Blog

New feature: Women born women?

2012-05-22T16:11:33Z

How is it possible for feminists to reconcile these two statements. The first, of course, is Simone de Beauvoir's most famous quote:

"One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman."

And the second is the entry policy for the upcoming conference, Radfem2012:

"We ask that RadFem 2012 be respected as a space where women born women living as women are able to meet and share information in a peaceful and safe environment."

Laura has already posted about how wrong it is for a radical feminist conference to intentionally exclude trans women.

But now Helen G follows this up with an analysis of the language they've chosen to use. Does the phrase "women born women" make sense? Can it be used in all conscience by feminists, who in general are no fans of the idea that gender is innate.

My pregnant body: sexualisation and sanitisation

2012-05-22T16:30:25Z

This is the third in a series of posts by Yasmin, a pregnant feminist who is sharing her experiences of pregnancy with us, in the hope that she is not alone in her thinking!

As I entered my second trimester, 3-6 months pregnant, I began to notice what seemed to be a leery quality in the gaze of a few men. It may seem odd to some to suggest that the pregnant body is in some ways hypersexualised. Or to others who are not feminist, that there should be a problem with being considered sexual when pregnant because, after all, you are fat and men/women can still find you attractive. The more noticeably pregnant I became, the more I could discern a look from many men that suggested the recognition that some man had "possessed" me; that I was concomitantly fertile yet safe ground.

Women, in particular, would begin to comment, publicly, on how my "boobs are so big", how "great" it is, as though this is the primary bonus of the whole process. It may seem like I am moaning again, but I find the talk problematic because it reinscribes as acceptable the objectification of the female form. Pregnancy requires that breasts be recognised as part of the female anatomy that is not simply there for aesthetic or sexual purposes. They are preparing to become functional entities, yet even now, there is an emphasis from without to maintain them as purely sexual.

In my previous post I wrote about the pressure on women to retain a sexual allure during pregnancy and in some ways, this is intensified throughout this particular stage. The famous talk of the "glowing" mother-to-be may well be true for some; for others, however, it is another objectified status that women are supposed to happily strive for. In not attaining it, one is deemed to be less than.

One pregnant feminist friend relayed the following story. During an antenatal class with one of the UK's leading charities in this area, couples were shown footage of mothers breastfeeding. One male participant chose at this point to ask why a more "attractive" woman could not have been shown. This was greeted with titters of nervous laughter.

It is paradoxical that this focus on and hypersexualisation of my pregnant chest will in a few months' time become even more acute. The stress upon large naked breasts as primarily fit for pornographic content like page three and top shelf magazines will mean that I will feel uncomfortable when bearing them to feed my child.

I myself had a female colleague, during lunch in the staff room, ask me whether I planned to shave my vulva in time for the birth. I explained that at the moment, I cannot SEE my vulva and did not relish the thought of taking a razor to it blind, as it were. How odd it is that I am supposed to care about the aesthetic state of my vulva at a time when, because I am in agony, I will really not give a second thought to who sees it and in what state.

A beautician confirmed my fears, telling me that a number of women close to their due date visit her for a Brazilian wax. Odd, then, that it is at this particular juncture, when the female body is perceived to be truly "woman", that the vulva is required to be taken back to its prepubescent form. To justify this, some women are fed dross telling them that it is for the benefit of the baby because a bald vulva will lessen the risk of eye and mouth infections that can be obtained by having pubic hair come into contact with these regions.

The "lovely" roundness of my belly and breasts, more importantly, detract from the more troubling conversations women could have about how difficult pregnancy can be on the female body. I should feel grateful and happy that I am now allowed to eat "whatever" I want and have a large chest to boot: clearly every woman's hidden desire. Yet, when I say that there are many complications people are visibly uncomfortable. I am not supposed to talk of the piles, constipation, bloating, heartburn, back ache, nosebleeds, sensitive gums, varicose veins... this list is, sadly, not exhaustive.

The sexualisation therefore goes hand in hand with a sanitisation of what actually can and often does happen when women are pregnant. (I will, in my next blog, discuss this in further detail.) And, as is often the case, the women are presented the carrot of attractiveness to tempt our concentrations away from more pressing matters.

New feature: It's not feminism that hurts men

2012-05-22T13:54:48Z

I expect many of you will be familiar with the recent Observer article by Elizabeth Day about philosopher David Benatar's claims that "sexism against men is a widespread yet unspoken malaise." (You may also be familiar with Suzanne Moore's response, along with Rhiannon and Holly of Vagenda's piece mentioning the book alongside other related issues.)

This notion doesn't seem to be unspoken to me. If anything, it's something I see a lot online, usually in response to a mention of sexism against women. While the "sexism" tag is often little more than a derailing attempt to preserve traditional roles, it's clear those traditional expectations are oppressive to men as well as women. Jo T touches on this when introducing her own critique of Day's article:

There's no denying that men are oppressed by certain cultural norms. These tell them that they shouldn't openly express their feelings, that there is only a very limited way to perform masculinity in an 'acceptable' way and that disagreeing with dominant tropes about what is and isn't 'manly' can lead to very unpleasant consequences. I read No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz and agree with a great deal of what is said there, about men, 'manliness' and the problems unique to men in a patriarchy. I also find Tony Porter's TEDWomen speech on the pernicious and damaging "man box" to be moving, and accurate, and highly pertinent.

However, as the section of the men's rights movement which hates women gains ground in online spaces, the recent Observer article by Elizabeth Day on the subject not only seems disingenuous but also potentially dangerous. Indeed, it all but concedes the vast majority of the anti-feminist talking points pushed by men's rights activists (MRAs). Before I begin, I should point out that Melissa at Shakesville has done a superb job of explaining many of the article's problematic aspects, not least that "it ain't women who are the primary gatekeepers of that bullshit [i.e. patriarchy]. It's other men."

The headline and standfirst of the article are bad enough: if women and girls were merely "lagging at school" and "the butt of cruel jokes", rather than victims of systemic violence and inequality, we'd count ourselves damn lucky. The piece then begins by setting out the usual tedious MRA talking points about the "supar sekrit!" oppression of men, using arguments promulgated by Professor David Benatar and men's rights author Warren Farrell. This is followed by a paragraph giving half a dozen examples of the oppression men supposedly face. In my opinion, these mislead the readers by omitting various highly relevant pieces of information and context...

Click here to read the rest of the review and comment

Picture shows the HTML for "end patriarchy" written in red pen across a white sheet that is placed on a pavement and tilted diagonally upwards into the top righthand corner. By ctrouper. Shared under a creative commons licence.

Weekly round-up and open thread, 15-21 May 2012

2012-05-21T15:29:21Z

Here's this week's round-up of some of the bits around the internet we haven't had a chance to blog about. Please add links in the comments section if there's anything you came across that you want to share too. Please note that a link here doesn't imply endorsement or agreement, and some links may be triggering.

We are all subversives: femme strength and queer solidarity (Radical Faggot)

Jamie Walker at This Affected Youth on the news that Zimbabwean Senator has suggested circumcising women, shaving their heads and asking them to wash less frequently could halt the AIDS epidemic.

The Australian Star (not unproblematically) interviews Andrea Roussel, a trans woman working as a prison warden who was able to stay in her job during and after her transition.

3 things professional women should stop apologising for (Fast Company)

The government has halved the staff at the Equality and Human Rights Commission and removes its obligation to assess whether government policies will affect the poor, and makes the Chair a part-time post (via The Guardian)

On the Ched Evans rape case: the Police speak to Sky News and Rima Amin on the Independent Blogs:(Ched Evans Conviction: The internet is not the place to dispute rape)

Also in The Independent: Richard Garner (Older female newsreaders forced to become Stepford Wives).

John Scalzi says being a straight, white male is "the lowest difficulty setting there is" (or 'privilege for gamers')

A Latina woman in New York has been jailed for 10 days for calling a judge a "white racist pig" (via Fuck Yeah Marxism-Leninism)

Black women's bodies, ourselves (and a twerkin' for mothers' video): An interview with strugglingtobeheard by leonine antiheroine

Afghan woman pushes for rights from behind the wheel (AlertNet)

RIP Donna Summer, queen of disco, who has died at 63 (BBC News)

New tumblr: Is This Feminist? (Because being a marginally acceptable feminist is a full time job)

Two comment pieces from The Guardian: Hollande's cabinet shows Sarkozy how to do gender equality - see, easy; and Fake gay weddings in Tokyo Disneyland are not a fairytale come true

Gay Star News: 106-year-old transgender woman speaks at Burma's first IDAHO

Londonist interview with the curator of 'Pink Does Not Exist' at Flat C, an art gallery inside the curator's own home in north London

A hospital trust in the West Midlands is planning to allow unpaid job seekers (on 'Workfare' programmes) to deliver patient care on its wards (via The Guardian)

The undercover reporter Mary Beith, who broke the 'smoking beagles' story in the 1970s, has died aged 73

Dammit Quesada: Ragnell on the assertion that a big-budget comic-book movie with a female lead wouldn't work

Rhiannon and Holly from The Vagenda write in the New Statesman. The men's rights zeitgeist: Don't buy into this pretend battle of the sexes.

Asking: The Pervocracy on consent

The (inaugural?) Intersect conference happened in Bristol last Saturday: read a summary of the day by organiser and former TFW guest blogger Natalie Dzerins at her blog, Forty Shades of Grey.

That's it for now - more next week!

Image by Flickr user duncan. It shows graffitti on a wall reading "Another subversive comment". It is shared under a creative commons license.

New review: Her Noise at Tate Modern

2012-05-20T00:42:22Z

The Her Noise theme began as a 2001 curatorial project focused on gender imbalance in sonic art. This led the creators to map women in the field, along with those in electronic music and punk, for a 2005 exhibition. A living DIY archive at LCC followed and on 5 May 2012, Tate Modern hosted the Her Noise Symposium: a day of discussion and art focused on topics such as such as women's voices and varied uses of technology.

Artist Joanne Matthews has reviewed the symposium for us. Here's a preview of what she has to say about it:

The Her Noise Symposium I attend on 5 May forms part of the Her Noise: Feminisms and the Sonic collaboration between Electra, CRiSAP and Tate Modern: a series of events investigating feminist discourses in sound and music (including performances by Meredith Monk and Pauline Oliveros that I sadly missed).

The Symposium is a day of talks and discussions among female artists, musicians, curators, writers and academics. It takes place in the Starr Auditorium at Tate Modern, which is not a particularly inspiring venue. As I'm not usually a fan of conference-style learning, I'm a little wary of spending an entire day in the uncompromising red room, with a slight hangover.

As an artist, I'm attending the symposium with the hope of farming for some inspiration to connect feminism to my artistic practice. I sometimes find talking about feminism rather stifling and need to explore new languages to liberate me from this. By exploring how feminist discourses are framed within a current cultural context, we can see tangible examples being explored and shaped.

Click here to read the review in full and comment

Picture shows several figures walking across the Millennium Bridge in London, approaching Tate Modern. Released into the public domain by its author, Adrian Pingstone.

In praise of slacktivism

2012-05-20T13:14:28Z

I've come across ever such a lot of uses of the word 'slacktivist' or 'slacktivism' recently. Described on Wikipedia as "a pejorative term that describes "feel-good" measures, in support of an issue or social cause, that have little or no practical effect other than to make the person doing it feel satisfaction," it's a dismissive way of describing online activism.

There are all sorts of ways to be an activist. Until the internet became so ubiquitious, activism was mostly about thermal underwear, flasks of tea, and watching a placard disintegrate in the rain. Okay, that's perhaps slightly exaggerated, but my earliest activist engagement mostly involved being somewhere, physically, for an hour or so. And I'm sure it always rained.

Demonstrations are a great way to grab attention, I wouldn't deny that (and may I put in a little plug here for Reclaim the Night, 24 November 2012). Meeting up with others who think like you, raising, quite literally, a common voice - glorious stuff.

But. If your demonstration doesn't have that many people, and only lasts an hour, and gets no publicity, how many minds have you changed? A few? The vast majority of the world will carry on blissfully unaware that you have a cause at all.

Meetings, demos, consciousness-raising (CR) groups - all of these are great, but I'd say there are some ways in which slacktivism is better. The first is inclusiveness: mothers don't always want to bring small children to a demo, and childcare is inevitably difficult to source for such things. Disabled people struggle to get into town on disabled-unfriendly public transport. Younger people might not have the support of their families and be discouraged from physically attending events. Those outside metropolitan hubs might not fancy a 5-hour round trip just to get to a 1-hour meet. Working mums might just not have the time.

By contrast, slacktivism is open to many more people. Keen feminist teenagers can use the web at school, even if their parents would ban them from demos. Disabled people can use social networking forums, at their own pace and at whatever time of the day or night is convenient, without worrying about accessibility of an event.

The anonymity of the internet also allows people to share experiences online without the emotional impact of talking in person at CR groups. It's terribly difficult to tell someone, even a friend, that you've suffered sexual assault or domestic violence, for example. But log in with an anonymous username and it's much easier. The success of Hollaback! and similar groups both provides a valuable outlet and raises awareness: this is the CR of our times.

The second is impact. A huge demo will have a huge impact, but the logistics of organising that are huge. By contrast, an internet campaign can attract hundreds of thousands of signatures, retweets, facebook posts and emails almost overnight. In addition, online campaigns keep going. Nobody's going to be frozen solid and desperate for a wee after 3 hours online campaigning. And they have the ability to bombard politicians; thousands of emails on one subject to one person will at the very least persuade them that there is an issue. This isn't dissimilar to Amnesty International's letter-writing campaign which has been going for decades.

The third is dissemination. Write something on a placard and wave it for an hour, and an hour's passers-by see it. Write something on the web, tweet it and facebook it, and watch it go viral. A couple of months ago, I started a hashtag (#ididnotreport) - the archetypal slacktivism, if you like. Two months later, it's being used in five different languages. You don't get that sort of attention from standing outside the House of Commons in the rain.

Curiously, I've also found that people will ignore a protestor. We have a peculiarly British way of looking straight ahead and pretending that we can't see 100 people with placards - you saw it with commuters when the Westminster village was in place, too. There's a tent there? With pictures of Iraqi babies with missing limbs? Nope, choosing not to see that. Say something on the internet on the other hand, and your detractors are drawn magnetically to you, which is both a burden because they will probably be abusive, and a blessing because these are the people who need to hear it most. There's never been any point preaching to the choir.

I don't want to denigrate real-time activism - long may it continue. But there's certainly a place for slacktivists, and I'll wear my slacktivism label with pride.

The photo above is taken from Daryl @reMedia8 used under the creative commons license.

Gendered assumptions in daily life

2012-05-22T16:23:02Z

This is a guest post by Hennie Weiss & Elin Weiss

Many women, and men, encounter daily interactions in which gender role stereotypes and "typical" gender behaviours are manifested. Sometimes we behave in gender stereotypical ways without even reflecting over it. Often these behaviours are simply habits. If a person however strays from gendered expectations there are sometimes consequences. Often other people acknowledge that a person is straying and attempt to correct this "error" by saying something or by acting in a way that makes it clear that you are straying too far from what is comfortably considered feminine or masculine. Other times, non-stereotypical gender behaviour is punished with violence or harassment.

A person does not have to stray very far from gender stereotypical expectations in order to be corrected by others. We want to share with you some of our own experiences in which we felt that our behaviour was corrected or given attention by a third party, sometimes perhaps even unconsciously.

Gender role assumptions are often based on stereotypical notions of how men and women should act, what is "proper" for one's gender, and what one is capable of or good at. One example of this was experienced by one of the authors. "On two different occasions, while mowing the front lawn, I have had men come up to me (one who was walking by with his dog, the other was driving and then stopped his car in front of my house) to give me advice on how to properly mow a lawn. For example, these men suggested that I wear other more suitable shoes and the second one suggested I wear goggles to protect my eyes from rocks that could be propelled by the blade underneath the lawn mower. There are no rocks in my front yard and my tennis shoes were fine to wear. I felt that these men wanted to give me advice solely because I was a female performing "typically masculine duties". Their advice made me feel infantilised, especially as their paternal advice was of no use to me".

A second example of gender stereotypes of women as less knowledgeable in regards to "typical masculine duties" was experienced by one of the authors. "When calling the landlord to discuss maintenance of my rental apartment and providing the landlord with the measurements I took of a window, he refused to acknowledge me and instead called my partner, assuming that he would be the more competent and reliable source. My partner gave him the exact same measurements, without actually measuring the window himself since I had already done so. After talking to my partner the landlord was pleased with the results. I was furious that my competence was not taken seriously and that my partner was assumed more knowledgeable".

The above mentioned examples took place in or around our homes. When out in public similar gendered assumptions also take place. Often gender stereotypical assumptions imply, that when a woman is out having dinner with a man, the man should be paying for the meal. "Often times when my partner and I are eating out they put the bill in front of him rather than me, as if he is always the one who (should) pay. When we order food to go, and I hand over my credit card, it is common for the staff to hand my card back to my partner rather than me, implying that he is in charge of my finances and the money exchanged. I make my own money and I can certainly pay for my partner and myself".

Other examples again illustrate this notion: "I was out having dinner with a male friend of mine. I ordered a beer, while he ordered a cocktail. The same server who took our orders brought us the drinks and handed me the cocktail and him the beer. I felt that the underlying assumption was that men drink beer, not cocktails, and women drink cocktails and certainly not beer". Another example happened just a few weeks ago. "Recently, I had dinner with a male friend. When it was time to pay I put my credit card down. When the server returned she put the card and the receipt in front of my friend, assuming that he was the one paying".

Another common stereotype of women is that they should be calm, quiet, happy and non-aggressive. They should always walk around with smiles on their faces, even when they have had a crappy day and do not feel like smiling. "It has happened a handful of times, when I am out walking, that random men on the street have felt like they have the right to tell me to "smile". This angers me because I do not know these people and they are taking their gendered assumptions of women as always happy and smiley out on me. Leave me alone and I would be much happier".

These common and sometimes daily interactions display examples of larger societal expectations placed on women and men. In the above mentioned examples, however, we have focused on our own experiences as heterosexual cis women. We are equally interested in hearing about heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual, queer and trans* (or any other way you identify yourself) experiences in which you have felt corrected because you might not neatly fit into, or act according to stereotypical gender behavior.

------------

Hennie Weiss has recently earned her Master's degree in Sociology. Elin Weiss has a Master's degree in Women's Studies. Their interests include feminism, gender, the sexualisation of women and the portrayal of women in media.

The image Gendered assumptions was made by Helen and is based on the copyright-free image Aiga_toilets downloaded from Wikimedia Commons. If you re-use this image elsewhere, please include a link back to the URI of this post (http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2012/05/gendered_assump).

There's nothing radical about transphobia

2012-05-21T15:46:14Z

Like many of you who have been discussing the issue on Twitter and Facebook today, I was angered to learn that a new UK conference for radical feminists, RadFem2012, is not only playing host to a well-known transphobe, but is actively excluding trans women from attending.

The conference is open only to "women born women living as women". Now, I personally support and fully appreciate the value of women-only space, but that space has to be open to all self-defining women. Excluding trans women from an event that aims to build an "anti-oppressive movement for the liberation of all women from patriarchal oppression" is bitterly ironic.

Trans women suffer horrifying levels of violence, abuse and discrimination, fuelled not only by the fact that they are women, but by the refusal of the vast majority of the cis population to acknowledge and respect their identities. The organisers of RadFem2012 have actively chosen to align themselves with this majority, and in so doing are complicit in trans women's oppression. Radical? Feminism? I think not.

Then there's Sheila Jeffreys, who thinks that "transgenderism" is:

...a practice in which persons who do not adhere to the correctly gendered practices that have been placed upon the biological sex are considered to have something called Gender Identity Disorder and they're expected to cross over into the other sex. Not criticize the gendered system as it exists, because that's unthinkable but to make some kind of "journey" by mutilating their bodies and taking dangerous drugs for the rest of their lives in order to supposedly represent the opposite sex.

The same Sheila Jeffreys who has been invited to speak at a conference where discussion will be "rooted in the realities of women's lives". Are we sure this isn't Irony2012? Because if Jeffreys and the conference organisers could bring themselves to listen to trans people's stories, to try and understand or empathise with the realities of their lives, they would realise quite how ridiculously facile and patronising the above argument is.

See, when I was little, I didn't like girlie things. I thought I would rather be a boy. But do you know what I did? I ignored or worked through the girlie things and got on with my life on my terms.

Which is far, far, far easier than going through what trans people go through and putting up with the shit they have to put up with to enable them to live their lives as the people they know they are. Clearly there's something much more significant at play here than not wanting to adhere to "correctly gendered practices", otherwise why choose the hard path?

Personally, I don't care what that something is. The fact that some people know they are male or female regardless of the sex they were assigned at birth is enough for me, because I respect other people's lived experiences. I don't want to sit around "critiquing" trans people's identity because - aside from the fact that this basically boils down to a disgusting debate on whether people have the right to exist - as a cis person I'm in absolutely no position to understand. And, quite frankly, it's none of my business.

What is my business, as a feminist, is standing in solidarity with my trans sisters and fighting the system that oppresses all of us. A system of which the term "women born women" is very much a part.

Boycott RadFem2012.

Further reading:

You can't smash patriarchy with transphobia

Trans Feminism: There's No Conundrum About It

Rethinking Sexism: How Trans Women Challenge Feminism

Responding To The Feminist Anti-Transsexual Arguments

Where did we go wrong? Feminism and trans theory - two teams on the same side?

17 May - International Day against Homophobia and Transphobia

2012-05-17T09:14:01Z

Today ILGA-Europe launches its first Annual Review of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe 2011 supplemented by the Rainbow Map. These documents are intended to offer an overall picture of the current status of the human rights of LGBTI people in Europe.

From a legal perspective, the ILGA-Europe Rainbow Map shows that none of the countries in Europe can claim to provide full legal equality for LGBTI people and, on average, the level of legal equality continues to be very low in most countries.

Progress has been uneven, to say the least - at its best, there is increased recognition of the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, particularly in the fields of asylum and protection from violence. Various countries continued moving towards the extension of legal recognition and equal rights to rainbow families; and there are a number of legal proposals towards the introduction of humane laws regarding the change of legal name and gender of trans people.

However, on the negative side, in some countries there is either no progress, or worse, there are moves towards the adoption of legislation criminalising the 'propaganda of homosexuality'.

While the publication of this kind of research is broadly to be welcomed, and as eye-catching as the rainbow map is, it may be considered problematic in its conflation of LGB, TS/TG and Intersex issues. Note also that intersections of race, class, disability, etc, are not clear; nor is it recorded whether subjects are binary or non-binary identified.

Download the ILGA-Europe Annual Review of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe 2011 here

Download the ILGA-Europe Rainbow Map and Index, May 2012 here

She Monkeys opens in London and Dublin

2012-05-15T17:13:58Z

Swedish director Lisa Aschan's last year's début feature She Monkeys (Apflickorna) is coming to selected London cinemas on Friday 18 May (and to the Irish Film Institute in Dublin a week later).

Please see Peccadillo Pictures' website for details.

Bringing to mind films like Céline Sciamma's 2007 Water Lilies (ah, the joys of swimming pools!) or Catherine Breillat's 2001 À Ma Soeur! (oh, the perils of having an older sister!), Aschan's film remains fresh and original in its depiction of rivalry between two young female equestrians. The constantly tipping power balance and palpable sexual tension between the girls lead to unexpected twists and turns of the plot, making it a gripping viewing experience.

I reviewed the film for The F-Word last year so you can have a read here if you need more encouragement. WARNING: the review gives away some of the plot (but does not, arguably, contain any major spoilers).

Where have all Cannes women directors gone?

2012-05-16T09:33:19Z

Arguably the most prestigious (and indisputably most glamorous) film festival in the world opens tomorrow in Cannes, the French Riviera.

As it is the Festival's 65th birthday, no-one else but iconic (and resurrected) Marilyn Monroe blows the candles on the birthday cake.

In the next week or so, we will see many glamorous women (in their latest Armanis and Chanels) in the 'Fashion in Cannes 2012' sections of newspapers and blogs and will no doubt witness numerous heated debates on how much of a lady's leg is too much to show and why it even matters.

The bad news is that not a single one of these gorgeous (in all respects) women will be treading the red carpet as a director of a film listed for awards (the list comprises 22 names of film directors and has film critics around the globe drooling).

La Barbe, a French beard-wearing feminist direct action group (they became famous last year for protesting against evident sexism made explicit in handling Dominique Strauss-Kahn's case), wrote an open letter published in Le Monde last week (here original in French), expressing their disappointment with this situation (English translation here on CiF).

Most online commenters chastise The Beards for not offering any female contestants (which is true) and point out that the introduction of quotas (which they never suggest) would be bad for the Festival's prestige.

More interesting, and highlighting serious problems with the industry and not just the Cannes Film Festival, was the answer by Thierry Frémaux, General Delegate (quoted here in English translation).

"As a citizen, I fully support feminist activism," he said [how very French and republican - AO]. However (and haven't we heard this all before?), "as a professional, I select work on the basis of it actual qualities. We would never agree to select a film that doesn't deserve it on the basis it was made by a woman...Women's rights need be defended beyond Cannes, which is a consequence and illustration of what is going on." [The last bit has a slightly religious twang to it: do not protest in the church, ladies - AO]

Do women have to be naked to get into the Met. Museum?

Can women be in Cannes only as the mistresses of the Opening Night ceremony?

Weekly round-up and open thread, 7-14 May 2012

2012-05-16T09:34:45Z

Hi all

Photo of different coloured spools of thread, by The Shopping Sherpa, shared under a Creative Commons License.

Parental leave: what's the deal?

2012-05-14T11:15:12Z

One of the few positive things in last week's Queen's speech was the government's promise to introduce new, flexible parental leave, in recognition of the fact that childcare should not be the sole responsibility of women. The specifics have yet to be set in stone, but one proposal - outlined on ConservativeHome - is for the £2 billion pot of maternity leave money to be split between all new parents, leaving couples to decide for themselves who will take time off from paid employment, how much and when.

The current system offers the birth mother up to 52 weeks' maternity leave: 6 weeks at 90% pay (unless you're self-employed), 33 weeks on statutory maternity pay (currently £135) or 90% pay, whichever is less, and the rest unpaid. Men or the mother's partner are entitled to two weeks' unpaid leave when the baby is born. Since 2011, partners can now also take up to 26 weeks of the birth mother's leave (additional paternity leave) at any time between 20 weeks and the child's first birthday. Only one partner is entitled to adoption leave (39 weeks at SMP), but this can also be transferred in the same way as maternity leave.

Rebecca Asher's Shattered includes a useful overview of other parental leave systems worldwide, including Norway (54 weeks: nine for mothers, six for fathers, the rest flexible), Sweden (480 days: 60 for each parent, the rest flexible) and Iceland (nine months: three for each parent, the rest flexible, can be taken by both parents at the same time).

There are a number of issues to take into account when considering parental leave policy. First and foremost, birth mothers need time to recover from the birth and - if possible - breastfeed their child. The WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months, and I personally think any parental leave policy must include six months provision for the birth mother as a minimum(whether she chooses to take it is up to her).

However, it's not much use being entitled to six months if you can't afford to take them, and we need to rethink how much money is made available to new parents, particularly those who don't have a working partner with a decent salary. Iceland manages to provide between 75 and 80% of the individual's earnings throughout the entire nine months, with a cap for high earners, so why can't we?

Take-up of parental leave by men is another sticking point. With the continued existence of the gender pay gap and some way to go in cultural expectations around the division of childcare, women may continue to take the bulk of parental leave, even if they would prefer not to. In addition, due to societal attitudes around parenting, men may find it harder to raise the issue of parental leave with their employers, and come up against more resistance.

Should we follow the lead of the Nordics and adopt a "use it or lose it" approach for fathers? This would likely help us move much more quickly towards a more equitable division of childcare responsibilities (as in Iceland). It would also mean employers could no longer discriminate against women of childbearing age, as men would be just as likely to take time off following the birth of a child. But if it comes at the expense of the birth mother's leave, it's hardly ideal.

Personally I also think it's important that couples can take leave at the same time if they wish, rather than just transferring it between them. I haven't had a baby myself, but I imagine it would be a massive help to have your partner around in the first few weeks, and men/partners should get to experience this important time too.

Finally, we need to address the negative cultural narrative around parental leave, particularly from business. This is neatly summed up in one comment on the ConservativeHome post, which refers to having children as a "lifestyle choice". Apparently the state and employers should not have to pay out or restructure their working practices to take new parents' and babies' needs into account.

Yet this is an incredibly blinkered argument. The state needs future generations of taxpayers, caregivers, workers. Businesses need a continual supply of employees and customers. Quite simply, we need people to have children. But if individuals receive no financial support or have to give up their jobs to do so, we'll either see a continuing decline in birth rates or an increase in child poverty, neither of which will help business, the state or society as a whole. Check out Zoe Williams' piece for more on the economic and demographic argument.

Forcing women into heterosexual marriage, required baby-making, confinement to the home and financial dependency - as some Tory policy-makers seem hell-bent on doing - isn't a solution either, unless businesses are keen to lose half their workers and women our independence and rights (um, no).

So parental leave makes a massive amount of sense. And to me it makes even more sense to extend it to all new parents, regardless of gender. Women, men and children lose out when childcare is assumed to be a solely female responsibility. It's high time we reformed the system, to everyone's benefit.

Photo by HoboMama, shared under a Creative Commons licence.

Gaggle update and call for reviewers

2012-05-14T13:25:02Z

With their debut album From the Mouth of the Cave finally hitting the shops on 4 June, Gaggle have announced that they will be staging a series of 12 London events (one for each track on the album) in the build-up to this, culminating in a performance on 8 June.

No other details of these particular shows have been shared yet but it has also been confirmed that the ensemble will be playing the Village Underground on 4 July. Tickets for this gig are available for £10 but, if you fancy writing a review for The F-Word, you can get on the guest list for free! If you'd like to be considered, send a message holly.combe[at]thefword.org.uk.

In the meantime, watch out for Hayley Foster da Silva's forthcoming review of the album. Here's a taster for the release in the form of an animation accompanying the single 'Army of Birds' (out 21 May).

You can also take a look at Hayley's piece about Gaggle's gig at The New Empowering Church in Hackney back in December.

Picture of Gaggle supplied by Work It Media.

Title updated at 14.25 on 14 May.

Rape hidden by marriage in Morocco

2012-05-16T14:52:05Z

Guest blogger Lottie Prince writes about Moroccan law where rapists can hide behind marriage.

'16 year old Amina's parents forced her to marry her rapist to preserve their "dignity", she killed herself to preserve her own.' @hadearkandil - Hadear Kandil

Since February 2004, King Muhammad VI has reformed many out of date laws within Morocco to approve gender equality and human rights in the country. He bought the legal age of marriage up from fifteen to 18. Custody of children does not instantly go to the father. Women are no longer 'owned' by their husbands and forced to obey them. Divorce also now has to be consented by both partners.

Yet one of the cruellest laws still remains; Morocco's penal code states that a rapist can escape being prosecuted if he marries his victim. The article definitely does not beat around the bush. It is written in plain black and white over the space of 7 lines. The government have said since 2006 that they will change the law and the violence faced to women. Still nothing has been done. Ten percent of the lower seats of the Moroccan parliament have to be reserved for women. It is true that King Muhammad VI has made the country one of the fairest for women's rights in the Middle East, but one shocking and barbaric law seemed to have been bypassed.

On 10th March 2012, Amina Filali committed suicide after being forced to marry the man who raped her when she was 15 years old. The 5 month long marriage resulted in her being continuously abused and beaten, until she finally took her life by ingesting rat poison at the age of 16.

The article making 'rape-marriage' legal states that both parties must consent. Amina was forced into it to protect her family's 'honour', as the rape resulted in her losing her virginity. It did not matter that she had not consented to what she had to ordeal; she had blighted the family name. It is also unclear as to whether she would have been tried as a child or an adult. As a child, the man who raped her and tore her whole life apart actually had more human rights than what she did. She would have had no choice in her future's outcome.
Morocco's laws have now been pushed into the world wide lime light. We are in 2012 and the country is still living under incredibly outdated laws where men have total power and women are expected to 'obey'. President of the Democratic League for Women's Rights (LDDF) Fouzia Assouli stated that the whole law was an 'embarrassment' to maintain traditional practice in the country that allows men to escape punishment through marriage. As Amina's tragic story becomes international there is still hope that the law can be abolished completely from Morocco's penal code to stop such a brutal and inhuman event happening to another innocent girl.

Bibliography:
DAHIR N° 1-59-413 DU 28 JOUMADA II 1382 (26 NOVEMBRE 1962) PORTANT APPROBATION DU TEXTE DU CODE PÉNAL.

Music paste up: Tune-Yards & St Vincent in conversation, an insight into Portuguese Riot Grrrl, new folk and electronica talents ahoy!

2012-05-14T22:51:56Z

This weeks music paste up includes two of the most exciting talents in rock music today in conversation: Tune-Yards and St Vincent.

Holly and I were also recently sent a link to a very exciting film about a Portuguese Riot Grrrl band, Everground, who were signed to Lisbon label Beekeeper. While this documentary was made many years after the band split up, it does still make for really enjoyable viewing.

Continuing the Riot Grrrl connection, Oxford's Secret Rivals will be touring in May and June, and you can see them at:

Port Mahon in Oxford tomorrow, with The Lovely Eggs
May 16 - Oxford Punt 2012 - The Cellar, Oxford
with The Cellar Family, Von Braun, Tiger Mendoza
May 19 - Sound City Festival 2012 - Mello Mello, Liverpool
June 8-10 - Wychwood Festival, Cheltenham Racecourse
June 16 - Riverside Festival, Charlbury

Folky renaissance woman Kathryn Bint, who records as One Little Plane, has a new album, 'Into the trees', which is out now on Kieren Hebden's Text Records. You can hear the eerily beautiful 'She Was Out In The Water' here. If anyone would like to review this album, please can you get in touch with me? Many thanks.

Meanwhile, this is the excellent Ms Mr with their new track 'Hurricane.'

Halifax/Montreal duo Purity Ring (Corin Roddick and Megan James), who 4AD describe as making "lullabies for the club, drawing equally from airy 90s R&B, lush dream pop, and the powerful bone-rattling immediacy of modern hip hop." release their debut album Shrines in July. There is something vaguely unsettling about their brand of electro pop, not to mention intriguing and, yes, I am once again looking for someone to review this album. If the clip below intrigues you sufficiently, please feel free to contact me.

The more guitar based Daughter have also recently signed to 4AD, and you can hear the poignant 'Landfill' below.

From newly signed to unsigned, this is the debut single by singer/recording artist Carol Rhyu and producer John Ho, who record as White Blush. A mournful eerie, delicate soundscape, White Blush cite their artist likes as Purity Ring, Grimes, Florence + The Machine, Cocteau Twins, Julee Cruise, Kate Bush, Nancy Sinatra and Nico, and from the evidence of 'Without You', it sounds as though the LA based White Blush will go on to great things.

You can find out more about White Blush by clicking here.

Until the next time...

Image of Carol Rhyu of White Blush provided by White Blush.

This piece was updated on 15 May on the advice of Carol Rhyu who has been having problems with her video on Vimeo. I have replaced the original clip of 'Without You' with a new upload on Youtube

The indefinable definition of feminism

2012-05-17T17:06:48Z

feminism► noun [mass noun] the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of equality of the sexes.
-ORIGIN late 19th cent.: from French féminisme.
feminist► noun a person who supports feminism
►adjective relating to or supporting feminism
-ORIGIN late 19th cent.: from French féministe, from Latin femina 'woman'.

It's odd the shock that the declaration 'I'm a feminist', or 'I advocate feminism' can elicit. I doubt if I was to declare that I was a socialist, an anarchist, a tory, that it would provoke such questions. There seems to be a weird fascination, a certain taboo that surrounds the term. In general terms, people are unable to see beyond stereotypes when it comes to feminists. On numerous times I've been asked when I'm going to 'become a lesbian' and when I'm going to 'cut all my hair off'. Most of the time, I find such responses funny, if not predictable. People are scared of the unknown, and for many, feminism is just that - it holds a certain sense of antiquity, as if it's been relegated to the past and is now irrelevant. Feminism, for so many is such an alien, ungraspable concept that when they meet someone who openly declares themselves a feminist, they want to solidify what it actually means to be a feminist and what that actually entails. They seem to crave a definitive version of what feminism actually is; or realise its instability which will enable them to successfully discount it.

I'm wary of such definitions. Feminism isn't something solid and wholly definable. It is an unstable term, but for me that is one of its merits. Undoubtedly there are certain aims of feminism which are common to all of its strands, but equally it is subjective. What feminism means for one woman will mean something wholly different to another woman. Which is why it is impossible to impose an over-arching, hegemonic discourse upon feminism. But also why such questions and such a need for a definition is unsettling.

Someone once asked me how I could possibly dare to call myself a feminist and still strive for a breakdown of gender stereotypes. After all, inherent in the word 'feminism', is the idea of a segregation of gender, an innate difference between men and women and as a result it is self-defeatist and self destructive - what it strives to undermine it, through its very name, serves to reinforce. At the time I was speechless and absolutely furious; I saw the sense in the argument and as a result briefly saw the possible limitations of 'feminism' as both an ideology and a movement. What resulted was an ideological crisis. Sure, I know that feminism has nothing to do with creating a world where women are superior to men. I knew that feminism does not have one blind, all consuming, and furious purpose. I knew that it is possessed of hundreds and hundreds of different strands and facets. I also knew that his argument against feminism was limited and reductive, but I couldn't say exactly why. I could not articulate a solid and impenetrable argument as to why he was wrong.

Laughably it's taken me several months to realise what I should have said to him there and then. The origins of the feminist movement were to ensure equality between men and women, yes, and to bring to an end thousands of years of male dominance and female oppression. Obviously it had the interests of women at its very core. But feminism has changed; just as all movements and ideologies do, it has progressed and expanded and in a way mutated. Women's rights will always be at the heart of the feminist movement yes, but more importantly it is human rights which are at its core. For me feminism's aim is to see the destruction of a patriarchal system which does not just imprison women but all of humanity. Men are not the culprits here- patriarchy is, and men are just as entrapped by patriarchy as women are, just as the Wall Street Banker is as much entrapped by capitalism as the anti-capitalist activist. We are not rallying against individual people, individual genders, individual classes; we are rallying against a dominant belief system - one which has all of humanity by the throat.

To truly understand feminism, one has to look beyond the label. It's true that if you are thinking in terms of semantics, then yes, 'feminism' is a somewhat reductive and oxymoronic term. But that in itself is a reductive attitude, and you yourself are guilty of imposing those limitations. If you are to think in such imprisoning modes of thought, you may as well throw up your hands and surrender to the world we live in. There is nothing progressive about such a declaration. Linguistically, feminism is tied to women, but symbolically, it goes far, far beyond that. Words are signifiers, but what is signified can be wholly different.

Language is in itself phallocentric and, as a result, a tool of patriarchy. It is part of a Symbolic Order which forces us to view the world in terms of binaries (day/night, man/ woman, culture/nature, love/ hate) and as a result, artificially creates divides and a hierarchical mode of seeing. If you chose to think of 'feminism' in terms of its Oxford University Dictionary definition, then you chose to view the world in terms of such binaries. Such restricted thought results in the conviction that feminism must be part of a binary, it must have an enemy, an opposite and naturally there must be a group who are marginalised and excluded from it. This causes people to flatten and compress feminism into a narrow, aggressive ideology which is solely reserved for women, is purely concerned with women, is filled with hostility towards men, is tied to an elitist attitude and, as a result, lacks transcendentalism.

But it is possible to reclaim language and to see beyond definitions which are tied to and inextricable from patriarchy and its resulting binaries Ultimately, this will result in us having taken certain steps to rid ourselves of the 'ideology of domination'. Feminism does not signify a belief system that is tied to the feminine alone, instead it is expansive and wide-ranging awash with ideas of freedom and liberty and equality. Feminism is an unstable term and in this instance, this instability is positive. There is not one totalitarian definition of feminism, instead it encompasses innumerable strands and nuances. Do not think of it in terms of a binary, because such thinking is dangerous. Instead it is part of a dialectic and an all-encompassing fight against oppression.

'Feminism is not simply a struggle to end male chauvinism or a movement to ensure that women have equal rights with men; it is a commitment to eradicating the ideology of domination that permeates Western society on various levels- sex, race, class to name a few- and a commitment to reorganizing... society so that the self-development of people can take precedence over imperialism, economic expansion and material desires' - bell hooks

The photo is of a caricature of a woman cleaning the house, posted using the creative commons license from thisgeekredes.

Slut-shaming and victim-blaming: the journalist, the vicar and the politician #bbcqt

2012-05-21T13:10:32Z

I've always enjoyed Question Time, but watching it while on Twitter brings a whole new perspective. Following the #bbcqt hashtag means that every aspect of my amusement, fury, skepticism, agreement and more can be shared, and validated, with others live. What's more, the hashtag truly makes the programme 50 times funnier, because people's pithy comments and thoughts are spot on and hilarious.

So, last night I sat down to Question Time with Twitter loaded and ready. The second question was, "Was race an issue in the recent Rochdale grooming case?". If only the panellists had read our blog yesterday! I braced myself for some awkwardly-worded attitudes about race and culture, but what came next actually stunned me.

The first person to answer was journalist Peter Oborne. My jaw dropped open when he stated that

"One of [the things involved] was the young girls who accepted the advances of these disgusting men. What does it tell us about what's happened to our society that we have 12 year old girls, 13 year old girls, who are happy to give up their affection and their beauty to men in exchange for a packet of crisps or a bit of credit on their mobile phone?".

No sooner had he completed his victim-blaming tirade when an audience member contributed to the discussion. This man, a vicar, stated,

"Children are guided by peripheral ideologies and interests, where they feel it is appropriate, at 13, to go out - forgive me for saying this - I'm not saying the victims in this case did that - but it seems prevalent on the streets in the area - where they go out dressed as if they are looking for that sort of issue to take place. They don't give themselves the privilege of growing up any more".

Yes, he went there. 12 and 13 year old girls going out dressed as if they are looking for it.

The next audience member was a woman who feels that society is not "addressing race", and that "we've got to stop with this political correctness [...] We're not racist, but we want to address this issue". Yes. Not racist, but...

Next up was Tory MP Caroline Spelman. The first thing she did was echo what the judge in the case said, that it was "lust and greed" at the heart of this case, not race. Good. She also went on to point out that the sexual exploitation of women and girls is endemic. True. However, she then went on to add her own kind of victim-blaming to the mix.

"It's not an easy time to be the parent of young teenage girls. You can't just lock them up at 7 o'clock - we don't want to live in a country where we need to lock up young women at 7 o'clock. We try and give them the right values, the right instincts, to keep themselves safe".

Oh, Caroline. By this time, I was raging.

Giving girls 'values and instincts' doesn't keep girls safe. Men not raping them does. #bbcqt #spelman
— Philippa (@incurablehippie) May 10, 2012

And I wasn't the only one.

Absolutely amazed that a debate on the sexual exploitation of children is focussing on the behaviour of the children involved. #bbcqt
— Gavin Shuker (@gavinshuker) May 10, 2012

Tweets were flying by at top speed, such was the strength of feeling. The panellists, the #bbcqt hashtag, and even the word 'vicar' were trending topics, meaning that they were the subjects being discussed the most.

Even Mary Beard, who in every other way was wonderful, gave a response about teaching teenage girls not to be attacked, rather than teaching boys and men not to attack.

"@Claire_Phipps: "If I had a daughter, I'd tell her..." Nobody *ever* says "if I had a son, I'd tell him" But that might help more #bbcqt"
— Lucy Wake (@lucywake) May 10, 2012

Some of the audience members pointed out that the police failed the victims initially, as did the care system.

When it came to Lord Oakeshott, he thankfully made a point of saying,

"I'm sorry to disagree with the Minister of religion in the front, but I thought he was verging on that it was partly the girls' problems for how they dress or something. That cannot be right - this was an evil crime, whatever the girls were wearing, and we must focus on that, surely".

Finally! Then, sadly, back to Oborne.

"We have to ask, why were these girls so vulnerable? Why were they so ready to surrender that innocence for a bag of crisps?"

Then, god help us, we returned to the vicar. By this stage I was too apoplectic with rage to even hear what anybody else said. I believe he explained that we had misunderstood him.

Does it really still need to be said that these victims did not surrender their innocence for a bag of crisps? That they were not happy to give up their affection in exchange for a packet of crisps or a bit of credit on their mobile phone? That they did not go out dressed as if they are looking for that sort of issue to take place? Do we still need to point out that teaching girls the right values and instincts does not make any difference to the decision a rapist may take to rape them?

It was offensive, it was depressing, and it was terrifying. Mary Tracy on Twitter summed up the discussion well.

Not a single panelist mentioned the rapists. Race? Girls? Clothes? Sure. Rapists? Nah #bbcqt
— Mary Tracy (@MaryTracy) May 10, 2012

[The first image is a photograph of a woman sitting on the ground at the London Slutwalk, with a bright pink placard reading "Stop victim-blaming". It was taken by Tom Radenz and is used under a Creative Commons Licence. The second image is a screenshot of the Twitter trending topics which was taken by @laurevans311]

Are libraries a feminist issue?

2012-05-14T08:46:39Z

Are libraries a feminist issue?

This is a question that I have been thinking about in the last few weeks. I am due to do a talk at the Victoria Baths Fanzine Convention in Manchester a week on Saturday, and this is one of the tangents I seem to have gone off on while pondering the wider area of women, fanzines, punk, riot grrrl and feminism. There are a lot of zines and websites about libraries, and they are frequently written by women.

I don't have any stats to back it up, but its been my experience that the libraries I've worked at here in the UK have all been female dominated. Some more blatently so than others, but as a rule I'd say at least 70% female, and in some very small libraries, 99%-100% female. Libraries are classed as being in the public sector by the way, and in the UK we have two women's libraries, one in London, one in Glasgow. They aren't related to each other, they just happen to both be called The Women's Library.

In mid March London Metropolitan University, who are responsible for the Women's Library in London, announced that they will be seeking a new home, custodian or sponser for the Women's Library collections. If a new home cannot be found by the end of December 2012, the Library will move to opening hours of one day per week for a period of three years, with a further review at the end of that period.

You can read the full announcement from London Metropolitan University here
and The Guardian have also been covering the story.

I don't live in London, but I've used the Women's Library for research on many occasions now. I've found the staff to be approachable and friendly, and the reading room is accessible both in the physical sense but also in the sense that accessing it doesn't involve masses of layers of bureaucracy. There doesn't appear to be a criteria you have to satisfy to access the collection, you don't have to apply months in advance, and as long as you abide by the reading room rules (which are sensible) then you can use the collection. Without the Women's Library both the punk women series and the Shocking Pink piece would both have had substantial holes in them.

But don't just take my word for it, read the save the women's library blog. There you will find good information about the library, and why the library deserves to be saved.

Libraries are not just places to go when the weathers cold, when you want to borrow a DVD, when you want to apply for a job online, they are also archives. They store things. The Women's Library in London stores women's history, and if it goes, so will a lot of that history.

On a similar theme of libraries suddenly looking financially vulnerable, the Working Class Movement Library in Salford, which includes an impressive archive of feminist pamphlets, journals, ephemera and publications within its collections, announced a massive fundraising drive late last year following funding cuts from Salford Council. Salford is a Labour council and, as such, has been especially hard hit by local government spending cuts.

As with the Women's Library in London, I've used the WCML to research women and punk. The two collections are very different in many ways, but there is occasional overlap: Both have the entire run of Spare Rib for example. But if you wanted to research Margaret Ashton, suffragist, pacifist and first female city councillor in Manchester, then the WCML would probably be a key stop on your research journey.

"We are recognised at home and abroad as one of Britain's most important collections of working class history. We are open for everyone to use without charge. The breadth and depth of the archives, books and artefacts makes the Library a vast and unique collection, capturing the stories and struggles of ordinary people's efforts to improve their world. Tony Benn has called us 'one of the greatest educational institutions in Britain'."

They say on their website, adding:

"Our founders Ruth and Eddie Frow started the Library in their own home, driven by the belief that working people should remember and value their own history. Together they rescued countless items which would have otherwise been lost to the future. In these turbulent times that history has never been more relevant - and the survival of the Library will depend on the generosity of our supporters."

In the US, there is a wikispace devoted to women in libraries, which describes itself as being somewhere writers can review "books, films and other publications of interest to the feminist library community"

Do we have a feminist library community in the UK? certainly I know feminists who work in libraries and, while I'll accept that there's an informal network of librarians and library assistants in the Greater Manchester area who are of a similar mindset, social group, have similar politics and tastes in music, I'm not aware of a specific network of feminist librarians in the vicinity. Modernists, certainly, emos and goths most definitely, and in many ways we are all Warrior Librarians and often a bit Unshelved as well, though - again - both US sites. Some things are universal though...

Picture of a woman sitting on top of a bookcase, entitled 'Hipster Librarian', by Super Furry Librarian. Used via a flickr creative commons licence

Rochdale rape ring; on political correctness versus survivor's credibility

2012-05-12T01:06:17Z

It has been revealed that one of the victims of the Rochdale rape ring reported her rapist to police in 2008 - twice - but he was not charged. As reported in the Telegraph and the Mail, the former MP for Keighley, Ann Cryer, suggested that the reason the charges were dropped was due to the men's race:

"This is an absolute scandal. They were petrified of being called racist and so reverted to the default of political correctness," she said.
"They had a greater fear of being perceived in that light than in dealing with the issues in front of them."
Although this is not the first time Mrs Cryer has tried to attribute general social ills to her belief that the police tread too softly with the Asian community, this theme has gained significant currency on the internet, no doubt in part encouraged by the media (the Telegraph made it the focal point of their article, with the headline "Rochdale grooming trial: Police accused of failing to investigate paedophile gang for fear of appearing racist") The word on the street - or the net - is that this is what happened.

The Guardian's take is not from the former MP; they report that: "police initially failed to pursue her case because the Crown Prosecution Service advised them she was not a credible enough witness."

We know that the victims in this case were vulnerable teenagers from "chaotic" backgrounds, and all had been engaged with social services at some stage. When it comes to 'credibility' that will have been an influencing factor.

When a rape is reported to the police, the CPS have to decide whether a jury is likely to believe the victim. They will then charge, take no further action, or 'no crime' it - make a record that no crime was committed. They might take no further action even if they accept that she was raped, but think a jury will not believe her - because they are dealing with a hypothetical jury in the society we have, not the society we might like, and that society is one which routinely disbelieves rape victims - just look at the Ched Evans furore.

We already know that reported rapes are no-crimed at a rate of 30% in Kent, as opposed to 2% in Gloucestershire. Kent has more pockets of deprivation than Gloucestershire, and its districts (in particular Thanet, Dover, Swale and Shepway) are much further up on the indices of multiple deprivation than those of comparatively well-heeled Gloucestershire. The teenage pregnancy rate is lower, too, in Gloucestershire than in Kent (25.6 v 34.7 per 1,000 women aged 15 - 17 in 2009).

Whether a woman is believed or not is often down to her presentation. The fictitious 'perfect victim' will be white, middle-class, virginal, sober, and a stranger to the rapist. The reality is messier. Research done by the Havens in 2010 shows that many people believe that a victim is at least partially responsible for her own rape in certain circumstances:

Performing another sexual act on them (73%)
Getting into bed with a person (66%)
Drinking to excess / blackout (64%)
Going back to theirs for a drink (29%)
Dressing provocatively (28%)
Dancing in a sexy way with a man at a night club or bar (22%)
Acting flirtatiously (21%)
Kissing them (14%)
Accepting a drink and engaging in a conversation at a bar (13%).

The CPS have to decide if a jury - a jury made up of people like those surveyed - will believe a victim or not. Being drunk, scantily dressed, and flirting all make it more likely that the rape will not be charged - and that makes "ladette" or "chavvy" girls less likely to be successful in getting their rapist charged.

Is this right, or acceptable? Hell no, but it's what happens, and it's why we need to keep fighting for women, ALL women, to be believed when they report rape.

To those people who say that it's "political correctness" that stopped the CPS from bringing charges against the Rochdale rapist, I snort contempt. In a society that was already stacked against vulnerable girls known to the care system, we add to it that such girls are just not believed when they report rape, although it goes without saying that they should be.

So before you damn the CPS as blithering toadies to an improbable PC conspiracy, have a good look at yourself, society. Have you ever suggested that a rape victim was making it up? Attention seeking? Asking for it? Have you ever been one of those who thinks a girl in a skimpy dress deserves it, or should have known better, or that a promiscuous girl was no better than she ought to be and probably consented? If so, you are a little bit responsible for that 2008 decision not to charge.

Uncomfortable with that? We ought to be. It is imperative that we believe victims when they report, regardless of their sexual history, intoxication levels or socioeconomic background, or we are all, collectively, responsible for child rape.