Women's pay

The Hills Report, out yesterday, shows just how divided our society has become.

Written by Professor John Hills, from the London School of Economics and the new National Equality Panel, the report was commissioned by Harriet Harman, the Equalities Minister.

Women’s pay is still shockingly below men’s.

From age 16, median earning for women initially rise like men’s, although at a lower rate. By age 30, women’s median pay has reached its peak and begins to decline, while men’s pay continues to increase.

At the peak of men’s average pay of £30k (age early 40s), pay for women is just over two-thirds of this, according to the Guardian’s graphic representation of the report’s data.

The figures are not surprising, and very depressing. We know women get paid less. We know it’s because women face barriers to combining work with childcare and that (although changing), society has traditionally expected women to make the sacrifices.

But what disturbs me most is that the pay gap begins to widen immediately – right from the beginning of adulthood when most women aren’t having children.

This indicates that there are more subtle factors at work. Discrimination in the form of lower reward and recognition for the same standard or better work than men’s. Sharp, disproportionate criticism and intimidation – by colleagues and society at large – of women and their performance at work.

And self-discrimination; the effect that these factors have on women. The eating away of confidence and ambition. And the result that women, who are equally talented and intelligent as men, do not push themselves as hard, do not shout as loud, and do not demand as much - and get less.

Women's false hopes of freedom

The Telegraph published a comment piece on Natasha Walter’s criticism of the growing trend of young girls who aspire to be glamour models and to dress in provocative clothing (see my earlier post).

In it, Michael Deacon contradicts himself. In the third to last paragraph he notes that he thinks the girls’ motivation is to achieve a better life, avoiding the need for qualifications.

In the final paragraph, he says that he would not mind if his daughter became a glamour model. Deacon is a Telegraph journalist - therefore middle-class. His middle-class daughter would not have to aspire to a better life. She would have many opportunities open to her (having got the qualifications). She would not need to choose to be a glamour model.

The girls he speaks of are not exercising their freedoms. They have little freedom because they tend to have fewer privileges; the chance of being a glamour model seems to them - initially - very appealing.

Feminists are not complaining about the decisions of the girls. We are complaining about a selfish, apathetic society that allows this situation to persist. We are complaining about the people who have the cheek to suggest (and to con women into believing) that this exploitation of women's vulnerability - this degradation of our sex - is empowerment and equal rights.

Sex, shopping and the law

“Some men think it’s just like shopping,” said Fiona Mactaggart, Labour MP for Slough. “But it’s not, is it? It’s buying the right to interfere with someone else’s integrity.”

I heard Fiona speak yesterday at the AGM of OBJECT, a charitable organisation that challenges ‘sex object culture’ – the ever increasing sexual objectification of women in the media and popular culture through lads’ mags, advertising or lap dancing clubs.

Many years ago, Fiona encountered extreme misogyny when she spoke up for feminist issues at her university – she appeared in her student newspaper accompanied by the caption ‘Would you rape this woman?’.

Now she is a strong supporter of the recent change in clause 14 (formerly clause 13) of the Policing and Crime Bill, which criminalises the purchase of sex from a pimped or trafficked woman (ignorance is no defence).

Applauding the determined campaign of OBJECT and EAVES (a specialist provider for women in the sex industry) which led to the change, Fiona (who was proudly carrying a Virginia Woolf 'A Room of One's Own' bag) said we now have to campaign to encourage the police to develop strategies to target punters, and to use the law to make people think.

What can we tell people to make them think?

• The reality of prostitution is that most of it involves exploitation of vulnerable women (see my blog post below). Nine of out 10 prostitutes would like to exit but feel they can’t (Farley, 2003).

• It is a very unsafe profession. Prostitutes are much more likely to die than other people – in London, for example, their mortality rate is 12 times the national average (Home Office report).

• If the status quo is not changed, this kind of exploitation – this degradation of human beings – will become normal and we will not get a society in which everyone respects human rights.

• There is no benefit of legalisation. It has been shown to increase abuse and exploitation by fuelling demand and endorsing the activities of pimps, traffickers and attracts sex tourists. In Holland, it was a failed social experiment. Exploitation and organised crime has rocketed, to the point where Amsterdam started to close down brothels in 2006. Latest plans are major policy reversals, such as the proposal to criminalise the purchase of sexual acts from unlicensed people and to raise the minimum age for selling sex from 18 to 21.

In Germany, the government has admitted that its aims to improve working and living conditions of prostitutes have not worked. In New Zealand, there are increasing numbers of people drawn into prostitution. And in Australia, the illicit industry – far from being eliminated through legalisation – has flourished untaxed alongside the regulated sector.

• After all this, if people still insist on the ‘prostitutes have choice’ argument, ask them if they would be happy if their own daughter were to become a prostitute, or if they know of anyone who says: “I want to be a prostitute when I grow up.” They will quickly realise that it is not a desired job with desired working conditions and they will be forced to confront their own dishonesty.

Women, speak out

A feminist is someone who thinks for herself and tries to get her voice heard. It’s difficult sometimes – it’s difficult for anybody. But especially difficult for women. We have grown up in a society which has been traditionally dominated by men and still is, in many spheres. The effect of this is a subtle dampener on confidence – and often a brake on confidence developing in the first place.

Perhaps there’s the problem that women tend not to push themselves as much as men do. Perhaps men feel they have more to prove (with a history of being the breadwinners). Perhaps women are intimidated by what they see as the aggressive style of men.

The result is that men are often more willing to speak in public, and women tend to be more self-critical.

More men get heard, more men get powerful jobs and more men run the country.

The Eloquent Woman: A blog on women and public speaking: Madeleine Albright: "Learn to interrupt" blog today writes about former US Secretary of State Madeleine Korbel Albright (the first female secretary of state and, at that time, the highest ranking woman ever to serve in the US government). Albright said:

"I tell women to act in a more confident manner. You need to learn to interrupt. Ask questions when they occur to you and don’t wait to ask. Also, you don’t need to ask permission to ask a question. Be a risk taker; business appreciates risk takers. This trait is desirable in prospective leaders.

"…If women continue to keep their heads down working away, instead of speaking up, they won’t get noticed."

How can women practise their public speaking skills, gain confidence and be noticed?

In London, here are some opportunities:

Join a speaking club, such as Camden Speakers Club (which I am president of), which provides a friendly and supportive environment for developing the skills for speaking effectively in front of an audience.

Become a member of a debating society, such as the Central London Debating Society, which holds fortnightly debates on lively current affairs topics.

Go to events, such as 'Speaking out - public speaking made easy' on 10 February, which will show you how to feel comfortable speaking in public. The event is open to all, but women are especially encouraged to attend and subjects include speaking in public from a woman's perspective.

Don’t be silenced by anyone – not least by yourself.

The sexbot sucks

In more ways than one. Roxxxy is the world’s first sex robot, apparently. Harmless? As already noted by Alex DiBranco on Change.org, I think not.

(The Telegraph also covered the story and reported on Roxxxy as though she was the latest app for your iphone.)

There is something very sinister about Roxxxy.

She is lifesize. She has skin sensors all over her body. She is wearing skimpy underwear and she is ‘ready to go’, say her developers.

She also has a selection of personalities. One of them is called Frigid Farrah. Farrah is ‘reserved and shy’. When you touch her, she says: “No! Stop!” (Remember, ‘frigid’ is an insult towards women who just don’t fancy you.) The idea is that you have sex with Farrah anyway.

What message is the sexbot giving out to society? You can do whatever you like to Roxxxy, whether she likes it or not. Especially if she says she doesn’t want it.

The message is that consent of a woman is meaningless, because men make all the decisions about how a woman’s body is treated.

You may think: but she’s only a doll! Maybe so, but much of sexism is subconscious; it’s about society’s attitude to women. It contaminates our culture and society. The more degrading images of women we see around us, the more we become used to seeing real women in the same way.

Rape is sex without consent; it’s all about power and control. Having sex with Roxxxy is simulating rape. Her existence – even as a doll – propagates the repugnant idea that women are objects and men can treat them as such.

Sooner or later, men will become bored with Roxxy because, after all, she is only a doll. They will want real power. They will seek that with real women – but, to the men, the women will all be Roxxxy.

See Roxxxy on YouTube here.

Men don't like us to know the reasons why they use prostitutes

Julie Bindel wrote a fascinating piece on why men use prostitutes, based on a research study that involved 700 men. They were interviewed for an international research project which aimed to uncover reasons why men buy sex.

I have been shocked by the online comments to her article, and also blog posts that have sprung up, which attack her journalism, women in general and her sexuality (as if the fact she is a lesbian has got anything to so with it!). See this one for example.

What seems to annoy the men who have commented (let’s call them Bindel’s critics) is the claim that women may be exploited. Now, there are a few women who choose to be prostitutes and are proud of it, and indeed this is unfortunately glamorised by the likes of Belle de Jour.

But, in the majority of cases, women are vulnerable and easily exploited and controlled. I have found some UK figures that that come from Home Office research or academic papers:

• Up to 70% of women in prostitution spent time in care, 45% report sexual abuse and 85% physical abuse within their families

• More than half of UK women in prostitution have been raped and/or seriously sexually assaulted. At least three-quarters have been physically assaulted

• Up to 95% of prostituted women are problematic drug users, including around 78% heroin users and rising numbers of crack cocaine addicts

• 68% of women in prostitution meet the criteria for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the same range as victims of torture and combat veterans undergoing treatment

• 75% of women involved in prostitution began when they were under 18

• 74% of women cite poverty/the need to pay household expenses and support their children as a primary motivator for entering prostitution

Can Bindel’s critics still claim that most prostitutes want to do it?

It seems to me that all the critics want to cling on to the fact that women want it and are therefore asking for it.

One person who commented even accused Julie Bindel of ‘oppressing’ him. This is of course laughable, given that women have been oppressed since time began, but it does make me think that we might be on our way to stamping out sexism. We might just have got to the nub of it.

Julie Bindel has made some men feel uncomfortable and angry (enough to lash out, exposing their homophobia), and I don’t think it’s because of what she says.

It’s because of what she found.

The men who were interviewed in the study were found to be one of two things. Either blatant misogynists, with no regard whatsoever for the welfare of the prostitute they were using, or men who did have some feeling. Feelings of loneliness, neediness and desperation, which we can only feel sorry for.

And Bindel’s critics do not like that they are people to be pitied.

Save rape crisis centres

Rape crisis centres offer support to women after they have been raped. The World Health Organization says that one in four women will be raped or sexually assaulted in their lifetime. The UK has the lowest rape conviction rate in Europe.

A decade ago, the UK had nearly 80 rape crisis centres, but now there are only 39 still operating and offering specialist support services to women who have survived sexual violence.

Here’s a quote from a woman who was raped, taken from a Guardian article about the struggle of the UK rape crisis centres to stay open:

"It's difficult to describe what [rape] does to you… For months afterwards, I couldn't sleep at night. I'd wake up in cold sweats because I was worried they would be breaking into my house after I'd reported it to the police. When my case didn't go to court I felt angry at the whole system, at the police who I didn't feel believed me. When I finally found help from the women here, it changed everything."

In London, there is only one remaining rape crisis centre. The North London Fawcett Group has been backing the campaign to save it. They launched the ‘Boris Keep Your Promise’ campaign to put pressure on the Boris Johnston, the mayor of London. In the run-up to his election, Boris promised to cut 20 per cent from City Hall's PR budget and give the resulting £744,000-a-year to Rape Crisis for at least four years. He said he would open three new centres and lobby the government for extra central funding.

A year later, Boris admitted that this money didn’t exist in his budget. However, he announced last week – at the London Assembly Budget and Performance Committee – that he is to double the provision of rape crisis centres in the capital, with the opening of the first new centre in a decade.

There’s a petition to central government demanding it provides long-term sustainable funding to independent rape crisis centres. Sign it here.

Promiscuity is not feminism

Natasha Walter writes in the Times today about a new generation of young women who are working as glamorous models, dress in revealing outfits and have multiple sexual partners.

It’s an age in which all teenage girls are feeling the pressure from their peers to be promiscuous and objectified – but instead of fighting it, they say they enjoy it.

One says: “Women are now in much more dominant roles in society…and they can say, you know what, I’m doing this for myself. It’s something to be proud of.”

The women are driving it, it seems. A 2006 survey among teenage girls showed that more than half would like to be glamour models. Many would consider pornography or lap dancing.

They are proud of being promiscuous. In fact, a man who becomes emotionally attached to them is a turn-off – they’d rather have men who “don’t really give a shit”.

And here’s the sad, empty truth. These girls also admit that they see the vulnerabilities of women of previous generations who have been left by men. They are trying to protect themselves by asserting themselves as sexual objects before men do.

“My father left my mother,” one says. “And since then she hasn’t really had a relationship. He’s had lots of girlfriends. I never want to be in that position. Never.”

Women who shun self-respect, love and emotional connection are not empowering themselves. They may be glowing with sexual confidence, but they are living in a false dream. Promiscuity is not feminism. Feminism is about respect of oneself and of others. A woman who lets herself be treated as a sex object is hurting herself and other women – who are then regarded in the same way. As objects, not people. And feminism goes backwards.

Why are they all snow MEN?

A snow-woman is a refreshing change. Here is one of these rare creatures.

Delilah's story

Delilah was beautiful and sexy, and Samson fell for her. But Delilah was a Philistine – and Samson was an Israelite, a terrorist and a murderer.

The Philistines bullied Delilah to discover the secret of Samson’s strength. Eventually, Samson admitted to her that the secret lies in his hair, and she cut his locks. His power curtailed, Samson was captured by the Philistines, who stabbed out his eyes with their swords.

The bible holds Delilah accountable for Samson’s defeat. The bible brands Delilah as 'evil'.

Here are some thoughts:

Samson didn’t have to tell her his secret. He chose to tell her.
Perhaps Samson wanted to tell her – perhaps he was tired of a brutal existence. Perhaps he was over-confident in his strength.
Perhaps she loved him, and he didn’t love her enough in return.
Perhaps he was abusive towards her.
Perhaps the pressure on Delilah from the Philistines was unbearable.
Perhaps Delilah was desperate. Perhaps she was unhappy. Perhaps she lost control for just one moment.

And some questions:

Why is it that a woman with hardly any rights – and who is oppressed, perhaps beaten and raped, denied options – is expected to demonstrate the same level of responsibility, integrity and rationality – if not more – than her male counterparts?

Why is it that we like women to be beautiful, but we judge them more harshly when men fall for their beauty?

If you like poetry...

Carol Ann Duffy's poem 'Delilah' in 'The World's Wife' is a beautiful interpretation of Delilah's story.

Sexist ageism and the feeble BBC

Harriet Harman, UK Equalities Minister, warned that ageism within the BBC is annoying its TV viewers.

She said that a former senior BBC executive told her: “The way we saw it was that as male presenters got older they become an authority and as female presenters got older they became a problem.”

If this is true, I am not surprised. I suspect that a proportion of society (male and female) harbours inbuilt – often hidden – sexist judgements and preferences. These people may not even realise it.

But does this mean that the BBC has to pander to this flawed thinking? There is no reason why the BBC can’t instate more older women as role models and influence the opinions and prejudices of the masses. As a corporation funded by the public, it has the power to inspire and a responsibility for integrity. The BBC should drive change, not be a slave to bigotry.

What is feminism?

'Feminism is the radical idea that women are people.'

I saw this graffitied on the wall of one of old buildings of the University of Coimbra in Portugal. This university is the oldest academic institution in the Portuguese-speaking world, one of the oldest in Europe, and has a history of student political campaigns.