Notes for a campaign

This is the weekend of UK Feminista Summer School – a fantastic couple of days packed full of advice, training and discussion on how to put feminist ideas into action.

One of the highlights of today was Karin Robinson, from Democrats Abroad, who promotes the US Democrats in the UK and was highly involved in the Obama campaign.

Karin had simple, but effective, advice for putting an idea into action.

1. Have a goal – has to be concrete but broad enough to appeal to all supporters
2. Point all supporters in the direction of the goal
3. Track your progress and adapt strategy if necessary

It’s tough work, but we can do it. Yes we can!

I like Men's Hour

There is a new radio programme. It’s called ‘Men’s Hour’ and is on every Sunday evening on Radio 5.

It describes itself as being ‘an hour of modern men being unusually emotional and painfully candid’ and has already received much criticism from all corners.

After all, why do we need yet another hour of all-men on the radio when we get that for the other 23 hours of the day? The arts are dominated by men. Women are struggling to be heard, and to be taken seriously.

But I listened to it with interest and I have to say I’m glad it exists. It is shallow, but at least it’s getting men talking and thinking about issues that affect them. My good (male) friend Athos said:

“I think its a step in the right direction and helps to move the male stereotype away from 'men's talk' = cars, gadgets, sport, sex and fighting.”

And that’s the point. Feminism is about women and men, and equality for women and men. As long as men feel pressured to conform to an artificial stereotype, they will not have equality, and that will affect women’s equality too.

Also, men have to start taking responsibility for their role in inequality. And the only way they will do this is by first understand the issues. Wouldn't it great, for example, if the men on the programme discussed the rapes at Latitude - after all, it's men who are doing them, so why is it always women who talk about them?

So, in the first episode, I liked the discussion about hypochondria – men are less likely than women to seek help, so this is a man’s equality issue. I liked the discussion about infidelity – after a bit of discussion, the consensus was that it’s better to be faithful.

And I liked ‘Thought for the Gay’ slot. I’d rather hear this than ‘Thought for the Day’ (religion-focused) on the Today Programme, which is usually boring and irrelevant. Also, if men understand what it’s like to be discriminated against because they’re gay (this week, the theme was the lack of gay footballers), they are more likely to understand sexism against women.

Athos said: “Gender equality does not mean only changing things for women, it means changing things for men too, and that can't happen without men's involvement. The gender landscape has been slowly changing over the last hundred years. For women this has been a more conscious change, women have tended to be more aware of how gender impacts their lives whilst men have tended not to talk about it. At least not in the media. I'm not saying this program is a shining example of male feminism but any movement needs to work on many frontiers and needs to change people's minds on many levels. So I see this as one of many steps to try and get to grips with that.”

I even liked the ‘Token Woman’ slot – the first one was with Jenni Murray, from Woman’s Hour. To me, this slot seems to be making fun of the fact that women are so often the ‘token woman’ in real life. By acknowledging it; by MEN acknowledging it, it is made to look ridiculous.

What I suggest now is that Woman’s Hour adopts a ‘Token Man’ slot, in which a man nominates his ‘woman of the week’. Now that would be deeply satisfying – although there would have to a condition – he notes her for HER, not her body, not her looks, and preferably her personality, her wit or her brains.

Men's Hour is on tonight at 19:30.

Skeptical feminism

Earlier this month, I went to a Westminster Skeptics event (run by the acclaimed Jack of Kent), where campaigner Simon Perry was the guest speaker and had some very useful tips on campaigning.

Simon has used the ASA, Trading Standards and publicity on the internet to expose the lies and scams of psychics, shut down nonsense allergy testing and successfully challenge Chinese medicine remedies.

The talk was an inspiration to anyone who is thinking about campaigning on anything – these methods work, as long as you have the determination and the ideas.

Skeptics and feminism
Feminism came up in the discussion; Simon happened to comment on an advert for lip balm that was accompanied by the caption that eighty (or some such high proportion) of women who use it are fifty (or somesuch) percent more happy. This is bad science, of course, not based on peer reviewed evidence, as all the other issues that Simon campaigns about.

He added he probably wouldn’t pursue this campaign though because he doesn’t strongly enough about it.

Fair enough. Everyone has their own bête noires. But it made me think of a few things. First, how I personally would campaign about this – because I believe it is not only wrong and based on false evidence, but harmful; it reinforces the idea that women should aspire to be pretty, and that this is necessary to achieve happiness and that this is what is valued by society. (No wonder about one in a hundred 16 to 18 year olds has anorexia and it is much more common in girls.)

Second, it demonstrates how, as individuals, we all have our own issues, and collectively, that’s what contributes to diversity and an interesting range of issues looked at. We need a good mix of people doing all these campaigns, according to what they personally feel strongly about, so that all issues get covered and everybody’s needs are addressed.

This brings me to government; without diversity, without a mix of people from both sexes and all backgrounds, there just won’t be the coverage of all the issues.

And we don’t have that at the moment. The Cabinet of 29 has only four women in it. No wonder the budget is so skewed to disadvantage women, as Ivette Cooper’s report revealed. There are not enough people thinking about all the issues that affect the population. Women are under-represented, so their needs do not get addressed.

Women need to be represented at senior levels in all areas of society, as well as government, and that includes a group such as Skeptics. Skeptics is an admirable set-up – fighting a worthy and important cause (combating bad science and dodgy evidence), but I looked at their speaker list and noted two out of 16 of their speakers to date are women.

One of those was Belle de Jour; there in the capacity of a scientist (according to the event advert), but I'm sceptical about that. She become famous by selling her body, so reinforces the myth that women can be successful only if they are sex objects; and that they shouldn’t be taken seriously. Plus, she is glamourising a very dangerous activity and I am sceptical about that glamour (women who work as prostitutes have a death rate far higher than the national average).

So I call on Skeptics to do the following:
Instate a more diverse speakership and some female role models – invite women who have done some campaigning and are notable for what they have done in this field (as all the men are invited for) – not for how successful they've been at selling their bodies. So for example:

• What about some notable female scientists, who can talk about their work and emphasise the importance of good evidence in policy and public understanding of science?
• What about a female politician or member of the House of Lords or who can discuss the link between science and policy?
• What about the high-profile women who have campaigned against bad science, lead charities and organise campaigns as part of their journalism or their activism?

Join Labour, vote for Diane

Do you remember Christmas number one in 2009?

Rock band Rage Against the Machine’s single, Killing In The Name, won the prime spot in the charts, beating X Factor winner Joe McElderry's The Climb.

Their success followed a Facebook campaign designed to prevent another X Factor number one and was described as a “truly remarkable outcome - possibly the greatest chart upset ever”.

The same could happen to get Diane Abbott into the leadership slot. Two activists who live in Diane’s Hackney constituency, Lynne Miles and Chitra Nagarajan, have written in the F-word their reasons why you should join the Labour party and have a say. It’s easy…

“You may not realise you can influence the outcome of the election but you can: even if you’re not a Party member already, you can join the now from just £1 and be allowed to vote. Anyone who joins up to and including the 8th September has a vote.
     “There are an estimated 175,000 members of the Labour Party, of which almost 25,000 have joined since the start of the election. New members could decide the outcome. There are tens, even hundreds of thousands of feminists in this country. We’re enough to make a difference. Even if Diane doesn’t win, the more votes she gets, the more influential she will be in shaping the future of the Party.
     “She is a politician in the best sense of the word: she stands up for what she believes to be right, and what is best for her constituents. Diane represents a real possibility for the Labour party. You’re her best chance of bringing it back to its core values.”

Plays on women and politics: the Tricycle Theatre

As part of The Tricycle’s Women, Power and Politics series, the theatre has just reached the end of hosting two excellent collections of short plays; ‘Now’ focusing on contemporary issues of women and politics, and ‘Then’, which has a historical theme. I reviewed ‘Now’, for the F-word blog.

The actress playing the role of female politician strides across the stage. She’s confident, she’s powerful. This is contemporary society, after all, in which women have the same rights as men to work, to become politicians and to become leaders of the country if they want to.

But there’s something amiss. Will this woman get what her male counterparts are getting? She is better, she works harder, but she is judged more harshly. She may work herself to exhaustion, she may achieve great results; but the criticism, the lack of support and the centuries-old legacy of male dominance that hack away at her self-esteem and warp how people perceive her, stop her in her tracks.

The first of the ‘Now’ plays, by Joy Wilkinson, is the story of Margaret Beckett, the Acting Leader of the Opposition and the sole female candidate in the race to lead the Labour party. Should she go for deputy as well? Her inner voice – the self-doubt that is the result of a lifetime of society’s pressure on women to give way to men – tells her that men deserve more. “Don’t listen to the men, you are the best!” say the (few) voices supporting her. But Tony Blair and John Prescott have more money for their campaigns. The newspapers say how good Tony is – and how bad she is. She doesn’t give up. She runs. She comes third. The woman who worked so hard for her party doesn’t even win her old job back.

The second play, ‘The Panel’, by Zinnie Harris, is about the harsh scrutiny that women face when being considered for a role (a job in a company) that has traditionally been a man’s. Each candidate gets the treatment from the all-male panel; there’s always something wrong with her. She’s too ‘serious’; she has a ‘past’; she’s too pretty so she’ll cause trouble. The final candidate can’t be faulted until one of them notes that this in itself is a fault. “She’s too good to be true.” It’s the most subtle kind of sexism – one that can rarely be proved, only noted over years of tedious observation, and this play demonstrated it so well that I turned to my male companion in the theatre, with a tear in my eye, and whispered: “Do you realise this is what it’s like for us?” He didn’t answer.

Loud music hurls us into the third play, ‘Playing the Game’ by Bola Agbaje, which is about the chaotic life of student politics. The female candidate is persuaded by her two glamorous flatmates that the only way to ‘stand out’ is to dress in provocative clothing and dance sexily to the camera. After being branded a ‘slag’ by her electorate, she changes into a tracksuit, and is promptly labelled a lesbian. This is the most uplifting play of the bunch – the protagonist uses her wits to trump the people trying to exploit her – but it also demonstrates an exhausting battle that men don’t usually have to fight to end up in the same place. That’s to say, to be someone who is respected for her views, not her body, and to be free and comfortable to speak her mind.

‘Pink’, by Sam Holcroft, is also about success. It’s probably the cleverest play of the collection, turning sexism on its head and catapulting us into a world in which women steal a little power from men for themselves. And it all comes down to sex. It’s ironic that the most powerful woman in the country, a fictional Prime Minister, is pleading with a porn star to help her; but in the most unexpected way. She wants her to portray in porn films a new image of a woman. This is the image that doesn’t exist yet; the woman who is permitted by society to be herself, to do things for herself and for her own pleasure (for example, enjoy sex) and is not judged for it.

The final play by Sue Townsend, ‘You, Me and Wii,’ is not just about women but about class. It’s heartwarming because the women – coming from very different backgrounds – collide in an unlikely scene and achieve an understanding. Can any woman be an MP? Yes, and yet to many women it appears an impossibility. The barriers are psychological and practical, emotional and cultural. In this poignant play, it takes a blood-stained female MP with humility and a heart to help change attitudes, and the result is an inspiration.

The ‘Now’ plays are tales of leaders and fighters, victims and losers. They are plays about strong women. They are about women who – in theory – have it all. But in reality, of course, they do not. Along every step of the way along the path to power, there are hurdles – subtle and invisible to some, but real and traumatic for half of the population – which hold women back. To have the truth played out on a stage; to feel again that helplessness and frustration that accompany so much of a women’s journey in life; wrenches at the core of a woman’s heart. And, I hope, at the same time, also sends out a ripple on to the far-reaching conscience of society.

A review of ‘Then’ is here.

Brazil, women and politics

Brazil is in the news. Brazil is booming, economically.

Last night I went to the South Bank to an evening with Brazilian writers – part of the Brazilian festival, an event celebrating women, politics, Brazil and fiction.

The writers Ana Maria Goncalves, Patricia Melo and Maria Valéria Rezende, chaired by publisher Liz Calder, discussed their books and Brazilian politics.

According to Liz, the Economist predicts that Brazil will be the fifth largest economy by 2014 and there are 20 million fewer in poverty under Lula, the current President, who started work as a poor shoe shiner and was a founding members of the Workers’ Party.

Ana Maria Goncalves said: “I’m very proud of Lula presidency. He is really interested in solving problems he saw when he was a worker.”

Patricia Melo, whose book Acqua Tofana (meaning ‘arsenic’) has the line “Women exist so men can measure themselves”, said the progress is a surprise for Brazil.

“We didn't expect this. It's a new reality. We are not used to opening the newspaper and reading good news. It is usually tragedy in reality. But this reality has to come with a new mentality including education; giving poor people access to education. I don't think politicians are prepared for this new reality. But it's a beginning.”

And it’s a beginning that may have a female leader, for the first time. Lula, who has to step down at the end of this year after serving his maximum two mandates, has chosen Dilma Rousseff as his official chosen successor.

According to Maria Valéria Rezende, the change in Brazil in the last eight years has been driven by women. Money has been given to families that live below the poverty line and “women administered it”.

And does fiction have a place amid all these changes? “I think Brazil is trying to know who Brazil is, where it comes from, ” said Ana Maria Goncalves.

This made me very happy to hear; I wrote my first novel, which is set in Brazil, because I was trying to understand a bit more about the country and its issues. Although, when I’d finished the novel, I felt I understood Brazil even less – it is a wonderful, colourful and complex country, full of paradoxes and contrasts, treasures and histories. My attempts at cracking it were like making small scratches with my finger nail on the outside of a green coconut.

Brazil’s culture is so different, so profound, I was in awe of it. The more I found out, the more of an enigma it seemed to be.

The path to equality

This article is published today on the website of Progressive Women, which aims to support women through discussion and networking events for women interested in politics and the economy.

The United Nations has just approved a new organisation, called ‘UN Women’, to promote women’s equality globally.

And not a moment too soon. A worldwide poll revealed last week that, although people in most countries believe that men and women should have equal rights, they acknowledge that, in reality, equality hasn’t been achieved.

In the poll, which was conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, many people – especially in some of the wealthier nations surveyed – said that men have more opportunities than equally qualified women for jobs that pay well and that life is generally better for men than it is for women in their countries.

We live in a society, at least in the developed world, where laws for equality are broadly in place, but we’re not achieving it. Very few women run large organisations, business culture remains a boys’ club and large numbers of women are shouldering responsibilities at home and at work simultaneously.

So what’s at the heart of it? The reasons are complex and subtle and part of our culture. Since the beginning of time, men have been the dominant sex. Men have been the breadwinners, women have looked after the children, and it’s been acceptable for men to exert their power over women using violence. In many countries, this is still the case. In many others, the cultural elements are beginning to shift, but it’s a long and difficult journey.

One of the factors is the expectation – of society in general and of women themselves – of what women can achieve. Often, in a room full of people – say, in a meeting or a debate – it’s the men who speak first and the men who speak most. This is regardless of ability, knowledge or eloquence. Women have just as much to say, and their ideas and contributions are just as valuable. But they are not speaking up as much – and they are not being heard. Consequently, men assume more powerful positions and women are pushed into second place.

Of course, this is not the only factor, but it’s definitely one worth exploring. What are the reasons for the difference? From birth, boys and girls are bombarded with stereotypes; boys are allowed to more aggressive and climb trees, for example, while girls are encouraged to be passive and play with plastic teapots. A commonly held view is that boys and girls are innately suited to these traditional roles. However, the scientific evidence for this is not substantial, comprehensive or conclusive enough, and there is more evidence that experience itself changes brain function (read articles by neuroscientist Lise Eliot and Professor of linguistics Deborah Cameron, for example, who discuss this evidence).

There are obvious differences between the sexes, but there is no scientific consensus that women are generally born with a natural tendency to empathise and that men are generally born with natural competitive streak and are better at solving logical problems. But if people believe these myths, is it any wonder that there are fewer girls than boys studying maths, fewer female politicians and more female carers? Stereotyping in itself has been shown to hinder people’s performance; for example, read about Professor of Psychology Claude Steele’s eye-opening work.

Some people argue that we should accept that men and women do different jobs, but they do not then acknowledge that carer jobs happen to be lower paid than engineers, for example, and typically ‘male’ jobs are held in far greater esteem by society than ‘female’ jobs.

A change in culture will be brought about only when these stereotypes, which block the progress of society and stops us benefiting from the potential talents of individuals, are crushed. Attitudes have to change everywhere – from the parents and teachers who must encourage young children to pursue a wider range of activities, to the media and population at large who must accept women as leaders without criticising them disproportionately to men. And attitudes have to change among women ourselves. Once we fundamentally believe we are as capable as men, our self-belief will take us a long way.

Hey baby...you're dead

Hey Baby is a new video game with a difference. No men killing prostitutes in this one! Women kill men who sexually harass them. It's revenge time!

Of course, this is not mainstream, and probably never will be (unlike the many video games which advocate violence against women just for fun). This one is just an idea. The idea made me smile though, in a sad sort of way.

Perhaps, if anything, it will allow men (all men, including the many who don't harass women) to see what pretty much all women have to tolerate, and get sick of, pretty much all of the time.

Quotation, quotation, quotation

I have been looking through an old Penguin Dictionary of Quotations, published in 1960, and have three observations.

1. The quotations are mostly from men (women throughout history have generally been invisible)
2. The few women who are quoted speak only about the fact they are women (as though this is the only interesting and distinguishing feature about them)
3. The pronouns used in all quotations, if referring to people in general, is ‘he’ (as though women do not exist; women are not people)

There are some quotations about women, said by men, yet most of those about  women being ‘fair’ (as in pretty).

Here’s one, from Mortimer Collins (1827-1876), an English writer and novelist.

'A man is as old as he’s feeling, a woman as old as she looks.'

Interpretation: women exist to look pretty. That is their sole purpose in life. Their looks are more important than their feelings. In contrast, men exist to be themselves – to be people. How they are feeling is more important than how they look.

I like to think Mortimer Collins was being ironic. It’s an insightful comment reflecting on the sad state of his society at the time.

It makes me sad though. Two half centuries later, I don’t think we’ve come very far.