Happy International Women’s Day and welcome to another weekly round-up! This week’s selection of links from the previous seven days includes everything from The Sun’s Oscars cleavage rating to Zoe Saldana’s portrayal of Nina Simone. We’d love to hear your thoughts on either (or both!) of these subjects or on any of the other issues covered.

As always, linking to articles does not mean endorsement from the F-Word and certain links may be triggering. We welcome debate in the comments section and on Facebook/Twitter but remind readers that any comments containing sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic or disablist language will be deleted immediately.

If you notice that we’ve missed out any important articles from the past week, feel free to let us know.

It’s 2016 and The Sun has rated the cleavage of some of the actresses at the Oscars (The Tab)

I refuse to call my daughter a tomboy. Here’s why (Bust)

Company gives women ‘period leave’ to make them more productive (The Independent)

This Women’s History Month, I Refuse to Celebrate Your Feminism (Huffington Post)

Zoe Saldana in dark make-up is no way to represent Nina Simone onscreen (The Guardian)

On International Women’s Day, feminists need to speak out against female connivance (The Independent)

Emma Watson: Check Out These Alternatives to Mainstream Porn (Harlot)

Kiddle: a search engine which endangers children (Another angry woman)

Why this radical activist is disillusioned with the toxic culture of the left (The Independent)

From the article: “I’m tired of watching people turn into pretentious assholes who think their activism makes them better than everyone else, even the oppressed and marginalised groups with whom they claim ‘allyship’.”

The image is used under a creative commons license with thanks to Magdalena on Flickr. It shows the interior of a London underground train. Through the window of the train, a wall covered in street art can be seen. The most prominent images on the wall are a suffragette holding a ‘Votes for Women’ sign and a Betty Page-esque pin-up model.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: Weekly Round-Up And Open Thread

Jane Chelliah is our guest blogger for March. She normally blogs at Ambitious Mamas and tweets @ambitiousmamas.

This year’s theme for International Women’s Day is “Pledge for Parity”. Five options have been listed as being pivotal to reducing or eliminating the inequality gap between the sexes and unconscious bias is one.

When discrimination is practised openly it can be quite often be challenged. Feminism was a powerful force in the 1970s in getting the state to recognise that mandatory policies were needed to give women equality through rights. While women still have some way to go before achieving true equality there are laws that prevent discrimination.

What, though, can women do when we are being held back by a different form of discrimination: one that is a nuance, an unspoken word and is practically intangible? In fact the perpetrator of the discriminatory act may not even realise that they are being so. This is what unconscious bias is about.

The Equality Challenge Unit defines it as

[A] bias that we are unaware of, and which happens outside of our control. It is a bias that happens automatically and is triggered by our brain making quick judgments and assessments of people and situations, influenced by our background, cultural environment and personal experiences.

Shelley J. Correll from Stanford University writes that unconscious bias is one reason for the motherhood penalty: the disadvantage that mothers suffer in the workplace. The penalty is that mothers earn less in the workplace, including less than women without children, and mothers who take family leave are less likely to be promoted.

The motherhood penalty is the pits because it manifests itself in so many ways. As a mother I have suffered from the visibility problem in the workplace. I used to work part-time, which meant that I was not always a face in the office seated in front of the computer giving the impression of being committed. The fact that I chose to work part-time and was paid a commensurate part-time wage did nothing to mitigate the visibility penalty.

The hidden problem was unconscious bias: mothers who work part-time either cannot cope with promotion or do not deserve to be promoted. Another barrier is the perception that mothers cannot be relied upon to get important work done because family issues will always take priority. This is one bias that is easy to debunk. Mothers who have to prove themselves in a company-biased culture which demands loyalty will often take work home while juggling a family emergency. Mothers can be trusted employees.

Compromise works two ways though. Companies and organisations have to recognise that emergencies do happen and sometimes it takes precedence.

According to Correll it is not mothers who have a problem. Companies operate by stereotypical attitudes that perpetuate the problems of unconscious bias. So a biased stereotypical attitude favours fathers over mothers because men are not seen as having domestic responsibility beyond bringing home a steady wage.

Women with childcare responsibilities aren’t the only ones who need flexibility to achieve a work/life balance. The dilemma of an ageing population has resulted in women taking on caring responsibilities for their elders, whether or not they have children. When the state cuts funding, women often step into the breach.

Change has to be initiated by the top brass of any company or organisation. This change would take the form of rethinking old norms and instituting new ones through company policies, awareness-raising and by providing courses for managers on tackling unconscious bias. Inaction causes companies and organisations to lose out on being able to select talent from a wider pool of people, which includes mothers. Women are achieving higher levels of education and are keen to earn a wage and the simple truth is that the working world cannot afford to rule out an entire cohort.

From a feminist point of view, the struggle is to put an end to the feminisation of poverty. There are increasing numbers of households headed by women either because they are single mothers or have partners who earn less than they do or are not in employment.

While I have chosen to write about how unconscious bias hits women in the workplace it is important to remember that unconscious bias also affects mothers who stay at home but in different ways. A stay-at-home mother is judged in capitalist terms as being out of work, while ignoring the valuable work being done at home. The fight against gender disparity involves all mothers.

The photo uses was taken by Devon Buchanan and is used under a creative commons licence. It shows graffiti on an exterior brick wall, with the words “WOMEN DESERVE BETTER” in yellow letters with red shadowing. There is a wooden door with some steps leading up to it visible to the right of the image.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: International Women's Day, motherhood, unconscious bias, work, working mothers

Jane Chelliah is our guest blogger for March. She normally blogs at Ambitious Mamas and tweets @ambitiousmamas.

Feminism was something that happened in the Western world, not in Asia where I grew up. It never occurred to me that I could be a feminist. Where I came from a woman’s virtue was judged from her appearance and ability to be demure. Feminism to me was something that was practised by rich and intellectual white women.

I moved to the UK in the early 1980s when people spoke about Margaret Thatcher as a feminist. I laboured under the illusion that feminists were white women with power; ordinary women like me could not be feminists.

My daughter was born in 1999. All I knew was that rush of feeling that people talk about when becoming a mother for the first time hit me too. While I did not know it at that time I bypassed being a feminist in my own right and became a feminist mother with a vengeance, but then I was ignorant about the concept of feminist mothering.

As the months went by I started to notice the stereotyping and expectations of a girl. That gush of motherhood morphed into something more protective and was grounded in wanting to create a different world for my girl.

One night I felt very isolated, as new mothers sometimes do, and spent hours on the internet looking for like minded mothers. I found a website called The Motherhood Initiative for Research and Community Involvement from which I learnt that my style of mothering with all the aspirations and hopes attached had a name: “feminist mothering”.

Feminist mothering can either be defined as the opposite of the common understanding of mothering or on its own as a liberating style of mothering. Feminist mothering is a life strategy or an underpinning narrative that is both theoretical and practical. It fights against the common assumption that motherhood is a patriarchal institution whereby the child rearing is left to mothers in the domestic and private sphere of the home, her work is devalued but she must always strive to be a ‘good mother’.

While mothering requires sacrifices in order to put the child’s needs first, a ‘good mother’ is seen as someone who always sacrifices herself as a person in her own right and who puts her own needs last, perhaps even when this is not what would benefit her child. However, feminist mothering isn’t about being a selfish mother. It is about recognising the barriers that women as mothers face such as gender assumptions, class and race issues and understanding that mothering is not a homogeneous experience. Feminist mothering is about seeing mothering as a subjective experience and finding stories from these experiences that can be used to empower women.

A ‘good mother’, on the other hand, is often a stay-at-home, married and middle class woman. There’s nothing wrong with any of these, I hasten to add, but it is the detrimental stereotyping that I object to, because women on benefits, gay women and working single women can also be good mothers. Mothers are a melting pot and feminist mothering is an inclusive philosophy.

In contrast to my upbringing where women were expected to live by a common code drawn up by the patriarchy, my daughter’s life is characterised by personal agency, empowerment and self-awareness.

My daughter at 16-years-old is unlike what I was at her age. She is aware of her strengths and feels confident to assert herself and defend herself when challenged about not complying with stereotypical views. While I thought at her age that boys were always right because of their sex she does not think that men are endowed with superior powers.

Feminist mothering is a concept that meets the demands of the 21st century because it is comprehensive and inclusive enough to face contemporary problems such as inequality, racism, sexism and gender essentialism, among others. A one-size-fits-all style leaves out the evolving nature of mothering such as mother activism – for example, Cindy Sheehan and her role as “peace mom”, or mothers like me who took part in the Occupy movement.

People often get the wrong end of the stick. I spoke about feminist mothering at London Occupy and was subsequently invited by a university to talk about breastfeeding and how it fits in, because they wrongly assumed I would be against it. But feminist mothering is about empowerment; just as some women may choose not to or not be able to breastfeed, those who do wish to should be supported to be able to do this. For example, being able to breastfeed in public places would be considered a feminist mother triumph.

In conclusion, Happy Mother’s Day and I hope today is a celebration of your subjectivity and a recognition of the diversity of mothers.

The image is a photo by Beth Scupham of a painting by Eng Tay titled ‘Mother’. It shows stylised characters; a mother sitting at a piano, one hand on the keyboard and one hand on the music pages, with a child hugging her from behind. Both have their eyes shut and look serene.

1 comment // Permalink // Tags: diversity, family, feminist mothering, feminist parenting, motherhood, mothers

Jane Chelliah is our guest blogger for March.

I am a brown-skinned Asian woman with a white-skinned 16-year-old biological daughter. The word “biological” is a conscious inclusion because very often it doesn’t occur to people that she is my daughter.

In shops we are asked whether we want to pay together. In restaurants we are asked whether we want separate bills. No offence is meant or taken but these are, at the very least, strong snapshot summary points of my lived experience in the 21st century, where discussions about race and multiculturalism do not encompass the genetic mixing of races.

When pregnant I was naïve about the complexity of bringing up a mixed race child. My very early years of mothering were monochromatic. The trigger point occurred when I was first asked about my “nanny job”. A brown-skinned woman with a white child? It was as if child-rearing that involved two contrasting skin colours could only be done for monetary purposes.

After that incident, which was a foreteller of similar questions being asked of me, I started to incorporate a cultural dimension to my mothering to get my little girl to recognise her mixed race heritage. This involved a game where I, Tamil by origin, would pretend to be a wolf that chased her because it wanted to play with half-Tamil children. Stories at bath time were about elephants, magic and faraway places.

Despite those cultural moments she did not fully understand that her physiology was mixed race. I discovered this when she came home from school during her Reception year and told me that she and her friends had been playing a game whereby they had clasped their palms, shaken their heads from side to side while uttering the words, “Goodness Gracious Me”.

I tried to explain why this was wrong (under any circumstances it would be wrong). She insisted that she could not be half Indian because her skin was white. People with my skin colour were ‘others’ to her. I could not fault her because society thinks in terms of black/brown or white.

As the years have gone by, more and more layers of complexity have been added to my parenting. Society does not expect her to be brought up in an Asian manner. Her skin colour determines how she is treated and that is as a white girl. Often it feels as if a cultural battle is taking place within our home.

There is an imperceptible pressure on my mothering to conform totally to a white-dominated cultural practice. While I respect this dominant culture I do wish that I could impart more than a flavour of my Asian heritage in my parenting. My sentiments, though, are rather Utopian. My life as an Asian woman has been sometimes marred by both unconscious bias and straight-out racism. Quite often I have been thankful that my daughter will never be subjected to this. Parenting a mixed race child heavily involves paradoxical thoughts.

In 2014 a white father wrote about how he hoped that his biracial son’s skin would stay white. This father subsequently wrote about seven scenarios that he did not want his son to have to go through.

In a similar vein I am pleased that my daughter won’t have to experience the five following things:

1. Turning up for an interview where the employer has a wrong preconception of her being a white person because her name suggests so and then to look visibly shocked throughout the interview as if she was an imposter.
2. After a major terrorist incident, no matter where in the world it has occurred, having people look at her suspiciously as if she were somehow complicit in terror inflicted by brown people; or to have people get up from their seats on the tube or bus because she has sat down next to them.
3. Being in a group composed of ethnic minorities who are dining in a restaurant and having a laugh at normal decibels but still have people look at her in disgust as if she has not learnt the etiquette of Western ways.
4. Having shop assistants say to her in a loud voice, “Can I help you?”, and then look suspiciously at her as if she cannot afford the prices of their goods on sale.
5. Being treated as if she has got where she has as a token when she has achieved things through her own hard work and merit.

In my perfect world there would not be a presupposed link between skin colour and a particular culture and people like me would be able to parent a fusion of cultures that would be seen to be the norm.

The photo is by Anne and is used under a creative commons licence. It shows a yellow dandelion among other flowers, which are all purple with several small blooms on each stalk. They are in long grass.

1 comment // Permalink // Tags: feminist parenting, mixed race, monthly guest blogger, parenting, race

Welcome to another weekly round-up, where we share (what we see as) the most interesting and important articles and essays from the previous seven days. This week’s collection of links includes everything from misogyny and homophobia in hip hop, to Latina feminist rock bands. We’d love to hear your thoughts on either (or both!) of these subjects or on any of the other issues covered.

As always, linking to articles does not mean endorsement from the F-Word and certain links may be triggering. We welcome debate in the comments section and on Facebook/Twitter but remind readers that any comments containing sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic or disablist language will be deleted immediately.

If you notice that we’ve missed out any important articles from the past week, feel free to let us know.

For those of us who love hip hop, but hate misogyny & homophobia (Black Girl Dangerous)

Ableism at the Feminist Table: What Are Ableism and Accessibility, and Why Do Feminists Care? (KSUWomensCentre)

What It’s Really Like to Work in Hollywood*(*If you’re not a straight white man.)(New York Times)

From the article: “I want to fill my desire to write vibrant, flawed characters, but then also be a role model to young people. It’s stuff that I think about all the time. Some people don’t have to think about this at all.”

“You Will Be Tokenized”: Speaking Out About the State of Diversity in Publishing (Brooklyn)

From the article: “You end up writing off your identity and your own story as something that makes you valuable to your job. You actually start thinking about it as a liability. If I had only grown up reading beach reads by and for white women, I would be so much better at my job.”

A Hollywood agent explains how negotiations work and why actresses are paid less (Cosmopolitan)

From the article: “I’ll go through the projects that are out there, and it will be four men for one woman. So when you have that few parts, that’s why women feel like they have to say yes, because they want to work. The real issue is women don’t have the luxury to hold out, because if they hold out, then what are they going to do? Are they going to not work for the rest of the year? If they don’t work for the rest of the year, they’re not in demand.”

All you see in me is death: The importance of Latina feminist rock bands (Impose)

10 Black Emerging Guitarists You Need To Pay Attention To (She Shreds)

Why We Smile at Men Who Sexually Harass Us (Medium)

Who cares for feminism? (Melissa Gira Grant at Pacific Standard)

Where do women belong in Indian cities? (Open Democracy)

Asiya Islam, the writer of the above piece, was previously features editor for the F-Word. You can read more of her writing HERE.

British fetish film-makers are organising against censorship (Pandora Blake)

From the article: “The current legislation surrounding porn distribution in the UK is not fit for purpose. The AVMS regulations, deriving from BBFC guidelines restricting what content can and can’t be classified for DVD publication, are out-dated and absurd, and do not reflect current social standards of obscenity in the UK. Many of the restricted acts, such as fisting, urolagnia and full bondage with gags, are common consensual practices, easily made completely safe with prior negotiation and common sense safety procedures. Others, such as ejaculation by cunt-owners, are in reality impossible to control – it is simply the way that some bodies respond to orgasm – and attempting to ban their depiction can be seen as a regressive and sexist crusade to control our bodies, autonomy and sexual enjoyment.”

Virtual reality could be a solution to sexism in tech (Quartz)

Responsible self-promotion: negotiating the relationships between self and Other, myself and ‘my’ work (gender, bodies, politics)

My problem with how eating disorder narratives shape our thinking (The Irish Times)

From the article: “Stories matter. Stories about beautiful, thin girls who look as though they suffer from an eating disorder and who get the help they need and are then cured (often while remaining at a sufficiently light weight to be deemed socially pleasing) obscure the ugliness and complexity of a set of disorders which are not just about weight but about having a damaging relationship with food, with your mind, and with your body.”

Sex worker and activist Laura Lee: ‘It’s now far more difficult to stay safe’ (The Guardian)

From the article: “During the past decade, women have increasingly relied on the internet to protect themselves against violent or unpleasant clients, turning to sites such as National Ugly Mugs and to those such as Adultwork and Escort Ireland which show how colleagues have rated men’s behaviour. “It might say ‘lovely guy, very punctual; would definitely see him again’. It’s a bit like eBay; both sides leave feedback. We have a number of online screening processes, but clients [in Northern Ireland] are point-blank refusing to use those systems. They are paranoid about anyone coming across their activities online. It is hugely problematic,” [Laura Lee] says.”

The image is used under a creative commons licence with thanks to Cross-Stitch Ninja on Flickr. It is a cross-stitch design in black cotton depicting a hand raised and balled into a fist in traditional sign of solidarity and support.

1 comment // Permalink // Tags: Weekly Round-Up And Open Thread

During February, our first guest blogger of 2016, Helen Reid, has been writing for us – a huge thank you to her!

Now as we move into March, we have a new guest blogger, Jane Chelliah. This is Jane in her own words:

Jane Chelliah is a 52-year-old Asian blogger who blogs on politics and feminist parenting. She became a feminist when her daughter was born because she did not want her little girl to grow up accepting cultural practices and the patriarchy as the norm. Jane works in the public sector, is chair of a charity for women with learning disabilities called Powerhouse, represents UN UK Women on the Gender Action for Peace & Security and practices intensive mothering even though her daughter is 16 years old.

This month, The F-Word will be featuring posts from different bloggers on feminist parenting, which some of Jane’s posts will be touching on.

Although we’ve selected all the monthly bloggers for the year, there are still lots of ways to contribute, with blog posts, features or reviews. Get in touch if you’re interested!

The photo is by Greta Ceresini and is used under a creative commons licence. It shows a person paragliding; they are silhouetted against the bright blue sky, with wispy clouds around. The paraglider is bright, rainbow colours.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: monthly guest bloggers

Helen Reid is our guest blogger for February.

In 2005, the since-disgraced head of FIFA Sepp Blatter said he thought women footballers should wear tighter clothes in order to attract more attention and funding. Gemma Hughes followed Blatter’s advice by founding the Lingerie Football League. The concept is based on a false premise: that watching women play football in a crop top and short shorts will somehow encourage (assumed male) spectators to watch women’s football more. Yet men and women players alike used to wear tighter shorts from the 1960s to the 1990s, and, as one female player wryly observed, people didn’t pay attention to the women’s game back then either.

However, only a month after its launch, the LFL was banned by the Football Association (FA) in January. Hughes found out about the ban through a tweet from FA Director Kelly Simmons.

@KellySimmo1 can you confirm if its true you're allowing @lingeriefluk to play at SGP?? They're promoting it and raising money?

— Jordan Brown (@JordBrowny) 16 January 2016

Hi no we are not and they've been instructed in writing that it will not take place at SGP. https://t.co/FaZ3NMndj0

— Kelly Simmons (@KellySimmo1) 17 January 2016

In a press release, Hughes said, “I thought it was some sort of joke when I read the tweet from Kelly Simmons MBE FA Director on 17th Jan saying we can’t play. But when I received the email from JustGiving on Thursday 21st January 2016 saying we had been banned, I realised it was real.”

Multi-million transfer deals in the transfer window are a stark reminder of the yawning gap between women and men in the world of football. A top female professional footballer can earn up to £60,000, while top men earn millions. Hughes wanted to fight this disparity through the LFL.

She is just a year older than me. Her sentiment and motivations are admirable and the grievances she expresses were very real when I interviewed her over the phone two weeks prior to the ban. “It broke my heart that my local junior women’s team are playing their last season this year because they don’t have a pitch to play on,” she told me.

“The message up there right now is: don’t play football, you can’t make a serious living. It implicitly means it’s ok for women to be paid less. We’re saying women will run the league for the benefit of women.”

However, women’s football seems to be on the up and last year women’s football reach unprecedented heights in England. The Women’s FA Cup was played at Wembley Stadium for the first time, in front of 30,000 spectators. England Lionesses played Germany at Wembley in front of a crowd of 50,000.

“Women’s football was being talked about on every radio station and national news programmes,” Tony Farmer, former manager of Chelsea Ladies Football Club and instigator of the petition against the LFL, told me on the phone. “2.4 million viewers watched a single game at 1am during the World Cup. The public is very aware of women’s football, and the Lingerie Football League is not only inappropriate but badly timed, for this reason.”

The petition was also supported by Women in Football, a network of professional women in the football industry.

We have signed the petition against the launch of a "Lingerie Football League" @hotelfootballuk https://t.co/huE5GWeU9e

— Women in Football (@WomeninFootball) December 23, 2015

The ban on women’s football was only lifted in 1971, after years of fighting for it to be lifted. “The true pioneers of women’s football,” said Farmer, “were the players and teams who refused to take no for an answer and forced the FA to lift the ban.”

“Their claims are actually insulting to all the players since 1971 who have worked so hard and overcome so much sexism and prejudice to drag women’s football to where it is today: professional top tier, weekly TV coverage and one of the fastest growing team sports in the UK.”

There is still, however, far to go. There are more supporters at Old Trafford for a weekly Manchester United game than the combined attendance of every Women’s Super League match of the 2014/15 season, Farmer told me.

Hughes said not enough has changed: “I want to see change in my lifetime.” I sympathise with her impatience. Women’s football should have grown more than it has, but to expect rapid change is to ignore the deep cultural and structural obstacles to women’s participation.

“We need media attention to get sponsorship and endorsement,” claimed Hughes.

But where is the sponsorship? So far the LFL has not succeeded in whipping up the media frenzy its founder expected, only succeeding in earning public disparagement from football linchpins. “It’s a knee-jerk reaction, it’s what I was expecting,” said Hughes of the backlash to her project.

Hughes justifies the aesthetic, saying, “In the professional game we’re imitating the men’s game. It should look like women’s football – the players should look like women.” But the concept of ‘real woman’ has often been used to oppress women who transgress traditional representations of gender.

The idea men will watch Lingerie Football League games because of the lingerie insults men’s intelligence as well. Men watch football games very regularly without needing to feel attracted to the players. Why should women’s football be any different?

The LFL protested the FA ban early this month at Anfield stadium in Liverpool, holding banners saying “Shame on the FA” and “The FA won’t let us play”. But the story of the British LFL seems to have come to an end.

The photo is by faungg and is used under a creative commons licence. It shows a women’s football game played outside at the University of Alabama, focusing on one woman running with the ball and another woman from the opposing team close behind her. Other players are indistinct in the background.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: football, interview, lingerie football league, monthly guest bloggers, sport, women in football, women in sport

The F-Word readers have been offered the opportunity to buy tickets for the Wednesday night performance of Three Generations of Women at the Greenwich Theatre at the special price of £10, discounted from £16 for full price tickets only. Tickets can be bought with the discount online or directly with Greenwich Theatre when quoting FEMSTORY.

About the play: In a process described as “the first time such a project has been undertaken” (The Independent on Sunday), Broken Leg Theatre have, over the past two years, invited women from around the UK to share their stories via an interactive website prompted by a series of questions such as “What is your best kept family secret?” and “What is the best piece of advice your grandmother gave you?” The response has been “incredible” says writer Anna Jefferson, with the website inundated with over 2000 testimonies from women whose ages stretch from 15 to 94, creating an online living archive. The writers, who wanted to explore how life has changed for women in Britain over the past century, have also worked with groups of women from city councils, universities, midwifery hospitals and retirement homes.

The outcome is a funny, heartwarming and sometimes poignant new piece of writing which gives a powerful and unusual insight into the fascinating dramas hidden in women’s real lives. The play centres around three women: Elsie who is born in a Yorkshire pit village in 1936 and will never know another way of life; Gilly the first woman in her family to go to university, enjoying every ounce of freedom the 1970s has to offer; and Frankie, who, in the present day, unwittingly sets into motion a chain of events that will uncover secrets the women in her family have long held buried.

---

The F-Word’s review of Three Generations of Women will appear in early March.

Image courtesy of Broken Leg Theatre. It is a black and white rehearsal shot showing four women sitting in a row. One woman’s head is turned away from the camera towards the other three who are looking at her. The three women with faces we can see are all white and of different ages.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: theatre, ticket offer

Welcome to another weekly round-up, where we share (what we see as) the most interesting and important articles and essays from the previous seven days. This week’s collection of links includes everything from #FreeKesha to Paper’s conversation with bell hooks and Emma Watson. We’d love to hear your thoughts on either (or both!) of these issues or on any of the other issues covered.

As always, linking to articles does not mean endorsement from the F-Word and certain links may be triggering. We welcome debate in the comments section and on Facebook/Twitter but remind readers that any comments containing sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic or disablist language will be deleted immediately.

If you notice that we’ve missed out any important articles from the past week, feel free to let us know.

On the sad inevitability of the grown man and the teenage girl (The Pool)

A Kind of Grace (Harper’s Magazine)

From the article: “The safe space does not guarantee protection, but it does offer a method for thinking harder about cruelty. The contingent, strategic demand for safety is not a retreat from reality but a closer examination of reality’s contours — not in every case, yet often enough that its critics should be more careful.”

The remarkably different answers men and women give when asked who’s the smartest in the class (The Washington Post)

Gender quotas do not pose a threat to “merit” at any stage of the political process (Democratic Audit)

Court of Appeal rules Government cuts to legal aid for victims of domestic violence ‘legally flawed’ (Independent)

Public toilets – the key battleground for bigots wanting to legislate trans people out of existence (Guardian)

When Neutral is Really Default Setting For Male (and White): A Slightly Non-Scientific SocMed Experiment (Sunny Singh Online)

From the article: “The change in handle took all sexualised, gendered, and racialised interaction to zero. Some discussion with women friends on twitter raised the additional possibility that perhaps a large dog, especially a Rottweiler, was being read as male. The next step seemed to test out (1) if this were true and (2) would a dog visually read as more ‘femme’ change the interactions. So next photograph was of our little Dachshund.”

What Bill Cosby taught me about sexual violence and flying (Literary Hub)

From the article: “Committing to not just valuing consent with partners, but willing ourselves to have hard, loving conversations with friends and partners about where we’ve been sexually, where we hope to go, and the roles that violence has played in our history, might be part of the work. Making sure that survivors of sexual, domestic and interpersonal violence living in poverty have healthy, free alternative places to stay and heal when home is bloody and emotionally destructive might be part of the work, too.”

Kesha Was Sexually Assaulted And Yet Capitalism Still Wins (Ravishly)

All children need to learn about sexual consent – it’s their right (The Guardian)

Susan Cahill: ‘My abortion was not remotely traumatic … I have no regrets’ (The Irish Times)

Do women really say sorry all the time? (The Debrief)

In conversation with bell hooks and Emma Watson (Paper)

As Rental Prices Rise, Women Stay In Bad Relationships to Survive (Broadly)

‘The lowest of the stack’: why black women are struggling with mental health (The Guardian)

The Media’s Reporting of Murdered Mother and Sex Worker Jessica McGraa Is a Disgrace (Vice)

The image is used under creative commons with thanks to John Talbot on Flickr. It shows a cherry blossom tree in full bloom against an extremely vivid blue sky.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: Weekly Round-Up And Open Thread

Silvia Carrus is an Italian illustrator and comic artist, living in London. She loves to make comics about feminism and animals, and has recently self-published the comic ‘Feminist Cat’. See her work on Tumblr and tweet her @silviargh.

This month’s comic depicts a man congratulating himself for not hating women.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: feMANism, male feminists, men's rights

A few weeks ago, high street chemist Boots reviewed pricing of its own-brand products to address discrepancies that occurred when items marketed separately to men and women were the same apart from superficial gendering. This led to changes to the pricing of razors and eye roll-ons, as well as a call from Boots to their suppliers to undertake similar audits.

The main thing I took out of this at the time was that it shows how ongoing campaigning can be effective. This occurred following a Time investigation, but there has been activity on this for years. It can take time for these complaints to be heard and get coverage in mainstream media or discussed in political processes, so I think this is a move that should encourage us to continue being vocal on whichever issues we care most about.

Still, I wasn’t moved to write on the topic until I read one too many comment sections to related articles. There’s a very common response to this story, which I’m paraphrasing here:

There’s nothing stopping women from buying the cheaper products if they are really the same; as rational actors, they can decide to pay more if they want the more feminine product.

It apparently begs the question for some people: what’s the fuss about? Differential pricing happens all the time. Perhaps it’s just like choosing between basic and luxury versions of the same thing, or electing for a more bespoke coffee order that adds on 50p. Yes, it’s more expensive, but you could have gone for the cheaper option. It was there.

I contest this idea that we are functioning in the sort of world that allows us to talk about ‘rational’ decision-making as if it’s a given or means a fixed thing. Reason number one why people don’t buy the cheapest product: they don’t know there is a cheaper product.

It is very seldom the case that identical products aimed differently at men and women are next to each other, in way that makes it easy to compare specification and price per unit. The cheaper version might be the other end of the row or, often, in an entirely different section of the shop altogether. What’s more, if they are in separate sections, that’s normally because those sections are gendered – this way for women, this way for men, or in other words, this way is for you, this way is not for you. So it may often be that a woman buying a more expensive razor would never think of going into the men’s section to look for a cheaper version. Does that mean she’s making a rational choice to spend more? I don’t think so. She doesn’t hold all the information and it’s an unreasonable expectation that each consumer will be able to critically analyse pricing information from across the entire shop every time they enter, in frequently changing environments. Whether they choose to buy a pricier moisturiser because it contains wolf tears is one thing, assuming it’s next to the more standard offerings; this is a totally different scenario to comparing items in different areas, particularly when you have no reason to suspect you are being subtly ripped off.

So, yes, an important step is simply raising awareness and encouraging people to shop with this knowledge. But even if somebody is aware that there is a cheaper version elsewhere in the shop, that doesn’t mean they are making a straightforward economic decision if they buy the women’s version.

It isn’t an easy thing to challenge gender. We are so continually socialised to be certain ways to align with society’s gendered expectations of us. If products are spatially differentiated by gender (or even simply differentiated by packaging), there is a societal or identity cost to deviating from the expected purchase. For some, this cost will be great enough to counterbalance the monetary cost, which I think is easy to understand. I imagine that for many men, if women’s products were cheaper, they would still opt to use explicitly male products due to fear of undermining their masculinity by using women’s shaving products or toiletries; in a similar way, for many women, making a conscious decision to choose male-marketed products is challenging.

Perhaps some of the original commenters would point at this and say, aha, that is in fact a rational choice. If so, I don’t find it a fair one to be forced to make. It isn’t that all women buying pink, glittery products love pink and glitter and so will pay more; some don’t feel able to pay the non-monetary costs of deviating to male-branded products, even if they would be fit for purpose.

There is a wider issue here about those societal barriers, which of course I would like to see challenged and reduced. But while they exist, I can only cheer anything that reduces the exploitation of women they systematically cause.

The image is by beachballhead and is used under a licence that allows noncommercial use with modifications. It shows shaving apparatus arranged in a pile. In the middle is a traditional shaving brush with a black handle and the brand “Omega” and “Made in Italy” on it. To its right is a pot of shaving cream; the words (some letters implied) read “Eton College Collection/Gentleman’s Shaving Cream”. A grey razor lies on top of this. Under the shaving brush to the left is an out of focus bottle with amber liquid inside and writing that I can’t make out.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: boots, costs, economics, gendered pricing, gendered products, identity, rational actors

As part of The F-Word’s #feMANism month, Sarah Fletcher discussed the need for a ‘men’s movement’, one that distances itself from the MRA nonsense and creates a space where men can critically engage with their own issues without taking up airtime in feminist spaces and movements.

I agree that feminists need their own movement. But I’m not convinced that men need one too.

Feminists have work to do and spending time talking about how men also suffer under patriarchy can detract from that process. Particular movements have purpose, and while they may welcome allies, should not spend their time addressing the problems of those allies at the expense of their original purpose. Men should be very wary about participating in feminism, and when doing so should primarily stay very quiet and do as they are asked – including leaving if that is what is necessary. In order to dismantle privilege and patriarchy, men have to accept that their lives are going to have to change and that they will not be the leaders of this change.

But this doesn’t mean that men should have their ‘own’ movement.

Movements have power and legitimacy. The last thing we need is another male-dominated movement. We only have to look at the problems of whiteness in feminism, or patriarchy in POC movements, or class for LGBT equality to see how movements can reinforce marginalisation.

Men do face real challenges, but the formation of a ‘movement’ around them leaves too much risk of a re-entrenchment of already privileged voices. Especially given the current context of MRAs, gamergate, pick up artists and other ‘men’s movements’ that already exist. I’d welcome a mature, critically engaged space, but I’m not sure that it’s possible right now.

While I don’t want to downplay the problems men face and which should be addressed, the biggest challenge to men in dismantling patriarchy is their own role in it. What can men really add to a critical discourse on patriarchy that feminists, queers and critical race scholars have not already contributed?

We know that our personal behaviour reinforces social structures of domination and we know that those structures cause our own suffering along with the suffering and exclusion of others. We do not need a new movement to proclaim these facts that have been well established by generations of marginalised scholars and activists.

We accept that there are systemic exclusions which cause suffering. But making the step between that acceptance and taking proactive, every day, action in recognising how our personal behaviour contributes to those systems is hard. Privilege is invisible. Which is why a critical men’s movement is going to be challenging because individual men often can’t see the role they play in patriarchy without a lot of help. But we should not rely on this being explained to us by every woman, person of colour or LGBT that we meet at parties, protests or picnics.

I have a suggestion for how this work could be accomplished.

In the past I have organised privilege discussion workshops. They’re an open space where people can discuss in practical terms how they are personally implicated in inequality, and what they are doing to change it.

The workshop structure is simple, an hour of safe workshop time, some key worksheets or readings on inequality – the internet has many fantastic resources available or you can take a more academic piece depending on the group. The Invisible Knapsack is good for starting a discussion and has been adapted for other identities. Everyone then talks through their responses to the piece, trying to understand how it is relevant to their lives and how they might change their behaviour.

It is very hard. There will be resistance and arguments. Good facilitation is essential, as is a big dash of humility. The discussion is about privilege; it should not get side-tracked into discussion about inequality. Anybody who doesn’t accept that they have privilege and need to change their behaviour needs to find other spaces to do their own kind of work. People need to be willing to call each other out, and be called out.

I don’t think this should form the basis of a men’s movement, because we find it hard to see privilege in ourselves or people that are like ourselves and it often takes someone else to call us on it. But I do think that men need to take a more proactive and personal role in addressing patriarchy and privilege, and to do so in distinct spaces where it doesn’t detract from other work that is being done.

If, as a man, you cannot accept this, then you are not a feminist or an ally; you are actively part of the problem.

Glen Noble lives in Beijing where he works in research funding, science policy and diplomacy; he completed a PhD in geographies of inequality in 2012 and has 10 years’ experience in activism, theory and teaching on privilege and inequalities.

The image used depicts a row of people in suits and is used under the Creative Commons license.

7 comments // Permalink // Tags: feMANism, men's movement, men's rights

Helen Reid is our guest blogger for February.

This post was edited on 17 February, 2016, to address some errors as outlined in the first comment on this post.

Although UNESCO recognised sport and physical activity as a human right in 1978, women worldwide are still excluded from sport on the basis of their gender.

The Olympics have never truly been an equal playing field. In 1928 women competed in track and field events for the first time, but several athletes collapsed at the end of the 800m race, leading the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to rule the distance too challenging for women. Female athletes were only allowed to run the event again in 1960. The 2012 summer Olympics were the first in which every sport had events for men and women.

The problem is not only at the elite level; it is a community-wide issue which has to be tackled through better education, more equal resources for sports and a huge shift in attitudes. This would have concrete consequences for many women’s well-being, as 80% of women in the UK do not do enough exercise to stay healthy. No wonder, as we are brought up watching men’s football, rugby and cricket. A mere 7% of sports media coverage is devoted to women’s sport, yet 60% of sports fans say they’d like to see more women’s sports on TV.

Those who justify unequal coverage claim men’s sports are inherently more entertaining given that men are stronger and faster. This ignores the centuries of exclusion behind the sporting situation women face today. When women are discouraged from participating in sports from amateur to elite level, the pool of athletes from which Olympians are selected is much larger for men than it is for women – so any measure of how fast the fastest woman is must be preceded by the caveat that far fewer women are encouraged to train and compete for this award in the first place. Even with such unequal access to elite sports, the gap between top male and female athletes’ running times has been decreasing.

Not only are women actively discouraged from participating in sports, but the rigid gender binary within sports is policed with drastic consequences for transgender sportspeople.

This has led to intense debate within the IOC over transgender athletes. Transgender women are seen as a threat to the principle of ‘fair play’, as they often have higher testosterone than cisgender women, which is seen as a miracle hormone to which male outperformance in sports is attributed. But the real picture is much more complex than a simple testosterone/oestrogen dichotomy – this simplification is a product of our gender/sex stereotyping, not the other way around.

Last month the IOC opened its competition to trans women by allowing them to participate without having had full surgery, simply keeping testosterone levels below 10nmol/L. Janice Turner took to her Times column to complain that this would make competition unfair. “This is bound to be exploited by medal-hungry male athletes in unscrupulous nations,” she wrote. “The Iranian women’s football team already includes two trans-females.” Turner perpetuates the transphobic idea that trans* people are masquerading as another gender. She also singles Iran out as being exceptionally deviant, an example of where this trans* trend or fad, as she might see it, has spread alarmingly rapidly. In fact transgenderism has been an accepted and celebrated part of Iranian culture for centuries. Of course their Olympic team will reflect this.

The moral panic over men masquerading as women in order to win is well-rehearsed. The deep suspicion directed at successful, strong women athletes is obvious in the treatment of Caster Semenya, the South African athlete who won the 800m event in the 2009 athletics World Championships. She was stripped of her medal after the competition due to doubts about her gender. Semenya underwent a gender test the night before the race, without her consent. The test results were never publicly released, although she did get her medals back and competed in the 2012 Summer Olympics, winning silver in the 800m.

The same disciplinary process ostracizes androgynous or intersex women and transgender women, with the language used to qualify them similar to that condemning doping. The new IOC policy is a step in the right direction, but a fundamental attitudinal change is also needed.

The field of sports provides unparalleled opportunities for intersectional activism. If women and transgender athletes don’t take up arms against gender testing and discrimination in sports, the deterministic account of women as incompetent and alien to sports and the transphobic account of transgender female athletes as men passing themselves off as women will remain tacitly accepted.

Dividing the benefits of sports along a rigid yet arbitrary gender binary contributes to global empowerment of men over women, intersex and transgender people. Sports should be for all.

The photo by Bidgee is used under a creative commons licence and available via Wikimedia Commons. The description provided is “Germany vs Japan women’s wheelchair basketball team at the Sports Centre”, and it focuses on an athlete representing Japan, in action, holding a basketball while concentrating on something out of shot. She is using a wheelchair. Two other athletes are visible in the background. They are all on an inside basketball court.

2 comments // Permalink // Tags: intersectionality, IOC, monthly guest bloggers, olympics, sport, trans women, transgender women, women in sport

Welcome to another weekly round-up, where we share (what we see as) the most interesting and important articles and essays from the previous seven days. This week’s collection of links includes everything from The Revenant to Beyoncé’s “Formation’. We’d love to hear your thoughts on either (or both!) of these issues or on any of the other issues covered.

As always, linking to articles does not mean endorsement from the F-Word and certain links may be triggering. We welcome debate in the comments section and on Facebook/Twitter but remind readers that any comments containing sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic or disablist language will be deleted immediately.

If you notice that we’ve missed out any important articles from the past week, feel free to let us know.

Is that a threat? The Slippery Slope From Disagreement to Harassment (The Lighthouse)

‘Bring Me The Girl’: Why ‘The Revenant’ was Hard for My Friends and Me (Indian Country)

From the article: “As indigenous women, we realize facing that scene was facing a mirror held up to ourselves. It was seeing the reality of our own trauma, the ways we have endured it. The ways we have survived it. It’s suddenly much bigger than myself. It’s bigger than my friend. It isn’t simply the connection to assault, to sexual violence that we share, but rather the portrayal of violence against indigenous women captured in just a few short seconds on the screen.”

When I grow up: Syrian refugee girls’ dreams for the future realised in beautiful photoshoots (International Business Times)

The Three Letter Word Missing From the Zika Virus Warnings (Dame)

From the article: “Rather than telling women to “avoid pregnancy” in the manner of avoiding a pothole, why are none of these assorted agencies telling men to stop having procreative sex until we know more about Zika? Why does the very suggestion of any government recommending men to practice abstinence for two years seem like a joke?”

Why it’s so hurtful when my friends complain about feeling ‘fat’ (Daily Life)

From the article: “As an actual fat person always much fatter than the person in question, it of course makes me compare myself to the person speaking. If my friend is sad about how fat they look, and they aren’t fat, how should I feel? They must think I am disgusting. Why am I even outside, forcing people to gaze upon my frightening and hideous being?”

Former ISIS Sex Slaves Form All-Female Battalion ‘Sun Ladies’ to Launch Massive Assault on ISIS (Al Alam)

UK’s national LGBT domestic violence charity faces closure (The Guardian)

DH Kelly wrote about the closure of a similar charity, Broken Rainbow, last year. Click HERE to read her thoughts on the closure of helplines and charities that provide such valuable advice to LGBT people experiencing domestic abuse.

In Beyoncé’s ‘Formation,’ A Glorification Of ‘Bama’ Blackness (NPR)

Met Police may stop automatically believing rape victims after criticism over historic sexual abuse investigations (The Independent)

From the article: “Dame Elish Angiolini, who conducted a review into the prosecution of rape in London last year, questioned whether ordering officers to believe claimants was appropriate.’It is more appropriate for criminal justice practitioners to remain utterly professional at all times and to demonstrate respect, impartiality, empathy and to maintain an open mind,’ she said.”

Sex education will not be compulsory says Nicky Morgan (BBC)

Imposition? This was never just about a contract (Junior Doctor Blog)

Young Women Don’t Owe Clinton (The Stranger)

Beyonce and Forms of Blackness (The Bluest i)

From the article: “Black activism is one thing. Black entertainment is another. Beyoncé is an entertainer, and she does her job amazingly. I like that she’s injecting a little Black Panther, a little Nola, a little history in her imagery. But it’s not her job to save us. It’s her job to make us dance and sing along. I don’t think she’d say anything other than that. And I don’t think we should expect anything other than that from her. We have black feminist activists. Scholars. Educators. Leaders. If we don’t know their names, then we can’t be lazy and look to a pop star to act as our stand-in. We need to learn their names. We need to read and follow their work. We need to give them the same amount of exposure and respect that we give the pop star. We need to put them on an adjacent pedestal, so kids recognize and follow them like they follow Mrs. Carter.”

The image is used under a creative commons license with thanks to Ana y María Quintana y González on Flickr. It is a close-up photograph of Beyoncé. In it, the singer is facing the camera directly and pouting. Her lips are painted a striking shade of red.

1 comment // Permalink // Tags: Weekly Round-Up And Open Thread

Catchy slogans get shared widely. That’s what’s happened with a photo of two doctors protesting against the proposed new contract for junior doctors which the British Medical Association says will lead to unfair and unsafe working conditions for doctors, putting patients’ lives in danger. The two male doctors hold a placard reading “I’m not a gynaecologist but I know a Hunt when I see one”. The photo was shared on social media by several friends of mine, all of whom are left-leaning and feminist-identifying, supportive of both the junior doctors’ strike, and of women’s rights. 

My first thought on seeing the photo was that it was a humorous put down of Jeremy Hunt. A play on words; a clever pun. It made a political point whilst ridiculing the Health Minister. I’m not going to deny anybody their right to make fun of Tory ministers, especially when they’re threatening the NHS and workers.

Then I had second thoughts. Could this be, dare I say it, ever so slightly misogynistic? Didn’t the butt of the joke rely on the implication that cunts are Very Bad Things? It’s only funny that Hunt is being accused of being one, because nobody wants to be that: to be called a cunt is offensive, because to be one is undesirable.

But wait! Did that reasoning make me a prude? We’re all supposed to be reclaiming words these days. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with female genitalia – our cunts are not shameful – so why shy away from use of the word?

That for me is the problem. I don’t think we should avoid the word, not at all. Rather, I think we should use it joyously. We should celebrate cunts; not apply the term to people we find objectionable, thereby providing further ammo to the insidious view that cunts themselves are repugnant.

Wikipedia tells me that cunt is a “vulgar term for female genitalia, and is also used as a term of disparagement”. It’s one of the few words which really retains the power to shock; the feared ‘c’ word. Only one other sexual swear word has its very own letter dedicated to it – and the ‘f’ word is hardly considered scandalous these days. Of course there are swear words relating to male body parts. If we can call people dicks, and pricks, if we can say bollocks and balls, if we can refer to men as wankers and tossers (newsflash – women masturbate too – but this universal action is mostly rendered as gendered male when used as a descriptive), then why should ‘cunt’ be treated any differently? Why is there such a force to the word, which doesn’t exist for all those other anatomical parts?

It all comes down to how society views female and male genitalia – and unsurprisingly, society is pretty judgement and fearful of women’s bodies. We need to do something to change that: cunts shouldn’t be considered verboten. But continuing to use the word as a derogatory expletive is not the way to go about doing so. 

Little cis boys are not taught to feel ashamed of their penises. They may fear that a penis is the wrong size or shape, or not performing adequately, but that’s because a functioning penis is seen as inherently desirable. The opposite, however, is true of cis girls, who are taught that their vulvas are worrying things, which should be hidden away and not talked about except when couched in euphemisms – most definitely not doodled on notebooks and scratched into walls, as is the vey publicly-acceptable penis. We say people have balls or spunk when we recognise their bravery or power. Conversely, we accuse ‘weak’ or ‘cowardly’ people of being pussies. This is symbolic of the huge disparity in the way society views cis male and female genitalia. 

Here are some of the messages little girls routinely hear about their genitalia. Vaginas are said to be smelly. They’re too loose, or too tight. Labia get accused of being ugly, the wrong colour, asymmetrical, simply too visible. A clitoris is seen as a dangerous thing, and millions of women have suffered female genital mutilation because of the prevalence of this belief. Girls are told that they’re not allowed to touch and enjoy their own bodies, that their genitalia is dirty and shameful. This means that lots of cis women grow up with very oppressive feelings about their cunts. 

And so you see, when we choose to disparage people by calling them a ‘cunt’, little girls grow up thinking that this is because cunts are vulgar: unwanted and unspeakable things. We need to reclaim the word ‘cunt’. We need to talk about them more openly, and to use the word more freely. But we need to do that in a celebratory way. Cunts are beautiful things. They’re soft and strong and warm, they can give pleasure and life. Our vaginas even self-cleanse – how cool is that?! Whatever you think about him, Jeremy Hunt is not a cunt – he’s nowhere near that awesome.

Shoshana Devora is our very own social media editor. You can follow her on twitter.

The image is by Timothy Krause and is used under a creative commons licence. It shows a sign reading ‘Viva La Vulva’ in purple letters, held up in the air by somebody whose body is not visible.

1 comment // Permalink // Tags: cunt, genitalia, Jeremy Hunt, language, offence, penis, protest, swear words, vagina, vulva

It’s official: having more women in leadership positions makes businesses more profitable. The Peterson Institute for International Economics and EY analysed data from 21,980 publicly traded companies from 91 countries and found that having at least 30% of leadership positions taken by women was associated with an additional 6% net profit margin.

Hurrah! It’s the study we’ve all been waiting for; now we have something really robust to point to when the utility of focusing on getting women into higher positions more often is questioned.

Well, hold on. While I have to admit, I did enjoy reading this, I want to be careful about using this as a primary argument to get women to the top in business.

Let’s start with why I actually want more women in these sorts of positions. We are massively underrepresented at the top of businesses; the sample used in the study indicated that under 5% of the firms have a woman as CEO, while 60% have no women on their board at all. These positions are associated with various types of power, giving individuals extra influence (in their company but also their wider field and even politically and socially) as well as higher salaries, so obviously women are missing out by not occupying them. And additionally, having women in these positions may give more junior women role models that help them progress, as well as having the potential to spot issues that may affect women in work more. Believing, as I do, that women are not inherently terrible at business, but have endured structural discrimination that continues to disadvantage us, I see an increase of women in leadership positions as way to highlight and right these barriers.

For this to happen, women do not have to be better than men. In fact, if you told me that decreased profit margins were associated with more women, it wouldn’t affect my desire to see a more gender balanced business world. The principles that my thinking is based on holds that some things are more important than optimum shareholder value. And these principles hold across the myriad areas where I see embedded sexism restricting and limiting women and men.

But improved performance is core to the argument that more women = more money. It says: the reason to enhance promotion opportunities for women is to cash in.

If this argument is used as the basis of increasing women on boards, that puts a ridiculous and unfair pressure on women who do go on to get these leadership positions, while being incredibly risky. What happens if the profits don’t rise? What happens if they fall? Does that mean women (all of us) are bad for business? Having supported the argument that changes should be profit-driven, how can we switch back to arguing for a more principled approach?

Indeed, the whole argument elevates and enshrines profit as the pinnacle of success. Yet I would argue that other metrics matter as well, beyond those mentioned above. A company that doesn’t see a 6% rise in profit, but does have a happier workforce or sources its products more ethically, for example, could also be considered more successful, even if the books don’t indicate this. (Note that I am not claiming that these would be results of having a higher proportion of women CEOs, but that they would be worthwhile achievements for any business.)

Tempting as it is to use research that aligns itself so well with a positive outcome, argumentation is important. It is by the debate we have that minds are changed, which has an effect much broader than the immediate issue. If we use the argument that women in the C-suite will drive profit increases, then it is plausible that some businesses will give more consideration to women candidates (as long as they are compelled by the stats, and there aren’t conflicting studies or anecdotal evidence in their particular field that undermines this information sufficiently in their eyes). But little has been done to affect how people view the world. The emphasis remains on profit at the expense of all else. Meanwhile, principles relating to fairness, anti-discrimination and dismantling structural inequality are neglected.

Embracing these principles would go much further in addressing a huge number of barriers facing women – not just the very few who are able to take such an opportunity. Therefore, they must be core to the debates we are having, or they will not have the oxygen of discussion to be sustained.

The image is by Alice Bartlett and is used under a creative commons licence. It shows a lego figure standing in front of a lego presentation showing a lego line graph showing an increase, pointing at it with a lego pointer. The lego figure has short black lego hair and has lipstick and eye make up on its lego face, in the way that lego normally uses to indicate we’re dealing with a lady lego here.

2 comments // Permalink // Tags: argumentation, business, debate, feminism, power, principles, profit, women in business, women in leadership

The author of this piece prefers to remain anonymous.

Rape. I always felt like it was going to be a case of when it happened to me and not if. I was 11 when I first heard a survivor’s story from a friend the same age. Since that day it feels like the women walking alongside me have been getting flicked over like dominoes. By the age of 18, I couldn’t count on one hand the women who I knew had survived rape, there were too many.

I was waiting for it to be my turn. I’d had enough wandering hands on my body, from strangers in the street, in the metro, in the night club. Street harassment became a ‘normal’, but by no means accepted, part of life from the age of 14. There was that guy who climbed into my bed and tried to have sex with me when I was travelling. Or the one who grabbed my wrist on the bus and wouldn’t let go. It seemed like the natural follow-on step was for someone to actually have sex with me without my consent.

And do you know what the really messed up thing is? I don’t know if I can call what happened rape.

I’m a strong, independent feminist who was brought up with an awareness of women’s rights. I’m educated and surrounded by supportive women. Yet, I didn’t even know the solid facts when it comes to consent. I don’t feel entitled to use the word rape. Despite how much I understand that it’s never the fault of the person acted upon, I can’t stop myself from feeling like I’m to blame.

I was drunk and don’t remember properly what happened. It’s a squeamish patchy memory about something very unpleasant that I could have avoided by not being completely wasted. Apparently I had kissed him back before it happened. We’re told not to get too drunk, not to go anywhere with strangers, not to wear short skirts, not to lead anyone on. I didn’t follow the rules.

I was surprised to find out that people around me, who campaign for a fairer and more equal world, weren’t too sure either. Many didn’t know if it was “rape”, if I was allowed to call it that, if labels would be “helpful”. If even those of us who view feminism as our top priority aren’t clear about what we can and can’t call rape then there is work to be done.

Consent is the most important thing that we need to be talking about and learning about when it comes to sex. We need to start with young people and make sure that they feel empowered and able to be assertive when it comes to their bodies and choosing to engage in sexual activity. They need to know what consent is, how to give it and how to ask for it.

I’ve always told my parents everything. I’m open with the people around me. But with this, I’m deeply ashamed. I didn’t tell some of the people closest to me.

When I go to work and people ask how my New Year was I don’t tell them that I got some bad news, drowned my sorrows with one-too-many glasses of punch and ended up being fucked numerous times by a sober older stranger who saw a vulnerable girl being violently sick and hysterically crying and decided he’d “help her out”. When confronted for taking advantage of a drunken girl who couldn’t give consent, he said he was doing her a favour and giving her the comfort she needed.

I didn’t know comfort was having someone flip you over onto your stomach and getting off inside you when you’re out of your mind drunk, half asleep and confused as hell about how you even ended up naked with a guy on top of you. I remember mumbling about wanting to go to sleep after putting pyjamas on as his hands directly took them off again.

I thought I was fine. I followed my New Year’s resolutions and got on with life. But I saw him in the street, from my window, and immediately ducked down in fear. That was at 5:30am yesterday, it’s now 3am the next night. I haven’t been able to sleep since.

There’s more I could say about how confusing and messed up everything feels. But I’ll end with the simple facts so that we’re all clear. I need to clear it up for myself too.

Having sex without consent is rape. If a person is drunk or passed out or in and out of consciousness then they cannot legally give consent. Consent is the positive decision to have sex, made when you are conscious of the choice you are making.

It was rape.

The image used depicts a person with shoulder-length hair with their back to the camera walking along an urban street.

2 comments // Permalink // Tags: consent, rape, survivor

Hiya!

The February playlist begins with the awesome new track by Riton, ‘Rinse and Repeat’. The track includes vocals by Kah-Lo, a Nigerian woman with a very low internet profile. You can follow her Twitter account here and listen to more of her on Soundcloud.

Julia Holter’s Have You In My Wilderness is one of my favourite albums of last year – absolutely sublime. Her current single from the album, ‘Sea Calls Me Home’, is an absolute delight. It’s always good to hear a track with such an inspired use of the saxophone, and this track nails it.

Tommy Genesis is an intriguing new Canadian rap star. If you like ‘Execute’ read more about her here and here. I’m looking forward to listening to more of her.

Feeling rubbish? Crank up Mama Cass and feel better.

If you like the Hinds track, check out Holly’s review of their latest album here.

Click here for your February playlist. Enjoy!

The image is a black and white shot of Mama Cass, taken by RCA Records in 1972 as a trade shot for her album Cass Elliot. The picture is a head and shoulders shot of Mama Cass, turning towards the camera, adorned with rings and bracelets, and wearing a feather boa or coat. She looks fabulous, but also a little sad and tired.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: female musicians, Gloria Ann Taylor, Hinds, Honeyblood, Julia Holter, Lucius, Mama Cass, Music, Niki and the Dove, PJ Harvey, playlists, Riton feat. Kah-Lo, Sugababes, The Dresden Dolls, This is the Kit, Tommy Genesis

Welcome to another weekly round-up, where we share (what we see as) the most interesting and important articles and essays from the previous seven days. This week’s collection of links includes everything from Facebook’s “motherhood challenge” to the arguments for and against safe spaces on university campuses. We’d love to hear your thoughts on either (or both!) of these issues or on any of the other issues covered.

As always, linking to articles does not mean endorsement from the F-Word and certain links may be triggering. We welcome debate in the comments section and on Facebook/Twitter but remind readers that any comments containing sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic or disablist language will be deleted immediately.

If you notice that we’ve missed out any important articles from the past week, feel free to let us know.

Uncovering the “privilege” of being a white passing person of colour: Why we shouldn’t let white people police who gets to be “white” (Vice)

The violence behind the words “be a man” (Bitch)

I Don’t Owe Anyone My Body (Buzzfeed)

Content warning: contains description of sexual assault.

From the article: “I hesitated, but reminded myself that he had done all the generically “correct” things when it came to dating: He texted the next day, he told me I looked beautiful, he arrived on time, he opened the door. He’s a nice guy, I scolded myself.”

Why the EU emergency brake on migrant benefits is sexist (The Conversation)

Facebook’s motherhood challenge makes me want to punch my computer screen (The Guardian)

From the article: “It’s not the casual posting of photos aimed at friends that I mind. It’s the revived fetishisation of motherhood, the idea that it’s a ‘challenge’ that only ‘mummies’ can understand, an exclusive, excluding club of laughing, shiny, breast-feeding super-beings who know exactly how to raise ‘great kids’ and will only invite others of their kind to join the party.”

Zika virus: Brazil journalist speaks out over microcephaly fear (BBC)

From the article: “I am aware that not everyone with microcephaly will be lucky enough to have a life like mine. But what I recommend to mothers or pregnant women is that they remain calm. Microcephaly is an ugly name but it’s not an evil monster.”

Boots revises cost of two products over accusations of sexist pricing (The Guardian)

DJ Justin James posts outrageous list of requirements for female DJs (Fact Mag)

What we talk about when we talk about anal (Dazed)

A Young Artist Wants To Give South Asian Women The Spotlight They Deserve (Huffington Post)

Study finds romcoms teach female filmgoers to tolerate ‘stalking myths’ (The Guardian)

Obama’s mosque visit demonstrates tacit acceptance of a form of gender apartheid (New York Times)

‘I had to undo eight years of being a woman’: how LGBT prisoners are lost in the system (The Conversation)

Tory councillor accidentally sent details of ‘smear plot’ to intended targets (The Guardian)

How to See the Charm That Everyone Else Sees in Your Harasser (Reductress)

Where is the pet shop? Roosh V Plans Secret Meetups, Announces Locations on Internet (We Hunted the Mammoth)

The explicitly sexual female artists that feminism forgot (The Guardian)

Three cheers for misogyny: why the world can’t handle Susan Sarandon and her 69-year-old cleavage (Stylist)

Republican “show us your cunt” bills are an issue for all women (fae rising)

Kesha wins a legal battle over her producer, Dr. Luke, who she says sexually assaulted her (Yahoo)

My LA Food Diary (Medium)

5 Sex Workers Speak Out On The Super Bowl Sex Trafficking Myth (The Establishment)

From the article: “If the media can convince readers that all sex work is bad and involves a level of coercion, it justifies the state’s criminalization of our work, bodies, and lives.” (Margaret Corvid section of piece)

The Sexism of Safe Spaces: Students’ unions that want to ‘protect women’ are turning the clock back (Spiked)

Please note, the concept of ‘safe spaces’ is complex and multi-faceted and The F-Word, as a site, does not side with any particular view on the issue. The above Spiked article is clearly very against the idea. There are many other articles out there that speak of the importance of safe spaces on university campuses and in other institutions. For another view, you can read this article from last year hosted on Everyday Feminism, 6 Reasons Why We Need Safe Spaces.

The image is used under a creative commons license with thanks to 5foot8 on Flickr. It is a photograph and depicts a person, with long dark hair, curled up on a stony beach. The person has drawn their knees right up to their head in a foetal position, so that their face is obscured. They appear to be dressed entirely in white.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: Weekly Round-Up And Open Thread

Besides “away”, where should men who care about gender issues go?

When The Durham Male Issues Society approached Durham’s Student Union in June looking for ratification, founder Adam Frost was told the group could only exist as a subset of the Feminist Society. Many sources would agree with this decision: articles from Everyday Feminism and the Huffington Post have made strong cases for men identifying themselves as feminist allies, most rooted in the idea that the patriarchy hurts men as well. Meanwhile, other feminists have been skeptical of the role of men in the movement. Guardian writer Kate Iselin wrote a piece entitled “Why I Won’t Date Another Male Feminist”, citing their self-importance and dubious intentions in regards to feminism. Recently, Sarah Ditum of the New Statesman criticised feminist men for taking up space in the movement.

The men’s movement is viewed with, at best, scepticism and, at worst, mockery and distaste. Men’s rights are often conflated with other separate but male-oriented internet subcultures: pickup artistry (websites that focus on often misogynistic and manipulative techniques used to seduce women), Gamergate (a movement rightfully criticised in the media across the political spectrum for its misogynistic doxxing — the leaking of highly sensitive personal information — of prominent feminists), and “Red Pillers” (a subreddit based on The Matrix which espouses in its philosophy that all women are somehow simultaneously sluts, children, and manipulative geniuses).

Has feminism’s synonymy with gender issues created an unnecessary silence around issues that disproportionately affect men, such as suicide, male violence (against both women and men), and homelessness? And has this silence driven activism-minded men to these misogyny-breeding subcultures where they feel more free to talk about these issues? With some women in the feminist movement fatigued by increasing male involvement, it’s time to make a feminist case for a separate men’s issues movement.

As a feminist, I’d be lying if I didn’t admit to being frustrated when male issues take centre stage in feminist discourse. I’m tired of hearing that “men should be feminists because the patriarchy hurts men”. Though the phrase is true, I find it slightly disingenuous: the patriarchy hurts men by equating masculinity with dominance and control. And despite the harmful consequences of this system (which are numerous), women are equated with submission and compliance, thus giving men institutional power. I am a feminist because I care about the subordinate status of women in society — and, while I whole-heartedly appreciate genuine male allies, I want the movement to be focused on women. Why isn’t “men should be feminists because the patriarchy hurts women” enough?

Similarly, the wider inclusion of men in feminism has caused mistrust of their intentions. Many complain that men seem to be on board with feminism when it appears in its sex-positive, choice-feminism strands — a pattern myself, and others, have noticed and become weary of. In Oxford University’s controversial feminist Facebook group Cuntry Living, of 10,000 members, a woman rightly observed that “the gender split in conversations about abortion or FGM is often 90/10 [female to male]. When decriminalisation of sex work comes up, it’s 50/50.” It’s easy to feel like men win “progressive points” in these discussions, while failing to defend anything more than a woman’s right to sleep with them.

I want men to be interested in feminism because they are passionate about the disproportionate treatment women around the world, and in the UK, receive. I want men in feminism because they sense an injustice towards women. I want male allies to show they care about issues affecting women that don’t revolve around sexual empowerment.

And if men aren’t interested, and would rather focus on issues affecting their gender, I don’t see the point of reeling these men into the feminist movement under a false premise, with the chance of tokenising their issues. Though many would argue that most of men’s issues are rooted in other intersections (class, race, sexuality, etc.), or negative symptoms of patriarchal norms of masculinity and dominance, perhaps these are issues that would be most efficiently dealt with if men were able to talk freely about them among themselves.

Many feminists fear the men’s issues movement, and I understand why: it’s equated with anti-feminism and associated with misogyny. Men’s Rights media outlets like A Voice For Men or the Men’s Rights subreddit are environments in which anti-feminist (and anti-female) stances are fostered, rather than focusing on awareness and true activism.

It is time feminism let a healthy men’s movement grow without immediate criticism: it will refine the aims and goals of feminism, allow issues that are not gendered towards women to be more effectively handled, and, for the skeptics, give rise to a concrete movement.

Nipping it in the bud with cries of “misogyny” before it grows isn’t working. It pushes, and perhaps encourages, some men into a feminist label they may not deserve, and others into reactionary, anger-oriented politics.

Sarah Fletcher is an American-British writer in her final year at Durham University. Her articles have been published at Feminist Current, Luna Luna Magazine, and Ambit. She tweets at @SarahFletcher27

The image used depicts the arms of two male-presenting people sitting at a table with coffee. It is used under the Creative Commons License.

4 comments // Permalink // Tags: allies, feMANism, feminist allies, men, Men and feminism, men's rights, MRAs, university

Silvia Carrus is an Italian illustrator and comic artist, living in London. She loves to make comics about feminism and animals, and has recently self-published the comic ‘Feminist Cat’. See her work on Tumblr.

This month’s comic depicts a man bemoaning his lot as a “friend” when his female friend should have noticed the “signs” he gave her of his undying devotion – like being nice and holding her hand for five seconds in 2010.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: Boy Friend, friend zone, friendzone

Samantha Rea watches Celebrity Big Brother and wonders how a snog can possibly be a scandal in 2016

As a child, my literary canon comprised the works of Enid Blyton and Judy Blume, the Sweet Valley High series and News of the World. At the weekend, while my parents read The Sunday Times, I caught up on kiss-and-tells by lingerie clad ladies, who claimed their conquests did it three times a night.

With a complete disregard for when these stories took place, let’s take a non-linear look at the tabloid splashes that shaped my psyche:

• Mick Hucknall shagging over 1,000 women, at a rate of three a day, Martine McCutcheon being sick in his hair and Alicia Douvall, the stalwart of steamy flings, saying: “I had to get away from him, he was weird.”
• Princess Di smuggling Will Carling – captain of the England rugby team – into Kensington Palace, under a blanket in the back of her car. Oh, and allegedly making 300 silent calls to the family home of rumoured shag Oliver Hoare.
• Mick Jagger spending nights with France’s First Lady and former supermodel Carla Bruni, while Jerry Hall was at home with the kids. Oops, no – scratch that – Jerry was shagging a horse breeder behind Mick’s back.
• Darren Day, “Britain’s Number One Love-Rat”, having coke-fuelled sex binges and passing his parcel round every soap actress in Britain – then walking out on Suzanne Shaw when their baby was three months old, declaring he “didn’t do family.”
• Chelsea captain, John Terry, shagging tabloid staple Alicia Douvall in the toilets of a nightclub while his wife was pregnant with twins.
• Eastenders’ Dean Gaffney having saucy sessions with porn star Linsey Dawn McKenzie, Alicia Douvall and the lucky ladies of Skegness, while his girlfriend was home looking after their kids.

This, ladies and gents, is tabloid fodder at its finest. So don’t tell me – a connoisseur of misconduct – that snogging is some sort of scandal. Yet that’s the story we’re being force-fed in the case of Celebrity Big Brother (CBB) contestants Jeremy McConnell and Stephanie Davis, simply because Stephanie had a boyfriend – Sam Reece – before she went into the house.

In McConnell’s exit interview on Friday, Emma Willis adopted her disappointed face and gave him a harder time than former UKIP-er Winston Mckenzie, who asserted that same-sex couples adopting was tantamount to child abuse. At the weekend, I switched on The Saturday Show to hear Gaby Roslin cueing the cameras for a close-up of McConnell with the question: “Do you have a message for Sam? What would you say to Sam if he’s listening now?”

A similar scenario played out on last night’s Big Brother’s Bit on the Side – and in every interview, model McConnell looks shame-faced, saying he knows his behaviour was wrong. In the house, former Hollyoaks actress, Davis, took the self-flagellating baton to say: “I know I’m hated because I’ve got a boyfriend and I’ve done what I’ve done… I’m basically a slut.”

Really? Did either of you have coke fuelled sex romps with strangers while your partner was home looking after the kids? Did either of you do apparently unethical things with a Cadbury’s Flake and a ‘family friend’? And are we really still labelling women ‘sluts’? I thought we were making progress here.

Let’s look at the facts:

• Neither Jeremy nor Stephanie are married
• Neither Jeremy nor Stephanie have children
• Jeremy, age 23, is single
• Stephanie, age 22, has been with her boyfriend less than a year.

And let’s be clear: ALL THEY DID WAS SNOG!!! (Probably.)

For a child of the tabloids, this is a bit of a non-fucking-story. I wouldn’t even rate it PG. I was reading steamier shit about Anthea Turner when I was eight and she was presenting kiddies’ craft show Blue Peter. Meanwhile, George Michael was cottaging on crack.

That’s where I set the bar for a scandal, CBB. If you want me to bat an eyelid at the housemates’ antics, I suggest you raise your game. Throw in a mountain of marching powder, Lord Sewell in Bet Lynch’s bra and task Darren Day with licking a bath load of custard off Vanessa Feltz. That’s what I call entertainment!

In the meantime, Stephanie and Jeremy should shrug off the desperate efforts to demonise their behaviour and refuse to apologise. Stephanie, you’re not a ‘slut’ – you just moved on.

Samantha Rea is a freelance journalist living in London. Her writing is a disarray of filth, feminism, poker and peccadilloes. She has an MSc in Gender & the Media from the London School of Economics and she’s happiest when she’s sinking into a sofa, drinking an Old Fashioned.

[Image description and credit: Screenshot from Channel 5’s Celebrity Big Brother, showing Stephanie and Jeremy hugging each other in what appears to be the kitchen (possible disinfectant spray visible in background on the left and a toaster on the right). Stephanie wears a black long sleeved top and faces the camera, while Jeremy is topless (revealing elements of his elaborate back and arm tattoos) and wearing a furry hat with large animal ears, with his back to the camera. The Channel 5 star logo is in the top left corner of the picture and ‘LIVE’ is in large white letters, with white stars on either side, on the right. Shared under fair dealing.]

1 comment // Permalink // Tags: Big Brother, celebrities, moral panic, sex scandal, slut-shaming, TV

“What’s the difference between tampons and Tampax?” the girl said. It was 2001 and I was eleven. I could hear from her voice that she was a few years younger than me, and the shadows beyond the toilet door told me there was another person there, who coughed and rubbed her foot on the carpet. “I don’t know,” she admitted. I flushed and walked out.

“Tampons are the things you stick up yourself,” I said in a bored voice, “and Tampax are those pads you use.” The girls thanked me and skipped out of the restaurant bathroom excitedly, like I’d invited them to join some sort of club. My smugness wore off the second the door banged shut and I felt hot, red embarrassment wash over me as I realised I’d made my answer up. The thrill of being a cool, older know-it-all had taken over.

Tampons have been my friend for over a decade but I don’t feel like I know them and their other pals much better now than I did when I was eleven. I’ll watch TV as a softly-spoken lady talks us through the amount of inoffensive blue liquid her pads can absorb. I cringe when my mum says “pantyliners”, and I’m acutely aware of the way I try to bury my Always under a pile of spinach and Babybels when I do my food shop, lest someone see the box brazenly sitting at the top of the trolley.

When my boyfriend and I first moved in together back in April I spent a good half a day unpacking my toiletries in the bathroom. I sort of looked forward to the first time one of us got the flu so we could try out our brand new Beechams. My shampoos and moisturisers set up camp on the open shelving above the toilet, and next to them sat the box of tampons and pack of thick, winged sanitary towels.

We were up and running. I was proud. But one housewarming guest said “Oh, great to see you’ve got your tampons on full display!” sarcastically. I felt vile. Was this one of those SIGNS YOUR RELATIONSHIP HAS BECOME TOO COMFORTABLE that I’d read about in a BuzzFeed article? When my boyfriend’s male friends dropped round, I temporarily hid everything period-related. But later, as I slid the boxes back into their dust-lined places on the shelf, I became angry. I need tampons. I need them like I need toilet roll and toothbrushes – things that are also “on full display” 24/7. I wondered why the comment had led me to feel like I was being lazy and sloppy when neither my partner nor I had any issues with the contents of our bathroom shelves.

I grew up convinced that the most AWFUL thing would be if a boy learned I was on my period. I watched movies where the female lead accidentally bumped into her love interest and – OH NO! – tampons went flying. Her secret was out. For many women periods are a cloak and dagger monthly event. I own a small pouch to stash pads in so they don’t peek out the top of my handbag while I’m paying for lunch. I hide tampons up my sleeve at work so I can smuggle them into the bathroom undetected. I’ve always said things like “It’s a… bad time of the month” apologetically to boyfriends, as if the word “period” might gross them out too much and render me forever unattractive and bloodstained in their eyes. I’ve been able to see cogs whirring as they worked out what this crazy euphemism might mean, and I’ve felt bad for not being more succinct but also resentful for not feeling able to be.

I wish I could talk about menstruation as openly as I do tonsillitis or foot cramps, but I still struggle. I feel as if I have to pretend it doesn’t happen. There’s something about showing the ‘process’ of ‘being a woman’ that isn’t acceptable – we’ve been taught to present the end product, and for some of us it’d be mortifying if our date turned up halfway through our winged eyeliner application or walked in on us shaving our legs. And, similarly, during our periods we’re still supposed to stay quiet – to make everything lovely and rose-scented and invisible until we reach the other side.

I don’t want that. I don’t want to be the girl who keeps her Maxi pads in a box in the cupboard, or the girl who says she has a slight stomach-ache when she actually has raging cramps. We have to deal with periods – let’s talk about them, too.

Sophie Jo writes a lot and cries a lot and is the queen of Disney trivia. Tweet her @notaquamarine.

The image used features a vintage advert for Carefree Tampons showing a woman in her underwear underneath a headline which says “Tamponphobia”. It is used under the Creative Commons license.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: periods, shame, tampax, tampons

Welcome to another weekly round-up, where we share (what we see as) the most interesting and important articles and essays from the previous seven days.

As always, linking to articles does not mean endorsement from the F-Word and certain links may be triggering. We welcome debate in the comments section and on Facebook/Twitter but remind readers that any comments containing sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic or disablist language will be deleted immediately.

If you notice that we’ve missed out any important articles from the past week, feel free to let us know!

#TraditionallySubmissive: How 30,000 British Muslim women like me took down David Cameron (By Shelina Janmohamed, The Telegraph)

Working women in poverty speak out (By Jenny Nelson, Red Pepper)

From the article: “I think the word is wrong. Aspiration suggests you’re somehow trying to get to the top of the tree. For me, the aspiration would be to think alternatively – what is the best quality of life I can have that supports other people around me? Otherwise people have lost their human value.. and I don’t want to aspire to that. I do want to go on holiday sometimes and buy my children decent clothes, but not at the expense of other people.”

Leaning in to the Feminine Mystique (By Lauren Murphy, Huffington Post)

Guilty Feminist: Podcast (Guilty Feminist)

Should we still respect Kanye West after his public fight? (By Amber Jamieson, The Guardian CiF)

When it comes to transgender rights, there’s nothing feminist about being a bigot (By Katy Guest, The Independent)

The Birth of Venus: Pulling Yourself Out of the Sea By Your Own Bootstraps (By Mallory Ortberg, The Toast)

Nine humiliating tory defeats you might have missed this week (By Bex Sumner, The Canary)

Julie Delpy and the Cluelessness of White Feminist Entitlement (By Kimberly Foster, For Harriet)

Sex Work Gives Me Anxiety – But For Me, It’s Better Than a Cubicle (By Magpie Corvid, Medium)

From the article: “Much of what would make my work safer or more convenient is illegal. If I offer services with a friend, we become an illegal brothel. If I rent a friend’s studio, she can be arrested as a brothel-keeper. If I hire a driver or security, they break the law by working for me. And of course, I face the risk that a client will turn out to be dangerous, and he will know my address.”

The image is used under a creative commons license with thanks to carnagenyc. It is a photograph of street art in Boston. The image is of a person in, what appears to be, a niqab. The person is standing staring directly ahead with their arms at their sides. Their veil is pale beige in colour, but their clothes are black and, on one sleeve, is a motif picked out in white that reads ‘Peace’. On one shoulder is, what could be, a case holding arrows (to use with a bow) but, where the sharp point of the arrow should be, there is instead a flower. The image is painted onto the brick wall of a plain-looking building. Two people in dark coats are walking past.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: weekly round-up, Weekly Round-Up And Open Thread

About a month ago, I posted a call for applications to be a monthly guest blogger at The F-Word, looking for people interested in blogging over the course of a month in 2016 about issues relating to feminism. We had a truly fantastic response; thank you to everybody who put time and thought into applying.

We’ve now selected all the monthly bloggers for the year (though remember, there are still lots of ways to contribute, with blog posts, features or reviews). I’m very pleased to introduce our first blogger of the year – sorry, I didn’t organise myself quickly enough to cover January!

Throughout February, Helen Reid will be blogging for us. Here’s a bit about her in her own words:

Helen is a 22-year-old feminist journalist living and writing about politics, culture and sports in Brixton, London. With South African roots, she grew up in France and Texas before moving to the UK for university, becoming involved with Cuntry Living feminist zine at Oxford. During her Masters in African Politics at SOAS she deepened her understanding of queer politics and African feminism and aims to write about these during her time blogging for The F-Word, as well as encouraging discussion of gender in sports. She’s looking forward to hearing feedback from The F-Word community this month!

The photo was taken by Alejandra Rojas Salazar and is used under a creative commons licence. It shows a red exterior wall in the sunlight; in the top left corner of the shot is part of a window, covering about 1/3 of the picture. It has a yellow frame and ornamental black bars, behind which there are plants, and then yellow shutters.

0 comments // Permalink // Tags: monthly guest bloggers