Comments from March 2008
Reader reactions to features and reviews for March
From Sarah
Thank you for posting such an honest and insightful look at prostitution.
Ekis, author of the article, replies
Thank you so much for the comment. I'm writing a book on the subject and therefore researching a lot of these "activist groups". What I've found so far, it's a big scam. Oh yes, there are prostitutes who do believe legalizing will make it better and who honestly fight for it, but if you compare the number of them to how many times they get quoted in the media, it's like one to 500.
And that also has to do with the internetization of media - today a stressed-out journalist with no previous knowledge who is doing a piece on prostitution, can easily surf his way into an "activist prostitute" who will answer the mail in a couple of hours with answers like "We, the prostitutes, want the same rights as everybody else." Of course! But what nobody does is search behind; who are these people actually, how many are they, who do they represent - and do the prostitutes who are living in hell have a website where you can ask them questions about it? They have no voice whatsoever. At all. It kind of lies in the nature of the subject. If you have misery, people will be silenced by misery itself. Natasja, who is dead now - there was no way any journalist would have made his way through to her. I happened to rent a room in the same house as her, that's how we made friends.
Another strange thing is, the "activist groups" you mentioned are often presented as trade unions although, I've never heard of a trade union which tries its best to hide the exploitation and violence. In all other sectors, trade unions expose the problems and confront employers. In this case however, the john is "such a nice person" and prostitution is great fun - all that needs to complete the paradise is legalisation! If you think about it, not even the most popular jobs are expressed that way by their trade unions. Which makes you think something is not just the way it seems.
From Jennifer Drew
The article How To Get An Activist Movement to Keep Women In Prostitution is excellent. The writer through the words of prostituted women shows how the very vocal and porn financed groups have changed the meaning of words such as 'choice, freedom' individual accountability etc.' Now slavery does not exist it is simply a 'choice.' Johns are no longer Johns but customers. Pimps and traffickers are simply business entrepeneurs. Individualism is a convenient term because it deliberately hides how societal disadvantages affect predominantly women but not men. I do not see large groups of men entering prostitution because it is 'empowering.' 'Choice' is no choice when so many women have no other option but to become prostituted women in order to survive. This is not 'choice' as this article clearly proves but rather is the normalisation and increasing acceptance that men as a group should continue to have the right to buy women's bodies in order to rape and sexually abuse them.
From Outrage
No, "unpaid work" is not an alternative term for slavery (the key characteristic of which is coercion), but "sex worker" is a relevent alternative to historically demeaning terms like prostitute, which colour not only a person's occupation but their whole being. Paid-for sex is not intrinsically a problem, but human trafficking, worker exploitation, underage employment, physical violence, workplace intimidation and health & safety are. These issues are not intrinsic to the sex industry, only to industries where people turn a blind eye to human rights abuse. This is not a "woman's issue" - there are enough male and transexual sex workers out there after all - it is an issue about respecting worker rights.
From Grainne Tobin
Ekis's article about prostitution in Barcelona was great - personal and thoughtful and genuinely informative. I too have heard a lot of that 'people make their choices' stuff, justifying sex work as a perfectly valid career option, and it always seems naive to me. It is not like other work, and it thrives on the problems in the prostitutes' lives. I was in Barcelona recently, having been there a few years ago. There was a visible absence of prostitutes on the Ramblas, so we surmised that there had been some kind of street crackdown which has driven it to less obvious places. As usual. Ekis' piece explains what has been happening. Selfishly, it felt good to have a break from my own nice, fulfilling work and not think too much, as a bland tourist, about others' difficult, hidden livelihoods in this city.
From JThompson
Re: Not a happy birthday: The author of "Not a Happy Birthday" relates the account of one traumatic birth experience with one horrific midwife... then asserts that this happens to "scores" of women. While I don't deny that some may women undergo uncomfortable and unnecessary procedures during birth (because of ill advised medical professionals) the idea that it's "rape" is denigrating to actual rape victims.
I know many medical professionals who work in obstetrics and gynecology - they got into this field because they love nothing more than helping women deliver healthy babies. Equivocating their best-intentioned efforts with rape is both sensationalistic and malicious.
Amity Reed, author of the article, replies
First, you maintain that because I included only one story of birth rape in the article, my assertion that this happens to many other women is somehow unbelievable. You need only look at some of the links I included in my story to see that this does indeed happen to many more women than one would like to believe. The fact that there are organisations and charities dedicated solely to helping survivors of medical mistreatment and birth trauma in particular (such as Witness and the Birth Trauma Association) should be testament to that.
Second, you state that while many women undergo 'uncomfortable and unnecessary' procedures (a gross understatement when we're talking about forcing hands or instruments into women's vaginas without their consent) during birth, that this does not amount to rape and that equating these acts with rape is denigrating to 'actual' rape victims.
What I find most disturbing about this method of thought is that we have come to equate birth with the loss of power. The idea that giving birth is a time to "check one's dignity at the door'" and accept that unpleasant and unwanted procedures will be performed on you, possibly against your will or accompanied by threats about the baby's health, is absolutely frightening and appalling to me.
We fight and fight for women's right to choose whether to carry their foetuses to term or not, but then tell them that their bodies are not their own, that they must submit to the will of others "for the good of the baby". How does that make sense? We either have full bodily autonomy or we don't. We can't pick and choose based on which experiences we deem acceptable and which we think are 'no big deal' because they are socially taboo and rarely challenged.
Finally, to address your third point, that by writing about these assaults I somehow tar all of obstetrics and gynaecology with the same brush, I would challenge your belief that based on the few personal relationships you have with people in these fields (who undoubtedly have the best of intentions and are good people) you can fairly and rationally arrive at the conclusion that no one in these fields harm women, even those doing so with 'good intentions'.
A rapist or abuser isn't always a sinister figure lurking in the shadows with a sadistic grin and an insatiable urge to harm - they can be extremely ordinary people who don't understand that the power they wield must be used with the utmost sensitivity and care.
They are the obstetricians who want to get home to their families and so order more drugs, more oxytocin to increase contractions and then a caesarean, all so he or she can be at the dinner table on time; the nurses who are overworked and tired; the jaded midwives who have 'seen it all' and think they know best. Their intentions may not have been evil but they must be held responsible for their actions when they harm and control the very people they are entrusted to help.
Calling the hell these women go through "sensationalistic and malicious" is not only offensive to them but to the very ideals of feminism.
From Shawna
What a fabulous article! I feel the same way myself about the the "business of birth! " As a doula I have witnessed many women being violated in one way or another and from my perspective and in my role, I am unable to say or do anything about it and it is frustrating and disgusting and disheartening. I am a mother of 3 and my first was born in a hospital and left me feeling much the same...I then went on to have 2 beautiful home births and I highly support and reccommend it to anyone who will listen! This does have to stop, women do need to take back their birthing power and protect it from those prying, probing, violating and intervening hands... Good on you for having the balls to write it how you see it...
From Penny Christensen
Thank you for your well written article on the crime of birth rape. I run an organization of traumatized mothers in Canada and I find this travesty depressingly common. We hear from many women with horror stories of their birth rape in hospitals and in their homes by midwives and by doctors and nurses.
For each story we hear we know there are hundreds who can't speak up. Keeping it on the back burner is how they cope. You correctly identify birth rape as a devaluation of women - their bodies, health and minds and this will not go away until a woman\'s right to decide which delivery choice (and her particular requirements about that delivery option) is best for her is respected and legally recognized.
It is an area that has been ignored too long by feminist thinkers and I'm so happy you, and others like you, are finally addressing this issue. You also make a good point about misogyny not solely being a trait associated with cruel and controlling men. Some of the most horrific stories we hear are about women abusing women. Systemic discrimination (and gender discrimination is no exception) remains systemic because everyone participates in it - even those most negatively affected by it.
From Kimberley
Your article on maternity ward rape was dead on. And it doesn't just happen in the UK. In Canada where I work as a Labour Doula, I find I spend much of my time preparing clients for the 'war' of childbirth. I tell them what could happen and how to protect themselves against the medical community. It saddens me and frustrates me that birth, while the most natural thing in the world for a woman to do is treated like an illness and something to be managed and when things fall outside of the norm, as most do the labouring mother is subjected to all kinds of horrible interventions that almost always leads to a section.
When will the medical community back off and let us do what our bodies were designed to do. Birth a baby!
From Lara
Thank you so much for placing the post "not a happy birthday" in your blog. I knew a bit about the medicalization of birthing and women's bodies, about the utter and total lack of respect for women's bodies and their dignity in hospitals, but I never called it "birth rape". It most definitely IS rape. Patriarchy's control of women's bodies in every way and at all times is so disturbing and mind-boggling. I am practically scared of ever giving birth in the future.
From rose_hasty
I was really interested to read this article as I have heard from women who were disappointed by the attitudes of healthcare professionals during their births but never heard or fully considered how this affected the way they treated the women's bodies. I'm currently pregnant and am a survivor of rape (not birth rape) and would like some reassurance on this issue when I go to visit the maternity ward I am registered with. As this is my first pregnancy I'd be grateful if anyone could give me tips on questions I could ask and requests I might make that could act as a sort of statement of my position on this kind of treatment and abuse.
From Karen Law
I am a VBACer and want to thank Amity Reed for providing a voice for so many women. I know of women who have endured birth rape and those who have endured Caesareans which should not have been necessary.
The childbirth revolution is gathering momentum slowly but surely, our voices WILL be heard.
From Michelle
Re: Labours left unfinished: third wave feminism: This is an amazing article and reflects a lot of my own thinking. We need to seek out and educate ourselves of the feminist her-story that came before 'us'; younger feminists today think they're fighting new battles in new ways, but most of the time we're not.
I also agree that we need to advance 'third-wave' feminism's emphasis on culture (which is inspiring and empowering) into challenging politics/wider structures, as Red mentioned. We have the ideas, we just need to get more organised to actually realise what we spend so much time blogging/writing about.
Thanks for writing.
From moira
Civil Rights activist Fanny Lou Hamer (1917 to1977) said "No-body's free until everybody's free."
Let's be even more specific - No woman is free until every woman is free.
Right now it's still men who get to say, chose, decide, dictate which women are free and which women are not free. Too many women still think that's OK.
We do not yet own ourselves. If even one woman is a sex object, is a trafficked piece of commercial transaction or is subjected to rape then it means that all women are still in that man-made category of traffickable, rapable, object.
It should be a crime for a man to buy a woman. It is no man's human right to have sex with a woman, any woman. There is no distinction between a slut, a slag, a prostitute and a 'good' woman - we are all female human beings - and men should get off our backs and out of our vaginas until we say we want anything to do with them.
These facts are true no matter what 'wave' of feminism happens to be happening right now.
From Deborah McAlister
As a wise women said to me Riot Grrrl and zines have a very important function in that they introduce feminism to women who otherwise might not be aware of it. It should not therefore be dismissed frivolous. I do agree with the author though as it should be an introduction to a movement not a movement in itself. We do need to move further, to get momentum to actually start doing something. Rather than being the lazy children of those women who actually got up shouted and were heard. I think the internet is partially to blame for our idleness, it's an amazing networking tool, but I think it makes it easy to feel active without ever having to bother leaving the house and actually DO anything.
Red Chidgey, author of the article, replies
Thanks for your comment on The F-Word article! I do agree, riot grrrl is/was certainly transformative - it totally revolutionalised my own life and set me on my merry way of a feminist life of mischief and action. Plus I think it's also really important to recognise, which I didn't really touch on in the article, that riot grrrl was a phenomenal movement which brought feminism to young girls and women - the fact that 11 year-old girls are still making grrrl zines now sends shivers down my spine when i think about the feminist possibility there. The next step for us zine feminists, I think, is to do more and more workshops to bring zine-making to young people - it a very powerful tool for young people to realise how easy it is to express themselves and publish their thoughts. I still see zines themselves as a form of direct action, and feminist media is crucial to any autonomous movement for social change.
I would be very interested to hear more of your thoughts on the role of the internet in feminist movements - perhaps you could write an F-Word article! I also have concerns that feminist dialogue occurs all to often in cyberspace. It is also increasingly important to realise that the internet also excludes the participation of some older feminists - this concern was recently brought up at the Bolton Women's Liberation Conference that was held on International Women's Day this year. Charlie Grrl reported back to FAF from the conference that the Bolton group began with two women putting an advert in their local paper and then having regular meetings. Now we just send out some emails and wait for the response (or not)! And sometimes feminists don't even meet in real time. Charlie made the very good point that there are "differences in the way feminists communication and network nowadays" and that this is an important "barrier to intergenerational networking".
Which leads me to think about all the other possibilities that we need our media to embrace: newsletters, magazines, films, and radio shows being just a start!
From Greg Davis
I was just reading the article on the ahistorical nature of "third wave" feminism, and it seems like there were much better opportunities for historical perspective. I mean, to say that feminism started, even in the UK, in 1969, seems so short-sighted. What about Mary Shelley? Even if she wasn't part of some broader social movement, her contributions to the concepts of equal rights for women was significant. In fact, I would say that even the second wave of feminism was well before 1969. I had always been led to understand that Simone de Beauvoir and her critique of the underlying masculinity of western culture was the actual start of the second wave of feminism.
I don't want to undercut the importance of riot grrl feminism, but it seems like the idea that 21st century feminism's main concerns ought to extend beyond economic concerns. I hoped that Val Plumwood was right when she said that the third wave of feminism would be about incorporating feminist critique with environmental, racial, and other forms of critique.
Thank you for the excellent site and its articles. I did enjoy reading the one I criticize above. I would love to further discuss any of these issues either in an open forum on the site or via e-mail. Even if you don't respond, however, I will continue to enjoy the offerings contained here.
Red Chidgey, author of the article, replies
Thanks for your reply to the article! I was being slightly provocative pitting the start of the British Women's liberation movement with the conception of its first conference (not feminism per se, just the WLM). And I do suggest some of the rumbles which were happening at that time...
But, yes, as for feminist history, it stretches way back, as well as sidewards (if we want to be non-linear!), and into the future (we build upon legacies known and unknown right now). And my name drops of women at the end of the article are from an earlier period of modern feminist history then the second wave.
So, I am personally very critical of the 'wave' theory of feminist history, though it has been used by women (such as Germaine Greer and, more recently Rebecca Walker) as a strategic device - to name a movement of activism as a way of dislodging the assumption that feminism is dead (I believe Susan Faludi in the Backlash notes that a period of 'post-feminism' happened even after the vote was won, that critics were suggesting that since the vote had been achieved there was nothing left for the militants to fight for. Which, of course, we know is not true - the 'first wave' was never merely about the right to vote - it was one, certainly driving, aspect of women's political and legal recognition at that time). So, the 'backlash' happens to women whenever this has been a push of feminist activity, and women have been protesting throughout the twentieth century, and before. The 'wave theory' is therefore of limited use to us as historians, but is pretty crucial for some activists as a rally cry.
For some, the 'third wave' is also used to discuss a diverse type of feminism. Like you point out, for many DIY, anarcha, or grassroots feminists right now, a feminist struggle is interwoven with the fight against consumer capitalism and intersecting forms of oppression - racism, ableism, environmental destruction, transphobia, classism etc. (and whilst these feminist concerns have a long heritage, and merge with socialist feminism in some instances, what gives third-wave feminism a distinctive flavour is that it is located in a specific historical condition. The world changed so much in the last quarter of the 20th century - with information communication technologies, shifts in fertility and marriage ages, changes in labour (who now stays in the same job all their life?), neo-liberalism and the globalisation of commerce, climate change, etc, etc) For some, third wave feminism is a response to the new social conditions we find ourselves in and an consolidation of allies within other social justice movements. And it is important to recognise that feminists have long known about the need to address gender oppression through many lenses (race, sexuality, the environment etc) - sometimes successfully, sometimes not
What would be interesting is to find out more about our feminist histories and to see what events and agendas, in all their multiplicities, were carried out in the first/second/etc waves - there are so many stereotypes and dominant narratives circulating, which I think obscures some of the very real similarities which can, and should, be made between the 'third wave' and its predecessors. After all, what is feminism but the theory and practice of freedom for all? I think many women have always practices their feminism as such, and some have not.
From Charlotte Jee
Re: 'I'm no sad victim. I've seen and survived the darkest side of life': I think Rachel Bell's latest article was really uplifting, despite the appalling subject matter and am very glad that she has brought to light a much misunderstood and ignored yet widespread crime. I would be interested in how I can get involved in the projects that she mentions - could anyone give me some advice on this?
From Jennifer Drew
Excellent article Rachel and very powerful in calling the Government and society to account. Yes, our wonderful society does not care about the fact too many men and boys are raping and sexually abusing women and girls. As for the female survivors well they continue to be silenced because 'rape' is a taboo word. The female survivors can be ignored because they are apparently too emotional, too damaged to be respected.
The Amina Project challenges all these areas and proves women survivors are not simply 'victims' but as always, survivors cannot rebuild their lives without help and support. This is not about dismissing women survivors of male sexual violence as 'just victims.' The Government should be funding this much needed project but instead it prefers to waste money targetting female drinkers and informing all women drinking alcohol is bad for your health. Well so is male violence against women but apparently this is not as important as keeping women firmly down in relation to men.
From megan
It's astonishing that all women and girls (whether they have been raped or not) are made to feel they should be responsible for what happens to them when it is impossible no matter how virginal, covered up or young you are to do this. It angers me that our society does not recognise this type of violence as unforgivable and does not do more to stop it. I have never been raped however I have been sexually harassed and i was made to feel the guilty one. it is comforting to know that some women are able to have a life after rape, seeing as i was always told if you were raped, your life was over. Obviously being told this has made me terrified of being alone with any man and has even made me think of suicide just in case rape ever happened to me. I hope that if it ever did I would be able to lead a normal life afterwards and reading this article gave me a glimmer of hope that this may be possible.
From Grainne Tobin
Re: Where the 1967 Abortion Act doesn't apply: I am the proud mother of the writer of this article. She is, unfortunately, absolutely correct in this account of the legal/political situation here in Northern Ireland. It is Groundhog Day with no change and no peace process for women's freedoms in our godgiven statelet.
From S.
Re: UK feminists must address worldwide issues: Whilst I entirely agree with Ruthie Samuel's claim that "UK feminists must address worldwide issues", I also believe that, to start with, we need to more accurately attend to the specificities of the existence of non-Western women, rather than assuming the categories 'woman', 'patriarchy' and 'oppression' as universal (whereas, they're actually very much grounded in both Western feminist and patriarchal thought). We must be willing to listen and to understand, but also to appreciate that Western feminist goals cannot fully facilitate the desires, agency and voices of non-Western "women". Sometimes we have to realise that we cannot "speak for everyone" and that listening to the voices of non-Western women (without imposing a structure of feminism upon their oppositional thought) is a perfectly admirable and strategically sound approach.
Ruthie claims that the lack of media coverage on global issues "comes from an unspoken and perhaps unconscious assumption that the oppression of women is part of the 'natural order.'" However, I believe that most attempts to address non-Western "oppression of women" establishes a "natural order" of its own - assuming such oppression to exist identically across cultures, which, although admirable in its aim, only serves to reproduce Western 'superiority' over non-Western 'barbarism'. Instead, we need to consider the social climate in which these women are established as "women", along with the socio-political climate in which oppression takes place. This means education, listening and accepting the limitations of addressing non-Western climates from Western perspectives. Assuming a model of Western oppression as universal will, in essence, do nothing to address the specificities that occur in this context and, although I appreciate its difficulty, we need to be more self-critical in our discussion of non-Western women. Individual feminists are not to blame here, for surely any consideration of global gender issues is considerably more useful than none at all. However, social change cannot be effected through surface change - change needs to happen at the base. For the West to bully non-Western countries into eliminating oppression will, in effect, do very little. We need to attend to the *specific* local context - this cannot be stressed enough. With an approach such as this - featuring a greater integration of non-Western voices without the presupposition that we can all come to an understanding of a cross-cultural notion of oppression or "femaleness" - we can begin to truly address global issues in 21st century feminist thought.
From Ben Samuel
Sister Ruthie!
Women of the world!
Happy International Women's Week, it's your week. We're receiving the f word loud and clear up here in Nottingham. Keep us updated on the Saudi injustice.
From Lalitha Sundaram
This is a really interesting problem - and one that often comes up when I'm talking about feminism to my male friends. My answer is usually: why can't I do both? More importantly, Why don't you do either?
But I concede, I don't do enough: it's a lot easier to get riled up when you know you can complain to the ASA about the Rustler's microwave hamburger advert and you know you can do so in complete safety. Who do I complain to about the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia?
The author makes some very good points: media attention is where it's at. Or, sadly, where it ain't. And the same goes for political will. Katha Pollit has addressed this, in her Open letter from American Feminists
I sometimes use this as an (admittedly far-from-perfect) analogy: At the heart of apartheid, would you (my male friends) tell a black man in the UK who had been discriminated against, say in the workplace, "at least you don't live in South Africa?". Fighting for small victories here doesn't always - and certainly shouldn't - detract from fighting for bigger ones elsewhere. And when those "bigger victories" are basic human rights, it's all the more urgent.
One more thing re: the Guardian's Women section. Why do I have to navigate through the "Life & Style" section to get there?!
From Eve
Re: Lust, Caution: "Although Wong always has the upper hand in their relationship, in the sense that Mr Yee is not aware of her part in the plot against him, he is still able to control her."
I disagree. In no way does she have the upper hand. He does, and in several ways: physically (he is stronger, hits her and ties her with his belt); sexually (he rapes her); mentally (he can separate a sexual affair from political business whereas she fails to); politically (she may be rebelling, but it is unsuccesful and in the film, his allies are left victorious); and financially.
From Alex
I read your review of Ang Lee's Lust, Caution with interest. I think you raise some very intelligent points but I diverged with a couple of your points in my reading of the film.
You write "Wong is ultimately unable to separate sex from love and equally unable to put her radical politics before her love for Mr Yee. He, on the other hand, manages to order her execution just fine". I am not certain that this is true. The way I see it, Mr Yee is in fact distressed at having to sign Wong's death warrant, indeed he is visibly bothered by it and trying to hide this feeling. The way it appeared to me was that because of the political power structure in which he takes part, he is obliged to sign the warrant even though he would rather not and is keeping pent up about it. Yee is too weak and pathetic to defy the power structure of which he is a part in order to make a stand over Wong and knows this, hence his sadness. Wong on the other hand is courageous enough to defy even her radical politics in the knowledge that she will likely die for doing so, in order to save what is a form of love at least on some level.
You write "Wong is portrayed throughout as a complex woman and it disturbed me that the act that prompts her to save her lover's life is the purchase of that most clichéd trinket: the diamond ring". I don't recall it being stated or indicated that the ring is really what drives her to do what she does. It seems to me that through the intense relationship and mind games that the two characters play with each other a deep, albeit unspoken, bond must have been formed or else, as you suggest, the whole thing would descend into cliché. It seems unlikely that such a complex character, along with an able and intelligent director like Lee, would allow the whole relationship to be proved by something so obvious and stereotypical. This is what leads me to think it must surely be more subtle.
You write "However, the film seemed to be suggesting that men are entirely capable of suppressing their feelings for the sake of politics" yet you do not consider the possibility that it is the social and political structures that the characters are a part of that defines their boundaries. Kuang is in love with Wong, yet he allows her to be used in all kinds of ways because his boundaries are defined by Resistance politics - when he eventually does speak up, his boss shouts him down. Yet again, a male character in the film is too weak to break political boundaries for another cause. Wong, as I recall is the only one to eventually break the mould, with the ultimate cost.
You write "What left me feeling profoundly sad was this willingness to offer up Wong's mind and body for the sake of a cause". This, I think, is the effect the film is supposed to bring about. The men clearly are willing to put politics above all else, yet this attitude is not revered by the film or supported by it but condemned by it (although not overtly). Only Wong has the strength to finally say enough is enough and save Yee's life, showing that she, unlike the men, will not be slave to politics any longer. As such the film brings sadness in that Wong has been abused for political ends in the first place and also in that the men see this is wrong but do nothing because they are either too weak to redefined their own boundaries or too afraid of the political structures they inhabit.
I hope you have found these ideas interesting and not tiresome. Just some thoughts where I differed I suppose. Your review was very well written though, I hope you don't think this reply is patronising or anything, I don't intend it to be.
From krysta-lee
Re: How the word 'slut' oppresses women: what about lesbian sluts?
Jennifer Drew, author of the article, replies
If you re-read my article, I was addressing the fact that it is predominantly men who call sexually active women sluts and this does incorporate men who term lesbian women 'sluts'.
No woman is a 'slut' if she is sexually active and this includes heterosexual, lesbian and bisexual women. But by the same token, if one believes any woman who is sexually active a 'slut' then this degrading sexual insult applies equally to all men who are sexually active, including heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual men.
The derogative term 'slut' - used by men against women - is designed to humiliate, degrade, and of course maintain male sexual power and control over all women. Men, just because they are biologically male, are not entitled to take the higher moral ground and claim 'I can be sexually active without any accountability but you women who are sexually active are all sluts.'
After all what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
From Daniel
I thought this was a wonderful article.
I had the thought that perhaps man is dominating not just the way men label women but also trying to put women into this place of judgment through fashion ads...As suggested.
I find it fascinating on how it was added that indeed when it comes to homosexuality the word "slut" comes up again. I think only a few men use the term for themselves...But jokingly of course.
This was something I never thought of before. But now that I think of it. I wonder why it doesn't exist for straight men. Because if we were to study sexual activity in all sections of human sexuality. We would probably find that homosexual, lesbian, and hetero males each are most likely, equal in promiscuous activity.
This goal...To create labels, that are beneficial and respectful. Is a great challenge. Since these terms are so... ground into our skulls.
I would commend the feminist if they were to succeed.
I would also like to be there for brainstorming the idea.
From Adam Halliday
I love sluts. I lost my virginity to a slut and it was awesome. I was 19 and far too passive and shy to finally culminate my long-awaited desire to fornicate. She was far more sexually aggressive, she knew what she wanted from me, and she took it. I am not going to say I was an entirely passive actor in this incident, but it would not have happened had she not been such an awesome slut. And by slut, I mean she loved sex and went out to get it when she could; so if she was a slut, then I loved it because I benefitted from it! In my mind, sluts are great cause they get me laid.
Like your article, my story is based solely on personal experience and therefore purely anecdotal. Passing off your anecdotal evidence as certainty mitigates your arguments. Typecasting men's and women's sexual exploits into emotive gender roles becomes self-defining, a trap and a catch-22 that by speaking out against disgusting and insulting labels that are applied to women's sexuality (slut, whore, skank, slag, chicken-head etc. etc.), you accept the possibility that women may actually be one. In essence, your outrage gives the word its power. Not to mention embodying the classic mertonian self-fulfilling prophecy, wherein by accepting these words as a derogatory absolute you ensure they will forever be used in a derogatory manner towards women.
Further, linking the use of these words to violent crime against women seems abstruse. It would be like linking the word "asshole" to the problem of bar-fights. The mere fact that a word exists to offend does not necessarily generate violence against its target.
In closing, the essence of your argument is appealing. In terms of sexuality, if a woman can be degraded by being called a slut, skank or whore, then men should be degraded by such words as well.
Jennifer Drew, author of the article, replies
You obviously have misread my article. The purpose of my article was to challenge male-centered sexual double standards wherein men who are sexually active are lauded as being 'studs and players' but women who even dare to challenge patriarchal misogynistic definitions of what is deemed to be appropriate passive feminine sexual behaviour are called 'sluts, whores etc.'
No woman is a slut simply because she happens to enjoy sex and actively pursues it for her sexual pleasure and not in order to sexually satisfy male sexual demands.
My article is not based on 'personal experience', rather it is about the widespread misogynistic beliefs concerning female and male sexual expression. If you care to re-read the article you will see no anecdotal evidence was contained therein.
I find your claims concerning 'typecasting men's and women's sexual exploits into emotive gender roles etc.' to be obtuse, unenlightening and totally without any foundation.'
The male-centered misogynistic sexual double standard must be challenged because it is designed to ensure women's sexuality and sexual autonomy is not only denied to them but kept rigidly under the control of patriarchy. No woman or man is a slut, whore etc. simply because they are sexually active. But since men presume it is their right to term certain women sluts, whores etc. then the sam must be applied to men who are sexually active.
From Lynn
I just read the article by Jennifer Drew regarding sexual oppression of women by using the words slut, whore, etc. After listening to endless news on Eliot Spitzer's use of prostitutes, my blood has been boiling over how sexist the attitudes of virtually everyone regarding men who pay for sex and women who charge for sex. Poor Eliot is just considered "stupid, using misjudgement". On the other hand, the woman, whom he violated, is called a "prostitute, whore, call-girl". She is basically a "nothing". The whole victimless crime B.S. that keeps being spewed makes me sick! I got the impression that poor Mr. Spitzer was a victim of a woman who "knew what she was doing" and he shouldn't resign. Ughhh! There has been no balance in the media regarding this sexist, patriarchic, attitude towards prostitution. I believe women are truly the victims (not just the prostitutes) but all women who constantly hear the message that men will be men and women should stand beside them, stay with them, and support them, and most importantly, be the sole lightning rod for humiliation.
From Jamee
Re: Fairy tales are Grimm: i think u did very well on explaining youself about your thoughts on fairy tales. this article will help me durin the fairy tale unit i am in for english+ class.....thank you so much!! :)
From Michelle Alfano
Re: It's So You: I really enjoyed this review ... conincidentally, I wrote a blog entitled F Words in a similar vein a few months ago about feminism and fashion:
It stiil annoys me that everything we put on our bodies/faces etc ... serves as some kind of signifier. Love the site ... will add it to my blog roll!
From Wendy Foster-DeGroot
Love the article and will definite look for the book. My love/hate relationship with clothes began in high school. I would catch on to the latest trend only after it was considered past and I constantly felt behind the times. Mean girls in high school have been replaced by the likes of Trinny and Hosanna and gay guys helping us look good naked. Wear what you like.
From Val Harrison
Re: Miss LSE or Miss-ogyny?: I AM SO GLAD it's not just me that's got a bee in my bonnet about beauty pageants! Well done Antonia. I think this is the tip of the iceberg. The pageant industry in the US makes millions every year from CHILD pageants. There was one over here in 2006 and some people reacted strongly against it (thankfully) I think this is just another attempt to find a way in through the side door to gain a more gradual acceptance. Before you know it age limits will be dropping and 'little sisters' will be able to join in. Faludi was right about the Backlash theory. It's still going on now!
From Val Harrison
Is anyone else out there fed up of seeing 'pole dancing classes' in their sports centres? I'm just concerned that there may be young girls out there who sign up to them just for exercise, who then go off to college, need to earn extra money and use their newfound 'skill' in clubs, only to end up in decidedly dodgy company. We need to admit that pole dancing may provide some fairly challenging exercise, but ultimately it is there for mens' titilation and for women to be ogled at. Am I alone in wanting to start a campaign to get these classes stopped?
From Naomi
Re: Why men should care about gender stereotypes: Thanks Alex for an intelligent article. There is an increasing movement of men exploring masculinities and going through the same analysis of gender stereotypes that women have been going through for a century. The White Ribbon campaign was set up in Canada for exactly this reason and now has representation around the World including in the UK and Scotland.
From Abraham Anthony
I hope you succeed in everything that you're trying to do. I believe in you and everything you people are doing. Just remember that you can never eradicate sexism. Instead of taking offence from sexist and misogynist men try having pity for them. Many of those people have something desperately missing from their life. Perhaps a little understanding could fill the void.
From Rhona Sweeting
Re: Abortion: still a feminist issue: Thank you for your article.
I had an abortion at the age of 26 and have no regrets - to be honest, I barely think about it. I have not suffered any depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (as if!), recurrent health problems or issues with relationships and am sick to the back teeth of the media reporting every incidence of abortion as some 'mini-tragedy'.
While I do feel sorry for the minority of women out there who have suffered long-term effects as the result of an abortion, I resent a male-dominated media telling me that I am in some way 'unfeminine' and uncaring for carrying out a procedure that is TEN TIMES safer than carrying a pregnancy to term wit no ill effects.
I am pro-choice and while I believe it would be lovely if the abortion rate was zero (due to a total lack of rape, sexual abuse, domestic violence, unreliable contraception etc), abortion MUST be safe and legal to protect ALL women from the hell of an unwanted pregnancy.
As many commentators have said before, if men got pregnant, we wouldn't even be having this conversation!
I do feel there should be more space for women like me to air their thoughts and not feel oppressed by some moral group who feel the need to push women who have had an abortion into some 'self-regretful sinners' camp'.
Thank you again for your article!
Irina Lester, author of the article, replies
Thank you for you great response, the mood of it, angry and unapologetic, is just the way I feel about the issue. I am always annoyed that nobody seem to realize what a hell unwanted pregnancy can be. They instead talk about abortions (when in fact they are just means to correct a horrible mistake instead of living with it!). As I cannot regret not taking my eye out, or not breaking my arm, I cannot regret not having a child when a mere thought of it was hateful.
And guess what? Motherhood, or parenthood in general for that matter, is such a big and irreversible step, it changes life so much, so it can only be justified if it is a voluntary. Some people come to regret having (sometimes yet another) child, it ruins their lives. I have read on forums many parents saying, that although they love their kids, they wish they had them later in their life. Many women arrive into motherhood completely unprepared for what it takes, and it is only now people started to talk about it openly, and they were willing in the first place. Now, who these inhuman morons must be to think, that even if you don't want to, you must experience all that?! Surely, the agony over unplanned pregnancy is the best indication that this particular woman must not, under any circumstances, become a mother at this point in her life. Maybe later, maybe with another man, maybe never. But not now. It is only those who ruined their own life want you to have a crap one too; many of them are religious idiots who think that not only they are born to suffer, but you are too. It is about the time to tell them where to shove it.
Again, thank you for your reply, I wish women were angrier and there were more feelings like yours spoken out, because enough is enough.
From Grainne Tobin
Re: Ask a feminist - The F Word problem page: I am new to this site (a second-wave feminist) and very pleased to see it, especially the 'ask a feminist' feature. I am a teacher. Last week some sixth form boys said something baffled about what feminists are supposed to believe, and I said I thought everyone in the room was a feminist as we share the belief that women and men are equal. I know it is over-simple, but it's a start. They really have grown up believing all the things on the 1969 manifesto, while simultaneously thinking feminists must be some other kind of person... Incidentally, I once had an astonished male adult education student tell me he couldn't believe I was really a feminist because I was being nice to a baby someone had brought to a class. Apparently we're not supposed to like children either.
From Alexandra Dymock
Re: Scarlet's 'campaign to make feminism fashionable': This is really a message for Catherine Redfern, who wrote the article about Scarlet's 'make feminism fashionable' campaign.
I only just spotted your article (when googling my own name -- narcissistic, I know) and just wanted to let you know that much of the interview I gave to Scarlet was cut out. It was originally three times the length and full of words like 'heteronormativity', 'genderqueer' and 'hegemony', so I'm not surprised they cut it. For the record, the 'I choose to do this, therefore it's feminist' cliché of neo-liberal feminism is not something I buy into.
However, I understand that Scarlet's agenda is also out to sell mags (which contain pornography, to some degree), and therefore they will market themselves to an audience of women to maintain the notion that it's okay to be pro-porn, and leave little room for reflexivity on that issue in case they lose readership. My own stance is anti-censorship and anti-decriminalisation, but I suspect that may make things a little foggier for their readers.
I'm currently a Masters student at Goldsmiths on the Gender & Culture programme and (funding permitting) hope to be working extensively on women's oral histories, generational difference and sexual subcultures over the next few years.
From Cari
Re: He's Just Not That Into You: Thank you thank you thank you! I am SO tired of simplistic views of men and women that make me feel bad for being a woman who "pursues" and which make men feel badly for enjoying being "pursued". None of my satisfying relationships have begun in such simplistic terms. Usually, either I or he made some kind of signal and it was a complex unfolding of mutual interactions that led to romance. It is refreshing to read this article, and it does service to all men and women.
From Dirly
Re: Against censorship: I want to add something to your article, an aspect that a lot of people aren't aware of. And that's how many girls get lured into participating in porno movies, like happened to a friend of mine. She worked in a night club and the owner used to get the girls pissed drunk and then persuade them to participate in sexual things, which he filmed. There were contracts but he could make them sign anything and then later, tick boxes such as "I agree to anal sex" , "I agree to being pissed on" etc. When the girls understood later on what had happened, the films were already out there and they couldn't do nothing about it. My friend lives with the anxiety of that film being shown someplace to someone she knows. Or that a new boyfriend will recognize her, having seen the film. So think about that not all participating in porno movies is out of free will and that there are many women out there with serious anxiety for having "acted" in one.
From Lynette
Re: A feminist guide to ballet: I guess there's a real huge disparity between the image ballet potrays, the connotations it conveys and the real physical and mental labour involved in the training. Having started ballet since I was 6, giving it up at 15 because my teacher said I was getting "too heavy to jump" though I was already underweight and then finally taking it up again 2 years ago when I was 20, I can identify with the writer's feelings. I still have overwhelming passion for the dance form and my heart still skips a beat when I see a tutu and pink pointe shoes but I've learnt that I'll never be stick-thin/waif-like and unless society broadens its perceptions on how ballerinas should look like, ballet can never be a feminist activity and i can never be a ballerina however hard I try. and I've learnt to be ok with that and just dance the best I can.
From Dulce Saenz
Re: http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2006/07/dont_cha_wish_pop_was_more_empowering: As I read your article, I could not help but agree. I realized everything you were saying had truth in it and you were almost convincing me that I myself had the wrong idea of women empowerment. However, at the end you said that this is the way women have been viewed forever and it will still take time for the women's appearance to change. However, becasue it probably won't change, why not empower it? If we are viewed as beautiful objects, why not play to our strengths? I feel that Beyonce, along with other artists have tapped into something. Beyonce is seen as a sex symbol, however still manages to catch the attention of both men and women. Men adore her and women admire her. She is strong and powerful, yet still beautiful and glamorous. It would be stupid to pretend that our society did not run like this, but it does. Because she has set her mentality to know it and understand it, she has been successful. She is still making headlines, still having an influence, and still making a change. I feel that as gnerations continue, we need to learn to not be ashamed of our sexuality. Not that we need to promote it or run around naked, but teach that it is not anything to be embarrassed about. This goes both ways. I think the Dove commercial did a good job by having women of all shapes and sizes on their ad. Beyoncce happens to be close to a perfect figure, but that is not what makes her empowering. What makes her empowering is that she is comfortable with it. And sometimes, it takes a strong woman like Beyonce to give us stregth and remind us of that. For example, a song that is very empowering to me is Can't hold us Down, by Chrsitina Aguilera & Lil Kim. By no mean do I dress or look like either of them, nor do I aspire to be like either one. However, the song itself gives me strength and incentive to be a feminist. I have seen their video and in no way does it offend me or make me think they are comforming. Simply, that is how they are comfortable. Thier comfort with themselves and their sexuality shines through and that is what makes them believable. In America's Next Top Model, their have been a number of plus size models (one in particular I can think of, however can't remember her name) who have been successful in the industry because they become comfortable in their own skin. Its not about being a size zero, its about comfort. Some women choose to embrace and promote different sizes or statements. I think that as women we hold more cards than we think and more than we are given credit for. Personally, I would like to see more artists, movie stars, and models be comfortable. Size, shape, and color does not matter. It's how one feels from within that makes a difference.
From megan robb
Re: Glamour models made me sick: i am commenting on the article that all glamour models are unintelligent and have no dignity, should beautiful women have to pour boiling water over their heads to be taken seriously, is it ok to discriminate against beautiful women and presume they are stupid isn't this just as bad as racism and hmophobia? also comments on airbrushing, airbrushing can be used for minor imperfections it can't be used to drop dress sizes or give someone a whole new head!
From Tina
I totally agree with you! Glamour models portray a terrible image of women.
I hope that u are getting over ur eating disorder. good article and good luck to ya!
From doug
Re: First episode of Star Trek: Enterprise: Why is the author of this artical so much like others who can't cope with the fact that this is written as science fiction about a time in the not so distane future for the people of this time frame? Talk about not being able to see!
From Gunther Clasen
Re: A bride by any other name: You did well discussing the future name with your husband, whatever the outcome. I can only encourage everyone to do that. We discussed the same and we decided the same when we got married. Although he didn't say, I think my Dad wasn't particularly happy. But then, he has four more sons to carry on his name. (Yes, I am male.) I met very few people making inappropriate comments about me changing name. But then my friends wouldn't do that or they wouldn't be my friends in the first place.
We married in Germany, where we both come from and where it doesn't matter which name you chose: the formalities are the same. (It is only when both keep their names that you have to nominate a "family name", which is the name your children will have.)
Problems only started in this country. I very nearly lodged a formal complaint for sexual herassment (yes, that's right, it works that way round as well) when I wanted to change the name on my account: They could only change the name if I had changed it by deed poll (which I hadn't) or "by marriage", for which one obviously had to be female (which I am not). Obviously, yes, thanks.
If you want to have it equally easy both ways round, it might help finding a couple willing to fight it up in the european courts. I have no legal qualifications, but I cannot believe that the current laws would hold agains men and women being equal. Remember that it is not only red tape coming from europe, there are benefits as well.
From MNSwedeGirl
Re: A perfect delusion: Amen! Your article seems to hit the nail on the head. As a reasonably attractive middle-aged woman (37) I am astounded by the unbelievable expectations of my physically imperfect male counterparts. I have met a few reasonably good-looking men who don't appear to concede to the notion that they somehow deserve a Bond-esque girlfriend, but then, these men are married or taken, which says that they have bridged the gap between the boys and the men.
From David J Smith
Re: Loose Women: Because I work shifts, sometimes I am at home when Loose Women are on. My wheelchair bound daughter likes to watch it , (as she say's there's nothing else on that's better!, so I get to see some programmes. You are so, so right in what you say about this programme. It does not do the cause for women any good at all.
From james walsh
Re: But What of Us? UK Riot Grrrl - Part 2: Caim acoss your articale I was trying to find out if Vital Disorders had done anything apart from 'prams' (which is on one of the bloodstains comps).
Your comment 'Throughout the eighties, the punk and post punk related scenes in Britain and America were characterised by their whiteness, heterosexuality, and middle class college boy mentality.' is pretty well nonsense and it was a hell of alot more mixed than the Riot Girl sceen- as for being White and MIDDLE CLASS- that was Riot girl not 80's punk- and in hind sight it was better (the 80's punk) sceen that we realised- and alot more self critical and intreasted in ideas than Riot Girl ever managed and alot less elitist- which was part of the point of 80's punk- while riot girl was covered with rightious middle class elitism. Maybe that why you still get kids discovering and getting strength from; Crass, 7 Seconds or the DK's (or even the Exploited- i guess not your cup of tea)and not Huggy Bear.
The sort of 'femminism' we have left is the sort that comes up with 'More than 30,000 women a year in Britain lose their jobs for simply being pregnant, according to a new report calling for tougher action to stamp out sexism in the workplace.
The campaign will focus on the experiences of women in the City
She said a change in practices in the City, which is at the heart of UK economy, would help to set the standard for workplaces nationwide.' link- http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/mar/30/equality.health
Punk was about ordinary people and human liberty - it wasn't just boys fun ( hey- theres a 7 seconds song there!)- but it didn't have any white liberal guilt trip hang-ups. We leave that for the middle class (in the Uk sense of the word).
From G Hitches
Re: The Signs of Ageing: I cant believe Mother Theresa is cited as a role model on a UK feminism site...
Mother Theresa tried to reduce womens rights, intervening on divorce and abortion (as you might expect, being a conservative catholic). She had some very strange views on poverty and suffering, claiming that these were gifts from God. In 1981 in response to the question: Do you teach the poor to endure their lot?, she replied I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.
She was a supporter of the Duvalier regime in Haiti, a particularly nasty dictator who killed approx. 30,000 Haitians during his reign, She took large donations from Papa Doc, and visited Haiti to say Madame President, the country vibrates with your life work., recieving the Legion DHonneur. She was successful in obtaining huge amounts of charitable contributions, but this money was largely spent on poorly staffed and equipped hospices. If that money had been spent on hospitals which could diagnose disease then she would have saved many lives (but of course, she thought the world was helped by the suffering of poor people...). In the early 1980s the editor of Lancet visited Calcutta and found that no analgesics were used. E.g., in her hospices no pain relief was provided, while she brought in hundreds of millions of dollars. And when she was sick, she went to a clinic in California.
I hope thats of interest, anyway. Mother Theresa is very much a sacred cow. But I think that if you take those points into account it isnt clear on what basis we should suggest that she is a good role model for women. Theres something distasteful here in our double standards; if such care was provided in England in the mid-80s we would have rightly denounced this.
From Dee Nic
Re: How to get an activist movement to keep women in prostitution: What a fantastic piece! sometimes I despair of the way the media uncritically 'reports' these groups activism. What's missing is basic economic analysis.
So good too to see a real convo with the truth finally emerging. Much of the legalisation campaign involves nothing but selective 'happy hooker' quotes.
Would love to see this get front page treatment at the Graun......
Well done, Elkis.