THE THINKER Godolphin’s Philosophy, Politics & History magazine
The ‘All About Women’ edition
A curated edition of 14 powerful articles written about women and the global fight for equality
Editors in Chief: Nadia Baghai & Kyra Jade Khlat
CONTENTS I.
The Woman Philosophers we ‘forget’ to cover - Nadia Baghai
II.
How have beauty standards for women changed over time? - Kyra Jade Khlat
III.
How does the phrase ‘Not all men’ hinder women’s fight for equality? - Hebe Dennison
IV.
The implicit bias towards (men and) women in the healthcare system - Gaia Goulandris
V.
Womanism - Isa Chen
VI.
Intersectionality and Simone De Beauvoir’s “The Second Sex” - India O’Donohoe
VII.
The impact of Roe v Wade on women’s rights - Lauren Pohlman
VIII. How the media and television industries have failed middle eastern women - Noor Abbasi IX.
Is feminism hindered by capitalism? - Isa Chen
X.
Women and the UK Supreme Court - Dilia Thovez
XI.
Beauty Standards: The Female Body - Rose Esiri
XII.
Have women’s access to means of equality changed over the course of the last twenty years? - Lula Johnson
XIII. Fighting for Women’s Rights: Why is it still necessary and how has the movement changed? - Sanaya Mittal XIV. Women in Islam - Sarah Althaqafi
THE WOMEN PHILOSOPHERS WE FORGET TO COVER Women philosophers exist! I know it sounds crazy, but yes - they exist, and they have done so for over 2000 years. If you have studied philosophy, it is easy to just assume that men are the only ones with complex theoretical ideas. When studying different philosophical theories, and different philosophers in general, it may seem that men are the only ones that can formulate ideas that can change the world. Obviously, that is just not the case. Whilst the syllabus doesn’t cover female philosophers, and if you don’t delve deep enough, you may not even catch a glimpse of the legendary Simone de Beauvoir there is always the opportunity to stretch further and educate yourself. So, here are a few female philosophers to get you started, with a brief taste of their theories to draw you in further. Hypatia: “Life is an unfoldment, and the further we travel the more truth we can comprehend. To understand the things that are at our door is the best preparation for understanding those that lie beyond.” Hypatia was arguably one of the greatest philosophers of her time, living around the 4th century AD. She was the daughter of Theon, a well-known mathematician. Hypatia, perhaps taking inspiration from her father, impressively went on to become not just a mathematician but also an astronomer and of course, a philosopher. The philosophy Hypatia focused on was Neoplatonism, which is the rebirth of Plato’s philosophy, led by the philosopher Plotinas. Neoplatonism focuses on the spiritual world, viewing material reality as a poor shadow of that, very well described in Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. At that time, mathematics and philosophy were intrinsically linked and because neoplatonism held mathematics highly as it was an important tool for higher contemplation, Hypatia’s skills were
highly favoured. Amazingly, Hypatia was respected enough to become the head of the Platonist school at Alexandria, in a time where women were barely educated, or at least in important subjects. She was described as a charismatic teacher, and the version of Neoplatonism that she taught to her students put much more emphasis on the scientific aspects of the theory. However, in time Hypatia faced a sad fate, her profound skills and her ability to argue ultimately contributed to her murder by a mob of incensed Christians in 415AD. Harriet Taylor Mill: You may well have heard of John Stuart Mill, who worked along with Jeremy Bentham to develop the theory of Utilitarianism. However, have you ever heard of the woman behind not just his personal life but some of his works? Harriet Taylor Mill was born in 1807 and was entirely educated from home. She grew very interested in poetry and writing from a young age and began writing extensively on topics such as women’s rights, politics, ethics and religious toleration while also being a mother to three children! It was during this time when she met John Stuart Mill whilst she was married to another man. They soon became close friends and intellectual partners and Harriet eventually married Mill after her husband died. Looking back, it is very hard to untangle her collaborations to his work from his own writing, and even he praised her abilities by saying - the “better half of my work is yours.” It is clear that through Mill’s work there are significant similarities between her ideas and some of the ideas he emphasises. Their beliefs were mirrored in their relationship, focusing strongly on equality in marriage, and creating the type of environment Harriet had promoted in her work.
Taylor Mill is most well known for her ideas on women’s rights ideas, well expressed in her essay on the Enfranchisement of Women (1859), and she continued to develop this in her Stuart Mills’ essay - the Subjection of Women (1869). The key thing to take from this is that Taylor Mill was commonly faced with unnecessary backlash from many of her contemporaries along with recent historians, who both dismissed her abilities. She has been branded names such as a “philosopher in petticoats,” and characterised as “perverse,” and it is clear that a lot of this stems from her being a woman in a “man’s world''.” These accusations towards her may be a part of the reason why most of us have never heard her name before, even if we know of John Stuart Mill’s work. Simone de Beauvoir: If you haven’t come across her already, Simone de Beauvoir was a well-respected French philosopher of existentialism and very importantly, a pioneering figure of contemporary philosophical feminism. Her most famous work, “The Second Sex,” laid the path for second wave feminism, moving on from fighting for the suffrage and onto conversations about sexuality, treatment in the workplace and much more. She called it the “second sex” in order to emphasise how men were always labelled as the first, default sex, and women consequently have always come second. One of the most important and influential snippets of her work is where she states
that “On ne naît pas femme: on le devient,” translated as “One is not born but becomes a woman.” This emphasises the fact that women are not born inferior to men, with less capabilities, but instead society makes them out to be worth less alluding to the sex-gender distinction. Simone de Beauvoir never married her partner Jean Paul Sartre but they did maintain a very strong relationship for 51 years until Sartre died. Jean Paul Sartre was a world famous existentialist and is still well respected for his works. Although they worked closely together, Beauvoir developed her individual philosophies, maintaining her existentialist belief in absolute freedom of choice along with the responsibility it entails, emphasising that one’s decisions must develop from individual spontaneity, and not from anything external. These are only three of the hundreds of women who have thrived in philosophical thought. Ultimately, philosophy is still a typically a male-dominated field and has been for as long as we know, Yet, although we may not get much exposure to women and their contributions to the wonderful world of philosophical thought, we must search for it, and learn about the wealth of thought that women have cultivated for centuries. So, do your research, find out more about these intelligent, thoughtful women and what they have to say, and spread the word to others! By Nadia Baghai
HOW HAVE BEAUTY STANDARDS AND SOCIAL EXPECTATIONS FOR WOMEN CHANGED OVER TIME? Beauty standards and societal expectations for women over the centuries have shifted dramatically with a woman’s role in society becoming more prominent in the 21st century. The roles of women in the society of Ancient Greece were deeply rooted by tradition. Women were not allowed to vote, secure an education or own property of any kind. Girls were educated only to prepare them for their roles in building a family and being a suitable wife to their husbands. Persephone, a Greek goddess, is shown to be beautiful, pale and young in her portrayals which is what was desired from a new bride. Girls were married at the earliest possible age at when her father would stop being her guardian and the role would pass to her new husband. This suggests an emphasis on conformity rather than diversity. Presently, there is an emphasis towards embracing diversity and rather than many conflicting opinions over what is beautiful, diversity is now becoming what we view as desirable. The Egyptian goddess Isis also offers insight into the roles of women in Ancient Egypt. Women, in many respects, held similar rights to men and were treated with equal respect. Women could get an education, become doctors, and divorce their husbands which was not condoned in much of history. Egyptian religion and mythology praised women and presented them as saviours therefore religion played a part in women being involved in politics. Although women were not defined by their fertility the Egyptian worship of the goddess Isis and her son Horus suggest an expectation for women to be mothers and contribute to society with their family. The Victorian era had a clear preference for fair skin tones and, along with the rest of Europe, displayed a clear colour
preference in their descriptions and interpretations of art. White marble or terracotta statues were seen as the epitome of beauty. Statues where remnants of coloured paint still lingered were ignored to match the aesthetic of the time, erasing the original beauty of the figures. As societal expectations of women vary greatly from culture to culture, certain discoveries end up being presented completely differently. The Victorian era was heavily circulated around fertility and motherhood. The purpose and ultimate life goal of every woman was to be fertile and produce as many children as possible. If a woman was infertile or failed to reach the sufficient level of motherhood required by society, she was seen as inadequate, having failed to fulfil her role as a woman. On average, women had at least five children. However, interestingly, fertility rates began to decline by the end of the 19th century. Many think this decline was due to the constant use of the corset to thin the waistline. A tight corset was a clear statement of social power and strength and it was also of importance to unmarried women to prove they were not pregnant. It is ironic that while society embraced the use of corsets to present the desire and presence of fertility, corsets were a cause of decreasing fertility. Women prioritised being desirable and respected over their health and fertility. From the beginning of the 20th century to the 1970s there was a huge emphasis on maintaining an unhealthy, extremely slim body shape. This contrasted with previous time periods that had seen slight plumpness as plentiful, a sign of wealth, health and fertility. With the rise of models, magazines and fashion, the ‘perfect body’ shape was presented to every woman as an appearance to desire
and strive towards. However, similarly to the use of corsets in Victorian England, fertility did not seem as valued, as many women led unhealthy lifestyles to achieve this unhealthily thin and androgenous body type. Previously, curvy and ‘womanly’ body shapes were desirable, such as the depictions of Venus and Aphrodite who had fuller stomachs and were perceived as a symbol of good health. However, in the 1920s the flappers inspired the rise of more ‘boyish’ figures with no body fat. This was women breaking away from the previous expectation from society of being ‘proper’. This was only temporary as the full figure
made a comeback in the 1950s, led by Marilyn Monroe, perhaps a parallel to the Kim Kardashian of our age. The 1950s encouraged a healthy BMI for women and the average in that decade was 23.6. While beauty and fertility ideals used to correspond with each other, they have gradually shifted further away from each other as the traditional gender roles for women have become less evident in western society.
By Kyra Jade Khlat
HOW DOES THE PHRASE ‘NOT ALL MEN’ HINDER WOMEN’S FIGHT FOR EQUALITY?
I
n the last few months, the testimonies of predominantly young women across the UK have been shared by the Instagram account ‘Everyone’s Invited’. From politicians’ outrage to extensive media coverage, it feels as though the male world is finally waking up to the horrific reality that women must face daily. However, among the pledges of support and calls for investigation, one phrase has been used considerably in retaliation to women publicly condemning sexual assault: ‘Not all men’. The backlash to this phrase has been immense, but supporters of ‘not all men’ have created a narrative that paints the male gender as the victims of women who hate all men. Men condemn the reverse sexism that they feel they are being subjected to, echoing similar cries that straight white men are now becoming an oppressed group. However, the term ‘reverse sexism’ fails to recognise the complexities that sexism includes. Whilst prior assumptions or hatred of a man due to their sex can be classed as gender-based prejudice, this is extremely different from sexism, which I would argue is more systemic. For thousands of years, women and other nonmale genders have been oppressed by society, with men holding more power in every aspect of life, from policymaking to the pay gap. Therefore, while hatred against men because of their gender is dreadful, I believe that this differs from the systemic oppression that affects all women daily and involves centuries of struggle. In the context of ‘not all men’, the criticism of men and patriarchal society by women, such as in response to Everyone’s Invited, should not be seen as ‘reverse sexism’. If men see talking about topics such as sexual assault in relation to patriarchal society as a threat, then how are we are ever going to progress in equality and legislation that protects women?
Supporters of ‘not all men’ also fail to recognise that the issue with this phrase isn't that it is all men but is instead the context in which it is said, and the motivation behind saying it. Women know it is not all men, but when you are walking down an alleyway at night, this generalisation becomes crucial for survival, as women are (unfortunately!) not blessed with a superpower that allows us to distinguish between the ‘good guys’ from the ‘bad guys.’ The use of the term ‘men’ is also used in reference to the more general misogynistic and patriarchal society that is a key cause of sexual harassment. Therefore, not only does ‘not all men’ solve nothing, but it also highlights the defensiveness of many men when confronted with feminist issues. One of the main pitfalls of ‘not all men’ is the way that it interacts with women’s experience of oppression. When used in response to conversations around subjects like Everyone’s Invited, it is evident that it’s a way of changing the focus of the conversation without engaging in it. Just like ‘All lives matter’, I believe the problem stems from the fact that men don't want to admit that they are part of the problem. It is often hard for people to recognise their privilege, and the way in which their position or social group have been actively contributing to injustice and persecution. Saying ‘not all men’ is a way of absolving their responsibility for the issue, but in the context of sexual harassment, it both invalidates women’s claims and fails to acknowledge the subtleties of patriarchy and rape culture. Men shouldn't just be held responsible if they’ve actively committed sexual assault or rape, but also if they have perpetrated in creating an environment which trivialises sexual assault and harassment.
In conclusion, while the term ‘not all men’ is not directly false, the motivation behind it means it is hindering women’s fight for equality. It stems from the fact that men don't want to admit the failings of the system and their gender, but without this responsibility, it will be very hard for action to be taken and rape culture to be eliminated from society. By Hebe Dennison
THE IMPLICIT BIAS TOWARDS (MEN AND) WOMEN WITHIN HEALTHCARE
A
n implicit bias is an unconscious attitude or stereotype that can be prevalent in the school setting, workplace, healthcare system and more. This article focuses specifically on implicit bias in the healthcare system and the effects this has on the diagnosis of women. Firstly, let’s focus specifically on brain tumours; they’re usually not difficult to identify, and a doctor to order an MRI is all that is needed. However, the doctor must be concerned enough to do this and unfortunately, that has a negative impact on many women due to the stereotype that women are more sensitive and dramatic than men, and therefore exaggerate their pain. In fact, a study done by the University of Miami found that when male and female patients expressed the same amount of pain, observers saw the female patients’ pain as less severe in comparison to men’s pain, thus revealing a serious gender bias. I'm sure men wouldn’t complain about period cramps though… Some common symptoms of brain tumours include, but are not limited to headaches, nausea, mental or behavioural changes, and more. These are some common and less distinguishing symptoms of brain tumours that make them more like symptoms of other illnesses. For example, symptoms of anxiety are similar to some of the common symptoms of a brain tumour. Usually this isn’t something I would highlight, but because of the implicit bias towards women within the healthcare system, it is more important than it seems. This is because it could lead to women being misdiagnosed or not even diagnosed at all and being brushed off as being over-dramatic, and in turn, not receiving the urgent care they need. In fact, Amy Miller, who is president and CEO of the Society for Women’s Health
Research shared that with society often dismissing women’s pain, many women felt that their suffering wasn’t initially taken seriously by medical professionals, and more often than we would like, women are diagnosed with something less severe. Mental health is another aspect of healthcare where implicit biases are unfortunately prevalent. For men, it is the stereotype that they are too ‘strong’ to express emotion and too ‘weak’ if they cry, and for women it is the stereotype that they are over-emotional and, as I mentioned earlier, can be misdiagnosed with a mental health illness rather than something more physically painful. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has identified that women are more likely to be treated for depression than men even though the rates of depression between the genders don't vary by much. One reason for this disparity could be that women are overtreated for mental health disorders because their own health complaints are not investigated thoroughly. However, another reason is that women may be more likely than men to discuss emotional issues with their doctor or feel more comfortable seeking help for their emotional struggles, simply because of gender stereotypes. In the UK, the suicide rate for women is a third of the suicide rate for men, yet more women are treated for depression than men. It would be too simplistic to just say that women are willing to open up more and that men prefer to keep their feelings private, but it is clear that for years, men have been taught that they are strong if they’re not struggling, or at least, if they don’t admit to struggling. To conclude, it is important for society to address and overcome gender stereotypes and biases because while they may not be
obvious, they can have detrimental effects on peoples’ health. Let’s hope that one day we live in a society that is less focused on masculinity or femininity but more focused on who people are as individuals. Implicit biases are subconscious; therefore, this is not to say that healthcare professionals aren’t incredible art what they do, but instead highlight the ingrained problem. Stereotypes and biases are something that will hopefully be less and less enshrined within our society with time, however, it is also important to acknowledge and address that these biases are prevalent, and we should try to teach ourselves not to continue with such a streamlined view of how the sexes are. The way I see it is that
one of the sexes is expected to be strong and emotionless and the other sex is expected to be over-emotional and dramatic. Yet, neither of these gender biases seem to be doing anything other than harming our society. By Gaia Goulandris
WOMANISM
S
econd wave feminism in the 1960s achieved a lot for women in the west. Its main goals were to challenge gender roles by critiquing the patriarchy that hindered women from achieving their full potential. There were fights for reproductive freedom such as abortion rights, equal pay, decrease of violence against women, women studies within educational institutions to ensure female scholars and works were recognised and second wave feminism also fought for workplaces to be free of discrimination based on sex. Whilst this was overall deemed to be a good thing, it was observed that the feminist movement tended to disregard women of colour, especially black women, and their fight to freedom too. White women were at the forefront of the feminist movement and benefitted the most from it, however, women of colour were struggling racism and sexism coincidingly which made it much harder for them to gain anything from either of these movements.
racism within the feminist movement and sexism within the African American community. Many women of colour felt as though they had to make a tough choice between fighting racism or fighting sexism due to the difficulty they faced when trying to fight both. The Women's Liberation Movement emerged in the 1970s with the aim to uplift women out of oppression and do so collectively rather than individually. American author, Alice Walker, first
introduced the term “womanist” in her 1979 short story, “Coming Apart”, defining it as uniting women of colour with the feminist movement, “the intersection of race, class, and gender oppression”. Walker described a womanist as a “black feminist” or a “feminist of colour”.
Unfortunately, this meant that the socioeconomic discrimination they were suffering was being largely ignored. However, it was not just feminism that was neglecting women of colour. Antislavery and abolitionist meetings would purposefully exclude women from attending. Women of colour therefore had limited opportunity to come together and fight the struggles they endured due to the
The keyways in which womanism differs from feminism is that womanism places a greater emphasis on class and race struggles instead of just gender ones. It is also more “family orientated” as it also aims to achieve solidarity with black men whilst appreciating the inner strength and beauty of black women. Alice Walker stated that “womanism is to feminism as purple is to lavender” inferring how feminism is captured under womanism and many would argue that feminism is not
enough, as a movement, to combat the patriarchy. To what extent is womanism still necessary? Whilst it can be said we have come a long way since the 20th century there are still many ways in which minority groups suffer. For example, the pay gap between white British men and white British women is £2.57 per hour however, between white British men and black African women it is £2.86 and for Pakistani women it is £3.86. Black women are also more likely to be ignored in medical situations, they are said to be “overreacting” and this often leads to misdiagnosis or childbirth problems. White women are also given a larger or better platform in the media, whether it is because they are more likely to be on the front covers of magazines, nominated for awards or because they aren’t depicted as angry and animalistic in cartoons. Placed across is a cartoon mocking Serena Williams as an angry and immature player, which received backlash due to the way it depicted Serena Williams for calling out the umpire. This emphasises the issue that while Serena’s male counterparts can express anger in much more aggressive
ways and have done so in the past, they have never been mocked in the same way that Williams was, showing the difference in perspective. To achieve full equality, we must remember the importance of
intersectionality within feminism, checking one’s privilege and learning how to use it and continuing to listen to other women's struggles to build a better future for our sons and daughters. By Isa Chen
INTERSECTIONALITY & SIMONE DE BEAUVOIR’S ‘THE SECOND SEX’
I
ntersectional Feminism = the understanding of how women's overlapping identities including race, class, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation impact the way they experience oppression and discrimination. The Second Sex by Simone De Beauvoir is often considered to be the holy grail of feminist philosophy-based literature. Published in 1949, The Second Sex marks the turning point from first to second wave feminism and is still relevant and brought up in 21st century philosophical discussions. The idea that acts as the basis of the book is of women as ‘The Other’ in other words, women are categorized by everything that men are not. This idea is arguably timeless, and still relevant, even 70 years later. That being said, it’s arguable that the book itself isn’t, and that’s due to its total lack of intersectionality. Maintaining an intersectional viewpoint is crucial in any discussions focused on the idea of equality, as before one tries to solve inequalities, one must understand that not all inequalities are created equal. The Second Sex is not an intersectional piece of literature. Perhaps that is to be expected from a book published only four years after the end of WW2, where many women were still fighting for the right to a vote. First wave feminism was targeted nearly entirely at middle class, white, women living in industrialised countries, so it’s arguable that De Beauvoir was correct in targeting her writing purely at women of that status. However, that doesn’t mean that that’s how it should be, and when reading it, it’s evident that Simone De Beauvoir is completely ignorant of her own privilege - though she was oppressed because of her status as a woman, she was also a middle-class white woman who had the privilege of being
privately educated, and an extortionate number of women at that time were not able to say the same about themselves. Beauvoir doesn’t mention the amplified struggles of women of colour even once in her 978-page book, and her chapter on “The Lesbian” simplifies the complexity that is sexuality down to women desperately trying to evade the patriarchy in whatever form they are able. Beauvoir either forgets, or seeks to avoid, the universal truth that there are competing frameworks of oppression - there always have been, and likely will continue to be. There are no binaries when it comes to equality, a person cannot always simply be totally privileged or have absolutely no privilege - varying interlinked experiences that a person may face because of their race, sexuality, religion etc. transcends said binaries, and a white woman would quite obviously face less oppression than a woman of colour. Beauvoir takes no notice of this and writes as though all who identify as women face the exact same level, and type, of oppression. That is simply not the case. De Beauvoir's lack of intersectionality raises the question of why The Second Sex is still viewed as a seminal piece of feminist literature. The answer to this is simply because it was, at the time of its publication. In 1950 only 1.2% of women in America went to university, and therefore the impact of a woman writing a 950-page novel detailing the fight that women, as a whole, face to escape the patriarchy was ground-breaking. As I previously stated, her book does contain some ideas that are applicable to all women, and in that way, it has acted as a fundamental building block of feminist philosophy. Fourth wave feminism is focused on entirely different aspects than second wave feminism was, and if one chooses to read The Second Sex, it is
important to acknowledge that certain aspects of it are outdated and do not translate to the 21st century. American philosopher Nancy Bauer argues that she can't “see a reason why anyone should read the book except heuristically, as a reminder of how easily, and dangerously, an author’s privilege can distort her perception of how things actually are in the world.” The Second Sex is not, and should not, be treated like a feminist bible. Its lack of intersectionality alone means that, as a book on feminism, it is largely rendered ineffectual in a 21st century context. The Second Sex’s lack of intersectionality should be placed at the forefront of all discussions concerning the book - not treated as though it’s a mere sidenote. If one chooses to view it as a book centred primarily on the historical standpoints of feminism alone, it serves its purpose hence why many might still choose to read it in a 21st century context. If one does choose to read it, it’s important to bear in mind your own privilege, and understand that feminism isn’t as simple as a collective group of universal experiences from “The Other Sex.” The book should be approached in a critical manner - it is possible to appreciate Beauvoir’s work for
what it was at the time and understand that the perspective that she writes from is one of privilege, and thus it is almost inevitable that some of her viewpoints and perspectives may be obsolete in the 21st century. By India O’Donohoe
THE IMPACT OF ROE V WADE ON WOMEN’S RIGHTS
R
oe v Wade is a landmark decision in the history of women’s rights, particularly in regards to the right to abortion. The 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalised abortion in the US, with court justices ruling that governments lacked the power to prohibit abortion. This ruling followed Norma McCorvey (under the pseudonym “Jane Roe”) challenging the criminal abortion laws in Texas, which made it a crime to perform an abortion unless a woman’s life was at stake. McCorvey’s argument was that the abortion laws in Texas and Georgia went against the US constitution by infringing women’s right to privacy. The court held that a women’s right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy, as recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut, protected by the 14th amendment, and recognized that the constitutional right to privacy “is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy”. The Court’s ruling affected the laws of 46 states, and the impact that it had on the rights and liberties of women was undoubtedly vast. Following the ruling, abortion services were made vastly safer and more accessible to women throughout the country, and the decision set a legal precedent that affected more than 30 subsequent Supreme Court cases involving restrictions on access to abortion. 8 years before the ruling, in 1965, abortion was so unsafe that 17% of all deaths due to pregnancy and childbirth were the result of illegal abortion. Today, among women undergoing legal first-trimester abortion procedures, the percentage sustaining serious complications drops to 0.05%. Beyond the advancements in safety, this case also heavily impacted the lives of
American women. The ability to make this personal health care decision has also enabled women to pursue educational and employment opportunities that were often unthinkable prior to this case. As shown in figure 1, since 1973 (the year of Roe v Wade) the percentage of women enrolled in university has risen from 25% to nearly 49% in 2008. While this is not enough evidence to define this as a causal link, it is very likely that women’s choice surrounding pregnancy would widen their prospects of higher education. Figure 1:
It was noted by the Supreme Court in 1992 that “the ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives”. In Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court found that a woman’s right to make her own decisions about her pregnancy deserves the highest level of constitutional protection. Through this ruling, the court also recognized that the right to privacy is not absolute, and that a state has valid interests in safeguarding maternal health and protecting potential life. By Lauren Pohlman
HOW THE MEDIA AND TELEVISION INDUSTRIES HAVE FAILED MIDDLE EASTERN WOMEN
I
n today’s climate, representation has become everything. This encompasses representation of races, sexualities, neurodiversity, religions, gender and more. As streaming services attempt to catch up with the values of our current society, representation in film and television has been revolutionised; this means Marvel’s release of the first black superhero, Disney’s inclusion of the first gay character or even entire tv shows dedicated to talking about teenagers’ awkward encounters with sex (yes, I’m referencing the adored ‘Sex Education’). However, inaccurate and insufficient representation can at times be more harmful than no representation at all. Sadly, this is the dilemma that the female middle eastern community is confronted with today.
Illustration by Nour Flayhan for Gucci Beauty via Grazia ME. Fortunately, film makers have moved on from the ‘terrorist’ stereotype that soared post 9/11. However, they have latched on to a new categorisation: oppressed, ultramodest, and unhappy middle eastern women. Let our first example of this be the character Nadia Shano in the Spanish Netflix TV show ‘Elite’. Nadia is a hijabi with strict Palestinian parents who receives a scholarship to go to an upper-class private school. Throughout her adjustment to the school, she falls in love with a boy
and, you guessed it, takes off her hijab for him in order to win his affection. This storyline is problematic for numerous reasons. Firstly, it suggests that girls born into Muslim families are oppressed by unloving and unreasonable parents. Although there is undeniably a population of conservative Muslims parents, oldfashioned parents exist in all cultures and areas of the world. Therefore, I’m unsure as to why Netflix has decided to solely apply this narrative to Islam and the Middle East. The representation of the dynamic between parents and their daughters entirely ignores the progressive and liberal population. Secondly, the show suggests that hijabis are forced into wearing their hijabs and feel trapped by them. In reality, hijabis feel empowered by their choice to wear their hijab. When interviewed by Allure magazine, influencer Habiba Da Silva states that her hijab ‘makes [her] feel so empowered and gives [her] agency’ and beauty content creator Yasmine Simone states that it provides her with ‘a sense of solidarity and unity’. There are certainly circumstances where Muslim women are pressured into wearing a hijab, however this should not be the only storyline presented. As France has recently passed legislation to ban the hijab for under 18s, it is important now more than ever to redefine what the hijab symbolises. I implore the film industry to stop giving hijabi women unwanted pity. The term ‘Middle Eastern’ encompasses a plethora of different cultures, identities, languages, religions and customs. The community is tired of being blurred into one image and one identity. This means that female middle eastern representation should include Levantine Arabs, Gulf Arabs, North African Arabs, Persians, Turks, Christians, Jews, Muslim women that do not wear a hijab and those that do.
There are 12 to 15 million Christian Arabs whose existence has been completely ignored by the media. Yet the film industry has completely missed these nuances. Is it because it’s easier to claim diversity if a population of more than 400 million can be condensed into a single character? A prime example of this is the Disney Princess Jasmine. I’m certain that all the little girls in the 90s were overjoyed to see a princess on their screens that they could relate to. However, this character seems to be a confusing mix of South Asian and Middle eastern stereotypes. It appears as though Jasmine’s costumes have been modelled after a belly dancer. On a more serious note, the nationality of Jasmine is never specified. She is simply ‘Arabian’, which is supposed to be enough of an explanation. This perpetuates the notion that there is no value in distinguishing between the different identities among Middle Eastern women. It’s ignorant at best, and orientalist at worst. The film and TV industries are indirectly endorsing misinformation.
Princess Jasmine, Disney Perhaps the reason that these issues seem to be constantly reappearing in Hollywood is because the writers of these films and shows are almost exclusively white men. Writers have always put together storylines about other cultures. This is not inherently problematic; what is problematic is when they do so without researching accurate narratives outside of what they know. Unfortunately, the men writing these films and shows, clearly know very little. It is evident that they have not honoured their responsibility to accurately portray the middle eastern female community. Until Netflix and Hollywood can learn how to correctly portray us middle easterners, it saddens me to say that we do not want your representation. By Noor Abbasi
IS FEMINISM HINDERED BY CAPITALISM?
I
n a world where women are being exploited for their labour, enslaved and tortured, and suffering the effects of climate change, is it possible to believe feminism will ever reach its aim under the capitalistic society most of the world lives in? Women have come a long way from the times in which our ancestors lived; we mostly have autonomy, the right to vote, the right to protect ourselves from domestic abuse and the right to an education. However, there are still many women that are unfortunate and have not experienced the benefits of feminism (and capitalism) thus far. Women who work for incredibly low wages and in poor conditions in sweatshops would not agree that capitalism has been kind to them. The International Labour Force discovered that in developing countries, roughly 168 million children ages 5 to 14 are forced to work. 85% of sweatshops workers are female and many of them report sexual harassment and mistreatment from their bosses. Managers often force these women to take birth control and check them for pregnancy to avoid having to support them in maternity leave. Additionally, capitalism aims to maximise profit and increase production efficiency, sometimes disregarding negative externalities of the production. This has led to huge environmental damages from waste and pollution, and it has also resulted in the exploitation of many workers. In capitalism there is a need for constant growth which results in the constant exploitation of natural resources to create commodities at the expense of biodiversity loss. Furthermore, if feminism aims to achieve equality for all men and women, surely it should be finding a way to change the system directly instead of mainly celebrating women in positions of success. When I talk about women who are “successful” I am referring more specifically to the #GirlBoss women who have managed to climb the ladder in fields
that are male dominated such as the corporate sector. Whilst it is great that some women are now able to gain similar financial power as men, it is counterproductive to the feminist movement if the roles these women are occupying are in those same corporations which cause negative externalities to other women who are less fortunate. However, it can be argued that the fact women are succeeding in male dominated sectors means that they can bring a new perspective to the table. Women tend to show greater interest in education, health and society within sectors such as finance, therefore, women can be effective catalysts for change within institutions. I stress the importance of the word “some” when I mentioned women who are able to gain financial power. Not all women are born into privileged families, given a good education and therefore a better opportunity to be employed in higher paid jobs. Capitalism only fuels this cycle as it fails to redistribute wealth effectively, so wealth is maintained in the top percentiles of society, making it very difficult for those in the lower class to succeed. However, some (especially conservatives) may argue that capitalism has worked for women, because women have more rights and opportunities than previously, and so we should stick with what works. This may seem logical at first, but we must not forget that the main reason women have advanced their positions in society is largely due to the efforts of the women and liberation movements in the 20th century (many of which had socialist backgrounds). Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1860-1935) was a first wave feminist who held the belief that inequality between the sexes was rooted within the economy. She thought the only way women could be fully liberated was through economic independence that could not be achieved with the capitalist system she lived through. My view is that it is too naive to
believe that the aims of feminism will be fully achieved if we continue to exploit women for their labour, destroy the environment and neglect the lower classes in the capitalistic system much of the world operates under. To achieve full equality for men and women we must ensure there is full equality of opportunity through policies such as increased government spending on education and the welfare state. We must also continue to protect the environment through investments into green infrastructure and green energy - either funded by the government or encouraging a shift within firms themselves, through democratic planning and public ownership. By Isa Chen
WOMEN & THE UK SUPREME COURT
T
he legal sector is becoming increasingly diversified, with steadily rising numbers of female judiciary members in the United Kingdom. Rather recently, 2019 marked the centenary of women in law, following the removal of the Sex Disqualification Act in 1919. Although there is, undoubtedly, still a long way to go, the United Kingdom Supreme Court specifically provides an intriguing insight into women in law. This article will aim to describe and evaluate the current situation, analysing the implications of gender equality in the judiciary. According to the Ministry of Justice’s 2018 figures, only 29% of court judges are currently women, with the situation in lower tribunals being at a much more equal 46%. Generally speaking, the ratio of female to male judges tends to be higher in lower courts, in comparison to the Supreme Court, in which there are currently only two female Justices. However, although this statistic is seemingly low, it is worth noting that the legal functions of the House of Lords were only transferred to the new supreme court in 2009, thus conveying the remarkable rate of change and gender diversification within the British legal system. That is not to say that more cannot be done to promote diversity within the judiciary, producing a more representative judiciary of the general population. In a speech at a centenary event, Lady Hale, the former President of the UK Supreme Court and first woman to take on that role, urged for a system in which at least half of the UK judiciary is female. Throughout the discussion regarding how to achieve full gender equality, the imposition of quotas was considered. Of course, such a policy would not go uncontested, and a complex debate surrounding the issue of meritocracy and positive discrimination may emerge.
In relation to the importance of diversity, with regards to obtaining a more representative judiciary, there is also a need to have equal female voices within the legal system. The recent death of the US Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg sparked genuine concerns of an overturn of the final ruling on the landmark Roe v Wade 1973 case, from which more liberal abortion laws stemmed, largely because of Ginsburg’s stance. This perhaps highlights the potential risks attributed to men dominating discussions that are fundamentally female issues, with which they have limited empathy or no personal experience. However, it is worth noting that judicial appointments in the US vary to those of the UK, in that Justices are politically elected and thus affiliated with political parties. This politicisation of the American judiciary was in itself a factor causing those concerns surrounding abortion legislation, because of fears of the appointment of a Republican Justice. Therefore, the extent to which the gender of the leading Justice influenced the final ruling is unclear, and cannot be easily quantified. Arguably, certain mechanisms do need to be implemented as promptly and as efficiently as possible. One of the current female Supreme Court Justices, Lady Black, announced, in November 2020, that she is to step down. This news has raised fears of a reversal in the progress of gender diversity, as this enables the prospect of only one female Justice, amongst eleven men, reverting back to a more dated ratio. Furthermore, the remaining woman, Lady Arden, is due to step down in 2022. There are currently concerted efforts to ensure that Lady Black’s replacement is female, with legal reformers placing a great emphasis on the need to modify the recruitment process, so as to promote the vacancy and encourage heightened
diversity within the Supreme Court judiciary. Equally, the appointment process is careful to uphold a system of meritocracy, and the selection stages have an officially recognised provision of equal merits. In conclusion, the diversification of the British judiciary, insofar as gender is concerned, ought to be recognised and lauded for its progress thus far. However, fears of a reversing trend bring to the fore the need to implement practical mechanisms, in order to achieve an improved judiciary. It can certainly be substantiated that the diversification of the judiciary would be a force for good. By Dilia Thovez
BEAUTY STANDARDS: THE FEMALE BODY
B
eauty standards of today are mainly created through social media - we all know this. Airbrush, Face-tune and the Kardashians pretty much sums that all up. We see these bodies and we start doing push ups. However, I think it is very important to note that societies’ standards for beauty are constantly changing. 20 years ago, bodies with curves were not as ‘in style’ as they are now. Learning of our current culture’s social and beauty standards in the future will be greatly assisted by that of objects, just as the social norms and ideals of the past have been illustrated to us through objects. In Ancient Greece, surviving sculptures have demonstrated the ideal body type of woman to be softly shaped, with rounded buttocks, large breasts, a head that fits into the body seven times, and a pear-shaped body. We can observe this in sculptures of Aphrodite, the Greek Goddess of love and beauty, who was typically depicted with these features, as seen in the Musée du Louvre: ‘Venus de Milo’ C. 100 BC. Another example of Aphrodite is seen in Botticelli’s ‘Birth of Venus.’ Venus is standing in a Venus pudica pose that has inspired hundreds of creative thinkers from then on to adopt features of this painting to portray symbols of fertility and grace. This can be seen in cover photos for magazines where women adopt the Venus pudica pose such as Vanity Fair’s 1991 cover of Demi Moore. Combining these objects from which we visually learn from, with Ancient Greek written work, we can see that although many lived in poverty, to be larger and carry additional body fat
represented wealth, as one could afford to eat to their satisfaction. Additionally, we know that the concept of ‘kalos kagathos’1 – which means that when someone was considered beautiful, they were also considered to have a good soul – something still followed today, whether that be subconsciously or not, however that which defines someone as ‘beautiful’ has not been immediately followed. These ideals of having the ‘supermodel’ body. People’s mental health illnesses are becoming increasingly prevalent, especially young people, and body insecurities are causing many of these, examples being depression, anorexia and bulimia. Knowing that standards constantly change and seeing reflections of themselves in ancient artworks can issue people with more confidence and a sense of belonging. Furthering this, historians in the future can, not only look (similarly to how we do now) at ancient sculpture or paintings but also look at the technology of today regarding body health and positivity. Take the newly popularized devices which promise to improve the strength of one’s abdominal muscles through electrical stimulation. Hundreds of years from now, historians will be able to see the distance people stretch to in order to procure their ‘dream body,’ and it will let them know about the societal pressures to be fit and strong, predominantly caused by the influences of social media as opposed to people genuinely seeking health benefits. By Rose Esiri
HAVE WOMEN’S ACCESS TO MEANS OF EQUALITY CHANGED OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST TWENTY YEARS?
T
hroughout the last twenty years, there have been large changes in terms of the access that women have with the means of equality. Although the UK is not the same as countries such as Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, women are perceived as being entirely different in the UK than they are in comparison to these countries where women are viewed as being extremely subordinate to men. This is shown in these countries in a number of different ways, for example the fact that in Saudi Arabia women are coerced into wearing some form of the veil as they are told to cover themselves up for the purpose of not tempting men by showing any of their skin. Also, women especially in Saudi Arabia are said to have some of the lowest levels of gender equality throughout the world which is as a result of reasons such as the fact that the country as a whole reduces the movement of its female population whereby women are not allowed to apply for a passport. As well as this, women in Saudi Arabia also are subject to extreme levels of domestic violence where women who experience such horrors often have a very hard time in terms of reporting these struggles for reasons such as the fact that women face many struggles in terms of getting justice for these issues if they do not have a male relative who works in the court system. Although there have been several developments in terms of the fight that has been going on in many countries, I would argue that some areas of the world, such as the Middle East have not been able to fully catch up to some areas of the West in terms of their levels of gender equality. This could be due to factors such as aspects of religion and culture impacting the way that women are perceived and in turn their
access to intrinsic human rights. For example, this can be shown through the difference in terms of the way that women are treated in terms of their rights to factors such as equal access to education, healthcare and voting rights. However, it can be argued that over the course of the last few decades, there has been a rise in terms of the revolutions for the rights of women, especially in the West. Examples of this could be the infamous #MeToo movement which ignited the start of getting those celebrities who treated women awfully, for example with sexual assault. The extreme media spotlight that was drawn into this issue created a spark in terms of how women are treated by those who are in positions of authority. To a certain extent, there have also been revolutions in Middle Eastern countries, for example Tunisia where women now have the right to abortion. By Lula Johnson
FIGHTING FOR WOMEN’S RIGHTS: WHY IS IT STILL NECESSARY AND HOW HAS THE MOVEMENT CHANGED? In the early 19th century the suffragettes fought for the right to vote and were given it in 1918. Now women can vote in 99 % of countries. So, isn’t striving for female equality irrelevant today? Before we delve into this, it is important to remember that just because women are legally equal, it does not mean they are equal within society. In this article I'm going to explore why fighting for women’s rights is still necessary and relevant in today’s world, and how the movement has changed. This fight has evidently become more complex because we are trying to tackle abstract barriers such as an unconscious bias, which it is inherently difficult to prove exist. Statistics show that 90% of people still have a bias against women in society but some may even say that the lack of women in positions of power is a consequence of lack of competence of women not of an unconscious bias. However, this is a misconception for, as shown by studies, there is no disparity in IQ levels between male and females. There was a study done by a researcher, in which he sent job applications to science professors, both male and female. The applications were identical, except that half were given a man’s name and the other half, a woman’s name. And can you guess what these results showed? The professors both male and female– said that the men’s applications were better, that they were more likely to hire the men and more likely to mentor the men, therefore they offered them a substantially higher salary. There have been numerous studies like this which re-affirm this point: that the bias exists and is prohibiting women to be chosen for jobs, or even as potential candidates.
An even more critical issue is that not only are women subjected to bias, but we are also the ‘invisible race’ because we live in a world that is catered for the man. In which office temperatures are 5 degrees too cold for women, as the ideal temperature was based on the heart rate of a 40-year-old man. However, living in a world catered to the male race is about more than just women being cold in their offices, it's about the fact that women are 50 % more likely to suffer injuries in a car crash because safety features are designed for men, or that a policewoman has a higher risk of being stabbed because her safety vest doesn't fit properly, as it was again, designed for a man. A study done by the Guardian shows that this is a consequence of the gender data gap in which men are used as default test subjects because we conceive humanity as being exclusively male. So, this begs the question: how do we close the gender data gap? How do we change the way people view women? And how do we increase the representation of women in many job fields. The final goal is gender equality, and the only way we can achieve this is through gender equity. Gender equity means treating men and women fairly based on their respective needs, as opposed to treating men and women like they're already on a level playing field. Because by no means are they. That is why fighting for women’s rights should be geared towards policies like positive discrimination or positive action, to ensure women are more represented in all fields. Furthermore, we must use more women as test subjects to close the gender data gap and therefore make the world fairer towards women in society, If more women are represented, more women will be incentivised to apply for positions of
power, and less people will have an unconscious bias. To answer the question, fighting for female equality is still very relevant as it will lead to a fairer and more progressive society. Echoing this point: Malala Yousafzai once said we cannot succeed when half of us are held back.
By Sanaya Mittal
WOMEN IN ISLAM The past few centuries have allowed humans to progress at a phenomenal speed in science, the humanities, infrastructure and agriculture. We have not only advanced in knowledge, but also morals; the Suffragettes fought for women’s votes; the civil rights movement in the United States fought for the rights of Black people; and today we are fighting rape culture. But long before these movements, there was a faith that tackled all these issues at once. It gave women rights at a time when daughters were buried alive, it stood against racism and discrimination, and it believed in peace. This religion is Islam, founded over one thousand four hundred years ago, and still practised today by millions of Muslims worldwide. The Jahiliya, the pre-Islamic period in Arabia, was a very different picture to that of modern society; it was a society in which hating women was taught. Daughters were not desired and were often buried alive soon after birth, because they were considered an economic burden. If a girl had grown to be a woman, she had no legal status, and was considered property. Furthermore, a woman would have no say in who she would marry – marriage was a contract between a man and a woman’s father. In exchange for a wife, the man had to pay the woman’s family a dowry, one his wife would not typically benefit from. Once she was married it was rare for her to divorce, and her purpose was to produce male offspring who could work, inherit, and guard the tribe. Islam brought a change in many of these things. For example, female infanticide was abolished, and the importance of woman was stressed, especially by the Prophet Muhammad PBUH: ("Whoever is put to trial by these daughters and he treats them kindly, these daughters will act as a shield for him from Hell.") Women were finally recognised, granted status in society
and given financial freedom. The entirety of a woman’s inheritance and earnings (including her dowry) were hers and she had no obligation to spend money on the household – that was her husband’s or father’s role. Finally, women could be teachers, writers, merchants and even political leaders. There are many Muslim female figures from the past and present that reflect the power Islam has given them. Khadija bint Khuwaylid was the daughter of a merchant and a wealthy, established trader herself who would become the first wife of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. She employed the Prophet to work for her at first, but soon they became friends at business partners. Contrary to tradition, Khadija proposed to him when she was 40 and he was 25. After the message of Islam was delivered to Muhammad PBUH, she was the first believer, and the first Muslim. Years after Khadija passed away, the Prophet Muhammad PBUH married Aisha bint Abi Bakr. She was a politically active woman, and a learned scholar in religion, jurisprudence, rhetoric and medicine. She narrated over 2200 hadiths, more than any other woman, and second only to Abi Hurayra, Abdullah ibn Omar, and Anas ibn Malik. She was the Prophet’s favourite wife and she taught women (and sometimes men) in Islamic studies. A more modern example of a powerful Muslim woman is Malala Yousafzai. She was born and raised in Pakistan, where the Taliban, an extremist group who prohibited music, girls’ education and art, took control of her town in 2011. At age 15, she was shot in the head because she spoke out for her right to an education. After gaining media coverage, she took advantage of this and spoke once more about the importance of girls’ education.
Now she is a well-known activist and proud Muslim. Unfortunately, despite the incredible efforts of Muslim women, they are labelled oppressed and weak by the media, because many of them wear hijabs. These harmful assumptions are untrue, as proved by history and modern-day believers. In fact, the oppression comes from occasional extremism, but mostly some countries, who have posed adverse laws and practices that threaten Muslim women’s rights and lives.
such as female infanticide and robbing a woman of her right to inheritance, this religion has reached what many Western countries are still unable to have: genderbased equality and women’s rights. From the origins of the faith to this day, Muslim women continue to prove that they are not oppressed because of their clothing, that they can do anything, and that they are powerful.
Islam has accomplished an incredible feat. By abolishing damaging ideas and action,
By Sarah Althaqafi
IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THE EXTRA STEP…
PODCASTS TO LISTEN TO… Philosophy • In Our Time – BBC Radio 4 • Panpsycast • Philosophy Bites History • In Our Time – BBC Radio 4 Politics • • • •
Politics Weekly Talking Politics The Spectator: podcasts The Guardian: political podcasts
THANK YOU FOR READING!