Each year, when advertising the march, we receive comments and emails asking whether Reclaim the Night London is open to trans women. We also received comments asking about this year's march on our recent piece on the women-only workshop at the Feminism in London conference. Although we have been told informally that trans women are implicitly included in the 'women only' label, it appears that the lack of public clarity surrounding this has lead to some confusion and resulted in some women - both cis and trans - feeling unable to take part in the march.

As discussed in the Feminism in London post, the use of the term 'women-only' is problematic because trans women cannot be sure whether the term includes them, given that society in general and some feminists in particular refuse to accept them as 'real' women. For this reason, we at The F Word think it would be helpful if the London Reclaim the Night march were advertised as being explicitly open to trans women. A simple amendment to the promotional material and website would widen participation in this important and significant feminist event. Trans women experience misogynist male violence - in addition to transphobic violence - and should be able to take to the streets along with cis women to protest against it.

So we passed readers' feedback and this suggestion on to RTN organisers at the beginning of October in the hope that the website could be amended for this year's march and that promotional material for next year's march will make it clear that trans women are indeed welcome. We have received no official response thus far.

Reclaim the Night is a fantastic event which F Word bloggers have attended and enjoyed in the past and we hope to be able to support a fully inclusive march in the future.

Yes, ladies, it's 'first ladette' Greer we have to thank for binge drinking, casual sex, high heels, violence against women, teenage pregnancies, the breakdown of holy matrimony, the loss of good ol' fashioned feminine demureness and the prospect of more women dying at sea should a large cruise liner hit an iceberg any time soon:

When the RMS Titanic sank in 1912, a large proportion of the female passengers survived, but 80 per cent of the men on board went down with the ship, doomed by chivalry. They had observed the code of 'women and children first' to the lifeboats.

Would that happen today? After the onslaughts of sexual equality, it seems unlikely. Anyone using such a term on a modern-day Titanic would probably find himself rapped on the shoulder by the ship's diversity champion and told he had uttered a sexist comment which would be investigated by the relevant authorities, just as soon as the lifeboats reached land.

In Shakespeare's day the gap-toothed country girl offering easy pleasure would later exact her price - the ball and chain of marriage.

Yet thanks to the messianic toil of the equality crowd, marriage has gone down the khazi, discarded by scowling intellectuals as a form of religio-sexual bondage, institutional sexism minted at the altar of a male-run religion.

And so women have been denied the financial and romantic security which came with marital vows. Women's lib gave men an excuse not to make a commitment and many of them promptly took it.

Hedonistic? Exciting? Novel? Daring? Germaine Greer's glory days were all of those. But the loss of dignity they entailed meant that the standing of women deteriorated.

With that, the conduct of men worsened. They no longer felt they owed their female acquaintances any sort of behavioural discount.

Statistics suggest that violent behaviour against women - and even by women against men - has risen. If women were to be treated equally, as Miss Greer demanded, surely it became no worse to hit a woman than a geezer. So certain cavemen seemed to think.

The very notion of being a gent became redundant if men and women were the same.

I almost feel sorry for the man.

Once again this is a real community response to domestic abuse and sexual violence and the Spinnaker tower will be coloured purple, we will be marching through Gun Wharf and then onto the streets of Portsmouth. At the Guildhall, we are hoping for refreshments and then the candle light vigil. We anticipate that the evening will end approximately 9pm.

The founders have created a petition requesting government funding as a matter of urgency, and would very much appreciate it if you could sign it.

The helpline number is 0800 5999 247.

a. To raise awareness and understanding of rape and sexual violence committed against women and girls. This will include exploding myths around rape and sexual violence and challenging public attitudes towards rape and sexual violence as symbolised by the low rape conviction rate;

b. By publicising the prevalence and effects of rape and sexual violence, provide a platform for campaigning for improved services in the Leeds area, thus striving to make safer and sustainable communities;

c. To build partnerships with national and Leeds based organisations and ensure Reclaim the Night Leeds is citywide;

d. To encourage and promote the participation of all women and work towards encompassing their diversity.

RTN organisers and supporters will be publicising the event on Briggate all day on Saturday 14 November, please do join them if you have some time to spare.

Hope to see some of you on the 28th!

Philippa has been blogging under the name of incurable hippie since 2004. She particularly addresses feminism, disability, lesbian identity and mental health issues on her blog, but has covered a great many topics over the years. She has been active in campaigning around domestic violence and rape, treatment of women in the legal system, asylum seekers and refugees, disability and mental health, environmental issues and in CND and the peace movements. She is a 32 year old woman living in the north of England and she likes photography, digital design, making zines, being in nature and mischief.

This questionnaire aims to collect some fresh information about what women think and know about rape. It is aimed at any woman, whether or not you have experienced rape, as we want to know what you think on this topic. We are using the word rape to mean unwanted sexual acts that you are willing to tell us about.

The information that we collect from this survey will be used to draw attention to women’s ideas about rape, what we want, whether we can find what we need after rape and what is happening in the law, from women’s perspectives.

You can find out more and take the survey here.

The UK Government is obliged to protect, respect and fulfil women’s human rights. As the 2010 general election is coming up and a change of government is possible, all political parties must address violence against women.

We need you to join hundreds of others in talking to your MP about the urgent need for an end violence against women strategy that ensures the same support and protection for all women - regardless of their immigration status.

At the moment, women who are of vulnerable immigration status have no recourse to public funds - so they cannot access refuges and have nowehere to go if they suffer violence. This must be overturned in order to ensure that all women in Britain have support services available to them. Find out more about the No Recourse to Public Funds rule.

Click here for details on how to get involved.

The day kicked off with a talk from former MP for Sheffield, Helen Jackson, who identified climate change and lack of education as the biggest threats to women's liberation globally. She then focused on women's rights in the UK, highlighting workplace discrimination and the need to recognise that grandparents are also negatively affected by our long hours, inflexible working culture. She pointed out that women's unpaid caring work impacts on our ability to earn within this culture, despite the fact that the value of unpaid care of older people alone is estimated at £58 billion, and argued that no one should have to suffer financially for making the right decisions for their families, communities and health. These messages need to be heard by politicians and decision makers, but in her experience this will only happen if more women are able to access these powerful roles.

The second, incredibly moving speech was given by Marie-Claire Faray-Kele, a member of WILPF and spokeswoman for their Voices of African Women Campaign. She highlighted the devastating effects of colonialism and the violent masculinity of patriarchal capitalism on African societies, arguing that the oppression of women - often pushed through Western religion - has been one of the key mechanisms by which the colonisers destroyed and fractured African nations. 90% of African women now experience domestic violence, and in her home country of Congo, girls are confined to the home or married off when they reach puberty - sometimes dying or being severely injured in childbirth - due to a lack of sanitary products and contraception, as well as patriarchal attitudes towards women and girls.

She focused on women as courageous resisters, however, who have to fight on multiple levels to get their voices heard: they are ignored by their own male-dominated communities; by disempowering aid agencies who set their own agendas rather than listening to the needs of local people; by international bodies and the UN, who listen only to men; by multinational corporations, international financial organisations and foreign governments who fuel civil wars and support oppressive regimes in order to exploit Africa's resources; and by all of us in the West who fail to challenge our governments' policies and fuel the demand for illegal exploitation of resources such as the mineral coltan, used in mobile phones and games consoles, by our unnecessary levels of consumption. Their fight is made all the more challenging by language barriers, as many women cannot speak French, let alone English.

At present, no one but WILPF is supporting Congolese women at an international level. Marie-Claire asked that we do all we can to make these women's voices heard. You can do so by writing to your MP asking them to support the Declaration of African Women and joining WILPF and supporting their campaign.

Jean Lambert MEP then talked about the impact of anti-trafficking legislation on women across Europe, highlighting the anti-Islam bias in much discourse on migration (such as the conflation of forced and arranged marriage) and the campaign to ensure migrant women are granted independent legal status. At present many women's status - and therefore every other aspect of their lives - is dependent on the male 'head of household'. Currently it is less risky to traffic people for sexual and labour exploitation than to traffic drugs, and this needs to change.

Ann Hamilton, vice-chair of the End Violence Against Women campaign picked up on the trafficking theme, arguing that a recent Guardian article asserting that the lack of sex trafficking convictions is proof that sex trafficking is extremely rare is entirely wrongheaded. Glasgow's anti-trafficking project, TARA, has seen 50 victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation this year alone, but the women's fear and shame and the police's failure or inability to class them as trafficking victims means there have been no convictions; this doesn't mean sex trafficking is a myth. Ann also highlighted the work that has been done in Glasgow to address violence against women and tackle prostitution, and will hopefully be guest blogging for us on the latter in the future.

There was an opportunity to discuss all the issues raised in workshops, where we agreed on actions we could take collectively or as individuals to push for positive change - a great idea, as I've sometimes been frustrated by the lack of opportunity to use the information I've gained from other conferences in a constructive way - and I got some seriously good feminist networking done! Well done to all involved.

We're still getting regular comments on the street harassment post I wrote last year, so I was delighted to hear that a Hollaback UK site has just been started by Laura C:

Inspired by HollaBack NYC, and a recent disturbing incident on the London Underground, HollaBackUK has been launched as a place for UK women to Holla Back at street harassers.

No matter where you are, who you are, or what you are wearing, you have the right to feel safe. Holla back at street harassers, let them know that we won't stand for it!

You can email or text photos and stories to hollabackuk01[at]gmail.com.

Image by arimoore.

The report paints a picture of a modern, working father who feels miserable about the proportion of time he is able to devote to his children, but who is too nervous to demand flexible working from his employers. About two in five men fear that asking for flexible working arrangements would result in their commitment to their job being questioned, and would negatively affect their chances of promotion. Although men are entitled to two weeks' statutory paternity leave (at £123.06 a week), 45% of men did not take it, with most saying they would have liked to. The most common reason was because the fathers felt they could not afford to.

It's clear that paternity leave needs to be extended in order that men have an equal opportunity to women to spend time with their children and that women do not have to bare the brunt of workplace discrimination against parents. The new plans to allow men to take 6 months' paternity leave after the mother has taken 6 months (which came at the expense of extended maternity leave) may help, but a more flexible system where the leave can be split according to parents' needs would be better. And men will need to step up and take what they are entitled to.

In a particularly blinkered and unhelpful article in The Times today, Eleanor Mills argues that working mothers in Britain are getting 'greedy' about maternity pay and are making life harder for others by giving employers no choice but to discriminate against women of child-bearing age, but she completely fails to take fathers' roles into account. If any person, regardless of gender, could potentially take paid time off work to look after a new child, this practice would stop, as employers wouldn't know who to discriminate against. It's the focus on mothers as the primary care giver that is the problem, plus the lack of state-sponsored and affordable childcare and work-based creches. Implementing serious change in all these areas would benefit everyone: mothers, fathers, children and even employers, who could keep their existing staff if childcare were provided. I just wish the business bodies would get it into their heads that there'd be no workers in the future if employees didn't have children.

I am absolutely livid. Why the hell should my boyfriend be assumed to be financially responsible for me? Why is the benefits system based on such an old-fashioned understanding of the way people live today? Plenty of people I know live in shared houses with their friends and partner, why should they be denied JSA when the housemates who aren't in a sexual relationship would be eligible?

I'm now £200 out of pocket and in debt because I was initially told I was eligible and had to spend that money to be able to live without financially burdening anyone else. The irony of the situation is my boyfriend couldn't actually afford to be financially responsible for me anyway, whereas our other housemate would be quite happy for me to live with them without contributing as he earns more money. Yet it's my sexual relationship with my boyfriend that apparently matters so damn much. We don't own each other. We are independent individuals, not a bloody two headed, one bank-accounted entity and I'm appalled that the government cannot recognise that.

I'm writing to my MP stat.

PinkStinks is a campaign and social enterprise that challenges the culture of pink which invades every aspect of girls' lives.

This site is for parents, and aims to gather support, promote discussion and ultimately to mobilize that support to influence marketeers and the media about the importance of promoting positive gender roles to girls.

Research tells us that self-esteem amongst girls is at its lowest ever and we are asking WHY?

We believe that body image obsession, is starting younger and younger, and that the seeds are sown during the pink stage, as young girls are taught the boundaries within which they will grow up, as well as narrow and damaging messages about what it is to be a girl.

We will redress the balance by providing girls with positive female role models chosen because of their achievements, skills, accomplishments and successes.

On this website you will find our continually growing list of real role models. Let's educate, inspire and motivate our girls.

It makes me so mad that both girls and boys are limited by the way their toys, activities and clothes are marketed, and I hope the founders of Pink Stinks and other like-minded parents can successfully fight back against what appears to be a growing trend.

You can join PinkStink's facebook group here.

Image by jakerome.

Changing licensing laws will allow local authorities to apply crucial controls and bring greater transparency to the industry - protecting both women who work in lap dancing clubs and women who live or work near lap dancing clubs. It willl give local communities back their say in licensing processes - a say which has been severely restricted by the Licensing Act 2003.

But, argue Object, the proposals are 'seriously flawed':

...they will be optional, creating a postcode lottery in which only some councils consider licensing in relation to gender and sexism - and contain a frequency based exemption, which will create a large loophole for the growing number of leisure venues putting on lap dancing / stripping nights.

The proposals will be debated in the House of Lords on November 3rd, and Lord Norton wants your opinion. Let him know what you think here. If you want to get involved in Object's campaign, see here for more information on how to lobby peers and MPs.

The People's Award is part of the Home Office's 2009 Annual Justice Awards, which recognise excellence within the criminal justice system. Voting opens on Thursday 15 October and closes at midnight on Friday 16 October, with the winner announced at a London ceremony on Tuesday 20 October. Harpreet's role is unique within the field of sexual violence, working primarily with south Asian women who have been raped or sexually attacked. As well as providing care to those who attend the Haven, in Whitechapel, east London, she also offers training and outreach help to community organisations working with south Asian women.

Haven manager Elizabeth Harrison praised Harpreet, saying she had transformed the lives of many of the women she has helped. Elizabeth explained: "She does fantastic work here. Since her post began, we have seen the number of south Asian women returning for follow-up care double. We're really proud of what she has achieved here
for the women who are so vulnerable within this community. "She has worked exceptionally hard to ensure that all south Asian women know that we are here, regardless of whether or not they have reported their attackers to the police. This means they can access medical care and psychosocial support here within the Haven."

You can read more about Harpreet here.

To vote for Harpreet, text HARPREET to 84080. Or telephone 0901 229 4091 and press 04. Texts cost 25p plus your standard network rate and phone calls from a BT landline cost 25p. Poll closes midnight tonight.

Nichola Pease, who runs the fund manager JO Hambro, told the committee that equality legislation in Britain was preventing women from getting the top jobs in the City. She said that many firms were scared of hiring women because penalties for successful sex discrimination claims were unlimited.

So how about they don't practice sex discrimination and sexual harassment then?!

The main focus of the article is the need to tackle the macho, sexist culture of the banking world in order to increase women's participation. (Which I think is a worthwhile cause, but simply enabling a very small minority of women to access high paying jobs isn't going to address the wider issue of the gap between rich and poor - which affects a far greater number of women - that is so obviously reflected in the City's greed and bonus culture.)

* A disability kindy (pre-101) series for people who are new to disability rights activism

* Disability 101 for kindy graduates

* A series of basic intersectionality posts specifically for feminists who are new to disability issues

* Consciousness-raising posts about identifying as a person with disabilities

* Discussions about how people without disabilities and feminists without disabilities in particular interact with people with disabilities

* Disability news quick-hits on ongoing disability issues in the news

* Link roundups featuring disability news and writing on disability issues from around the Internet

* Discussions about the language of disability rights activism, from differing terminology used internationally to the specific language used by individual groups which advocate for disability rights

* Posts about the disproportionate amount of sexual, physical, and social abuse targeted at women with disabilities

* Posts about people with invisible disabilities and mental illnesses and challenges unique to those groups

* Posts about the relationship between disability rights activism, social policy, and the law

* Discussions of how to be an ally to feminists with disabilities

* AND MORE!

The blog looks extremely comprehensive and well-organised and the latest post, which explains why disability is a feminist issue, might be a good place to start if you're new to the subject.

"It's horrible, there's nothing else to describe it," says Nana A Tamakloe, founder of Confidence Model Management, which has a diverse range of models on its books. "The image says we'd rather turn a European model white than hire a black model."

There's been no response from the magazine.

Germany's most popular women's magazine, Brigitte, has banned professional models from its pages and will feature only 'real life' women with their own identities - from footballers to musicians - from now on:

"From 2010 we will not work with professional models any more," said Andreas Lebert, editor-in-chief, adding that he was "fed up" with having to retouch pictures of underweight models who bore no resemblance to ordinary women.

"For years we've had to use Photoshop to fatten the girls up," he said. "Especially their thighs, and decolletage. But this is disturbing and perverse and what has it got to do with our real reader?"

He said the move was a response to complaints by readers who said they had no connection with the women depicted in fashion features and "no longer wanted to see protruding bones".

"Today's models weigh around 23% less than normal women," Lebert said. "The whole model industry is anorexic."

Sounds like a positive initiative within the obviously problematic context of focusing on women's bodies, but I think it should be remembered that models are 'real life' women too. Pushing the idea that 'real women have curves / don't look like that' is just another form of judgemental body fascism.

Designer Karl Lagerfeld has responded by claiming that people prefer to look at skinny women and those who complain about the size zero trend are just jealous chubbies:

"These are fat mummies sitting with their bags of crisps in front of the television, saying that thin models are ugly," Lagerfeld said in an interview with Focus magazine. The creative director of the fashion house Chanel added that the world of fashion was all to do "with dreams and illusions, and no one wants to see round women".

Lagerfeld seems so absorbed in this poisonous world that he's become completely removed from reality. With the pressure to be curvy and sexy on one side - thanks to the 'real women have curves' and lads' mags brigades - and to diet ourselves into skinny oblivion on the other, women just can't win.

Those who support the proposals are calling for the registration and mandatory HIV testing of sex workers - 50% of whom are estimated to be infected with the virus - meaning only those who pass the test will be able to legally engage in sex work. South African sex workers' rights and advocacy group SWEAT explain why mandatory HIV testing is not in sex workers' best interests:

Window periods in which infections cannot be detected

It is common knowledge that certain diseases, such as HIV, can exist in the body for a certain period without being picked up in medical tests. The virus can be transmitted during this period. A client who expects a sex worker to be free of STI's because he/she has a health certificate stipulating this, may be more likely to insist on unprotected sex and may become infected. Mandatory testing thus increases the risk of contracting HIV rather than minimising this risk.

Violation of rights

The South African Constitution guarantees the right not to be unfairly discriminated against, the right to dignity, the right to privacy, and the right to freedom and security of the person. All these rights would be violated by laws requiring sex workers to have compulsory checkups.
Furthermore, compulsory testing for HIV contravenes the HIV/AIDS Charter.

Sex workers are made responsible for the spread of HIV & STI’s

Requiring sex workers to undergo mandatory health checks places the responsibility for the transfer of STI's solely with the sex worker. The medical fact that male clients are more likely to infect female sex workers is ignored.
By requiring only sex workers to have check ups, authorities are stating that they are not interested in the health of the sex worker but are merely concerned with the health of the client.
Furthermore, by criminalising sex workers who are infected, authorities discourage sex workers from being tested.

More here.

HIV/AIDs campaigners have spoken out against the proposals, arguing that the government should not be prioritising concern for foreigners over its own citizens:

"The clear way forward to help tackle the tens of thousands of women forced into prostitution through poverty is to legalise it now, not to make it a temporary measure for the World Cup," said Vuyiseka Dubula of the Treatment Action Campaign.

"We need prostitution decriminalised now so we can start to help these women, many of whom have been abused and brutalised from a young age."

I guess it's too much to ask that football fans try and find it within themselves to keep it in their pants and not risk perpetuating that abuse.

The thing that Brucie and his ilk so stubbornly fail to understand is that the cultural memories of centuries of abuse do not evaporate quickly. They are what Barack Obama called the "legacy of discrimination" - an inheritance which becomes for so many a legacy of defeat.

The reactions of the "lighten up" brigade come down to that lazy inability to see that just because a word is spoken — or a sketch performed — in non-malicious jest, it can nonetheless cause deep hurt and offence. Perhaps in the mouth of Anton Du Beke, "Paki" is merely half the word Pakistan, as it is to many who have stormed the talkboards. But in the ear of others, "Paki" is something quite different. It is the word that once rained down in playgrounds or football terraces or streets, and frequently still does in our far-from-civilised society. The stubborn refusal to admit to those historic associations is a tacit perpetuation of them. This is how, long after legislation has addressed the wrongs of the past, one generation still manages to pass the discrimination furtively on to the next.