the people there who strive for equality allow to call themselves "feminists"? In China, selective abortion and infanticide of female foetuses and babies is still common. Is it okay to be a ""feminist if you're in China? In Turkey and other parts of the Middle East, women are regularly murdered for "honour crimes" such as making eye contact with men. If I want gender equality there, can I say I'm a "feminist"? (I could go on.)</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">If your answer is yes, then why should it not apply equally to those Western countries where the oppression of women is still a major feature of our culture, although a better-hidden one? The word "feminism" will only become inappropriate and outdated when there is actually in reality a rough balance of equality between men and women.</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: small; line-height: 19px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: small; line-height: 19px;">To finish off, allow me to deal with the part of the essay the author devotes to hitting women.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 19px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It’s still a common social-norm that a man striking a woman, regardless of it being initiative </span></span><span style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">or</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> retaliative, is considered taboo. I can’t speak for the reasoning of others, necessarily, but to me, a bruise on a man’s face doesn’t seem as out-of-place or upsetting as one marring the otherwise alluring sight of a woman’s. </span></span></blockquote><blockquote>... </blockquote><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I know women who declare “sexism” if treating them differently than men is inconvenient for their purposes, but when receiving the </span></span><span style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">same</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> treatment as men is similarly, (or differently) inconvenient, the story changes – “but I’m a </span></span><span style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">girl!</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> ”</span></span></blockquote><blockquote>... </blockquote><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I don’t hit women, but I don’t hit men either. However, if a man should attack me, I’ll defend myself by attempting to prevent him from injuring me in whatever way is most effective – yet should a woman attack me I’ll likely be careful about defending myself, so as not to injure her, even if I suffer greater injury as a result. Why? The most obvious reason is because I can reasonably expect a woman to quickly change her act when Police arrive, and if she’s bruised somewhere, I’m in big trouble, even if I’m bleeding. </span></span></blockquote><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Most of the essay is misguided but largely innocuous. Those bits are blood-boilingly vile. Allow me to give you a little much-needed education on violence against women, Dude From the Internet. The reason why a man hitting a woman is considered "taboo" and "upsetting" is to do with the context within which a man hitting a woman usually takes place. When a man hits a woman, it is almost <i>exclusively </i>a man who is in an intimate relationship with that woman, hitting her because that is one of a wide variety of ways of controlling her. Women do not get hit by men due to what you call "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;">adolescent-drunkenry"</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;">. They get hit by men they love, men who claim to love them, often men they live with, have children with, share a life with. The reason we feel our stomachs churn when we hear of violence against women is not because women are dainty and fragile and have faces that are "otherwise alluring", it's because of what that violence means.</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;">The part about Police behaviour is almost laughable. You would know, if you had researched violence against women like I have, that the way the Police have traditionally treated incidents of domestic violence against women is with flippancy and neglect. Over the last 5-10 years, things have improved, as Police have been more properly trained in the root causes of domestic violence and the appropriate way of dealing with those situations, but they are still far from reliable as a means of women being able to protect themselves from a violent abuser. Again, the reason you would be in "big trouble" is not that women benefit from preference and privilege in our society, but the very opposite - the fact that a man who bruises a woman is overwhelmingly likely to be the abuser, not the abused. </span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;">I get what you were trying to do, dude. You just did it really, really poorly.</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; line-height: 18px;">As Shakespeare might have said: The End.</span></span></span><br />
<br />
</span></div></div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-49788622668390950062011-04-05T15:33:00.002+01:002011-04-05T23:10:27.681+01:00AV: Y/N?<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;"></span><br />
<div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">In one month, you have the opportunity to vote in a referendum that could change the electoral system used in general elections. Turnout is expected to be much lower than normal general election turnout, which is odd, really, because it's much more important than a single election. The result of this vote could change what British democracy means altogether. But I know that some people don't quite get what it's all about, and consequently can't make their minds up whether to vote, and if so, whether to vote yes or no.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">In this blog post I'll be explaining the Alternative Vote (AV) system and comparing it to the current system, First Past the Post (FPTP), which will hopefully be helpful to those who didn't memorise an array of electoral systems for A Level Politics. I'll do a bit of myth-busting regarding some of the claims that have been made by both the Yes and the No side, and then I'll go on to explain why I intend to vote YES for a change to AV.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><strong style="line-height: 16px;"><span style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><u>AV, WTF?</u></span></span></span></strong></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The Alternative Vote electoral system is actually very similar (as electoral systems go) to our current state of affairs. Each geographical constituency is represented by one MP, and if a political party succeeds in winning over 50% of the seats in the House of Commons, they form a government. None of that is going to change under AV.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The only difference is how MPs actually win their seats. Under FPTP, whichever candidate has the largest share of the vote wins the seat for that constituency. Under AV, they have to return a majority - over 50%. The way that majority can be reached, without over half of all voters voting for the same candidate, is by taking into account what people's second, third (etc) choices are. That's why a change to AV would mean changing how you cast your vote.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Instead of deciding which single candidate to cast your vote for, you can rank all the candidates in order of preference. Once all the votes have been cast, the first-choice votes are counted. Assuming there isn't an outright majority, the candidate who got the fewest first-choice votes is stricken from the election, and the second-choice votes of the people who voted for them are treated as if they were first-choice votes. If there's still no majority, you take away the second-last candidate and do the same thing with the second-choice votes of the people who voted for them. And so on and so forth, until a majority is reached.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><strong style="line-height: 16px;"><span style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><u>MYTH-BUSTING</u></span></span></span></strong></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I have been unimpressed with some of the arguments coming from both campaigns so I'm going to sift through some of them and hopefully set a few misconceptions straight.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br style="line-height: 16px;" /></span></span></div><ul style="line-height: 16px; list-style-type: square; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Will AV make politicians have to work harder to keep their seats?</span></span></li>
</ul><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Well, yes, perhaps, in some cases. This argument is based on the fact that in order to win a seat a politician needs to get a broader consensus than usual, and cannot just rely on the same 30% of people voting for him who voted for him last time. However, realistically, people's votes are still influenced to a large degree by party loyalty and where they see themselves in the political spectrum, rather than decided solely on the basis of how hard they think their MP has worked. What will happen is that individual politicians will have to do more to reach out to people who don't completely share their political creed. This could be seen as a good or a bad thing - you can imagine it leading to more people feeling involved with politics, or to politics becoming devoid of direction as all candidates fight for the messy middle ground.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><ul style="line-height: 16px; list-style-type: square; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Will AV lead to more hung parliaments?</span></span></li>
</ul><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">There's no reason to assume that it would. In the bigger picture, changing to AV is unlikely to make a deep impact on the face of the House of Commons. Most of the candidates who would have been elected under FPTP will still be elected under AV, unless it's a particularly close race. (This might make you think "then why bother?", but that's a different story.)</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><ul style="line-height: 16px; list-style-type: square; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Will AV keep the BNP out? Or will it encourage people to vote for them?</span></span></li>
</ul><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Both, oddly enough. Because you can list candidates by preference under AV, you're more likely to express support for a small party than you are under FPTP, which encourages people to vote tactically. So we would probably see a few more first-choice votes for the BNP than the number of votes they currently get. However, because the BNP are usually pretty far down the list of "most popular parties to vote for", they would usually be knocked out of the competition pretty early on. They would have to get over half of a constituency to vote for them (1st or 2nd choice) to get a seat under AV. They're probably more likely to get a seat under FPTP, where they may only need 30%, or even less, to win a seat.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Please remember, as well, that the effects the voting system has on the BNP are equally relevant to the Green Party. To vote based on what you think will keep the BNP out is short-sighted and neglects the real question, which is: what is more democratic?</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><ul style="line-height: 16px; list-style-type: square; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Isn't AV really complicated and obscure? Don't only, like, two countries use it?</span></span></li>
</ul><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The way to work out who's won each constituency is a bit complicated, I grant you, but as a voter the change to your ballot slip is pretty straightforward. While only a couple of countries use AV in their general elections, it's very popular as an electoral system for smaller elections - like for political party leadership, or (if you went to the University of York), student union elections.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><ul style="line-height: 16px; list-style-type: square; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Do some people's votes count more than others under AV?</span></span></li>
</ul><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Kind of. You're less likely to end up having wasted your vote under AV, because if you vote for a smaller party, your second choice will be taken into account - it will be as if your first choice never existed. Some people are arguing that that means your vote would be given more weight than the votes of those who voted for more popular parties. It all depends on how you look at it.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><ul style="line-height: 16px; list-style-type: square; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Will AV leave us with politicians who were nobody's first choice?</span></span></li>
</ul><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">While it is technically possible that this could happen, it's extremely unlikely - and the politician in question would still have to have a broad base of support from within his constituency, even if it was the support of people who felt they were getting a compromise solution.</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><strong style="line-height: 16px;"><span style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><u>YES TO AV</u></span></span></span></strong></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">In a month's time, I plan to vote yes in the referendum. Here's why:</span></span></div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><ul style="line-height: 16px; list-style-type: square; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I believe AV reflects the way people actually think about politics. I've never voted for Labour before, but I'd rather have a Labour MP than a Tory. And I would certainly never vote Conservative, but I'd rather have a Tory MP than a BNP representative. Unless you think that every candidate but one is an incompetent bastard, AV will suit you.</span></span></li>
<li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I want further electoral reform. One of the biggest criticisms of AV is that it doesn't go far enough, and it would be more democratic to have a system that incorporated proportional representation. I agree. AV is not my favourite electoral system and I think there are a lot of issues with it, as I hope has become apparent. But I believe a resounding 'no' vote will shut down the possibility for any electoral reform within my lifetime.</span></span></li>
<li style="line-height: 16px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I believe it's fairer and more democratic for MPs to be elected by an outright majority who are pretty okay with him or her winning, rather than by a smaller faction who are delighted they won while the majority of voters are seething.</span></span></li>
</ul><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">My intention has not been to convince you to vote yes - just to try and make the choice a bit clearer. I hope I've done that - any further questions, fire away.</span></span></div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-47290876537455573112010-10-20T14:04:00.000+01:002010-10-20T14:04:46.954+01:00Stop Please, No, Please. Please Stop Blaming Rape Victims.Anyone who lives in or regularly visits London will be familiar with this little gem of a poster:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/26-cabposter-415.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/26-cabposter-415.jpg" width="237" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I am honestly stunned that this campaign is still around. According to The Internet, it began in November 2009 - so despite widespread condemnation of them by feminists, it's managed to last a year. This suggests to me that perhaps the reaction against them hasn't been as large or as vocal as I assumed it to be. After all, when I look at that poster the problems with it are immediately obvious. I don't understand how anyone could ever think that an appropriate anti-rape strategy, let alone one suitable enough to last a whole year. But clearly my reaction is not a universal one. So, for those who don't see any problem with it, or who feel uncomfortable with the poster when they see it but aren't sure why, let me break it down for you.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>1. The victim-blaming</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The message of the advert is: 'Take an unbooked minicab and you'll get raped. If you get raped after taking an unbooked minicab, this is your fault, as you shouldn't have been taking an unbooked minicab.' In case anyone thinks I'm "reading too much into this" let's take a closer look at the small text.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">'Whether you approach the driver, or they approach you, there's no record of the journey and you're putting yourself in danger.'</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">YOU'RE putting YOURSELF in danger. The guy who rapes you isn't putting you in danger by raping you. You did this to yourself. It's an incredibly simple message, and it's one that permeates our culture: rape victims bring it upon themselves. The fact that a Mayor of London-sponsored initiative is championing it so heartily just goes to show the extent of the victim-blaming problem.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>2. The triggering</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The whole point of the advert is that the main part of the text comprises of things we imagine rape victims say while they're being raped. Just in case this text isn't enough of a reconstruction of an actual rape scene, they've also included the visual aid of a woman terrified and screaming in the back of a car. Basically, they've done everything they can to recreate within a poster the experience of being raped.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I find it astounding that apparently no one on that marketing team thought to bring up the fact that actually, recreating the experience of being raped might not be cool for someone who has been raped. That seeing this poster even once, let alone multiple times every day, might cause them to relive that moment of their lives. That it might compound the trauma even further by repetition. That it might prevent rape victims from being able to draw a line between the incomprehensibly awful experience of being raped and the everyday experience of going about their lives, using the tube. Surely all of that is obvious. We have to assume that the ability of rape victims to carry on with their lives was considered a necessary sacrifice.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">What's harder to explain is the sick feeling in my stomach that I, and other women who have not been raped, get from seeing it. The reasons for that might be many, but I think it has something to do with the knowledge all women have of our vulnerability to rape. We know it might happen to us - not only in unbooked minicabs but in our own bedrooms, on the street, in a trusted friend's house, in a nightclub, anywhere - and the poster serves to give us a daily reminder. Living life as a woman, that fear is always lodged somewhere in the back of our minds. Thanks, Boris, for bringing it to the forefront as well, several times a day.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>3. The pleading</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The more I've seen the poster, the more I've felt that there was something wrong with its message beyond mere victim-blaming. It's not just that the message of the poster is "if you take an unbooked minicab, you're getting yourself raped" - it's the execution of that message, the way it pleads with women like a woman would plead with a rapist. In what situation would you say "Stop, no. Stop please, no, please. Please stop"? Any situation within which the person or people you are talking to is doing something terrible to you. Once we see the poster as Cabwise / the Mayor of London talking to women through the advert, this becomes rather grotesque. The implication is that women, by continuing to take unbooked minicabs, are doing something terrible to Cabwise. Our actions - blithely supposing that we might be free to do something as simple as taking a taxi without having to be vigilantly on our guard - are so abhorrent that they merit PLEADING with us to stop. Women, by taking unbooked cabs, are doing something that is analogously as bad as raping someone. Let that sink in for a minute.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">How can this poster be defended? I suppose it was chosen for its "shock value", its "hard hitting", "attention grabbing" approach. Frankly, if your marketing people can't think of a more appropriate way to get people's attention than simulating a rape, you might want to get new marketing people. This message might have been communicated in any number of different ways. Maybe one day - dare to dream - we'll see a campaign which recognises that it's the men who rape who are doing something wrong, not the women who are raped.</div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-9229409192479018262010-06-23T23:01:00.001+01:002010-10-20T14:05:23.607+01:00Speaking UpThis blog has been a little quiet on the subject of feminism recently. Appropriately, what I want to talk about today is the way in which we (in particular, we feminists) find ourselves not speaking out about things that appal us, keeping quiet about things that enrage us.<br />
<br />
Those of you who know me might not think this is something I suffer from. I do find myself talking about feminist issues an awful lot and often with some force. But don't be fooled into thinking I - or anyone like me - is immune from being silenced. Knowing I might be faced with such an accusation, I spent about a minute thinking of examples of what I mean. Here are just a few of those that occurred to me off the top of my head.<br />
<br />
- when a van driver or builder whistles at me in public, I do not shout at them to fuck off or noticeably retaliate. The furthest I can usually stretch myself is to shoot them a look of weary disdain.<br />
<br />
- when a certain academic at the University of York started talking in a seminar about female genital mutilation as "FMG", making sure to pronounce those quotation marks so as to show that it was clearly a problem feminists have made up to entertain themselves, I said nothing.<br />
<br />
- when I noticed an exceptionally sexist poster advert for credit card company Capital One, I didn't write in to complain. I got as far as googling it, noticed someone else had written a blog post about it, and felt that was enough.<br />
<br />
- when I had a (fairly robust) feminist criticism to bring against a different academic's paper in a political theory workshop, I didn't feel confident enough to bring it up in the workshop itself and only mentioned it to the author afterwards, when he didn't have the opportunity to think about it properly.<br />
<br />
- when I was waiting at the bar at The Duchess nightclub, I was approached by a male stranger who kept trying to put his arm around me, and ultimately succeeded at kissing me on the cheek; although I physically recoiled and attempted to extract myself from the situation, I did not go apeshit at him for sexually harassing me. I didn't even say anything.<br />
<br />
Why does it happen, and keep happening, that when we're put in a position we don't want to be in or when we are faced with something we abhor, we keep quiet?<br />
<br />
Answering the question, my first instinct was to give the disclaimer that sometimes, obviously, it is simply about pragmatism. There's a time and a place for behaviour like yelling at people, and in some circumstances certain reactions may be inappropriate or may only make things worse.<br />
<br />
The more I think about it, the more I think that is pretty much bullshit. When faced with manifestations of patriarchy, what's "appropriate" - in every time and every place - is keeping quiet. That's kind of the point. To do anything else is inherently subversive, whether it's yelling at someone who harasses you or schooling a seminar leader on the finer points of acronyms. It's okay to have these concerns, but for goodness' sake, don't bring them out into public! People might think you were some kind of psycho radical feminist.<br />
<br />
Speaking of which: can we talk about this for a moment? The way in which some kinds of feminism are considered socially acceptable while others are mercilessly derided, even by feminists themselves. It seems like it's okay to be a liberal feminist in the minimalistic sense of thinking that people are in some vague way equal and that we shouldn't discriminate and that's pretty much it. A step above the category of "I'm not a feminist but [insert feminist statement here]" is the category of people who do say they're a feminist but are very quick to qualify what they mean by that. Because they wouldn't want anyone thinking they were at all vocal or aggressive about their feminism. God forbid.<br />
<br />
I have been guilty of this and looking back I find it inexcusable. Yes, some feminists are more radical than me. Some take it to extremes that I find hard to understand, or that I don't feel are compatible with my personal brand of feminism. But every time I, or anyone else, says "I'm a feminist - but not like <i>that</i>", we are publicly degrading feminism. We are adding to the atmosphere of silencing that stops feminists, all feminists, of every stripe, expressing their views. We have to stop doing that.<br />
<br />
Going back on topic: is it that simple? Is patriarchy the reason we don't speak up, acting on us both consciously and subconsciously, telling us our views are unwelcome and making us feel unwilling to express them?<br />
<br />
To a large degree, yes. But it's also about energy. To express the kind of feminist sentiment I'm talking about is to fight, and we can't be fighting every moment of our lives. No one is capable of that. We all have our own coping strategies for this. A lot of people, wisely, don't bother fighting with strangers on the internet (whether about feminist issues or something else entirely). I myself have largely given up fighting on Facebook, preferring to simply remove the offending friends. But the energy to fight can also desert us when we most need it - in serious conversations with good friends, or when we feel sincerely violated.<br />
<br />
I haven't come to this question with a quick-fix solution, an answer that will empower us to reject being silenced and speak up every time we want to. Perhaps the best we can hope for is that we recognise it in ourselves when it happens, so as to better combat it the next time. There are a lot of things that are terrifying and difficult the first time you do them, but the more you practice, the more capable you feel. Maybe speaking up is one of them. We could probably all do more to test that theory.<br />
<br />
I was going to close this with something about "picking our battles" and putting the effort in to fight only when we think there's some small chance of it making a difference. But again, I'm tempted to dismiss that as bullshit. Speak up whenever you can, and if you do that, then you don't have to beat yourself up about the times when you can't.<br />
<br />
<br />
[P.S.: tying this post and my previous one together, one of the catalysts that got me to actually sit down and write this was <a href="http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/06/21/on-language-and-body-and-fear/#more-18017">a Feministe post 'on language, and body, and fear'</a>. It's a really good explanation of the way we can silence one another, even when we (ostensibly) agree with the view that's silenced.]Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-3403843776840378702010-06-15T13:57:00.001+01:002010-10-20T14:06:10.202+01:00My Very Own Obesity CrisisSomeone asked what my BMI was recently, and, given that I haven't weighed myself in a long time, I had no idea. I plugged my height and the weight that I thought I was the last time I was weighed into an online BMI calculator and the answer immediately flashed up: 31.1. Obese.<br />
<br />
My heart started pounding. I was prepared to be in the 'overweight' bracket, even fairly high up in it, but this felt like something else altogether. I had stopped being a person and become a Public Health Concern.<br />
<br />
A day or two later I realised that the weight I had entered was wrong, and upon weighing myself (I bought a fancy set of bathroom scales, so jolted was I by the BMI's judgement) I found I was actually slightly below the threshold of obesity. Phew! But why should this be a big deal? How does it make sense that I'm allowed to feel okay-ish about myself at 11 stone 9.5 lb (163.5lb), the upper limit of 'overweight' for my height, but not at 11 stone 10 (164lb), the lower limit of 'obese'?<br />
<br />
Pretty much everyone knows by now that BMI is an unreliable way of measuring individual health (though, more on this later). What is perhaps less fully realised is that its categorisation of normal/overweight/obese often does not match up at all with our culturally-ingrained standards of those categories. <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/77367764@N00/sets/72157602199008819/">Kate Harding's Illustrated BMI project</a> is a great way of showing this. I recommend browsing through the whole thing, but photos like this one, of a BMI-overweight woman, are where it makes its point most profoundly:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1311/1457384857_debde6b151.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1311/1457384857_debde6b151.jpg" width="240" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Similarly, when we think of what obesity looks like, we have a pretty specific mental image. Here are some of the top Google Image results for the word 'obese':</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><a href="http://www.mygtv.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/obese.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.mygtv.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/obese.jpg" width="267" /></a> <a href="http://www.thereheis.com/nucleus3.22/media/gallery/20070822-obese.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.thereheis.com/nucleus3.22/media/gallery/20070822-obese.jpg" width="239" /></a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><a href="http://thebsreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/obese1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://thebsreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/obese1.jpg" width="249" /></a> <a href="http://theinsanityreport.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/obese-america.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://theinsanityreport.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/obese-america.jpg" width="260" /></a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">...and here's me.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><a href="http://i495.photobucket.com/albums/rr317/hfunkyh/P1040076.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i495.photobucket.com/albums/rr317/hfunkyh/P1040076.jpg" width="240" /></a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Most people are bound to think that because I don't look like the women in the four pictures above, I can't be obese. But the BMI is used to define those categories. The meaning of obese, strictly speaking - and don't forget, this is the meaning that's used in the media - is the meaning that the BMI gives it. And according to that meaning, I am a mere few pounds of weight away from being part of the Obesity Crisis.</div><br />
So, I'm asking myself, what is it about this word 'obese' that has us all running scared? Obviously, our visual association of what it looks like to be obese is wrong: not all obese people look like those women. But there's also the other side of the equation - when you hit obesity, you are alleged to be an automatic health risk, more likely to suffer from heart disease, diabetes and even cancer. And this is, perhaps, where the BMI is at its most troublesome.<br />
<br />
Now, I'm no model of perfect health. I try to eat healthily but I do indulge on occasion, and while I go to the gym a couple of times a week I also sometimes choose to drive when I could cycle. On the whole, however, I'd say I live a healthy lifestyle, probably healthier than average. If you're under 25 or so, you probably know at least a few people who find that they can eat junk food regularly, do almost zero exercise, and retain a slim figure, which is upheld as 'normal' (read: healthy) by the BMI. I suspect that those people may be equally at risk from a health perspective as me; possibly even more so. This is supported by research that shows that thin people can have very high levels of visceral fat surrounding their organs, which makes them prime candidates for the health risks associated with obesity. (<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18594089/">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18594089/</a>)<br />
<br />
This all brings me on to my main point. While there is a correlation between size and health, the two obviously do not walk hand in hand. Yet overweight and obese people are singled out by health professionals and the media as needing to change their lifestyle, regardless of what lifestyle they actually live, and normal-weight people are designated as healthy, regardless of their actual health. The fact that weight is associated so closely with lifestyle choices, and thus with health, is the source of the persecution that overweight people face daily, and it's simply misguided.<br />
<br />
Weight is seen as something chosen or controllable: it is acceptable to bully and abuse overweight people, so the story goes, because they made themselves that way. This is not true. I could lose a lot of weight if I starved myself and spent hours every day working out. To say that by choosing not to do that I choose to be overweight is absurd: it's like saying that the thin person who eats junk food every day and rarely leaves the sofa is choosing to be thin.<br />
<br />
In conclusion: obesity does not mean whale-like. Obesity does not mean sudden risk of death. In fact, it doesn't seem to mean anything meaningful at all, which leaves me wondering why we consider it a useful label. I have to wonder whether we keep it around simply as a scare tactic: by building up all these deeply negative associations around it (people who are too fat to get out of bed! heart attacks!), we make sure that people who cross the line into obesity know that their bodies are not socially accepted. Of course, they usually know this already, thanks to those helpful, health-conscious co-citizens who find it appropriate to hurl abuse at them and treat them as less than human.Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-46778272416512229942010-05-24T21:53:00.001+01:002010-05-24T21:56:53.347+01:00Immediate reaction to Lost series finale.Um, spoiler alert. Obviously.<br />
<br />
So it's been a little less than an hour since I finished watching the End of Lost and I've had a little time to mull over it. Did I like it? Was it a satisfying conclusion? <i>What did it all mean?</i> Well, since I want to work through my thoughts on these weighty matters a bit, I thought I might as well share them with you.<br />
<br />
First off. Can people stop saying "they were dead all along"? There is absolutely no reason to believe this. They were dead all along in what we've been calling the 'sideways universe'. We were led to believe this alternate universe split off from the original one when Juliet detonated the bomb, and it was an alt-verse in which the incident never happened, the hatch was never built, the plane never crashed, etc. That was revealed not to be the case, and the sideways universe was in fact simply an afterlife for all the Losties to catch up with each other before they headed off into Heaven or whatever.<br />
<br />
Anyone who watched it in hopes of a grand unifying theory explaining what the island was and why it was so mystical, and anyone who tries to extrapolate such a theory from this finale, is fundamentally misguided. The show's creators previously said that the only question they felt they had a responsibility to answer was the one posed in the final season - i.e., the sideways universe. That's what they did. Of course there's still a lot of mystery surrounding Lost, but I think that's for the best. When the questions are directly answered it can be clumsy and unsatisfying. "Oh hey Michael. Are the whispers the ghosts of dead people?" "Yeah." "Oh. Sweet." No one can claim that was a satisfying scene, and if all our questions had been answered in the finale it would have looked like that scene extended by two hours.<br />
<br />
So, what happened? To paraphrase Daniel Faraday, everything that happened, happened. Knowing that the original universe is the only true one makes things a lot simpler. Sawyer, Kate, Claire, Miles and co. flew off the island. Jack stayed and died. Hurley stayed and became the island's protector. Ben stayed as his second-in-command; the new Richard to Hurley's new Jacob. Desmond, presumably, took Locke's boat (though wasn't it Penny's boat all along?) and went back to his constant. At some point, everyone died. And even though they all died at different times and in different ways, they were still all together at the same time in the afterlife. That's just how it works. It's an afterlife, it doesn't really need to make sense.<br />
<br />
Now onto some problems. There were notable absences from the church at the end: Michael and Walt. What could this be about? It seems unlikely that the actors' relationship with the show made it impossible for them to return - remember we only saw Michael a handful of episodes ago as a ghost. I have a more complex theory about why Michael wasn't there that would take too long to go into, so for now, let's just remember that Hurley and Desmond came across Ana Lucia in the episode before, and when Hurley asked why she wasn't coming with, Desmond said she wasn't ready. Clearly, there are Losties who weren't supposed - for one reason or another - to be at the church with the rest of them. It's not a very satisfying explanation, especially since the producers obviously pulled the stops out to get characters like Shannon and Boone back, but it can tide us over.<br />
<br />
Speaking of Shannon. Is anyone else bothered by the way her post-death reunion with Sayid was portrayed like their one true love when the show has consistently been pushing Sayid and Nadia as the epic love story? No? I saw some commenters wonder if Sayid saying "the only thing I ever wanted died in my arms" as referring to Shannon and I thought they were being stupid, but now it seems like they might have been right, and that kind of negates Nadia's existence, which bothers me.<br />
<br />
There are things about the alt-verse which sit uncomfortably with it being an afterlife. Like the fact that Jack and Juliet had a child together and yet never had any of those flashing "OMG I REMEMBER YOU" moments... or the fact that they were even a couple in an afterlife which primarily involved distorted or inverted versions of real-life events and relationships. And as an explanation in itself, I found it a little disappointing. I was hoping that the two universes were going to merge in some way that left everyone better off, and that still made sense. But I guess having one "real" universe that still involves extensive time travel is probably enough for us to be dealing with.<br />
<br />
I'll round off with a few things I loved. The glorious return of Vincent! Kate saving the day in the end after 6 seasons of being a generally disappointing lead female character. The line "Christian Shepherd? Seriously?". Benjamin Linus in general. Sawyer and Juliet's reunion, even though it did turn out to be post-death.<br />
<br />
All in all, I think it was satisfactory as a finale. Of course there are still loose ends, and it's those that we fans will have plenty of fun trying to get to grips with when we obsessively rewatch our dvd box sets over and over again, but it did enough. It felt like a proper goodbye - not least, of course, because for the characters it really was. I understand frustration that the finale didn't live up to the general epic awesomeness of what Lost has been over the last six years, but really, no single episode could have done. We just have to take what we got and be able to, finally, let it go.<br />
<br />
<object height="385" width="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9MlA5ZvLZFs&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9MlA5ZvLZFs&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-10091142994318084842010-05-14T22:26:00.005+01:002010-10-20T14:07:33.066+01:00Boys save the world, girls get a manicure: naming and shaming David Lloyd York<div style="text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Here's something I came across at my gym (David Lloyd York) earlier.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I had to shrink it down to fit it on the page, so here's a clearer version: <a href="http://i495.photobucket.com/albums/rr317/hfunkyh/P1030806psd.jpg">http://i495.photobucket.com/albums/rr317/hfunkyh/P1030806psd.jpg</a></span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbeqjp3KN7MjEtAnTbXPW0CiPkmtJXCB7tBOZaCtgHJT-Z3so-ar-Uf2k4rwdC5F8zcxf6gSUJur3ydDsn7w_qJ28CkZrbQiJTzfbmsHmWHbcNiA0tmAIU2Q0QGu32v6Y4HpZWoqK6ByRz/s1600/P1030806psd.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="clear: left; float: left; font-size: small; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbeqjp3KN7MjEtAnTbXPW0CiPkmtJXCB7tBOZaCtgHJT-Z3so-ar-Uf2k4rwdC5F8zcxf6gSUJur3ydDsn7w_qJ28CkZrbQiJTzfbmsHmWHbcNiA0tmAIU2Q0QGu32v6Y4HpZWoqK6ByRz/s400/P1030806psd.jpg" width="300" /></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Now, I have issues with my gym in the first place. It sends out an unbelievable amount of messages enforcing the idea that thin = beautiful, thin = healthy, thin = morally good. But I tell myself that this should come as no surprise, this should be nothing more than we expect from a gym. After all, they directly profit from their customers' self-loathing and self-recrimination about their weight and appearance. Here, however, David Lloyd are actively pushing the most outdated and face-palmingly stereotypical ascriptive gender roles possible, and worse, they are pushing them on children - and as far as I can tell they are doing it for no particular reason.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Now, hopefully I don't need to explain </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">why </span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">this is problematic. But I am going to spend a little time deconstructing </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">how</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> it is, by pulling out the different threads that feed into this offensive poster and examining them each more closely.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Value of the activity</span></span></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Let's look again at how the invitation is extended to the boys. "We need you to save the world!" Now, any adult reading this poster knows that the two activities offered to the kids on the basis of their gender have no major difference in value. They're both means of keeping the children occupied for a while so that their parents can relax. David Lloyd doesn't really need little boys to save the world. But the activity they undertake is loaded with value by the advertisement. The boys are told, and are encouraged to pretend, that their playtime will save mankind. Pretty empowering stuff! Fed ideas like that, they might just grow up and go into the world believing not only that they can make a difference, they'll know that they're the right people to be making a difference.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
Let's try and find some value assigned to the activities for the girls.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Um.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In contrast to the boys' section, there is nothing here to suggest that there's any reason, value or purpose in undertaking the task of being a princess. All we're told is that girls will love it! You hear that, girls? You. Will. Love. It. Now sit down and enjoy your pedicure, goddammit.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Focus on attractiveness</span></span></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I'll just comment on this quickly, since it's so obvious. The activities appropriate to being a girl involve prettying oneself up - not for any particular reason, just because it's what girls do and it's what makes girls happy. Going back to the assessment of value, in so far as they are permitted to achieve something valuable (becoming a princess), the only way of achieving it is by heightening their physical attractiveness. Again, awesome message being sent out here to young children.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The boys, meanwhile, have no reason to believe their physical attractiveness will make a jot of difference as to whether they can become superheroes and save the world. Woah, it's just like being a grown up!</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Nature of the activity</span></span></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Here that classic old gender dichotomy of passive/active rears its head. Sexists throughout history have employed the idea that men carry the vitalising force of life, while women are mere vessels, to justify and underpin their ideas. So it should be no surprise that what boys are given to do involves actually </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">doing</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> something - flying leaps! karate chops! round house kicks! - and probably making a lot of noise and a lot of mess while doing it (which will of course all be forgiven, because, you know, boys will be boys). Meanwhile, as alluded to before, the girls are required to sit still and be demure and have things done to them. There shall be no running around: that might mess up your hair and make up.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Along similar lines, the boys are encouraged to exercise their skills of creativity by designing their own super hero outfits. At the end of the day, there will be something they can take home and keep, knowing that they made it and put something of themselves into it. The girls will each be presented with "their very own crown". Except it's only their own in so far as someone else is deigning to give it to them. Yay?</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">A final note here: traditional male gender roles are just as damaging to equality as female ones, primarily in the way they promote violence and aggression. Fittingly, these are endorsed equally here alongside the equality-damaging female gender norms - what the boys are actually doing is being taught to fight.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Approach to food</span></span></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">This point might seem petty, but anyone who has had a troubled relationship with food (which I expect will be the vast majority of women reading this, and relatively few men) ought to be able to appreciate why I bring it up. We're told "obviously saving the world is hard work, so the boys will have fresh fruit, crisps and drinks to sustain them." The high level of physical exertion the boys will have undertaken in their extremely valuable task demands that they be fed; they'll need food to replenish their energy after all that saving the world. This treats food as exactly what it is: a form of nourishment that we need to balance out the energy we expend.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Girls, on the other hand, will have "fresh fruit and crisps to nibble on". Not only does their form of activity not require any energy replenishment, they are only permitted to eat in a particular manner: in very small amounts, in a ladylike fashion. They're not to devour their crisps or wolf down their fresh fruit. They may nibble, and then they may collectively shame themselves about the calorie content of what they've just eaten - oh, sorry, passed into grown up world there for a second.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The gender complement</span></span></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><u><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Has anyone else noticed how the two roles assigned to boys and girls here fit together perfectly? The boys will be super heroes, and the girls will be princesses - and we all know that the main ambition of a princess is to be rescued by a man. It's not just gender roles that are being taught here, but overtly heterosexual gender roles. The kids have to be reminded that the proper behaviour of boys and girls fits together perfectly and naturally! How else would they learn that the only right kind of partnership is that between a man and a woman? You know, other than from all the messages they receive every day from the media and society in general.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Now, you might think, perhaps I'm coming down too hard on David Lloyd. After all, what they aim to achieve is giving parents a break from the toils of childcare, and since that's primarily undertaken by mothers, this is kind of good for gender equality, right? And besides, there's always that gender-neutral option of a movie night at the bottom! If parents don't want their kids to grow up fitting strictly into the received notion of what men and women are supposed to be, or if their children are a little resistant to being superheroes or princesses, they can watch a movie. So there's really no need for all this fretting. Right?</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I thought that at first too, but then I figured I should pay the gender-neutral option as much attention as I paid the other two, and having done so I'm not so sure whether it's a positive alternative. It's the option "for the kids who just want to chill out". In the boys' case, I assume, this means the kids who are too lazy to want to do flying leaps and round house kicks, or too apathetic or cynical to be duped into thinking these things will save the world. For girls, it's the only alternative to spending the evening primping yourself to achieve maximum physical beauty. So, if you're a girl who doesn't feel so great about the way she looks, maybe you'd rather "chill out" at the movie night.</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I don't think it's a coincidence that "lazy" and "physically unattractive" both correlate to "fat" in our culture (and even more so in the culture of David Lloyd, as I mentioned at the very start). After all, look at how food is presented here - very different to both the sustenance model of boys' eating and the nibbling model of girls', what's on offer here is gorging oneself. "Endless amounts of popcorn and soft drinks" is rather different to the balanced combination of fruit and crisps offered elsewhere, and the fact that it's endless is presumably intended to appeal to the crowd of childhood overeaters. This isn't so much a gender-neutral alternative as it is an alternative for the boys who are too lazy or fat to be super heroes and the girls who are too ugly or fat to be princesses. What's implied is that you can't choose to opt out of ascriptive gender roles, you can only fail at living up to them. (Again, we recognise this in grown up life - remember how all feminists are ugly, hairy, alone and bitter?)</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">A final note - I mentioned at the outset that David Lloyd are pushing gender roles on children for no apparent reason; they don't have an obvious profit motive here, as they do when they try to convince their adult customers they are too fat. But it occurs to me that not only is it for no reason, it's also counterproductive to their own line of business. Anecdotal evidence suggests that at least half of David Lloyd York's clientèle are female. Telling a little girl that physical activity is only for boys, and what she ought to do is sit quietly and have her nails done, is hardly going to encourage her to grow up to be the kind of person who pays an extortionate amount of money to use a gym (which involves physical exertion, and getting sweaty, ew, and messing up her hair, omg!). Western society spent a lot of time thinking that women were too frail and delicate to participate in physical activity; I'd like to leave that in the past, and it would be in David Lloyd's best interests to do the same.</span></span></div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-30594096146856085062010-05-08T16:47:00.003+01:002010-05-08T17:27:06.762+01:00Maybe Do It Nick: Why a Lib-Cons coalition might not be as terrible as we imagine.<span style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As I write, the top trending topic on Twitter in the UK is #dontdoitnick. It seems most Lib Dem supporters, and doubtless all Labour supporters, oppose the idea of Nick Clegg selling his soul to the Tories for a slice of the government pie. Most are actively supporting the alternative of a Lib-Lab coalition. There are good reasons for feeling this way; the ideological chasm between the Lib Dems and the Tories is just cause for doubt over whether there can be a coherent platform for the two parties to stand on; the Tories and the ideas they represent are generally reviled by Lib Dem voters; the two parties clash on major issues, and the concern is that the only "concessions" Cameron would make to the Lib Dems are policies he is already on board with, like scrapping ID cards. But I don't think Clegg should be warned off this coalition quite so quickly, and for several reasons.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">1) Electoral reform</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So, we know Cameron & co. are against PR and against electoral reform in general. In his "big, open and comprehensive" offer to the Lib Dems he did not bring to the table the one thing they really want - his offer of an all-party committee of inquiry amounts to nothing (Jenkins, anyone?). But I think it'd be premature to assume that this is non-negotiable. If Clegg makes a referendum on electoral reform the single necessary condition of an alliance, Cameron might have to reconsider, given that Labour have offered this on a silver platter. And if electoral reform was achieved, the face of British politics would be changed forever - and in the Liberal Democrats' favour. Yes, we would have to put up with playing second fiddle to an unpleasant government for a few years, but beyond 2015 there would be real representation for Lib Dems, not the systemic unfairness that means 23% of the vote gets us 8.7% of the seats.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">"But," the Twitterverse cries out, "the Lib Dems will never trust Clegg again if he betrays us all and coalesces with Cameron! PR will do nothing to help them when their supporters all abandon them!" Well, if they do, they'd be foolish to. Our electoral system as it stands prevents the Lib Dems from ever being anything more than a third wheel in the Labour-Conservative relationship - they have no power and relatively little influence. Being part of a government coalition would mean recognition and would make it possible for some of their policies to actually be implemented. As a small third party, the Lib Dems have approximately zero chance of getting electoral reform through, or any of their other policies. Why are Lib Dem supporters so quick to turn their back on something that would ultimately benefit them?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">2) Cameron's proposed compromises</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">This brings me to my second point. Let's assume Cameron gets his way and a Lib-Cons coalition is entirely on his terms - that means no electoral reform, no budging on Europe, immigration or Trident. What he has suggested he's willing to compromise on is the tax system. Remember that the Lib Dems would raise the threshold of the lowest band of income tax to £10,000. If Cameron caved to this, not only would it mean one of the most important and fairness-centric Lib Dem policies getting through, it might also give us a reason to hate the Tories slightly less in the first place. Isn't the reason we're all so opposed to them at least partly because they represent the vested interest of the richest in society? Bringing in left-wing tax policies ought to counteract at least some of that revulsion.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">3) What is the alternative?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">A Lib-Lab coalition undoubtedly makes more sense ideologically. Both parties sit on the centre-left of the spectrum and share core values, and there would be much more room for agreement. Plus, Labour sorts are quick to point out, more people voted against the Tories than for them - it's simply unfortunate that the centre-left vote was split between two parties, and to get a true representation of the electorate's feelings, those two ought to bind together. This is, however, problematic. There's something counterintuitive about suggesting that the people who have the right to govern are those who came second and third in the contest, and Clegg's ostensible reasons for trying to negotiate with the Tories - that it is the right thing to do in terms of democracy, and that he alone ought not to be the kingmaker - are on my view very good ones.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">However, there are tactical reasons as well as reasons of principle to favour a Lib-Cons coalition over a Lib-Lab one. Let's assume a Lib-Lab coalition results from the hung parliament. Based on current election results (with only one seat left to declare, which will not do so until 28th May) it would comprise 315 seats out of 650 - not even a majority. They would have to bring MPs from at least two other small parties on side in order to create a working majority. This is probably doable, so let's say they get to the requisite 325 seats. That majority would be so tentative, and met with such a large Conservative opposition, that getting anything through - let alone radical Lib Dem policies - would be very difficult. Any small back bench rebellion would throw it off kilter. Someone who wants to see Lib Dem policies implemented would probably not end up preferring this state of events, even though the coalition itself makes more sense.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Plus, Labour isn't all happy fuzzy rainbows and puppies. One of the few policy areas that the Lib Dems and the Tories share ground on is also one of the most important for the Lib Dems - civil liberties. A Lib-Cons coalition would emphasise this and we might see some real steps to counteract Labour's appalling record. There would also be something dispiriting about voting for change in the form of the Lib Dems and getting it in the form of a coalition which gives primacy to the party that's been in power for 13 years. Labour have a lot to answer for, not least in the Middle East, and for some Lib Dem supporters (though probably a minority) propping up a Labour government would taste almost as sour as bolstering a Conservative one.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Let's also remember that if Clegg does not side with Cameron, Cameron might look to form a temporary minority government and then re-call the election in hopes of getting an outright majority, which he would have a pretty good chance of achieving. Then we would be much worse off - electoral reform has a snowball's chance in hell of getting past a Conservative majority, and the Lib Dems would be relegated once more to the position of insignificant minority third party, their policies once more dismissed as implausible, unworkable and just plain mad.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I am no Conservative, and I don't mean to assert that a Lib-Cons coalition is definitely the best option for the country. I know there are good reasons why it may not be. I've simply tried to identify some reasons why it is a genuine option that should not be dismissed out of hand, and one that might end up benefitting the Lib Dems in a real way - and why the alternative might not be so rosy. Undoubtedly there's more to be said on the issue, but I think I've rambled on sufficiently for now. Commence commenting, trolling, flame wars etc.</span>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-83200423806167484752010-04-19T02:03:00.002+01:002010-10-20T14:08:41.122+01:00Pop songs that piss me off: She Said by Plan B<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">As a feminist, a lot of things in our pop culture piss me off. That's a given. But nothing in recent weeks has come close to provoking the sheer rage that this song does:</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> </span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><object height="385" width="640"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rQjh9H-ymK4&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rQjh9H-ymK4&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">You might be watching this and thinking, what is this song about? Why is it making Helen so angry? It's catchy and musically interesting and the video has some cool dancing! All of this is true and it makes me sad that I have to hate Plan B for it. Let's get the lyrics up for closer inspection.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">she said i love you boy<br />
i love your soul<br />
she said i love you baby oh oh oh ohh<br />
<br />
she said i love you more than words can say<br />
she said i love you bayayayayby<br />
<br />
so i said, what you sayin girl it can't be right<br />
how can you be in love with me<br />
we only just met tonight<br />
so she said.. boy i loved you from the start<br />
when i first heard love goes down<br />
something started burning in my heart<br />
i said stop this crazy talk<br />
and leave right now and close the door</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></span></span></blockquote><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">[chorus]</span></span></span></blockquote><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">so now up in the courts<br />
pleading my case in a witness box<br />
telling the judge and jury<br />
the same thing that i said to the cops<br />
on the day that i got arrested<br />
i'm innocent i protested<br />
she just feels rejected<br />
had her heart broken by<br />
someone she's obsessed with<br />
she likes the sound of my music<br />
she makes out a fan of my music<br />
so i love them diamonds to lose it<br />
cos she can't separate the man from the music<br />
and im saying all this from the stand<br />
but my girl cries tears from the galleries<br />
got bigger than i ever could have planned<br />
like that song by the Zutons Valerie<br />
so the jury dont look like they're buying it<br />
and she's making me nervous<br />
and i'm just screw faced like i'm trying it<br />
their eyes fixed on me like i'm murderous<br />
they wanna lock me up<br />
and throw away the key<br />
they wanna send me down<br />
even though i told them she...<br />
<br />
[chorus]<br />
<br />
so i said why the hell you gotta treat me this way<br />
you don’t know what love is<br />
you wouldn’t do this if you did<br />
oh no no no noo</span></span></span></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">...sorry about that. But I think it was necessary - you have to watch the video and hear or read all the lyrics to figure out what is actually going on. If you let it wash over you, you'll probably miss what the song is about. It's about a woman who falsely accuses him of rape. If you don't believe me, watch it again.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Where am I getting this from? Okay. The lyrics make it obvious that he has been falsely accused of a crime by a woman other than his girlfriend. The video together with the lyrics make it obvious that he slept with her and then rejected her, causing her to make this false accusation against him. I ask you: what other crime is there that she might accuse him of in this situation? I've tried to think of one.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Now comes the tricky part: explaining why this makes me incandescently angry. The immediate objection that is bound to be raised is: 'but this happens! Sometimes women do accuse men of rape, [insert case here as read about in tabloid of choice], why are you angry about Plan B rapping about it? Do you want to pretend it never happens?'</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">No. I am aware that there are occasions on which women have made the appalling and horrifying decision to falsely accuse someone of rape. It is of course an utterly detestable and unjustifiable thing to do, but it happens. Now, when this terrible thing happens, what do the tabloid media do? They sensationalise it, of course! They put it up in a big flashy headline to let everyone know: this is what women are like! Careful what do you (or <i>who</i> you do), boys, because they're out to get you! This has a threefold effect:</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">1) It puts the idea in people's heads that an accusation of rape is just as likely to be false as it is to be true.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">2) Consequently, it makes it even harder for genuine rape victims to report their case and convict their attacker (more on this later).</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">3) It makes women aware that if you want to ruin a man's life, here is a way you can do it.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In other words, it makes everything worse for everyone.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">So, back to Plan B. Is he sensationalising it? Actually, it'd be very difficult to argue that he is. The crime he is accused of is never directly referred to, and it doesn't seem to have been widely discussed (a Google search for "Plan B" + "She Said" + rape only turned up a few reviews stating that his music deals with subjects such as rape). So, given that he's being fairly subtle about it, why am I so angry?</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Not being a Plan B fan, I had to do a little research into the album from whence this song came. It turns out the album tells a story about a singer who is imprisoned for a crime he didn't commit (this one, I guess) and his whole life is ruined. So, to clarify: he's the victim of a false accusation of rape, he is imprisoned for it and it ruins his life. Guys! This is exactly what the tabloids were trying to warn you about! False accusations of rape ruin lives!</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">You know what else ruins lives? Actual rape. And it's a hell of a bigger problem in our society than fake rape cases. Research suggests 1 in 4 women will be the victim of rape or attempted rape. Only a small proportion of actual rapes are reported. Only a small proportion of reported rapists are charged. And only a small proportion of charged rapists are convicted. The BBC news website gives me a conviction rate of 6.5%*. Everyone (who knows anything about the reality of the situation) knows that the justice system is not a friend of the rape victim. So why is Plan B presenting us with a story in which an innocent man ends up among that 6.5%? How unlikely does that seem? What motivation does he have for concocting such an unlikely story which also supports the negative effects on both women and men that the tabloids create?</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I wouldn't like to speculate. I can only assume his reason was that it was an edgy, controversial subject. And that's just not a good enough justification for bolstering our society's tendency to disbelieve a rape victim.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Plan B, allow me to adapt your lyrics: you don't know what the reality about rape in the UK is. You wouldn't do this if you did. Oh no no no no.</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">[Thanks to Rosie, resident Plan B fan, for confirming my suspicion about the song.] </span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">* to see a clearer breakdown of the increasingly small percentage, click here: </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><a href="http://www.cer.truthaboutrape.co.uk/3.html"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">http://www.cer.truthaboutrape.co.uk/3.html</span></a></span></span>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4368806848708615239.post-68621969115191920132010-04-16T11:02:00.001+01:002010-10-20T14:09:25.097+01:00The Liberal Democrats: The Invisible 1/5 of the Electorate<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, like many others, I watched the first televised pre-election party leaders' debate last night. Although I felt Nick Clegg did quite well for himself overall, I was still surprised at the results of the polls which asked who had been the most successful. Let's look over those poll results, shall we?</span></span></span><br />
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">ITV: Clegg 43%, Cameron 26%, Brown 20%</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">YouGov/The Sun: Clegg 51%, Cameron 29%, Brown 19%</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Channel 4: Clegg 58%, Brown 28%, Cameron 13%</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Sky News: Clegg 37%, Brown 32%, Cameron 31%</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">(thanks, BBC News.)</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Why was I surprised? Because as someone who's quietly supported the Liberal Democrats my entire politically-aware life, I know very well how whenever they come up in conversation the almost unanimous reaction is "voting Lib Dem is wasting your vote, they'll never be in power, they haven't got a chance, etc etc". The political climate since 1945 has been structured along a two-party line: the two parties being Labour and the Conservatives. That's the choice you have. Liberal Democrat voters have been seen as bizarre anomalies, people who refuse to accept reality.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Yet put Clegg on tv alongside the other two - the representatives of the two parties received wisdom says we should vote for - and not only does he hold his own, he comes out on top! What's going on?</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And this is where I drop the bombshell. You might want to sit down.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Liberal Democrats are not a non-entity. They are not only now emerging from a swamp of total political obscurity. There are in fact people who regularly vote Lib Dem. And they are not an insignificant minority.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Time for some statistics!</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the 1997 general election, in which Labour stormed to power, the Lib Dems got 16.8% of the vote.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the 2001 general election they moved up with 18.3%.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the 2005 general election they took it up a notch again, with 22.1%.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">(thanks, Wikipedia.)</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Nowadays, support for the Lib Dems hangs pretty steadily around the 20% line. That's one-fifth of the voting electorate. The point I'm trying to make is: that ain't nothing.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So why are the Lib Dems so marginalised? It's the electoral system, dummy. Our First Past The Post system means that where support for a party is spread thinly across the country, instead of being concentrated in certain areas, it will get disproportionately few seats. In the 2005 election, with 22% of the public vote, the Lib Dems got 9.6% of the seats in the House of Commons. Even I can admit, 9.6% does look like nothing.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, to recap. About a fifth of voters support the Lib Dems, but in the public consciousness they are seen as non-existent. Or they have been, up until now. My sense is that the tv debates might change everything. With the majority of public support post-debate, no one can now claim that voting for the Lib Dems is voting for a non-entity. No one can claim that you're throwing your vote away and ignoring reality. We're not invisible any more.</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span> </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The next couple of weeks, and the poll results that come out after the next two debates, will be fascinating to watch. For now I leave you with this nugget of information. Labour's landslide victory in 1997 was achieved with 43.2% of the popular vote. If the results of the debate polls are maintained, that's the kind of percentage Clegg and co. might be able to attain this year. Anyone who tells you the election is still a two-horse race is full of shit.</span></span></span></div>Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15787708792184032639noreply@blogger.com2