feminism vs feminism and male privilege

This morning I have read the following:

1. should Beyonce have been wearing underwear on the cover on Time magazine while being declared the worlds most influential person

2. are organised nurse-ins a good thing or do they they actually harm the breastfeeding in public cause

3. should women stop wearing high heels as a feminist statement or should we reclaim them as a feminist statement

Oh and I have also just remembered a couple of days ago the article criticising the way the women who run The Vagenda stood with their hands on their hips, and were therefore subconsciously mirroring the very over sexualised female they argue against. Really? Is this really where we are at??

Of course debate is good, these things need to be discussed and I'm glad I live in a time when they can be openly debated, but I am so tired of the fact it is only women having these conversations. I have yet to hear a man utter the line “should David Beckham really have posed in his pants, I think it undermines men everywhere and sets a false expectation on us all by portraying us as sexual objects”, and I don't expect I ever will hear it.

Men can just “be” without the actions of some of their own sex having a reflection on them as a whole. They don’t have to argue and debate and justify and try to convince each other of the true definition of masculinity. I really cannot imagine how liberating that must be.  

I guess the counter argument is that women are the ones fuelling these conversations and therefore voluntarily dividing ourselves, but of course we can’t not discuss these issues. When you come from a place of inequality and are striving for change everyone is going to have different ideas of what the end result should look like. Does equality mean that lap dancing is empowering and allows women to express their sexuality without moral judgement, or does it mean lap dancing is really male fantasy sold to women as empowerment? Or was Caitlin Moran right in How To Be A Woman and we need more porn of the female friendly variety, or is an equal society more in keeping with the aims of Object and Gail Dines? Its a minefield and one which only women have to navigate, while men can just, well, just live really.

Of course I want feminism to be my kind of feminism and am willing to argue and debate it so I realise I am part of the problem I am moaning about, so I know there isn’t an answer. It just made me quite tired today and very very aware of the luxury of male privilege and in need of a little rant.

Its exploitation not immigration

Theres an article in The Mirror today “revealing” the sex trade in women brought in Romania and sold in to prostitution in the UK http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/romanian-girls-trafficked-sold-sex-3175123

Firstly I cant really believe its a “reveal”, this is hardly a new phenomenon is it? Dont most people know that sex trafficking is an enormous industry and that there are actually more people in slavery today than ever before in history, and surprise surprise the majority of them are women.

Secondly, and this is the bit that really pissed me off, is the horrible slant the article is given, selling this problem and one of immigration and lack of border controls.

The articles opening line is of the pimp saying “England's opened the gates and can't do nothing…” like it wasnt happening before.

It follows up with details of how gang bosses will “make millions over the EU scrapping of our border restrictions with Romania and Bulgaria.” Again, they made millions before, border restrictions did not stop this trade.

Then we have the pimp saying “They can’t do nothing to you. Romania is in Europe now” followed by “Like many gang bosses throughout Eastern Europe Meder knows the EU policy of “free movement” between member states works well for them.

Immigration restrictions placed on Bulgaria and Romania when they joined the EU in 2007 ran out on New Year’s Day, allowing their citizens easy entry to the UK. Watchdogs estimate ­European crime lords already net £20billion a year from the vice trade. And experts fear that number will continue to soar because of the end of restrictions.”

And finally “Last night Tory MP Peter Bone, who previously chaired the all-party group on trafficking, said the end of restrictions was “a gift to traffickers”. He said: “That’s one of the disadvantages of free movement.”

This is NOT a border control or immigration problem. It is plain and simple a problem with men buying women for sex and not giving a shit how they came to be in the terrible situation they are in. How can anyone read this and not be outraged that thousands of very young women have been duped, coerced and bullied into a life of prostitution.

The article itself states that these particular women were being auctioned off with the promise that they could service up to 20 men a day, and that they have no other life choices once they finish school. 20 men a day. It makes me want to weep for them, and yet this is barely concealed scaremongering and playing into the hands of UKIP and every other xenophobe who reads this. The comments below the article pretty much bear this out.

Right now, this second, prostituted women are being raped by men who live and work among us, yet their hellish lives are being used to score points in an immigration argument. As long as men are free to buy and sell women for sex this trade will continue, and no amount of border control or UKIP policy will change that.

What Sort of Person Would Not Want Any Rights?

What sort of person would not want equal rights? Who would not want to have equal rights with the rest of the population? Who wouldn’t want to vote, drive, get an education, have the right not to have sex, have reproductive rights, have the right to work, have the right to be paid the same as other people for doing the same job to name just a few?

Mary Berry thats who. I was genuinely quite depressed to hear her comments today including such gems as “feminism means shouting at men and I don’t like shouting” and “feminism is a dirty word”.

It is quite obvious that she doesn’t know what feminism actually is because feminism has given her all of the things mentioned above, and the opportunity to work and be wealthy and successful. I haven’t yet met a feminist who thinks it’s about who opens the bloody door!

It is also incredibly patronising to men. The Mary Berry way to getting what you want from men is “to persuade them gently to do things, and, of course, when they come back they say “Oh wasn’t that fun”. My husband, and most men I know would be completely insulted at this idea. It ignores any meaningful communication in a relationship, and takes away womens voices. IF Mary Berry wants her husband to do something why doesn’t she just ask him and have a proper adult conversation about it instead of simpering to him? And what about if the man in your life doesnt say “wasn’t that fun?” What about if they deny you your rights, or they hit you, or they take absolutely no notice of you and do what they want anyway? Do you carry on gently persuading? Or as long as they are chivalrous and pull a chair out for you is that ok? I’m happy for her that she appears not to have experienced sexism, but to denounce feminism and all the hard - and in the case of suffragettes the torturous and sometimes fatal - work that other women have done and are still doing to ensure women are treated equally to men, her word are very hard to listen to.

She is a hugely successful woman because of her talent, but also because of the opportunities better women than her fought for. She chose to go back to work 5 weeks after having a baby, well good for her. Its women’s rights that gave her that choice. She runs her own company and has written 70 cookbooks, again its womens rights that have enabled her to have such a career.

Following on from Joanna Lumley and her ignorant views on rape this was not the headline I wanted to see this morning. Thank goodness women like Mary Beard and Claire Baldwin offer some kind of alternative commentary for us to read.

The Kate Middleton Topless Photos

So far the reaction to the Kate Middleton topless photos has been depressingly predictable. A good 50% (if not more) of the reader comments in the online press and on twitter in some way hold Kate responsible for going topless in the first place.

Even a large number of the supportive comments still have that snarky little “but what was she thinking” tagged in to the end.

There is so much wrong with this attitude. She was on a private holiday, on a private estate with her husband. She has every right to expect to be able to do as she pleases in these circumstances. She was stalked and her privacy grossly invaded. Should women have to accept this level of intrusion just for having breasts? There is nothing wrong with sunbathing topless on private property, this does not equal “asking for it”.

This kind of victim blaming attitude is the start of a very slippery slope and it is worrying that so many people still perpetuate this point of view.

In its rush to condemn French Closer magazine the press also seem to have missed the irony that the news broke while William and Kate were on a visit to a mosque that involved her having to be completely covered and wearing a headscarf to stop men looking at her. A large majority of the western population believe that women covering up in this way is repressive, yet a famous woman can’t take her top off in private without being papped and then blamed for it. Which is it to be?

This obsession with women’s bodies, this need to reduce them to the sum of their body parts regardless of anything else they may achieve, this constant blaming of women for acting normally is
out of control right now.

I hope William and Kate sue and win, and I hope people think twice about buying magazines with pap shots in. The only way this will stop is if the public stop looking at these pictures.....I can dream.

Women of the Olympics

It’s all so predictable I can hardly be bothered to comment on it.

The Olympics is nearly upon us, which means women in sportswear, which means lots of articles and adverts on what their bodies look like and not what they can do.

Already Jessica Ennis is advertising Oil of Olay, because God forbid she should excel at her sport and not have soft skin, and she and the British beach volley ball team have been criticised for being fat (i.e. don’t look like FHM models) and now Victoria Pendleton and Zara Dampney have posed naked for GQ magazine.

Victoria says she has a nice bum and it’s not really any different to competing in a skin suit so why not? Well, in one example she is competing in a sport and wearing appropriate clothing to assist her, and in another she is posing naked in a sexual manner in a mens magazine. Quite a bit different I would say.

Why reduce their hard work and ability to what they look like? I just don’t get it. A recent article about Chris Hoy focussed on his amazing thigh muscles and detailed the diet and exercise regime he follows to get them. A recent one on one British tennis player Laura Robson called her the incredible bulk, musing on her change from “slender” to athletic. No wonder girls drop out of sport at a young age.

The final insult which made me get off my bum and make the effort to comment on this was the fact that Zara Dampney says likes her body but dislikes the grooming regime required to wear the outfits. The volleyball team is actually sponsored by cosmetic surgery group who carry out their hair removal for them. An advert in InStyle magazine featured three of the team in knickers and bra tops, advertising hair removal at the sponsors clinic. The strap line is “successfully treating laser hair removal patients for 15 years.” Patients? Since when does having pubic hair make you a patient in need for treatment? It can’t only be me who thinks it would just be easier to wear slightly bigger pants?

I would love it if these high profile female athletes just said enough is enough, we will either be interviewed about our sport just as the men are, or you can forget your article.    

Welcome to our world

A friend told me about an incident today that happened to her father in law. He was at his gym which is part of a hotel, and while getting showered and changed it became obvious that the only other man in the changing area was watching him quite closely.

The other man started a conversation and asked if fil was staying at the hotel, to which he answered no. Other man asked if he would like to stay, fil was suitably shocked and said no thanks. Other man asked if there was anything he could do to tempt him, cue father in law getting dressed in lightning speed while hurriedly explaining he was meeting his wife.....who he loved............yes wife....did you get that strange man, a wife, with kids!

Anyway, he was understandably quite shaken and shocked by this, he doesn’t come from a generation or background that is comfortable talking about homosexuality let alone being propositioned by a gay man while in a state of undress. It made him feel extremely uncomfortable and vulnerable and such sexual advances from either a male or female is not something he had experienced before.

My friend was suitably understanding and we all agreed no one should be made to feel like that, however, this is the reality for an enormous amount of women. A YouGov survey published in the Guardian reveals that four in ten young women were sexually harassed in public spaces in London last year. This harassment ranges from unwanted comments to physical touching and groping.

This kind of harassment is insidious and so easily and often passed off as just a bit of fun, or even complimentary, that it just blends in to everyday life for a vast majority of women. The only difference I can see is that in the father in laws case the unwanted attention was from a man and he is not homosexual, but being hetro doesn’t mean you are fair game for sexual advances. No woman should have to put up with unwanted attention because she sometimes has consensual sex with a man.

It makes women feel unsafe, it makes us scared, and it reminds us constantly of our vulnerability. The person making the advance knows his intent is merely to compliment/joke/impress/pull/show off/pass the time of day, but we don’t. In his book The Gift of Fear, Gavin de Beckers sums it up really well when he says “Most men fear getting laughed at or humiliated by a romantic prospect while most women fear rape and death.” That is our reality. (Disclaimer – before anyone says it, yes men too get raped by other men but the numbers are much smaller and this is a feminist blog therefore my concern is with women).

So, I feel for my friends father in law, I really do. It was inappropriate and it made him feel bad. Now imagine living with the risk of that all the time. Imagine that if it does happen no one will really care. Imagine that men can proposition you and call you frigid when you say no, or can touch you and be offended when you tell them to fuck off. Imagine always being physically smaller and weaker than the person coming on to you, and not knowing if they will get nasty if you don’t laugh along or get the compliment.  It’s pretty damn shit.

Policing Femininity in Sport

A very interesting and disturbing article today here about Caster Semenya, the South African runner who was investigated and suspended by athletic officials because her abilities and appearance raised concerns she was a man.

It turns out that this isn’t an isolated case and an undisclosed number of female athletes will be competing in this years Olympics after having to undergo surgery or hormone therapy. These are athletes who are born as women, raised as women and compete as women, but who have a higher than average testosterone level, in some cases higher than most men. Some of these women have subsequently been found to be intersex – something it is possible not to be aware of. In Semenya’s case she had internal undeveloped testes.

It’s not a new phenomenon for strong athletic women to be checked for gender, it’s just that naked parades have been replaced with hormone checks which reveal the presence of such internal organs.          

There are a vast number of factors that occur through nature or nurture which will affect the chances of an athlete being successful. Jon Entine raises the question of race being a factor, and Bruce Kidd comments that “Personal household and national income is far more relevant to performance than hormonal makeup,” he says. The countries with the highest GDP produce the most gold medals. The richer the athlete, the higher the likelihood of a winner” in the original Star article.

I don’t see anyone asking a black athlete to tone down the fast twitch muscles, or checking the social background of competitors before competing,

There are some people who are genetically gifted to exceed at their sport. This list shows the best VO2 max scores achieved by male athletes. Is it unfair that they have a better natural ability to consume oxygen during exercise? What if research showed a certain hormone could be identified that governed this, would this have to be suppressed with drugs or surgery?

Lance Armstrong has some well documented genetic advantages which helped him win the Tour de France 7 times. Why isn’t anybody testing him to pin point the reason for this, and then suppress it with drugs?

Now call me paranoid, but the only reason I can see is that these are female athletes who do not fit the accepted definition of what it means to look like a woman. They don’t look feminine enough and they don’t fit the acceptable ascetics for a female athlete, so they are subjected to testing. To quote Bruce Kiss again “It’s still the old patriarchal fear, or doubt, that women can do outstanding athletic performances. If they do, they can’t be real women. It’s that clear, it’s that prejudicial,”

Are men tested for testosterone? Will men who have the highest levels have to have it suppressed so as not to have an advantage over other men? Where will it end? Maximum height for basketball so short people can play? Of course not. Its only women who are subjected to this kind of invasive bullshit.

This is a naturally occurring hormone, not a “male” hormone that women have no business having. Some people have less, some have more. Not everyone fits in to a nice neat biological definition of male and female. She is not taping her penis up and shaving her beard before competing.

If the playing field is to be fair, group people by the myriad of other performance indicators; their testosterone, height, weight, race, social economic background, funding or any other category you care to think of, but don’t continue to subject women, and only women, to this level of scrutiny and indignity and force them to undergo unnecessary and unwanted surgery just to be able to compete.