What difference does wearing black actually make?

by Laura McAdam

I get asked this a lot. People love the idea and then you see the thought seep into their mind, but what good will wearing black on Thursdays actually do?

I guess that people have different reasons and hopes when they take on this kind of ritual. Here are a mine:

Sadly, I know that I need a visible, tangible reminder of all that my eyes have been opened to. Every Thursday, after finding clothes each of complimentary blacks (you'd be amazed how many shades there are...) I remind myself that I'm privileged to have such a choice. As I catch myself in the mirror which prompts me to think how much black washes me out, I'm reminded of the safe and healthy world I live in. Ok, so wearing black isn't the biggest sacrifice nor a painful choice, but it is a nudge in the right direction for me.

When I was in India and heard about this movement, predominantly in the southern hemisphere, I was moved to join with people around the world who quietly, peacefully stand for justice and equality. And when I hear of people who take part in South Africa, Scotland, Sierra Leone and many other places I see the bright side of our globalised world. Furthermore, when you tell a woman in Uganda or Jerusalem that there's a load of people who choose to take a weekly action to remember their cause and stand alongside them, and you see the tears in their eyes as they realise they are not alone... well. Trust me, it makes it mean something.

Finally, it's about the principle. I'm not the most intelligent writer, nor have I individually got much political clout, I don't have enough money to improve the lives of half the world's population and I'm not going to get a chance to do a speaking tour around the world to change hearts and minds any time soon... But add my voice, my pennies and the simple fact of 'knowing' to the tens of thousands of others who give a damn and look, we have a stirring. We have a movement of people who have decided that the way the world works isn't fair and that they must do something, however basic. Occasionally this simple action prompts more and we have some peaceful activitism occurring. And peaceful activism has some form, dontchaknow...

So yes, I'm sure everyone has different reasons and hopes when they do something like this. But this International Women's Day, if I could quietly ask you to do something?

Catch yourself in the mirror. Consider that you're part of something global, and do what you can to stand in solidarity with those fighting for peace and justice. Even if it's just something simple.

And another thing...

And check this out!



Laura

100 Years... and we still need International Women's Day

This Tuesday 8th March will mark the 100th Anniversary of International Women's Day.

Are you doing anything to celebrate/commiserate?

Extra blog contribiutions are very welcome. Here's one nicked from the Guardian to get us started...

Laura McAdam

Papers and Peer Pressure

by Susie Burdett

I had thought that I would blog to celebrate the creation of UN Women, the new UN organisation that has taken over operations for gender equality from the previous four organisations of the UN that were once dedicated to women's issues. I was going to talk about some projects, such as Prosperity Candles, or a shelter in Ethiopia, that are some of the positive initiatives occuring in complex political contexts. But then this article, about toilets, worked to combine a few of the random loose threads circling my brain.

Those loose threads can be effectively summed up in the picture at the top of this article.

So how do I get from toilets to Julia Roberts? Well, simple really. The International Development Enterprises (IDE) are trying to improve sanitary conditions in Cambodia and at the same time provide economic opportunities for local businesses. They do this through the somewhat controverisal method of shaming people into using a toilet. Sanitary conditions are a major problem in Cambodia. For the sake of those of a more sensitive constitution, I won't go into detail, but previous attempts to improve conditions by giving toilets away have failed. By shaming people into wanting a toilet, the IDE hopes to create the motivation to use it, and having developed an easy to build model, they have given local businesses a chance to build and sell the toilets, thus increasing economic activities at the same time as improving living conditions.

On the other hand is a photo of Julia Roberts dressed to impress which was widely ridiculed in the press due to the naturally occuring axillary hair clearly on display. Media, whether that be the newspapers, movie (both mainstream and x-rated) makers or magazines, continuely subjected people to images of a a supposed ideal of man and womanhood. Media has helped make plucking, shaving, trimming and shaping of body hair the norm, and have transformed plastic surgery to an aspiration for many seeking this apparent model of perfection, rather than a valuable tool allowing those suffering terrible injuries and disfigurements to lead normal lives.

Whilst I may find a narrow definition of beauty - and indeed the stress on the importance of beauty over other, more practical virtues - uncomfortable and distasteful, I am not actually condemning the beauty industry or the media (and cultural) obsession with celebrity and beauty - I am in no position to cast the first stone. My point is, if media can change the beauty ideal from the hairy men and women found in, say, The Joy of Sex to the plucked, buffed and toned actors, actresses and models we see on film, TV and in magazines, what else could they do?

Media, particularly social media, has been vital to raising awareness of conflict and tragedies around the world - as has been clearly highlighted by the news coming from Tunisia and Egypt, but it has also used peer pressure and shame to inflict and impose a narrow view of gender. It is clear how powerful media is as a force for creating change and raising awareness. How much change could they do for the good if, rather than using shame to inflict one way of being a woman (or man), they celebrated humanity, condemned injustice and encouraged equality? Both the media and the IDE use shame in their tool kit. But what a difference in the results!

A Note to Men

by Richard McAdam

Gentlemen.

Is for you the word 'feminism' burdened with negative connotations? Does it foster in your manly breast prejudice and resentment, and elicit little more from you than a cocky rolling of the eyes and the arching of an insouciant brow? Does it conjure up images of angry, shrill lesbians daring to express outrage at invisible injustices? Then let me, as one man to another, prescribe the following course of action: through rigorous self-examination, self-education and self-flagellation, you resolve to STOP BEING AN IDIOT, and with the aid of some sort of neuro-linguistic programming adopt a deep and irrefutable notion that the above reactions to the f-word are clear and present symptoms of your BEING AN IDIOT. YOU IDIOT.

What this does not mean: adopting 'feminist' views as a means-to-an-end, paying lip service in order to get some 'lip service' ifyouknowwhatImean. (I mean kissing). It does not mean merely affecting outrage at the objectification or oppression of women when you are not possessed of any true and tangible notion of what that actually means, on any real and visceral level. It does not mean insisting on workplace equality and settling for that as being the only kind of equality that is important. It does NOT mean spouting hollow homilies on the strength and individuality of women or the beauty of the female form whilst at the same time clinging to an idea of them as possessions, convenient accessories for your ego. Don't kid yourself that the men who inflict the horrific physical and emotional violence in the stories from distant lands are some sort of different species, 'monsters' completely alien to your idea of yourself. We might not all necessarily be nurturing the capacity for that sort of cruelty; but that sort of cruelty has been born of these sorts of attitudes.

Why does it not mean these things? Because, ultimately, it's you, as a man, being oppressed; it's you, as a man, suffering the inequality and the prejudice. Not as a result of some numinous notion of human 'togetherness', but because this attitude directly diminishes you. You are a victim of your own discrimination, because what you excise when you decide that you will view women as anything other than equal is a fundamental function of your self. And no, you are not destroying your 'feminine spirit' – you are destroying your 'masculine spirit'. You just need to adjust your idea of what 'masculine' means.

Let me offer you up a contemporary role model: the motion-picture actor Ryan Gosling. Here at Mr. Hugo Schwyzer's blog (a site I'd recommend you delve deep into as part of your self-education), Mr. Schwyzer suggests Mr. Gosling's characterisations as presenting 'a new kind of masculine ideal', because 'he plays flawed and complex men whose tender decency is always at war with his compulsions and his rage,' and not 'overgrown boys'.

The skills needed to fight that war, and to achieve the goals of altering/enhancing/maintain your attitudes toward women are conveniently concomitant with the skills required to be fulfilled and happy. (Or the act of striving to cultivate those skills is in itself fulfillment and happiness, probably, or something.) They are the skills that will, ultimately, make the world a better place. Responsibility, kindness, maturity, and a balance of stoicism and sensitivity. These shall be your goals and your rewards.

Also, girls will like you more, you idiots.

Dates and Women

No, this blog isn't about the effects of a sticky fruit on women, or a guide to how best to romance a potential date, but is a kind of follow up to my last post International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. The article "Dates and Women" on the BBC website was sent to me as possible inspiration for a blog post, and it seemed a suitable subject as a follow up. I encourage any and all readers of this blog to take a peek, if only to save me having to regurgitate the whole argument!

Farai Sevenzo writes a passionate and meaningful article about the need to go beyond dedicating days to women, and to look to making marked attidudinal changes to women's position, status and education. He argues that whilst dedicating days to raising awareness of women's issues is a start, we have to make changes in our own outlooks, and to bring about real differences, promote change and go further than the odd flashpoint of interest.

Whilst I agree with much of what Mr Sevenzo says, what strikes me most about the article are the comments left by readers at the bottom of the article. I feel that these highlight how our own points of view affect how we interpret the world. Among the comments left is praise from a Social Scientist, glad to shaken out of theoretical inertia and many comments from women from all over Africa speaking in support of dedicating dates to the issues they, and their sisters across the world face. But I think that two comments in particular jump out at me, one from an African woman who seems a little defensive, criticising Mr Sevenzo for discussing days dedicated to women, rather than commenting on the number of other days dedicated to other causes. She expresses no surprise that the article is written by a man. The last post (or at least at the time of writing this blog) comes from an British woman, who expresses her thanks that an African man points out the need for change, and for a new approach to the ending of gender discrimination.

I think these two posts in particular highlight the difference a persons perceptions can have on how they read this article - on one hand a lady who feels aggreved that a man should suggest that days dedicated to womens causes are not final solution to gender discrimination, and on the other hand we have a lady who agrees that we need to change our attitudes and awareness, not just on one or two important dates, but in general. The way we feel about an issue, and about the wider world, can affect how we view a certain situation. I am no exception to this. Doubtless I have read the post in a different way in which you may have done. This is what I get out of this story. Until we look critically at how we view the world, question our own assumptions, learn, educate others and fight inertia in the face of discrimination, real change will not happen, no matter how many Women's days there are. Last year was the centenary of the International Day to Eliminate Violence Against Women. Lets hope that by next anniversary there has been some real, positive change in the value women are held in, a reduction in discrimination and violence against women, and an improvement in their education.

International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women

By Susie Burdett

The United Nations has declared the 25^th November as the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and marks the beginning of the 16 days of Activism Against Gender Violence Campaign. Which seems as good a time to blog as any!

But the difficulty is what to blog about. I could talk about the abuse women suffer at the hands of those at home, by strangers, and even, in some places, by the authorities. I could discuss the use of such cruel punishments as flogging and the death penalty (or even just the death penalty itself). The choice is (sadly) almost endless, but I think I’m going to take inspiration from the root of the day, and see where it takes me…

The 25^th November isn’t just a random date chosen from the 365 available, but is the anniversary of the assassination of the Mirabal Sisters. Patria, Minerva and Maria Teresa were three sisters (their fourth sister is still alive and curates a museum dedicated to them) heavily involved in the resistance against the Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo, who ordered their assassination. On the 25^th November, after a visit to their husbands in prison, the three sisters, plus their driver, were dragged into a sugar cane grove then beaten and strangled to death. This marked the beginning of the end for Trujillo, who was assassinated a year later.

The Mirabal Sisters are just some of the many female political campaigners who dedicate their lives, sometimes at great danger to themselves, to promote democracy, equality or justice. Women all over the world, in many different ways, have, do and will continue to fight for what they see as right. From the Suffragettes of late 19^th/early 20^th Century Britain, to women participants in collective action in the South America, Asia and Africa, women have and do fight to promote democracy.

Political participation, however, continues to be problematic for the female sex. Women who wish to actively participate in politics continue to face challenges and obstacles, even when they have gained the right to vote and to stand in government. In Afghanistan, for instance, female candidates face intimidation and often violence during their campaigns. For one candidate, this intimidation ended in tragedy when five of her campaigners (all male) were killed.

Even in countries with a longer history of equal participation, such as the US, women candidates face obstacles in their campaign. This article shows how news media in the US treat male and female candidates differently. Female candidates not only receive less coverage, but their coverage concentrates more on their viability as candidates than their issue positions, and to further compound their chances, their viability coverage is more negative than their male counterparts (for instance, we are likely to be able to say more about the likelihood of Christine O’Donnell being a witch than on her political beliefs). With this kind of coverage, the general public, who are often dependent of the news media for their information on candidates, are more likely to form a negative opinion of female candidates than their male opponents.

But let us be more positive for a moment. Where there is success for female activists, and there are many successes, the benefit isn’t just to them, or just to women, but to the whole of their communities, country and to the wider world, who in today’s global communication era are touched by the efforts of others. This week we have also seen the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, whose decades long campaign to bring democracy to Burma, which has come at such a huge personal cost, has brought international attention to the plight of the Burmese people, and whose release will hopefully bring fresh hope to the people of Burma.

I realise that I have strayed from the theme of eliminating violence against women, but I firmly believe that without democratic privileges, women will not be free from violence, as they will not be able to hold to account the people who perpetrate that violence without the mechanisms which democracy gives them. Democracy is also an appropriate subject, as for many prominent female political campaigners (as well as make campaigners), violence and aggression are common tools employed to silence them.

I have always said that I will cast a vote at every opportunity given to me, because people have fought to give me that right and people continue to fight for that right, facing intimidation, aggression and violence. Voting is a privilege I am lucky to have, and with privilege comes responsibility.