Feministy

Food, and a rant

2009-02-26T21:39:00.004Z

After a very long pause, I will continue with this blog. I was moved almost to tears by the grand final of Masterchef this evening (I can be quite highly strung at times), for many reasons. I really, really love that there is a reality TV show about cooking. It is one of my favourite occupations - planning meals, choosing ingredients, the action of preparing the food, and finally eating your creations. Little in life is more satisfying (mathematics can be, at times). I love watching truly talented chefs cooking their hearts out, which is what all three finalists did.

On top of this, I think we as a nation need to think more about the food that we eat. I know that to anyone who knows anything about health/obesity/nutrition etc. that is not news, but I feel it needs to be restated frequently. We have lost sight of the pleasure of good, fresh ingredients cooked simply and well, in favour of uniformly (mostly orangey brown) fast food.

I am so glad to see a TV show that celebrates real, genuine, talent, as opposed to the facile, shallow 'celebrity' shows favoured by ITV (in particular - other networks are guilty too). It is one of my pet hates that so many people who do important work in this country are so undervalued (teachers, nurses, binmen...). So I'm glad that we are being entertained by people who actually have something to offer us, for once!

Anyway, this brings me neatly onto my next point - the thing I am currently feeling most irritated about. One of my housemates, an Australian gentleman of curious views, said as we watched the penultimate MC show last night that he believed cooking was a 'low level skill', and that he believed this was true because 'chefs don't get paid very much'. This shows a depth of ignorance on two, entirely seperate, levels: firstly, this comes from a guy whose idea of cooking is breaking carrots in half and dropping them in boiling water, so he clearly has no idea whatsoever of the skill involved, and secondly the valuation of everything in monetary terms.

I do not understand the wilful ignorance of people such as him. It is as if he celebrates his ignorance, and endeavours to become more so (is it possible to deepen one's ignorance?). Anyway, as Feministy can surely imagine, I unleashed my feistier side on him, and I hope he rethinks his views.

Antifeminist day at the beeb

2008-08-25T16:16:00.002Z

So, I come out of my lengthy blogging break to point out two BBC articles which pissed me off this afternoon. Firstly, poor old Jeremy Paxman is being discriminated against! I know, I know, it certainly doesn't seem that way, with his comfortable Newsnight position, and lucrative interview possibilities. However, apparently this is all totally irrelevant, as, because Paxman can name 5 women prominent in broadcasting, it seems that suddenly white middle class men are being horribly discriminated against. Hmm. I seriously disliked him anyway, he is so arrogant, but I am sad to see that my worst suspicions have been proven true. He is also a pathetic misogynist who is clearly intimidated by the fact that white middle class men might be forced to actually prove their talents in future, rather than just relying on their gross overprivilege. So, get over yourself Paxman, and realise that you are not as entitled as you would like to think, and hopefully soon everybody will come to view you as an irrelevance, as I do.

Secondly, there is to be a Nun's beauty pageant held online. There is so much that is fucked up about this that I really don't know where to begin. It just goes to show what happens when you have a patriarchy. Firstly, women must be dressed 'modestly' in order to avoid inflaming the passions of men, who apparently, are incapable of self-control. Then, reproductive choice is systematically opposed, with the ultimate goal of reducing women to being walking incubators. Finally, it seems, despite all of this, women must still be sexy. I try not to put anything past the catholic church these days, however, even I was pretty surprised to read this story today. They utterly disgust me with their hypocrisy, and their shocking treatment of women.

Law exam blogging

2008-05-24T10:53:00.002Z

I am in the middle of exam hell, but here is a quick link that is of interest. Another example of how the patriarchy hurts women: cars are not tested with crash dummies of an appropriate size/shape for women, only for men.

The Right to be Grumpy

2008-04-21T20:27:00.003Z

Why do men think it is acceptable to shout things at women on streets? The other day, I was walking through Bath, and a Big Issue seller told a woman walking in front of me, who had, incidentally, very politely refused the magazine, to 'Cheer up, you might be quite pretty with a smile.' Why on earth did he think he had the right to say that? Any intentions I may have had of buying the magazine myself were instantly quashed; it is absolutely that woman's business why she was not smiling, and it was in no way his place to comment on her appearance in any way.

ARGH!

2008-04-21T08:57:00.002Z

Apparently, "bosses weigh up pregnancy risk" prior to employing someone, and only 5% would employ someone if they knew that they were already pregnant.

At the moment, I am too angry to blog about this (although its hardly news, it still makes me mad). Hopefully later I'll have calmed down enough to write something sensible.

Pasta Bake

2008-04-20T19:33:00.002Z

Ok, so I know that its just a bog standard student dish, but it is just so comforting on a cold and rainy night!

Ingredients (for 2 hungry people)

2 rashers bacon, chopped
1 large chicken breast, in smallish cubes
1 big leek, chopped finely
1 onion, chopped finely
5/6 mushrooms (depends how much you like them, I, for one, absolutely love them!)
3 big tomatoes, sliced
Generous handful of grated cheese
100g pasta shapes (penne/fusilli always good)
Heaped teaspoon of flour
A dash of milk
Some hot water

Method

Soften the onions, seal the chicken, soften the leeks and then add the bacon. Fry until the bacon is cooked but not browned, then add the flour. Stir until you can't see any floury bits, and add the milk. Meanwhile part boil the pasta, until al dente. Add the hot water to the meaty bit until it is thick and creamy, but not too runny. Drain the pasta, and stir into the sauce. Pour the whole lot into a baking dish, and place the tomatoes on top so that the pasta is covered. Sprinkle the cheese lightly on top, and cook in a hot oven for about 15 minutes, until the cheese is browned and the tomatoes cooked. Serve with a green or mixed salad. Delicious.

Mmm...Greek salad

2008-04-20T12:00:00.003Z

Thats what I had for dinner last night. I really like how all the flavours really compliment each other.

Recipe (for 2)

I Romaine lettuce
4 inches of cucumber (how do you quantify cucumber in general?!)
12 cherry tomatoes
1 small red onion
1 red pepper
olives (I prefer green, but black is more traditional)
Feta cheese (I use the pre-cubed Apetina stuff, and its pretty good)

Mix all the ingredients together after chopping/washing etc. I used french vinaigrette on mine, which is not very purist, but you could use whatever you wanted. Waitrose sell a yummy sweet balsamic and red pepper dressing which goes well with it.

I served mine with warm olive ciabatta, because I can't live without carbs. Delicious (and very easy!)

Abortion as art?

2008-04-18T10:37:00.002Z

Bitch PhD has written about an art student who, for a period of nine months, artificially inseminated herself frequently, and then took abortifacients in order to induce miscarriages. She has used the blood from the miscarriages in order to create a piece of artwork, and has also created videos of herself having miscarriages in her bathtub, which will be displayed as part of her exhibition.

The Yale Daily News carries the story in full.

I really don't know how to feel about this. On one hand, I feel that it demonstrates that women can - and do - have abortions, and are able to continue to live their lives without regrets. It shows that abortions and miscarriages are events which happen to women everyday, and they don't have to be the big deal that the press makes them out to be. However, it does make me feel uncomfortable, and I'm not sure why. I am quite a squeamish person, and perhaps thats why.

I am an advocate for women having full control over their own bodies, and I guess that Aliza Shvarts (the artist) has taken this argument to its ultimate conclusion. The YDN carries a couple of comments which include;

Sara Rahman ’09 said, in her opinion, Shvarts is abusing her constitutional right to do what she chooses with her body.
“[Shvarts’ exhibit] turns what is a serious decision for women into an absurdism,” Rahman said. “It discounts the gravity of the situation that is abortion.”

I disagree - if you have a constitutional right (or in the UK, perhaps a Human right) to do something with your own body, then by definition, that means that you cannot be abusing that right, even if you use that right in ways which some people disapprove of, or if it is an unconventional use of that right.

I think that what makes me uncomfortable about this, is that it will just fan the flames of prolifers who want people to believe that women only have abortions for "frivolous" reasons, or are too stupid to actually know what they are doing. I don't think that there is actually a "good" or "bad" reason for having an abortion - I trust women to make the right decisions for themselves, but this is an extreme case, and is almost certainly not going to be well-received by the mainstream press.

I'm still thinking about this one, and hopefully I'll be able to read some more opinions on this.

Update: Feministing report that the University have said that Shvart's art was a hoax. However, the artist herself has rebutted this, and insists that she did artificially inseminate herself, and take herbal abortifacients.

I really, really don't know what to think about this.

Update 2: Amanda Marcotte and Majikthise have got some very good reasons why this art project is a hoax.

Sanctimonious Monsters...

2008-04-18T08:52:00.003Z

...is an excellent way of describing both Pope Benedict and George Dubya Bush, as this post by Phrayngula describes.

The hypocrisies inherent in George Bush's version of Christianity, alongside his actions as President of the US, never fail to amaze me. As for the Pope, well I think that reading Feministy's post about his reactions to the sex scandals to the rapes committed by priests within the Catholic Church gives you a good idea of what sort of a man he is.

Fascinating video about the effects of a stroke.

2008-04-17T15:54:00.005Z

I really really can't do this video, or Dr Jill Bolte Taylor justice. She provides a fascinating, moving, and completely new analysis of how our brains function, and how the two hemispheres interrelate to one another. Watch it!

h/t Feministing

Dispelling myths about feminism

2008-04-17T15:10:00.001Z

OK, so I'm feeling a little lazy about blogging today!

This is what a feminist looks like!

2008-04-17T15:06:00.001Z

Who knew?

2008-04-17T14:35:00.002Z

Who knew the Surrey Comet had such a diverse and passionate group of commenters?

via Alas, A Blog

Idiot of the day: Silvio Berlusconi (again)

2008-04-17T09:41:00.003Z

Second time in a week! This time, he has criticised the Spanish Parliament for being "too pink". The Telegraph reports that he went on to say that;

"Zapatero has formed a government that is too pink, something which we cannot do in Italy because there is a prevalence of men in politics and it isn't easy to find women who are qualified for government."

Firstly, I assume that by calling the Spanish Parliament "too pink" he actually means to refer to the fact that Zapatero has appointed equal numbers of men and women to his cabinet. A prevalence of men in politics is a problem, but I'm not sure that Berlusconi sees it that way. He appears to be using the fact that there are a lot of men in Italian politics as a reason why women are not, and can't be, represented. Not excusable Mr Berlusconi. Just because someone is difficult to find, doesn't mean that they are not there. Perhaps women in Italy who are suitably "qualified" for politics are few and far between, but as a member of a privileged majority in Parliament, you should be seeking out these women, and actively encouraging them to become part of the political life of Italy. Only when everybody feels enfranchised and represented will you enjoy genuine democracy.

One quibble with the reporting of this in the Telegraph;

Mr Zapatero has championed equality since he first rose to power in March 2004 and consolidated his position as self-confessed feminist with his choice of cabinet in his second term, saying: "I feel very proud that there are more women ministers than men."

Emphasis mine. Why is feminism something we have to "confess" to? That implies that there is something wrong with Zapatero being a feminist, which in my opinion, there certainly isn't!

via F Word

Yet another sickening angle on the Iraq War

2008-04-16T17:04:00.002Z

Reading Raving Black Lunatic's blog about female US Military workers being raped in Iraq, and the links he posted, actually made me feel nauseous.

Obama fear

2008-04-16T14:50:00.004Z

from Salon

Idiot of the day: Boris Johnson

2008-04-16T14:37:00.002Z

No actual particular reason why I have said this today. This link on The F Word demonstrates what a nasty piece of work he really is. Don't let the bumbling buffoon act fool you.

A sample of some of the disgustingly offensive things he has said over the past few years:

Conservatives: ‘accept that material inequality is inevitable, and
that trouble comes from too zealous an attempt to change
this.’(Lend Me Your Ears p126)

‘We seem to have forgotten that societies need rich people,
even sickeningly rich people, and not just to provide jobs for
those who clean swimming pools and resurface tennis courts.’
‘When I shamble around the park in my running gear late at
night, and I come across that bunch of black kids, shrieking in
the spooky corner by the disused gents, I would love to
pretend that I don’t turn a hair…

If there is anyone reading
this who has never experienced the same disgraceful reflex,
then - well I just don’t believe you. It is common ground
among both right-wingers and left-wingers that racism is
“natural”, in that it seems to arise organically, in all
civilisations.’ (Lend Me Your Ears p210)

(taken from the F word)

Sex and the City

2008-04-16T12:49:00.002Z

After reading Feministy's post entitled 'How to be a Feminist Boyfriend' a couple of days ago , and then finding this article on the Guardian website this morning, I have been thinking about what it is I want from a relationship. I have been single for a very long time now, and have never (yet!) had a serious relationship. This is not because I can't get a boyfriend - I have probably been asked out more times since being at University than most of my female friends put together, and have been out on lots of dates with a variety of different men. I realise that the reason I am still single is actually very simple; I haven't found a man I want to be with, yet.

I think that Feministy's list of things that a thoughtful and caring man should consider on a reasonably regular basis is very perceptive. So many men that I have met over the years take so much for granted. I am not saying for a moment that this makes them bad people, or automatically unsuitable for me as 'boyfriend material', just that it is so easy to be thoughtless. I spend a lot of time worrying about a whole spectrum of different things, and I suppose I would like someone who shares at least some of my concerns.

The article in today's Guardian asks the question "Is it the case that a strong women can't desire a husband?" Obviously, for me this is a long way in the future, but I really think that a strong woman can desire an equally strong man in her life. This question, to me, is the first step on the path to that old feminist 'man-hating' stereotype. Of course it is possible to want to have a steady, secure relationship with a man.

Having such a relationship does not mean forfeiting your feminist beliefs. As Feministy says, what is important is that you have that relationship with somebody thoughtful, who respects you. I suppose that if I were to have a relationship with a disrespectful, egotistical and misogynistic man, then that would be forfeiting my feminist values. But I can't believe that I would feel secure in such a relationship, or remotely happy. Being a feisty and intelligent young woman, I would not last long with someone who tried to push me into an old fashioned 'female' role, which would not suit me for a moment!

So, in conclusion, I suppose what I am trying to say is that while I would very much like to find myself a boyfriend, it is not something I am going to rush into. Reading Feministy's post on Monday made me feel better about this decision, and I feel that, as a strong woman, I should stick to my guns.

Pope really worried about the damage rape scandals have done to the Catholic Church

2008-04-16T11:02:00.003Z

The Prada Pope made some revealing comments, which were reported in yesterday's Guardian, revealing his true concerns about the priests who committed countless rapes in the States during the nineties.

"It is a great suffering for the church in the United States and for the Church in general and for me personally that this could happen," Benedict said aboard a special Alitalia airliner, nicknamed Shepherd 1.

Yeah, because when I read about priests raping little kids, my primary concern is for the Church and for the Pope. My heart is bleeding for those guys. Fuck those whingeing victims who have cost us so much money in compensation, and damaged our reputations!

But he does have a point, the child abuse scandals did damage him personally, as there is an increasing body of evidence which suggests that he was involved in trying to cover up the scandals.

How to be a feminist boyfriend

2008-04-14T10:30:00.004Z

Feministe feedback had a really interesting thread the other day, answering the following question:

Your most recent entry - on what a feminist relationship looks like - is primarily pitched at female feminists. I, as a well-intentioned but nonetheless male participant in relationships, would really like to know the answer to that question. i don’t commit the obvious sort of mistakes that non-feminist guys do, or at least i hope i don’t. Nonetheless there are certainly crimes of ignorance, so to speak.

In fact, you should write a book answering this question - “how to be a feminist boyfriend.”

There were loads of really great responses, and you should go and read them for yourself, but it reminded me of a conversation I had the other night about privilege with The Boy. He is definitely the most non-confrontational man I have ever met, and certainly strives to be fair and egalitarian, not just in our relationship, but in other aspects of his life too.

However, I sometimes feel that he doesn't examine what male privilege does for him on a daily basis. He generally doesn't analyse himself too closely anyway - thats not the person that he is - but I tried to impress on him that we all have a duty to be aware of our privileges (for example, in my case, being a well-educated, white, middle-class, straight, cis, woman), how they have smoothed our paths, and how the experiences of other people differ based solely on factors which they have no control over, including gender, race, sexuality, gender dysphoria, and a million other different things which can affect out experiences, and our treatment by others.

So, in order to be a feminist boyfriend, or indeed, a person who cares about others, here are some things which I think that The Boy should think about when he goes about his daily life:

I am lucky that my genitals look how I want and expect them to look.
I am lucky that when I do something badly, people don't put it down to my race, gender or sexuality.
I am lucky that when I get turned down for jobs, I don't have to wonder whether it is because of my race, gender, or sexuality.
I am lucky that people take it for granted that I can do things well, and competently.
I am lucky that when I turn on the TV/look in a newspaper or magazine/watch a film, I find many people or characters represented who I feel I can relate to because they are the same race, gender and sexuality as me.
I am lucky that my combination of race, gender and sexuality is so well-represented in the Houses of Parliament, the judiciary and other instruments of the state

This is obviously a far from exhaustive list, and if you want a far more exciting and complete list, Ampersand at Alas, A Blog has more. My point is not to write a full list of the privileges that white, straight, cis, males enjoy, it is to point out that thinking about these things, and incorporating this awareness into the way that you think about the world, can make you a better feminist ally, and of course, a better feminist boyfriend!

Where is my Babydaddy?

2008-04-14T10:10:00.002Z

The Guardian reports today that the Fatherhood Institute has published a report stating that 7 out of 10 people believe that fathers should be able to stay in hospital overnight to support the mother of the child, as well as develop a vital early bond with their baby. The NCT and NHS have both approved the idea in principle, but point to practical difficulties which could result in this idea not being introduced.

I think this is another way in which men can start to assume greater and greater roles in caring for children. I think that it is vital that men get all the opportunities that they can to take an equal role in the upbringing of their children. In my opinion, having the early chance to bond with their child, as well as to help to support their babymama, can only be a good way of furthering this aim. What do you think?

Maths? But thats a boys' course!

2008-04-13T20:16:00.002Z

That is a reaction with which I am all too familiar, as a female Maths undergrad. And you know what? A small part of me believes it. And a little bit more of me believes it every time I struggle with work, but my male friends appear to be sailing along. Despite the fact that at most good Universities in the country, and I suspect across the world, the number of female Maths undergrads equals that of the males, sexism remains unbelievably prevalent when people consider the subject of Mathematics. A particularly gobsmacking example is that of the views of Lawrence Summers, President of Harvard University, outlined in this article. I am incredibly glad I am not studying there!

So why do people cling on to this outdated view that women are more talented verbally, and men more talented mathematically? Why can both men and women not be good at both? I consider myself to be verbally talented, but believed my real talents to lie in the more scientific arena; despite the frequent misogynistic attitudes I encountered. The single best and most inspiring lecturer I have had, a Cambridge Mathematics graduate, was female. So was she just some mad exception that proves the rule?

I believe the struggles I have with my studies not to be gender related, but genuine difficulties with a very tough course. I also think that many boys find the course as difficult as I do, but have been trained to think very differently; if a boy says to someone that they will be reading Mathematics at University, the reaction will be, in general, very different to the reaction I get.

I don't know why I have such issues with self belief, whether it is a gender stereotype related problem or whether it is something more personal, but I strongly believe that women studying and working in all of the sciences, not just Maths, need much more encouragement and support than they are getting. It is no good having equal numbers of boys and girls starting scientific degrees, if the women are only going to get disheartened and depressed by the misogynistic attitudes of their peers.

Female apprentices earn less than male

2008-04-11T11:26:00.002Z

Perhaps I should stop reading the BBC News website so often, but it just provides such good fodder for blogging!

In the latest, female apprentices earned £147 compared with the £186 per week that male apprentices could expect to receive. In yet another example of brilliant investigative reporting, the beeb suggests that this is because;

The difference is mainly due to the fact that female apprentices tend to work in lower paid sectors than males.
Hairdressing apprentices earned £109 a week while apprentices in electro technical posts earned £210 weekly.
Those in early years posts earned £142 a week compared with £189 for those in engineering and manufacturing, the research commissioned by the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (Dius) said.

However, they don't take it upon themselves to investigate why it is that we seem to value - and therefore reward - traditionally male occupations so much more highly. Particularly telling of our screwed up values system is the low wage which is attached to early years care. Why is this not more highly paid? Either we do not as a society think that being able to access high-quality childcare is especially important, or we have found that we can get away with paying the (predominantly) young women who do significantly less than what they could hope to get if they chose to work in other sectors.

Actually, I think it a combination of those two factors. Firstly, patriarchy has a general impression that childcare should be free - after all, women did it for years without being paid for it. Why should the uppity bitches expect money for it now? Secondly, it does seem as though the people who actually do these jobs accept their low wage packets as part of the deal. Perhaps this is because, as with nursing (another female-dominated low wage profession), there is an element of altruism which means that the people entering the profession do so for more than financial gain. However, just because someone does something with the best of intentions does not mean that they should not be adequately compensated for their time and effort. Traditionally female jobs, such as those within the "caring" professions, should have their salaries brought in line with jobs from other sectors which have similar levels of skill required.

As a final note, I actually think that, as society could not function as it currently does without people filling these roles, and taking care of the more vulnerable members of society, their pay should reflect that. However, at the moment, I think that at least increasing it to the levels of other similar jobs will have to do!

Poppadoms

2008-04-11T11:23:00.000Z

Nothing really to say about them, apart from Sharwood's Chili and Cumin ones are YUM!

Groundbreaking research of the day!

2008-04-11T11:10:00.002Z

The BBC has discovered that boys and girls choose to play different musical instruments to each other! What I really love is that the article makes statements like

"And it's somehow easier for a girl to cross over into 'boys' territory and play a trumpet than for a boy to take up the flute."

Hmm, I wonder why this could be? Perhaps because basically the worst thing to be called/associated with/likened to in our culture is a girl. Gendered insults like "slag", "pussy" and of course, "cunt" demonstrate this. However, it is easier for women to emulate men because there is a general assumption that they are the "norm", and women are somehow deviant from this. Therefore, it actually upholds a patriarchal values system when women express a desire to engage in similar activities to men, because it maintains the assumption that what men do has inherently more worth and value to society, than what women do, which must be regularly derided, and absolutely not emulated.

What is really sad is that children as young as 6 are able to pick up on these cues, and choices which they make are guided by these prejudices.

Knives Out

2008-04-10T19:57:00.002Z

Reading this article concerning the epidemic of male violence against women earlier this evening reminded me of a rather horrible experience I had on a train from Cornwall to Bath last Friday. A very scary drunk man threatened me, and, although I was oblivious to this particularly nasty aspect of the encounter, he had a knife. He slashed his throat in the buffet carriage before being carted off the train in Bristol by 4 policemen, presumably armed. However, before the train got to Bristol, he was seated right across the aisle from me. He didn't harm anyone else on the train, although the women he had shouted obscenities at and otherwise threatened were undoubtedly, like me, rather shaken by the experience.

The niggling thing, for me, is this; at what point would it have been reasonable to consider him a very real threat? At what point should action have been taken? Looking back, I was in very real danger for that whole train journey. It was extremely easy for that man to be on the train and cause so much trouble - and he was left totally to his own devices. What can we do to increase the safety of people in a confined environment, such as a train?

c'mon Italy, join us in the 21st Century!

2008-04-10T16:11:00.002Z

Ok, I know I had a go at Berlusconi yesterday, and I have to say that I actually love Italy, but clearly the Italians have got some work to do on women's rights. This article comes up with the shocking statistic that just 46% of Italian women have work, because women are considered to be less good candidates than men. People who say that sexism doesn't exist in the western world anymore: what more proof do you need?

"get your tits out for trafficking"

2008-04-09T13:35:00.003Z

I did not come up with the title of this post unaided, it actually comes from the excellent article written by Julie Bindel highlighting the fact that more and more charities are using highly sexualised - and sexist - images of women in order to further their cause.

What really bothers me about the actions of charities like Peta is that it is never OK to subjugate the rights of one group in order to further the interests of another. I don't accept the argument that "the women volunteered/agreed" or whatever. We can all be agents of our own oppression. Just because someone has agreed to something doesn't make it not sexist.

I wish that these charities would think up some ways of appealing to the masses (which they must obviously do) which doesn't simultaneously objectify and alienate a whole group of people by likening them to animals, and perpetuating the sexist vision of women which a great deal of society sadly has anyway.

Feministe has more.

Idiot of the day: Silvio Berlusconi

2008-04-09T13:01:00.004Z

Apparently, Silvio Berlusconi has really hit the left where it hurts; left-wing women are ugly! Why is it that when right-wing politicians or activists are feeling threatened, they find it appropriate to compare the relative attractiveness of their female supporters? Says a lot about the values of the right.

As an aside: Berlusconi has pledged to appoint 4 women to his cabinet if he is elected at the next election! Wow! That will be so amazing and representative! Thank you Silvio Berlusconi!

Abortion in Nigeria

2008-04-07T14:12:00.002Z

I read this article on the beeb with tears in my eyes. I can't bear to think of women dying so needlessly in Nigeria, because a procedure that is relatively straightforward in the west is denied to them. However, the reason I particularly wanted to highlight this article, is because of the way that it ends.

Two attempts to change the law were stopped by conservative women's groups.
They say a change in the law would promote promiscuity, and weaken the moral fibre of Nigeria.
"Making more abortions available is not the answer," says Saudata Sani, a female member of the House of Representatives for Kaduna state, in northern Nigeria.
"Women need to be educated about their rights over their body and given opportunities to plan their families, but it must be done in a way that protects public morality."
Other medical specialists say that the law is just a part of the picture.
"Even if it was possible to get a legal abortion, many women would not be able to get a safe one," said Dr Francis Ohanyido, the president of the International Public Health Forum.
"Medical facilities vary widely and it is almost impossible to guarantee quality."
Cultural taboos mean even if there was a clinic in their town, it would be impossible for most women to go there, he said.

Firstly, making abortion illegal apart from to save the life of the mother, which is the current situation in Nigeria I believe, clearly and obviously does not prevent women from seeking abortions. It does, however, create a climate in which women find it increasingly difficult to access the care that they require. Furthermore, they are frightened of going to seek medical attention if they start to experience severe pain or bleeding etc after having received an illegal abortion because they are worried about the consequences for them, and for their families. This is costing women their lives.

Secondly, I wouldn't want to presume that I know how to solve all of the problems facing women in Nigeria, when it comes to their reproductive rights. I can fully accept that simply legalising abortion there will not put an end to unsafe practices, and the death of many women. That is why I view it as a first step. Just because something is difficult, does not mean that we should not attempt it in the first place.

My First Post

2008-04-07T09:18:00.002Z

So this is my first post...feminism and food, two things which really interest me!

It's a Jungle Out There

2008-04-06T18:25:00.001Z

I am in the middle of reading the hilarious and down to earth offering by Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon. I will write a review when I'm done, but at the moment, it gets 10/10!

Back to blogging...

2008-04-06T18:24:00.002Z

I am in the middle of the craziest law course in the whole world, but I am going to try to start blogging more regularly again. Watch this space!

Ratatouille

2008-01-10T15:36:00.000Z

This is one of my favourite dinners!

1 red pepper
1 aubergine
1 onion
2 courgettes
1-2 cloves of garlic
1 tin of tomatoes
1 tsp tomato puree
1 tsp olive oil
1 tsp mixed herbs

Saute the onion and garlic in the olive oil. Add the courgette and red peppers. Cook until slightly softened, and the onion is translucent. Add the tinned tomatoes, aubergine, tomato puree and mixed herbs. Put in the oven at a medium temperature for about an hour.

You could serve this with couscous, pasta, potatoes, bulgar wheat, rice. The possibilities are endless! I like a bit of grated cheese on mine too.

Review: Sex...with Mum and Dad

2008-01-10T14:52:00.000Z

I know, I know, the title is horrendous. But actually I think that this programme on BBC3 is worth giving a chance, particularly for teenagers and their parents (who the show is primarily aimed at). The basic premise is that the relationship between the teenager and their parent(s) has broken down. They go to visit Maria Schopman, who is a Dutch "sexologist" and family therapist helps families to talk about sex and their experiences of it, and attitudes towards it.

As a family, they have to involve themselves with various tasks which involve a great deal of nervous giggling and red faces. Some of the tasks have included making clay penises, putting dolls into a variety of sexual positions, and drawing stick people of the number of sexual partners that you have had. But, despite the initial embarrassment that these tasks of course cause, they seem to work. Teenagers and their parents use these exercises as a way of opening up a dialogue about sex which has been missing previously.

One of the most positive things about this programme is that fundamentally it accepts that teenagers are sexual beings, and that that is OK. Whilst teenagers in the last show (who were using casual sexual relationships as a way of trying to seek intimacy) are encouraged to moderate their behaviour, I actually don't have a problem with this. Once they had been able to be honest with themselves and their parents about sex, then they actually made the decision for themselves that they did not necessarily want to engage in that particular behaviour any more. They were not pressured into making this decision, and Maria Schopman appears to be entirely unshockable and unjudgmental.

I think that not talking to children and teenagers about sex, relationships, STDs, pregnancy, and a wealth of other issues relating to sex means that they can feel lost. They engage in risky behaviour because they are not aware of safe sex. As Maria Schopman points out, in the Netherlands, teenage pregnancy and the rate of STD infection is significantly lower, and she believes that this is because they discuss these issues with their children in depth, giving them the tools to go and and enjoy sexual relationships safely, and knowing that they have the support of their parents. We should be doing this in the UK too, as this programme aptly demonstrates.

Spanish abortion clinics to go on strike

2008-01-09T15:46:00.000Z

Now, whilst I support wholeheartedly the aims of the Spanish doctors involved in this, I am not sure that further limiting women's access to abortion is really the way to do it. The BBC reports that over 2000 women could be affected by these strikes. Some of the women will no doubt be able to get the procedure once the strikes are over, but they will still have had to endure being pregnant against their will for longer than they should. Unfortunately for other women, who are up against the time limit for abortion, they will be forced into childbirth. This is not a happy situation for anyone.

Spain: sort out your laws so that women can access abortions quickly, safely and legally, and doctors can perform them without fear of criminalisation.

But what about teh menz?????

2008-01-09T10:01:00.000Z

I'm a bit late on this one, but it is just too important to pass by. The LA Times published an article about "post-abortion syndrome" in men. Lets just take a moment to remember that this is not a proven illness in women, so it is totally bizarre to be referring to this "illness" in regard to men.
(Just to warn you, if you don't like swearing, don't read on!)
So, to the article;

SAN FRANCISCO -- Jason Baier talks often to the little boy he calls Jamie. He imagines this boy -- his son -- with blond hair and green eyes, chubby cheeks, a sweet smile.

Interesting to note that it is a boy that Jason Baier imagines. Clearly, this would be his preference, as everyone knows that women/girls are only half-human anyway. Why would he be bothered if his fiancee had aborted a daughter?

Baier, 36, still longs for the child who might have been, with an intensity that bewilders him: "How can I miss something I never even held?"

These days, he channels the grief into activism in a burgeoning movement of "post-abortive men." Abortion is usually portrayed as a woman's issue: her body, her choice, her relief or her regret. This new movement -- both political and deeply personal in nature -- contends that the pronoun is all wrong.

Yeah, because abortion definitely affects men more than women. How could we have been getting it so badly wrong for so long?

Last spring, the Supreme Court cited these accounts as one reason to ban the late-term procedure that opponents call "partial-birth" abortion. The majority opinion suggested that the ban would protect women from a decision they might later regret.

Women's testimony was also used to justify a sweeping abortion ban passed in 2006 in South Dakota. (Voters overturned the ban before it could take effect.)

Now, I don't want to be unfair here. Women can also act like assholes about abortion. Just because you regret your abortion love, doesn't mean that you should be able to restrict the access of other women to the same procedure. We are sentient adult human beings. Sometimes we will make choices that we will later regret. That is up to us. It is part of life. We do not need to be "protected" from procedures which we decide that we need to have.

Therapist Vincent M. Rue, who helped develop the concept of post-abortion trauma, runs an online study that asks men to check off symptoms (such as irritability, insomnia and impotence) that they feel they have suffered as a result of an abortion. When men are widely recognized as victims, Rue said, "that will change society."

Interesting. More proof here that women are clearly less human and less important than men. Yeah, sure women have been moaning on for years about abortion and how they feel about things. But we can't take them seriously, after all, everyone knows that women are irrational emotional creatures. But teh menz? They are so different. If they are sad, we must all take notice! Because they are so strong and manly, their tears are really important. Almost as important as the sacred sperm.

But the activists leading the men's movement make clear they're not relying on statistics to make their case. They're counting on the power of men's tears.

God, yeah, statistics and shit are so dull and irrelevant. Lets just get some men to cry on telly, and then women won't be able to kill teh baybeez without our sayso anymore!

Even abortion rights supporters acknowledge that men may benefit from counseling when they and their partners face an unwanted pregnancy. Sociologist Arthur Shostak has interviewed thousands of men waiting in abortion clinics; though they tried to project strength to help their lovers through the ordeal, many told him that they felt powerless, anxious and alone. Some dreamed about the children they would never know.

Now, I am not denying that abortion can be a difficult experience for everyone involved. All medical procedures are stressful, not just for the person receiving the treatment, but for anyone who loves them too. I am sure that men do experience regret after their partner has had an abortion, but that does not give them the right to limit other women's access to the procedure.

Chris Aubert, a Houston lawyer, felt only indifference in 1985 when a girlfriend told him she was pregnant and planned on an abortion. When she asked if he wanted to come to the clinic, he said he couldn't; he played softball on Saturdays. He stuck a check for $200 in her door and never talked to her again.

Aubert, 50, was equally untroubled when another girlfriend had an abortion in 1991. "It was a complete irrelevancy," he said. But years later, Aubert felt a rising sense of unease. He and his wife were cooing at an ultrasound of their first baby when it struck him -- "from the depths of my belly," he said -- that abortion was wrong.

Aubert has since converted to Catholicism. He and his wife have five children, and they sometimes protest in front of abortion clinics. Every now and then, though, Aubert wonders: What if his first girlfriend had not aborted? How would his life look different?

He might have endured a loveless marriage and, perhaps, a sad divorce. He might have been saddled with child support as he tried to build his legal practice. He might never have met his wife. Their children -- Christine, Kyle, Roch, Paul, Vance -- might not exist.

"I wouldn't have the blessings I have now," Aubert said. So in a way, he said, the two abortions may have cleared his path to future happiness.

"That's an intellectual debate I have with myself," he said. "I struggle with it."

In the end, Aubert says his moral objection to abortion always wins. If he could go back in time, he would try to save the babies.

But would his long-ago girlfriends agree? Or might they also consider the abortions a choice that set them on a better path?

Aubert looks startled. "I never really thought about it for the woman," he says slowly.

I think we can all agree that this guy is a complete wanker. Instead of feeling bad that he went to play softball instead of going with his partner of the time to support her, he only wishes that he could get "the baby" back. It is interesting that when it was most convenient for him for his girlfriend to have an abortion, so that he could continue with law school etc, "it was a complete irrelevancy." When he benefitted from the abortion, it was fine. Now, he has the insulation of many years. He is married. He is never going to be in a position where a baby could ruin his chances. Now is when he decides that abortion is wrong. Strange that isn't it?

Also, he would rather go back and "save the babies" from his two failed relationships, rather than enjoy the children he has now, with a woman that he (presumably) loves? I think that goes to show how shallow and hypothetical the whole anti-choice argument is. He is able to say these things because he never has to act on them. He is able to oppose abortion now, having benefitted from it in the past, because he never has to face an unwanted pregnancy. He is able to have the best of both worlds, because now he can moralise about the effects of abortion, and say "it wasn't my fault", so that he doesn't have to be responsible for the choices that he made when he was younger.

The final comment, "I never really thought about it for the woman", says it all to me. He doesn't consider women to be anything more than fuckholes and incubators, who unfortunately have brains and mouths attached, which inconveniently mean that they blather on about their "rights" and their "ambitions". God, why don't they just shut the fuck up and let him fuck them and father children without having to worry about any of the consequences? Jesus, life is just so unfair, he is so discriminated against.

My heart bleeds, fuckwit.

Idiot of the day: Pervez Musharraf

2008-01-07T17:41:00.001Z

Oh, I get it, Benazir Bhutto was the only person to blame for her own assassination, not the person who pulled the trigger. Silly, silly me. Thank you for telling us the truth President Musharraf.

via Feministing

...sigh...

2008-01-07T12:28:00.000Z

My exams are over! So I'm hoping to get back into a bit more of a routine with my blogging.

In more important news today, Which? has conducted a survey of cosmetic surgery providers, and found that many of them do not fully explain the risks, and do not give people long enough to decide.

I'm not a massive fan of cosmetic surgery anyway, and this just convinces me further of how convenient it is that we make women feel so shit about the way that they look, so they spend literally thousands of pounds on makeup, anti-ageing products, weightloss remedies, magazines offering miracle cures, etc etc, and when that fails, and they still get older, they resort to cosmetic surgery. What a moneypot!

Britney blogging

2008-01-05T18:04:00.000Z

I try to stay away from 'celebrity gossip' and things of that nature. A little while ago I realised that both women's magazines and the gossip rags just make me feel shitty, and so I made a decision to no longer read them. I have not regretted it yet.

But it is impossible to avoid the Britney Spears media circus. I find the whole thing really depressing, because whilst some people may argue that she put herself in the public eye, so she must live with it, I just don't think its as simple as that. Just because someone is famous doesn't mean that they are no longer a person who has a right to privacy. What I particularly despise about the way that Britney is portrayed in the media, is the obvious glee which every mistake or incidence of poor judgment is met with. I'm not claiming that Britney Spears is a saint, but she is clearly going through a difficult period in her life. The glare of the world's media is not going to aid her recovery, and at the moment, we are voyeuristically watching a young woman on what seems to be a journey of self-destruction. How is that entertainment?

Walking home from the Tube

2008-01-04T22:55:00.000Z

Yesterday, when I was walking home from the Tube, a man decided to follow me about 3/4 of the way home making animal noises at me. Although on the face of it, this was not necessarily intimidating behaviour, it was intimidating for me. I think it is important for women to talk about these everyday experiences, to demonstrate how frequent they are, and how normalised they are by our society.

Idiot of the day: Andy Dolan of the Daily Mail

2008-01-04T16:30:00.001Z

Entitled, Beware of the Office Piranha: Male bosses warned of man-eating women who are preying on them, the article goes on to outline the shocking risks which men face from women every day when they go out to work. Women are seducing poor defenceless men who are, it seems, unable to say no. Some of these men who end up having sex even have wives, but they can't help it, its not their fault. In fact, I'm surprised that the author of this article, Andy Dolan, has not set up a charity to help the poor victims of these evil man-eating women. One of the worst crimes these women commit is that if they become pregnant, they actually expect the fathers - these poor preyed upon creatures - to pay child support! Outrageous! What has happened to the days when a man could bang his secretary with impunity, and then go home to his wife? What is the world coming to?!?

Hilarious!

2008-01-04T13:46:00.001Z

via Shakesville

Obama and Huckabee lead after Iowa

2008-01-04T09:35:00.000Z

I don't know yet how I feel about Barack Obama. I desperately want America to diversify their political profile, and so, from that point of view, I would like to see either Clinton or Obama become the Democratic candidate. However, they both have problems, and I don't want to support them simply because they either have a vagina or have black skin.

I'd like to see more of them, and of John Edwards too, before I decide who my personal preference would be.

On the GOP front, I am not surprised that Huckabee is leading, he has seemed the most popular in polls for a while. In some respects, perhaps he isn't that bad a candidate if the world has to endure another Republican as US President. But, if you are in the majority of the population by being either a woman, or gay, he is bad news.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the New Hampshire primaries on Tuesday.

Something I love...

2008-01-03T17:17:00.001Z

Coming in from the cold, putting on thick socks and a big jumper, and looking outside. I love the feeling of snugness!

Iowa caucus day

2008-01-03T13:29:00.000Z

I just wanted to share an interesting article I found about Mike Huckabee on the Guardian website. Huckabee is one of the leading Republican candidates, and looks set to do well in the Caucus today. However, his record on women's rights is diabolical, as Kira Cochrane describes. She points out that whilst his refusal to be drawn on whether or not women should act as ministers is not in itself a big issue, it reveals a great deal about his unwillingness to discuss issues of equality.

One of the things which worries feminists the most though, is his release of rapist Wayne Dumond, nearly 25 years early, despite having received letters from Dumond's victims begging him not to release him. Dumond went on to rape several other women and murder at least one. He died whilst awaiting trial for these crimes.

In general, I don't feel that incarcerating people for great lengths of time is necessarily an answer to anything. I genuinely believe that even the worst criminals can be rehabilitated to the extent that they are able to enjoy a relatively free life. However, what I'd really like to call Huckabee out on here is his hypocrisy. He is a man who supports jail as a punishment for wrongdoing. He is a man that supports the death penalty. Why, then, go against all of your supposed beliefs to release a man who has committed serious and violent crimes, and is likely to commit them again?

But most concerning of all is Huckabee's complete disregard for women's reproductive rights and bodily autonomy. I can't really say it better than Cochrane here;

Staunchly opposed to abortion (which he has compared to the Holocaust), one of Huckabee's first acts as governor was to block Medicaid, the health scheme for people on low incomes, from funding an abortion for a 15-year-old with learning disabilities who had been raped by her stepfather. This went directly against federal law, which requires states to fund abortions in cases of rape.
It is the sheer, unbridled cruelty of this decision that gives the lie to Huckabee's claims that he cares for the vulnerable. If there is anyone more vulnerable than a disabled teenage rape victim, I certainly can't think who it might be. Who hearts Huckabee? Only fools or misogynists.

Cochrane is right in her description of this decision as cruel. Clearly, Huckabee is unable to empathise with anyone who has a uterus. Fingers crossed that Huckabee is not the next American President!

3 bean chili

2008-01-02T18:22:00.000Z

I love this on jacket potatoes, even though this is totally non-authentic!

1 tsp olive oil
1 red/green/yellow pepper, chopped
1 red onion, chopped
1 chili, chopped
1 tsp ground cumin
1 tin baked beans (I like the Whole Earth ones, but any will do)
1 tin kidney beans
1 tin other type of beans
12 cherry tomatoes
1 tsp tomato puree
1 tsp sugar

Fry the onion, pepper, and chili together. Then add the cumin and stir for about 30 seconds. Add the beans, with the juice from the baked beans as well. Add the cherry tomatoes, tomato puree, and sugar. Cook for about 30 mins, until slightly sticky in consistency.

Season to taste. I like to serve this on jacket potatoes, but it would be equally good on rice or in burritos or on tortilla chips. Serve with a good dollop of natural yogurt or sour cream.

Councils face £2.8bn fine in backdated pay for women.

2008-01-02T17:55:00.000Z

The Guardian today reported that following a Local Government Employers study, councils in England have been discriminating against women significantly and consistently. This is bad enough, but the biased way that this serious issue has been reported reveals a great deal about the attitude of the mainstream media towards women. The Guardian is supposedly a thoughtful, left-leaning broadsheet, but this report reads more like it has been written by one of the rags.

Curtis criticises women for resorting to no-win no-fee lawyers in order to try to seek justice:

Council leaders and trade unions today warn the bill could escalate because local deals being thrashed out are under threat from firms of no-win no-fee lawyers. The lawyers, who pick out individual cases, say they are simply fighting for women to get the full six years in back pay they may claim, but the local deals typically reach smaller settlements to ensure all women, systematically, receive some money without making deep cuts in services.

However, later in the article, she cites an example of a woman who was offered a pitiful and insulting sum to 'repay' her for the discrimination which she has suffered.

Rosaline Wilson, 60, from Guisborough, near Middlesbrough, earned £6.50 an hour managing a team of 13 care workers for Redcar and Cleveland council. She was offered £5,000 to settle out of court but won £32,000 with a no-win no-fee lawyer.

We should assume that Polly Curtis thinks the stupid bitches should just shut the fuck up and stop creating such a big, expensive mess.

Why shouldn't women claim the money that they are owed? They have worked just as hard as the men at the same jobs, and whilst I understand that it is a problem if the money to repay these women is coming out of the budget for other areas of the council's work, the question of how this bill is to be financed is really not their problem. Women shouldn't have been discriminated against in the first place, and if the councils don't like it, then there is a simple and effective solution to make sure that this does not happen again: Do not discriminate against anyone.

Law exam hell

2008-01-02T12:09:00.001Z

I am currently in law exam hell so my posting may be a bit sporadic for the next few days.

But, in the meantime, here is an interview the BBC did with Julia Roberts, supposedly about how she balances motherhood and her career. However, despite quoting Roberts, who said that the emphasis placed on appearance in Hollywood has a detrimental effect on acting - they then go on to spend over half the article describing Robert's appearance. They describe her clothing at the interview and then mention that she stripped "down to a floral fuchsia bikini for her role as a wealthy Texas socialite in Charlie Wilson's War."

They only briefly quote Roberts on motherhood right at the end of the piece.

It is a tough trick to pull off, as any working parent knows.
Still, if you are Julia Roberts you are in with a chance.
"I have a really great husband, who's also a great father. I have great girlfriends and I'm in a position where I can have somebody help me with my kids when I need that - I'm not doing it by myself."

Well done BBC on another sparkling example of journalistic integrity, incisive articles and intelligent discourse.

Belated post: Idiot of the day: Norman Wells

2008-01-01T20:11:00.001Z

Apparently, the reason that the teenage pregnancy rate is not dropping as quickly as the government hoped when it set its targets for 2010 is because schools are relying on sex education and contraception too much;

Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, told the Sunday Telegraph that the government had allowed the "systematic removal of every restraint that used to act as a disincentive to under-age sex".
"The problems associated with teenage pregnancy will never be solved so long as the government persists with its reliance on yet more contraception and sex education," he said.

Yeah, because abstinence only education has such a great history of success in the states! And we really aren't making young people feel bad enough about their sexual choices. I think single mothers are getting a particularly easy ride. Norman Wells, thank you for enlightening us.

Happy 2008!

2008-01-01T12:23:00.000Z

My plans for 2008 include:

Finish my law course
Find a job for when I finish law school (in 2009)
Continue to develop coping mechanisms for dealing with negative emotions
Go to Fiji to see my Grandmother
Go to India
Continue to blog regularly

and probably a million other things too!

Tom the Dancing Bug

2008-01-01T12:20:00.001Z

I love this cartoon!

From salon.com

Don't punish men for the evils of sex slavery?

2007-12-31T10:27:00.000Z

This article is an interesting one. It starts well, with Henry Porter acknowledging that the current laws in this country, which criminalise the woman selling sex, but not the man buying it, are unfair and wrong. He then goes on to outline some of the ways in which countries like New Zealand and Canada have tried to change this, as a response to changing attitudes. So far, so good.

However, this is unfortunately where things start to unravel. Denis MacShane MP plans to takcle the serious problem of sex trafficking in this country by trying to introduce new amendments to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, which would allow Police to prosecute men found paying for sex in certain designated areas. Porter outlines this in his article. However, he goes on to say that we should be very sceptical of MacShane's motives, because he may well be anti-prostitution! Therefore, we can't believe anything he tells us about the problem of sex-trafficking, and we should disregard any changes which he tries to make to reduce the number of trafficked women suffering in this country, because basically, he is just trying to stop prostitution! (Or something like that).

MacShane and his supporters may have a strong moral revulsion for the sale of sex, but they insist that their approach is a strictly practical one to deal with trafficking. What they cannot say is that this amendment contains a tacit admission of the government's failure. There are already laws to deal with trafficking and enslavement and it may be that MacShane's figure of 25,000 trafficked women is hugely inflated. In a letter to the Guardian last week, Professor Julia O' Connell Davidson of the University of Nottingham called it preposterous. She pointed out that in the police Operation Pentameter last year 515 establishments were raided and 84 victims of trafficking were found. At this rate, there would need to be 150,000 establishments for MacShane's figure of 25,000 to reached.

Now, I don't have any exact figures regarding the numbers of people who are trafficked in this country, so whilst I can't comment on the accuracy or inaccuracy of the figures discussed, I would like to call Henry Porter out on some shocking journalistic sloppiness. In the same paragraph, whilst he points out that the government is failing to tackle trafficking effectively (which actually, I agree with), he also then quotes Police statistics to demonstrate why it is that we should not believe MacShane's statistics. I thought you just said that the government is failing? Therefore, why are you using Police statistics to advance your argument against MacShane, when you yourself acknowledge that these are unlikely to reflect the scale of the problem in this country?

So we must conclude that the government does not view the act of buying sex is wrong in principle. This is a shaky position to start from if we are about to introduce yet another criminal offence, because it will be clear to everyone that the exchange that takes place between a man and a woman and a man and a man is exactly the same. The same levels of revulsion, pleasure, release, exploitation, abuse, regret and despair may exist in both transactions, yet only in one will an offence be committed.

I don't view the act of buying sex as being wrong in principle. However, this is a ridiculously simplistic way of looking at things. It is naive, and frankly stupid, to claim that selling sex is simply a choice which someone has chosen to make, and so the person buying sex has no culpability. You must look at the reasons behind why people buy and sell sex. Do men need sex? Of course not. Sex is a positive and enjoyable part of life, but men do not have an entitlement to sex, simply because they want it. However, if one is impoverished, trafficked, a drug addict, or otherwise disadvantaged, then money is a necessity. Therefore, the exchange of money for sex is not a fair transaction, made without any kind of duress. The prostitute is in a position where to refuse sex would result in great hardship and suffering. The man is in a position where to not buy sex would result in walking around feeling a bit sexually frustrated for a while. Not the same thing.

Actually, I agree with Porter's final point here, although I don't agree with his reasoning, because I think that either it should be illegal to buy any kind of sex, or it shouldn't be. This part of the law would add unnecessary confusion and complication to the law.

There is clearly a feminist drive to this measure. Nothing wrong in that perhaps, but it does account for the singular bias of the MacShane proposal. Columnist Joan Smith has suggested that critics responded hysterically to it because they have a vested interest in a man's right to buy sex from a woman. That is hardly fair. The objection is not that it deprives men of the ability to exploit women, but that it is ill thought out.
The same feminist voice would no doubt argue that every woman has a right to dominion over her body in matters such as abortion. It follows that a woman has the right to sell sexual services and, if that is true, someone has the right to buy those services. You cannot allow the principle of sale without at the same time consenting to purchase.

So Mr Porter, we start to see your true colours! This is an article ostensibly about legal reforms intended to reduce the number of people who are trafficked in Britain each year. Yet, you rebut any suggestions that one of your concerns about making buying sex illegal is that it would no longer allow you to exploit vulnerable women with impunity. In order to support this point, you use the example of abortion as a way in which feminists argue that women should have bodily autonomy. Of course, I agree with you, and I agree with the fact that in an ideal, egalitarian world women should be free to decide to sell sex for money. But we are not discussing those women Mr Porter. We are looking at these legal reforms through the lens of a country which has increasing numbers of women trafficked into it each year. At this stage, I don't think anyone is able to advocate for a 'perfect' law. We need to introduce reforms which will allow prostitutes the protections which they need, and punish the people responsible for perpetuating the cycle.

Your final point "You cannot allow the principle of sale without at the same time consenting to purchase", is particularly interesting. Again, I agree with you. Are you then arguing that men who have sex with women who are unable to consent are guilty of rape? After all, if women are in a position whereby the are not able to agree to any sort of transaction freely, and you have sex with them, then you are not buying something which they have offered of their own free will. You are raping them.

And what is payment? Most often, it is cash or a credit card, but payment comes in other forms - holidays, goods, jewellery, advancement, property. Many shy from an openly acknowledged transaction; some are candid about a business arrangement in which the parties hope to emerge with profit or satisfaction. We would like it to be otherwise perhaps, but that is the way of the world.

What are you saying here Henry Porter? Are all women who rely on men for financial support prostitutes? Does that make going off to buy a fuck from a trafficked woman ok because you believe that you indirectly pay your wife for sex? Maybe you feel resentful about the leeching bitches who steal mens money, but if you grew a brain and looked around you, you might understand why women become financially dependent on men. Women get paid 17% less than men for the same work. If they are married, or (shock-horror) have a family, then they are less likely to be hired in the first place, because they are perceived to not be committed enough to the job. In most relationships, women do the majority of the child-care and other domestic duties, which allows men more time to focus on their careers. Furthermore, supporting your wife does not mean that you are entitled to fuck her whenever you want. Since 1991, getting married does not mean that you can rape your wife with impunity.

Tougher penalties might be an answer but let's not forget that the police already have powers to deal with every aspect of prostitution, from kerb crawling to enslavement. Instead we need to tackle what drives so much prostitution - poverty and drug addiction. It is right that newspapers are beginning to refuse adverts for escort and massage services but as the cabinet ministers who recently admitted to drug use know full well, making the demand for drugs illegal does little to stop supply.
Denis MacShane may be well-intentioned but his amendment is bad and confusing law because it seeks to remedy a failure by police and immigration officials - which may not even exist - by attacking the choice made by two consenting adults.

So, despite earlier claiming that the government's current policies are failing, you now support your argument that buying sex should remain legal with the the point that the police have all the powers they need in order to be able to deal with prostitution, "from kerb crawling to enslavement". Coherent, consistent, and well thought-out I must say!

To go back to my earlier point, if women are deeply impoverished or addicted to drugs, then they are not able to make a free choice about whether or not to engage in prostitution. In a choice between having sex with a man and being able to eat/shoot up, or not having sex with him, but starving/suffering horrendous withdrawal symptoms, I think I know which option I would choose. However, that does not mean that I am making a free choice to be a prostitute or to have sex. Actually, there are a million other things I would like to do far more. Therefore, it is not a "choice between two consenting adults" that we are discussing here.

I find that I am often very conflicted about my feelings about prostitution. On one hand, I do think that it should be up to women to decide what to do with their bodies, and of course this extends to selling sex. However, this argument is frequently used as a get-out clause by people like Henry Porter who want to bury their heads in the sand and ignore the realities of life for the majority of prostitutes in this country. There are a small minority of women who do freely make the choice to be prostitutes, but as Henry Porter himself acknowledges, the vast majority of prostitutes in this country are there because of poverty or drugs. As I have already argued, this is not a free choice, and these women need to be protected rather than criminalised. Men (and indeed women) do not have an entitlement to sex. Therefore, if one of the things which we have to do in order to protect vulnerable prostitutes from exploitation is to make the buying of sex illegal, which means that punters will no longer be able to exploit people with impunity, then we should take that step. After all, we all have the right to live lives free from exploitation.

Benazir Bhutto assassinated in Pakistan

2007-12-27T16:24:00.000Z

Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto waves to her supporters in Karachi during a rally against the Pakistan government. Photo: http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/photocredit/achievers/bhu0-004

I wasn't entirely shocked to hear this news a few hours ago, but today is still a sad day. Benazir Bhutto was an inspiring woman, and although she was dogged by allegations of corruption throughout her political career, the fact remains that she was one of the first women elected to power in an Islamic country. She was brave, and faced her critics head-on. I don't know how things would have worked out in the forthcoming Pakistani elections, but her assassination will certainly lead to yet more questions about the legitimacy of Musharraf's regime. Whatever you think about Bhutto's politics, it is a sad day for democracy when a politician is murdered, because it silences free speech.

Marriage

2007-12-26T20:18:00.000Z

Courtesy of www.chicago-smile-makeovers.com

Marriage has probably been once of the most difficult areas for me to come to terms with as a feminist. Although to a certain extent, I have always felt that women are underrepresented in Parliament, in business and in academia, to give a few examples, and I was aware of other inequalities, I only started to actively identify as 'feminist' a few years ago. Until I did that, I had always imagined that I wanted a white wedding, not necessarily large, but definitely with a big white dress, and in a church.

Then I became a feminist, and I started to think about the traditions which surround weddings. I read interesting articles like this, this, and this. I began to wonder about the overtones of ownership, transfer of property, virginity, as well as more modern traditions, for example, the way that the press refers to 'bridezillas'. I don't know how I fit into this. My partner had a very traditional upbringing, and, although he is sympathetic to feminist values, would like to get married one day. Deep down, I would too. I went to a wedding at the weekend, and it was an interesting experience for me. I haven't been to a wedding since I started to identify as a feminist. It was in a church, and I was even more convinced that that sort of wedding was not for me. I hate the idea of being given away by my father; I am not a piece of property to be handed over! I don't believe in God, and so all of the references to God within the service would be meaningless to me. I don't want a significant part of my wedding ceremony to be either meaningless or offensive to me. I want every word to have significance. I want it to be personal. I want it to reflect me, my partner, and our relationship. So I guess a church wedding is out then!

But there were things which I felt that I do want to have one day. I would like to be legally and emotionally unified with my partner by going through a ceremony which is meaningful to both of us. I would like to show my family and friends the commitment which I have to him, and which he has to me. I would like to have the same last name (more to come on that later!).

Will I wear a white dress? I don't know. I have very mixed feelings about it. I don't like the overtones of purity and virginity, which it is intended to imply. However, I don't want to remove all tradition from my day, so that it is not recognisable as a wedding. Also, I love dresses, and I like the idea of wearing a beautiful white dress - I'll only get the opportunity once after all!

I expect that I will make a speech at the reception. The day is about me and my partner - I should be able to have a say! I will not throw my bouquet. If women attending my wedding want to get married, then they should ask their partners themselves, rather than relying on antiquated traditions to try to get their partners to propose to them!

I imagine that we will double-barrel our names. My name is quite unusual, and it is so much a part of me, and how I define myself, that I cannot imagine being without it. My partner's is very common, and will go well with mine. I think this is a wonderful way for us to show our commitment to one another. It is symbolic of how we intend to keep our own identities, but also how our lives will become unified, by keeping our own names, but also gaining the name of the other. I am a 'Ms' now, and I expect that that will not change.

As for the proposal, engagement rings etc, I guess I'll wait and see how it pans out. I would certainly not rule out proposing to him, but I won't say definitely whether or not I will because he reads this blog! If he proposed with an engagement ring, I would be happy. I love all jewelry, and I am a complete magpie when it comes to shiny things like diamonds. He knows this, and I suppose as long as he understands the terms on which I would wear such a ring, then I would be able to wear it happily.

This was a bit of a stream of consciousness post, but it is helpful to get these things written down. I often find that writing things down helps me to clarify my stance on various issues. I suppose what I want most is a day that my partner and I can look back on happily, and which fits in with our worldview and values system.

This is the reality of churches in middle England today.

2007-12-26T20:04:00.001Z

My partner's parents are devout Christians. This has caused problems on occasion in the past. However, things have got easier, and these days, the relationship between my (athiest) partner and his parents is generally good. We agreed to go to a carol service with them at their local church on the 23rd. The church itself was lovely, very simple inside, but lit by Christmas lights and candles, which made for a good atmosphere. The service was well-attended, and the carols were good.

Now on to the negatives. I had never realised that there were so many pro-life paternalistic, and patriarchal overtones in the Christmas story. During the readings, I became very uncomfortable with the messages which were being conveyed. Mary, for example, is given no choice in whether or not to carry God's child. Furthermore, when Joseph finds out that she is pregnant, he no longer wants to marry her, but is persuaded by an angel sent by God who assures him that Mary is 'unsullied' and therefore is fit for marriage. There were many other examples, and at some point I intend to read these Bible passages in detail, and then write a critique of the ideologies expressed.

The worst thing was however yet to come. The vicar at this church felt that it was appropriate to start his sermon by making jokes about the name "Mohammed", and encouraging the congregation to laugh (which they did). My partner and I were so paralysed by horror that all we were able to do was to stare at each other in disgust. If this is the sort of 'tolerance' of other religions which the Church of England practices today, then it makes me want to run as fast as possible in the opposite direction. I cannot believe that he is able to get away with that sort of reprehensible behaviour. The Church of England should be deeply ashamed of itself. I am certainly ashamed for it.

Christmas etc

2007-12-26T19:59:00.000Z

Well, I've had a very busy few days. First off, I went to the wedding of some good friends of my boyfriend's. It was a lovely day, and I wish them every happiness. Then, we went to my partner's parent's for a mock Christmas on the 23rd, which was good fun. We then travelled to my parent's house, where we spent the evening of Christmas eve, Christmas day, and today. I have eaten lots of delicious food, and drunk lots and lots! It has been wonderful to see my sister after so long (about 3 months).

So, apparently, women are not funny.

2007-12-21T16:31:00.000Z

This article made me really incensed. In order to find out this earth-shattering news, some dude cycled round round the streets of Norwich on a unicycle and 'measured' people's reactions. Scientific! Men were apparently more likely to make 'amusing' comments like "lost your wheel?" which I personally think is absolute proof that men have the upper hand in the funny stakes. Well done for advancing the frontiers of science, Professor Shuster.

Should paying for sex be illegal?

2007-12-21T14:26:00.000Z

I'm not totally sure how I feel about this. On one hand, it feels paternalistic and patronising to women to make buying/selling sex illegal. Surely we should allow women the bodily autonomy and self-determination to be able to make those choices for themselves? However, on the other hand, there is a massive problem in this country with young women being trafficked and forced into a life of prostitution. It is our responsibility as a society to protect these women, and ensure that they are able to escape this existence, and are then provided with the support that they need to go on and live healthy and fulfilling lives.

I feel very uncomfortable with the notion that it is ok for men to buy sex, because I feel that it reinforces the notion that women are commodities which can be bought and sold, and that men have some kind of entitlement to sex and to women's bodies. However, I feel that if we legalised all aspects of prostitution, making brothels conform to regulations, then there would be a greater level of protection for women involved in sex work. Whilst I don't feel that this is necessarily the best long-term solution, because as a society we need to tackle the reasons behind why men feel justified in buying sex from women, who are often (whether through choice or because of prejudices within our culture) on the fringes of society, and ostracised from everyday interaction with people.

The Golden Age of Couture at the V&A

2007-12-20T15:55:00.000Z

Dior's 'New Look' 1947

I finally managed to go and see this exhibition today. The exhibition at the V&A focusses on what Dior called 'the Golden Age of fashion', between 1947 and 1957 in Paris and London.

I have always had an interest in fashion, most particularly what fashion can tell us about people's roles and status within society, as well as social norms. I think it can be a useful reflection of key historical themes. Dior's 'New Look' was obviously the most influential development in fashion in the post-war period. It epitomised the desire to once again live luxuriously, and not be concerned with utilitarian garments, and rationing of fabrics, which had continued throughout the war years.

However, as I went round the exhibition, I was struck by how restrictive the garments were. Of course, they were often very beautiful items of clothing, very finely made, with intricate detailing, and fine fabrics. But, for me, I felt that they symbolised a greater desire within society for women to return to their traditional roles as wives, mothers, and sex objects. The fact that they had proved during the war years that they were capable of far more than this was conveniently forgotten. Christian Dior's 'New Look', which highlights feminine curves, and must be worn with a corset, was not designed for women to be active. So, although I enjoyed the exhibition, and I am very glad that I went, I felt that what I saw before me, when I looked at the fashions of the nineteen-forties and fifties, was a successful attempt by the fashion houses to re-emphasise the differences between 'masculinity' and 'femininity', and to remind women that their value and worth lay in their appearance, fertility, and culinary skills, and not in their ability to plough a field or put together intricate pieces of machinery.

Yum yum!

2007-12-20T15:51:00.000Z

I went to Tayyabs last night. It is an amazing Pakistani restaurant in Whitechapel. I recommend the lamb chops, naan breads, and Karahi Chicken Sag. I also had a delicious mango lassi which really cut through the spiciness of the food. Best of all, two of us ate for about £30!

Be warned though, this food is spicy, and they do not cater for people whose palates prefer something a little milder!

My changing attitudes towards abortion

2007-12-19T16:41:00.000Z

As I have said before, today I am completely and utterly pro-choice. It is not my place to make any kind of moral judgment about a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, whatever her reasoning is. It is absolutely none of my business.

I didn't always feel this way. Anna Clark wrote a fascinating post at RH Reality Check about her evolution from being "pro-life" to being pro-choice. Amanda Marcotte also has an interesting debate on this topic happening at Pandagon. I made the following comment;

Both this post, and the one at RH Reality Check were really interesting. I went through a similar evolution in my opinions on abortion. Although now I would identify totally as pro-choice, there was a time when, although I never described myself as ‘pro-life’, I felt uncomfortable with the idea of abortion being used unless it was in the case of rape or for medical reasons. I don’t really know what changed. I suppose I grew up and had sex, and realised that life is not as black-and-white as I had previously thought. When I look back, I can’t believe that I ever thought it was just or fair to pit a fully-formed adult woman with an independent existence, thoughts and feelings, with a fetus.

I suppose I wanted to expand on this point a little bit. In some senses, before I became sexually active, and was therefore forced to accept that an unwanted pregnancy was a risk for me, I was intellectually lazy about the whole issue. It is easier in many ways to believe that you are not one of the women who might have to have an abortion at some point in your life. You can feel morally superior to the women who do not live in the little bubble that you do. What I realised as I got older though, is that there is no particular type of woman who has an abortion. There is no particular reason why women have abortions, their reasons are as diverse as they are. And whilst I might never become a woman who has had an abortion, that doesn't mean that I shouldn't care about the rights, and the dignity, of women who have had to make that choice. After all, they are no different to me.

Just to add on a slightly different topic, someone in comments asked how pro-choicers should respond to the question, "why is it a baby when it is a planned pregnancy, and a fetus when it is unplanned?" Amanda Marcotte answered the question very well, by pointing out that we trust women to define their own experiences, so, for a woman who has being trying to get pregnant, she of course looks forward to the birth of her baby, and thus refers to it as such. In contrast, a woman who is faced with an unwanted pregnancy does not have that same happy anticipation of the birth. For her, it is only a fetus, and that it valid too. I would just like to add to the examples of self-definition that Amanda used. I think that a very good response to this question would simply be, "why is it 'sex' when you have consented, and 'rape' when you haven't?" Because people have different experiences, and so define those experiences differently.

Unicef photo of the year

2007-12-19T16:23:00.000Z

This picture just makes me feel sick. Melissa McEwan at Shakesville says all I would pretty much want to say. For me, this image, taken in Afghanistan and which has just won Unicef's photograph of the year, shows to me how far from success the Bush administration is in its supposed goals of spreading 'freedom' and 'liberty' globally. According to the Metro, 60 million girls every year are married whilst they are still children. How much more evidence do we need that Bush and his cronies do not give a shit about liberating people (perhaps especially women, given his stance on the Global Gag Rule), the only thing they care about is lining their own pockets.

One day, I hope that there are no more child brides, but I commend Unicef for once again bringing the world's attention to this very serious and distressing issue.

edited to add: the girl is 11 and the man is 40.

Female heart patients are losing out

2007-12-18T17:27:00.000Z

Why are women "less likely to receive standard medications for heart disease and less likely to be enrolled on rehabilitation programmes"? The BBC suggests that part of the reason that women lose out and more likely to die from the condition, is that they generally contract cardiovascular disease when they are older, and therefore fighting other diseases simultaneously. This may be true, but why are women being excluded from medical trials testing new drugs to treat this condition? Why are the recognised symptoms so male-orientated? Oh yeah, the women are excluded from all the studies on cardiovascular disease.

I think that this article reveals some very fundamental problems with the way in which we recognise and treat disease in this country. Of course, there are some diseases which only appear in males or females, for example testicular/cervical cancers. There are also some diseases which disproportionately affect one gender, for example breast cancer. But where there is clear evidence that both men and women suffer from a condition, why are we focussing all of our efforts on only one gender? Perhaps it would be easier for doctors to treat patients if there were 'men's diseases' and 'women's diseases', each with their own distinct symptoms and treatments. Unfortunately for them though, this is the real world. Men and women who suffer from the same diseases have different symptoms, and doctors should be equally capable of recognising the illnesses in both sexes. One gender does not have the 'proper' symptoms, whilst the other has only 'more subtle' shadows of the genuine symptoms.

Just because a woman is old, and potentially suffering from other illnesses too, why should she receive substandard care? I can't help but worry that one of the reasons that women don't receive the care that they deserve is that it does not have the campaigning potential that an illness like breast cancer does. I'm not saying that it is not important to fund breast cancer research and treatment, but the suffers of this illness are frequently young, in the peak of their reproductive years. They may have young children, large networks of friends and family who are able to advocate for them during these most difficult of times. Perhaps also our society's obsession with breasts contributes to the success and popularity of the breast cancer campaign.

So where does this leave women with diseases which aren't sensational in any way, who don't have celebrity endorsed poster campaigns, charity runs and media coverage? They affect older, less "camera-friendly" women? Are these people worth less? Cardiovascular disease in women should be treated as seriously and carefully as it is in men. The patient's age, gender or the fact that they have other illnesses should have no effect at all on the quality of the treatment that they receive.

Shorter Redwood: "If you know a man, you cannot say no to sex"

2007-12-18T15:34:00.000Z

The Daily Mail often has some gems on its pages, but this article deeply shocked me. John Redwood, a Tory MP, has, on his blog which I linked to, said the following;

...none of us want men to rape women, but there is a difference between a man using unreasonable force to assault a woman on the street, and a disagreement between two lovers over whether there was consent on one particular occasion when the two were spending an evening or night together. Labour’s doctrine of equivalence has led to jury scepticism about many rape claims, in situations where it is the man’s word against the woman’s and where they had agreed to spend the evening or night together. Young men do not want to have to take a consent form and a lawyer on a date, just as young women have every right to go on a date and to say “No”, having it respected.

OK, so basically, if your boyfriend/husband rapes you (incidentally, 'rape' means having sex without the consent of the other party - it has nothing to do with strangers and dark alleys), you are up shit creek. The police won't believe you anyway, and it is going to be impossible for you to persuade a jury beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant raped you.

I don't have all the answers. But I do know a couple of things. Firstly, the circumstances surrounding the act should have no effect on the culpability of the man. Whether the rape occurs in the context of a marriage of 15 years, or a so-called "stranger rape", it is the fact that the woman did not consent which matters. There is a massive flaw in the Sexual Offences Act here, which allows for the jury to take "all the circumstances" into account when assessing whether or not the defendant had a "reasonable belief in consent". This could technically result in men who have been brought up with a very misogynistic father for example, and who believe that all women should consent to sex immediately and without question, being found not guilty of rape, whilst, on the same set of facts, a man who is well aware of rape laws, the fact that women can (and do) refuse sex, could be found guilty. Obviously, this is unfair. The test should be an objective one, and the clause including "all the circumstances" should be removed from the statute.

Secondly, the Police should be compelled to investigate all allegations of rape. They should not be allowed to simply "no-crime" cases which they think will be too difficult to investigate, or for women that they simply do not believe. The Police are not the jury here, it is their job to investigate allegations of any crime.

Thirdly, I think that a national campaign to raise awareness of what rape is, how often it is committed, and that the victim is never responsible for what happened, even if she was flirting and wearing a short skirt, is vastly overdue.

John Redwood, you are a detestable disgusting man, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Feministing has more.

Yucky hospital food

2007-12-17T18:16:00.000Z

Why on earth can the government not see that having good, delicious, nutritious food is extremely beneficial both physically and mentally? I've never had a serious illness luckily, but even when I've just had a cold or something, I always try to focus on what I'm eating to make sure that I'm giving my body all the nutrients it needs in order to be able to recover. I can only imagine that this is waaaay more important if you are suffering from or recuperating from an illness serious enough to hospitalise you.

Prezzo

2007-12-15T20:38:00.000Z

I went to the Prezzo restaurant today. I was not impressed. We were shoved in a cold corner and ignored. Our food took forever to come, and when it did, my pasta was cold. Don't go there! The food is overpriced and the staff are rude!

Ok, rant over.

:-)

Simon Hughes, answer me!

2007-12-15T20:26:00.000Z

I have written two letters to Simon Hughes lately, one in September, and one in November. He has not replied to either.

Here they are:

1) Abortion
Dear Mr Hughes,

I am writing to you because I am concerned about the attempts of Nadine Dorries MP to restrict women’s access to safe and legal abortion, by reducing the time limit. I appreciate fully that the issue of abortion is a matter of conscience.

However, it is exactly because it is such a difficult and complex issue that I feel that women should be free to make the choices most appropriate to them and to their own personal circumstances. Furthermore, I think it important to remember that women who are desperate to access abortion will do so, and it is preferable to everybody that they should be able to do this both legally and safely.

Women must be allowed to have full autonomy over their own bodies. Indeed, it is grossly inappropriate for Parliament to attempt to pass restrictive legislation on this matter, given that it would be impossible for them to take each and every woman’s unique circumstances into account. Ultimately, these decisions must lie with individual women. In my opinion, it is the duty of Parliament to facilitate this freedom of choice by investing in women’s health care and education, and allowing women to make informed decisions about their own bodies.

A far more effective and “woman-friendly” way to attempt to reduce the already tiny number of late-term abortions in this country (about 1.6% I believe), would be to make access to early abortion on the NHS much simpler and quicker. Furthermore, GPs who conscientiously object to abortion should be compelled to make this stance clear, so that women’s ability to utilise abortion services are not hampered by an obstructive GP.

As a young woman myself, I feel very privileged to live in a country where it is possible to access abortion. However, I feel that these abortion laws must be reviewed, and it should be possible for women to access abortion without having to cast aspersions on her mental health, as she is currently forced to under UK law.

Making these positive changes to abortion laws in this country; improving access to abortion services, obliging GPs to state whether or not they support a woman’s right to choose, and removing the outdated caveat to our abortion laws which states that women’s mental health must be at risk before they are eligible for abortion, would make a massive difference to many women, and I believe, would further reduce the number of late-term abortions which are carried out.

I look forward to your response.

2) Rape
Dear Simon Hughes

I am writing to you because I am increasingly concerned about the low rate of conviction for rape in this country. Obviously, it is a difficult crime to prove, and I understand this. Furthermore, I understand that it is not the place of politicians to criticise the judiciary. However, there are some problems with the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which make it much harder for juries to convict rapists, and allows many perpetrators of this terrible crime to walk free. As an MP, you have a responsibility for the content of this Act, and I would like to put the following criticisms to you:

1) The definition of “consent” under s. 74 of the Sexual Offences Act is vague, and has led to a degree of confusion in court, particularly regarding the ability of a victim to consent to sexual intercourse when intoxicated. I think a larger section outlining the effect of intoxication on the ability of a person to consent to sexual intercourse needs to be included in this Act, so that the law is absolutely clear in this area.
2) S. 1 (2) of the 2003 Act is very problematic. The ability of the court to look at “all the circumstances” leading up to, and including the sexual act itself, means that this test of “reasonable belief” is not an objective test, as it should be, but a subjective test. This means that the jury are allowed to hear evidence from the defence that the victim was wearing a short skirt, or had been behaving flirtatiously, or that the victim had consented to sex with the defendant on a previous occasion. None of these are relevant factors in the ability of the victim to consent, nor should it affect the defendant’s “reasonable belief” in the victim’s consent. At the moment, we have a situation where a person’s ability to consent or not depends on their previous sexual relationships with the defendant and others, what they were wearing, and whether or not they have behaved flirtatiously in the past. Obviously, this is neither fair, nor good public policy. Furthermore, we have a situation where the victim is denied justice on the basis that the defendant is of low intelligence, has poor communication skills, or is young, for example.
Instead of having this test, which allows the defence to cast aspersions on the moral character on the victim (and usually means that the CPS will not take a case to court in the first place), the test should be whether or not the “reasonable person” would have believed that the victim was consenting to sex. This is a much fairer test, because it requires the jury to look only at the established facts of the case, and does not permit the defence to try to make allowances for the individual defendant, with the aim of an acquittal.

Many other criminal offences contain an objective test, which is considered much fairer. The Offences Against the Person Act for example, which has high tariffs, including life for s. 18 offences, has a lower requirement still. For conviction on s. 47 and s. 20 offences (as well as s. 18 in the alternative), the defendant must merely be reckless as to the level of harm which they have caused (i.e Simple assault, battery, or ABH).

Therefore, I feel that the argument about the concern that juries may convict innocent men of rape is unjustified, and is contradicted by another statute, which has high tariffs, but a lower mens rea element.

I would be very interested to know your opinion on this matter, which is of grave concern to many people in this country.

Please write back! Or I will come and see you in your surgery and ask you, firstly, why you don't think that replying to your constituents is important, given that you work for us and are accountable to us. Secondly, I will ask you for your considered opinions on abortion, and thirdly, I will ask you if you think that the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is working.

Chocolate

2007-12-14T17:42:00.000Z

Oh God I am having bad choccie cravings today. What I really want is a Gu chocolate pudding, or some Green & Blacks. Mmmm!

The pill available from chemists?

2007-12-14T17:18:00.000Z

This is some news which should fill you with Christmas cheer. Anything which widens access to contraception is good with me.

But, a couple of years ago, I needed to buy the morning after pill. I went into one pharmacy, actually it was a Sainsbury's pharmacy, and requested that I speak to the chemist about the morning after pill. The assistant went away and spoke to him, and then came back and told me that he would not come to speak to me "because it was against his beliefs, and he thought that emergency contraception was immoral". Several things incensed me about this:

1) He was male. My general view on issues to do with female reproduction is no uterus = no opinion. He is in the very privileged position of never worrying that he might be pregnant when he doesn't want to be.

2) He did not have the courage in his convictions to come and tell me himself. Instead he got his assistant to do his dirty work for him.

3) OK, he absolutely has a right to hold those views. I am not arguing with that. But, if you are not prepared to fulfill your duties as a chemist, then find another job.

4) It was fucking 5.30 in the sodding afternoon. I did not have the option to go somewhere else that day. (Luckily, I still had time to get up early the next morning, and go to the chemist, so all was well for me :-)) What if I had been at the end of the 72 hours when the pill is effective? He could well have been partially responsible for me having to make an extremely difficult decision, which (certainly according to his world-view) would be much more ethically murky.

So, although I think that this is potentially good news, I am worried that obstructive pharmacists like the one I met will prevent women from accessing the pill as easily as they should be able to. We'll have to wait and see!

Pesto

2007-12-11T11:13:00.000Z

Pesto is definitely one of my favourite foods! It is so simple to make too.

Couple of handfuls of basil
Handful of pine-nuts
Clove of garlic
Tablespoon of olive oil
Salt
Grated parmesan

Warm the pinenuts in a pan until lightly browned. Tip them into a pestle and mortar and grind them. Chop the basil a little and then add it to the pinenuts in the pestle and mortar. Add the salt and garlic. Grind until the mixture has formed a paste. Add the olive oil. I don't normally add much parmesan to my actual pesto - I prefer to grate it on top, but you could also add some of the cheese at this stage.

Serve on top of pasta, in sandwiches, on gnocchi or however you want!

Rape victim, aged 10, "probably agreed to have sex"

2007-12-10T15:42:00.000Z

Oh. My. God. I don't know a great deal about the Australian legal system, but I know that the reason that there are laws in place which state that children under a certain age do not have the capacity to consent. Therefore any sexual intercourse with them is rape. These laws are there in order to protect young people from being preyed upon by adults and (in some cases) older children.

Even if this 10-yr-old had consented to sex, her consent should mean nothing in the eyes of the law. Otherwise why do we have these laws in place?

This just makes me so sad, and simultaneously confirms why it is that I am a feminist. I can only hope that the victim manages to access the support she needs in order to rebuild her life, and that the judges and prosecutors involved are sacked.

Congratulations to Feministing!

2007-12-10T15:38:00.000Z

Feministing recently announced a big upgrade to become a community site. I think this will be awesome, and as a regular reader, I am very excited to see the changes. They managed to raise over $7000 in a few days, so they can go ahead with the upgrades now.

Weekend

2007-12-10T14:47:00.000Z

Holy shit Oxford street is awful at any time of year, but at Christmas time in the pouring rain? Words cannot describe it. I went there this weekend to do some Christmas shopping, and came away completely soaked and with only one out of the 6 pressies I needed to buy. Time for plan 2: internet shopping!

Bean burritos

2007-12-10T11:08:00.000Z

These are probably the least authentic burritos in the history of the world, but I love them, and they are ridiculously easy, so here is the recipe.

Serves 2
4 wholewheat tortillas
I tub of spicy tomato salsa
1 Red pepper, choppped
1 Red onion, chopped
1 can of refried beans
chopped chili (optional)
grated cheese
natural yogurt

Turn on the oven to about 200 degrees. Put the refried beans, red onion, red pepper, chili, and salsa inside the tortillas. Roll them up. Put in an ovenproof dish. Then put a couple of dessert spoons full of yogurt over the top. Grate cheese on top of that, and put in the oven for about 20 mins until the filling is heated through and the cheese is golden brown. Yummy!

You don't have to use yogurt at all if you don't want to. You could just add cheese, but I like the sourness it adds.

"Pro-sex, Pro-child, Pro-choice"

2007-04-13T11:01:00.000Z

This is just to let you know what I think about abortion.

I am fiercely pro-choice. I have never had an abortion, but I find it reassuring to think that if I were to find myself with an unwanted pregnancy, I would be able to decide to have an abortion if that is what I needed.

It is my body and it is my life. I am the one who would have to go through the physical, emotional and practical traumas of pregnancy. Therefore, I am the one who decides what happens with the pregnancy. Thats it.

Sue Palmer on 'This Morning'

2007-04-13T10:35:00.000Z

Ok, so I do sometimes watch 'This Morning', but, in my defense, it does cover quite a lot of topics which I feel are relevant to me as a young feminist. Today the author of Toxic Childhood, Sue Palmer was interviewed about the pressures which we as a society put our children under.

Now, I don't necessarily completely disagree with everything which she has to say, but there is one point which was made again and again on 'This Morning', that bastion of liberalism, which I felt compelled to pick up on. Contraception (including the morning-after pill) being prescribed to underage girls. Apparently this is inappropriate because it undermines the role of her parents. What? She would rather make sure that middle-England's parents sensibilities are not upset than ensure that young girls are given an opportunity to avoid an unwanted and potentially devastating pregnancy. What about the rights of the girl to control her own body? Perhaps we should trust her judgement and trust that she would have spoken to her parents about sex and relationships if she had felt able to. We are more concerned with the "rights" of her parents than the rights of teenage girls to make their own decisions about their own bodies.

This makes me sick. Refusing to provide young girls with contraception on demand does not prevent them from having sex, it just makes it more likely that they will become pregnant, or catch an STD. We should be providing children with comprehensive sex education from a young age, to ensure that they are properly equipped to deal with sexual relationships when the time comes. We should be making it easier for them to access contraception confidentially, and we should accept that teenagers have sex. They always have done and they always will do, and as long as they are aware of the risks, then it is not a problem, and in fact, it is none of our business.

Joke

2007-03-13T16:58:00.000Z

From my lovely boyfriend:

What do you call people who use the rhythm method?

Parents!

Abortion, sex education and privacy

2007-03-13T16:04:00.000Z

I am feeling pretty worked up about this article I read on the beeb earlier today. Why? Well, because it is frequently stated by experts that confidentiality is really important to teenagers seeking advice about sex, relationships, contraception and abortion. If the right to confidentiality is withdrawn, teenagers do not stop having sex. All we have to do is look to the United States to see proof of that. Many schools now only promote abstinence until marriage in place of comprehensive sex education. As a result, they have the worst teenage pregnancy statistics in the developed world, and a population which is woefully under-informed about sex and contraception. After all, a recent survey revealed that 95% of Americans have sex outside of marriage, so we can see that abstinence, despite being 100% effective, is in fact 95% unrealistic!

So, if we know that preventing teenagers from having sex is not going to work, what is the solution? Well, in my opinion, we need to extend our sex education programmes in schools, to make sure that nobody slips through the net. We need to make sure that the physical elements of embarking on a sexual relationship are thoroughly covered by professionals: school nurses, midwives and health visitors, and we need to also discuss the emotional implications with children and teenagers. Ultimately, we need to make sure that anybody deciding to have sex is able to do so knowing the risks involved. Without that knowledge, how can it possibly be described as 'informed consent?'

The above is the only viable way to go about trying to prevent teenage pregnancy and reduce abortion rates. We cannot justify impinging on the privacy rights of teenagers to satisfy the paranoid needs of their parents to know exactly what their activities are. If we educated young people comprehensively about sex, then I feel that we would be able to trust them to make the right decisions about their own bodies and their own lives.

As for the claim that "Parental information laws in the US are said to have resulted in a 15 to 20% drop in abortion rates for minors." What does that mean exactly? It doesn't claim that conception rates have dropped, which I think we can all agree, would be a positive effect, it claims that fewer young girls are accessing abortion services। Is this really a positive thing? If these young women want to carry the pregnancy to term, then of course they should be supported, but my concern is that right-wing pearl-clutching parents are preventing their daughters from using abortion services, and instead are determined to make their daughters face up to the 'consequences' of sex। Basically, they are punishing these young girls for having sex outside marriage by not allowing them to take responsibility for their own reproductive organs. Is this really the situation we want to be left with in this country?

The politics of street-parking

2007-03-12T10:46:00.000Z

Whilst I was writing the previous post, I heard an altercation outside in the street, with one man yelling loudly. Obviously, partly out of concern, and partly out of nosiness (I admit), I looked out of the window to see what was happening.

I have a lovely elderly Indian man as a neighbour, who has lived in the house next door for about 40 years. He had asked a young (white) man to move his car closer to the car in front, so that someone else would also be able to fit into the space which he was using. Now, knowing my neighbour as I do, I am certain that he would have been as polite and courteous as he was able. However, the young man decided to take issue with his request and started to verbally assault my neighbour. My neighbour said to him 'is this civilised behaviour?' which the young man leapt on as a 'racist insult'. I am really angry about this. This just screams of white male privilege doesn't it? How dare this elderly Indian man ask him to move his car? Doesn't he know that this young man can do what he likes, because he is superior in society?

I think this is one of the fundamental problems with our discourse about race in this country. I think that the term has been hijacked by people who resent attempts at equal opportunities. This is not the first time I have witnessed a white person use the 'race card' in an argument as a way of trying to discredit the opinions of their adversary. In contrast, I have never heard a person of an ethnic background accuse racism in this way. Now, of course, I am only one person, and so my experiences may well not be representative, but I feel very strongly that we are now deliberately misunderstanding the term 'racism' because, in fact, we are still deeply racist.

Now, I am sure actually that the young man did think that my neighbour was being racist. But I think it was because of several factors. This young man did not like being told that his method of parking was inconsiderate by an Indian man, whose English is a little accented, because he felt that his rights were more important than those of my neighbour, because he was born in this country. I think that this is very revealing about the deep-set opinions of this young man. He was unable to see past the colour of my neighbour's skin, and so for him, the issue became one of race. My neighbour, on the other hand, was shocked to be called racist, and I could see him reeling, because his simple request that this young man move his car forward by about 2 feet had been no more than that. There was no political, racial, or ideological motivation behind his request. As a resident of this street, where parking is very competitive, he was trying to ensure that the space was being used as efficiently as possible. The worst criticism of my neighbour is that he was being a busybody.

Perhaps we need to have a national poster campaign or something, to re-educate people about what constitutes racism?

Rape, Race and Prostitution; Campaigning for Justice in the 21st Century (Conference)

2007-03-12T09:42:00.000Z

I recently started volunteering at Crossroads Women's Centre in London, and they put on this inspiring conference in honour of International Women's day. Despite harrowing stories of women's personal experience of rape and domestic violence, as well as racist attacks, I felt that this event was very positive. There was a genuine sense of support for the brave women (and men) who stood up to talk about their experiences. It was interesting also to see the links between rape, race and prostitution, and the ways in which women are particularly disadvantaged in these fields.

I think we have got a serious problem in this country. The police are not taking rape seriously enough, putting pressure on victims to withdraw their accusations, 'no-criming' cases, and failing to investigate others fully, which means that the CPS is then unable to take these cases to court and win. We are not protecting women. It is difficult to know what the solutions are, but I think that we need to start making a really big fuss about the statistic that there is a rape conviction rate of 5.3% here. As women, we have to start standing up for our right to be able to walk around alone, late at night, drunk and wearing a short skirt, and not fear rape, or if the unimaginable were to happen, we should not doubt that the police would work their hardest to find our attacker.

As for racism and prostitution, these are simply not talked about enough. We like to live in a fantasy world where racism doesn't exist, and if it were to happen, the police would 'deal with it'. The reality is somewhat different. A brave asylum seeker from Somalia told us her story of being violently attacked by her neighbour, who called her all sorts of horrendous names, and smashed her nose in. When she called the police to her house, they arrested her husband, and let her attacker get away. If this doesn't prove the institutional racism in the police, then I don't know what does.

I think that the most revealing thing that can be said about our attitudes towards prostitution is that it is still the prostitute who is criminalised, rather than the punters who perpetuate this cycle of abuse and humiliation (as it is for the vast majority of prostitutes in this country, who have a history of childhood abuse, drug addiction, or who have been trafficked.)

I can't claim to have any solutions to these problems, but I feel that the first course of action for us all should be to accept that these are still problems, which particularly women face, and are impeding their ability to contribute fully to society as they are fully entitled to do.

Shilpa Shetty

2007-01-18T12:43:00.000Z

I don't watch Celebrity Big Brother, but I have been reading reports in the press all day about the appalling behaviour of housemates towards Shilpa Shetty. I think that this is a clear case of racism, and Channel 4 should be disciplined severely by the regulator. I would feel more comfortable living in a society where we call a spade a spade, and are able to find it in ourselves to accept that racism still exists, and we still have to strive for equality on race as much as we do for gender.

Welcome to my blog!

2007-01-17T20:32:00.000Z

Hi and welcome to my blog! I'm going to try to put something on this blog every few days at least. Mainly I guess I'll focus on feminism and gender issues, but I'll probably spill over into other left-wing issues from time to time too.

So...check back soon!