The F Word: Women of the World

women of the world SEPTEMBER 2015 ISSUE #3

£2.50

G LAN TON

FE

M

IN

IS

the-f-word.indd 1

T SO CIET Y

07-Sep-15 5:14:46 PM

CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 6 8 9 10 12 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 26 29

Letters from the editors Greta Gillham Wright & Sophie Quinn A day in the life of a teenage feminist Sami Henry I’m sick of yellow fever Beth Madeley A response to the denigration of feminism Nika Bienko Lolita and Cosplay: self confidence, self-expression, and strange looks Lauren Henry Anti porn; pro sex Sophie Quinn The middle eastern voice Gannat Fahmy Playlist: Women of the World Cleo Gravvet The Sojourner Truth story Ramani Chandramohan Believe Victims of Rape Sophie Quinn Take up space Ray Carter Nicki Minaj: our queen Beth Madeley My feminist inspiration: the speed sisters of Palestine Cleo Gravvet How to tell if a man is really a feminist Fergus Lamb Capitalism, feminism, and morality Emma Westbrook Get over it Lauren Henry Kintsukuroi: a poem Ray Carter Riot grrrl and Intersectionality Victoria Baines Catcalling Rosie How Past the LG of LGBT+ Louise Dunk & Jennifer Walton Women of China: their past and present Anna Fulcher Liberate body hair! Frieda Ford A sprinkle of glitter: adolescent female experience Emma English

30 Feminism in the punk music scene 32 Filipina Feminism Sami Henry

Ele Boiling

founded by greta gillham wright & beth madeley edited by greta gillham wright & sophie quinn art by beth madeley & greta gillham wright formatted by esme feurtado printed by oyster press supported by simon langton girls’ grammar school & marie selwood

the-f-word.indd 2

07-Sep-15 5:14:48 PM

letters from the editors Feminism is a linear concept, and one which must develop in response to the changing social climate. This issue is centered around women of the world, a theme which gives a platform for the diversity of our voices and experiences as women. In the creation of this magazine, we actively shape feminism into a more intersectional, inclusive space as we explore and challenge any fixed notion of what it is to be a woman.

It is therefore essential that we expand our feminist vocabulary to one of inclusion. I have always found the concept of equality an unsettling one, and whilst I recognize its benefits when campaigning in isolation, such as for equal pay for all genders, its vagueness and imprecision endangers feminism of becoming diluted. By presenting equality as the female utopia, we undermine the differences between us: of race, class, age and sexuality.

Women are multi-faceted, complex, and constantly changing, to deny our nuances is to deny our humanity. And a dismissal of this difference is inevitably intertwined with marginalization; that is, intertwined within the constrictive, patriarchal notion of femininity.

And with whom do we strive for equality with? Men are as diverse a collective as women, and to depict men as possessing equal privilege, ignoring class structures, racial prejudice, or homophobia, is to fuel the system which ultimately represses us.

Because our capitalist culture is so dependent on hierarchy, we cannot realistically strive for equality without acknowledgement that the most marginalized groups, those who have the greatest priority within feminism, will be dismissed. I do not want to be assimilated into this status quo, I want to overturn it: I want liberation.

The concept of liberation does not work within our capitalist culture, it seeks to dismantle and undermine it through shifts in the perception of social structures. For example, Selma James, one of the forefront activists of the Women’s Liberation Movement, re-envisaged the concept of the family, campaigning for home and care work to be valued as much as construction and desk work. Domestic work is intrinsically linked to the female, and is therefore seen as below that of typically male professions. But because James’ theory removes gender associations from work, the very notion of a working class is positively expanded beyond its capitalist definition.

The liberation ideal can also be applied to quasi-feminist corporations such as Dove, who advertise that all women are beautiful – if they purchase Dove products. If we remove the concept of beauty from its capitalist associations, that of economic value,or prize worth – associations which are historically inseparable from the objectification of women – we liberate what it is to be beautiful to a far more individual and subjective definition: one which does not rely upon an adherence to the standards which the status quo demands.

Society is not a fixed object, nor is it defined by an exterior force other than the people within it - and this makes it precarious.

Therefore, a shift in the perception of what it is to be a society and of the fixed roles – if any – which should dictate it, challenges the very foundations on which our patriarchal culture is built.

Within the process of the liberation of all marginalized groups inevitably comes a redefinition of society and of modern world.

This is feminism, and this is revolutionary.

Greta Gillham Wright

If feminism is about equal rights and treatment for all people, why isn’t it called humanism? Or equalism? Egalitarianism? Why do we have to name it after women, isn’t that discriminating against men? Do we need meninism, because feminism ignores men?

Yes, feminism is about people being given equal rights. But for this to happen, we need to acknowledge that in the world in which we live, we do not have that equality. It is primarily women who are facing the struggle – not just women like me, but women from all walks of life.

Our society’s gender inequality requires a specific lens. Because women are generally marginalised compared to men in our society, they need narrative space for them and their allies to talk about women’s issues and experiences. Without naming the issue of women’s equality, or challenging the power structures and cultural norms that generally privilege men over women in our society, there is a chance these issues might get deprioritised.

If you’re using the term ‘humanist’ to mean believing in equal rights and equality, you just might want to check that other people understand what you mean. The term ‘humanism’ arose during the enlightenment in the 18th century, and referred to a movement promoting reason, justice and ethics, while rejecting religious dogma and the idea of divine and supernatural powers. There is a strong and vibrant humanist movement today that draws its legacy from this time, combining a commitment to human rights with a secular and rational worldview. It does not specifically focus on gender inequality. So while you can be both a feminist and humanist, one term does not substitute for the other.

The reason for a distinguishable feminism is that in egalitarianism’s and humanism’s past, women were left out. People didn’t automatically understand that egalitarianism or humanism meant all humans. They were capable of saying ‘all men are created equal’ and calling that ‘egalitarianism’ while ‘all men’ was defined to exclude women and people of colour and even non-land owning white men.

So being explicit about supporting feminism, or identifying as a feminist, is first and foremost a matter of acknowledging that women’s equality and empowerment can be neglected if women’s equality and empowerment are not actively recognised and diligently paid attention to.

People who demand to be called equalists, rather than feminists, are ignoring the fact that we aren’t actually equal. An equalist doesn’t fight for equality that isn’t there yet, they fight to keep the status quo of equality they simply believe is already there.

The equalist debate is one way of preserving patriarchy, whereas feminism seeks to give women power on their own terms.

Ultimately, feminism is not just about equality; it is about liberation from oppressive social structures. Females have been forgotten in this world, and if we want full equality and empowerment of all people, we need to pay attention to all people equally. So far, more attention has been paid to dominant groups, which is why now, we need to focus on marginalised ones. If you do not care for the name feminism, you do not care for women at all.

Sophie Quinn 1

the-f-word.indd 1

07-Sep-15 5:14:49 PM

the-f-word.indd 2

07-Sep-15 5:14:58 PM

I’m Sick of Yellow Fever Trigger Warning: this article discusses pornography, molestation and rape.

True story: one time I was with a group of friends and it came up that I am (half) Japanese. A boy who I had never talked to before (or since) turned to me and said, and I pinky swear that I’m not even exaggerating, “Oh, so you’re into kinky sh*t then, yeah?”

I find it hard to say that I’ve been a victim of racism outright, because the majority of the racist comments I’ve received have been intended as compliments, sexual attention thrust upon me by virtue of being a ‘Japanese schoolgirl’. By being Japanese and young I mirror thousands of pornographic images that saturate the Japanese adult industry and enjoy success in their own segregated ‘Asian’ section in western porno sites. Images of a typically underage-looking-but-don’t-worry-she’s-not-really sexually inexperienced girl who is often forced into sexual acts.

Rape, essentially. Another true story: Once when I was about 15 I sardonically (and, in retrospect, naively) dressed as a Japanese schoolgirl for a halloween party. When I got there multiple boys informed me that I “just looked like a porn star.” These boys were my age, still children, but had absorbed and normalised these images of rape and felt comfortable openly comparing me to them.

Unfortunately, pornographic photos and videos are just the tip of the depraved ice burg. In Japan young girls in their school uniforms line the streets of Akihabara (a busy shopping district) handing out leaflets offering ‘compensated dating’ services. As far as the leaflets are concerned, these girls go for walks and eat meals with men for money, often working in cafes that specifically cater to a schoolgirl fetish. However, in reality they offer a varied menu of ‘other’ services upon negotiation. It is only technically illegal to pay for penile-vaginal penetration in

Japan, so everything else is on the cards, although obviously plain old illegal paid sex is common too. The schoolgirl fetish is so prevalent that there are even brothels decorated to look like classrooms. Another incredibly disturbing trend; since more female-only train carriages have been created as a response to high rates of molestation, brothels that mimic train carriage interiors have started popping up. This echoes an entire sub-genre of porn that depicts (you guessed it) schoolgirls being molested and gang raped on trains and buses. It’s not surprising then, that in Japan sex trafficking is rife. According to the 2014 U.S. State Department’s Trafficking in Persons Report, “The Government of Japan does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking”.

Obviously the sexualisation of teenage girls does not just exist within the perimeters of Japan. The most searched key word globally on Pornhub in 2014 was ‘teen’. Britney Spears’ ‘Baby One More Time’ music video exists. The western world is a scary paedophillic clusterf*ck too. However, the sexualisation of Japanese schoolgirls is uniquely evil in that it not only fetishises our youth, but also our very ‘asian-ness’. Some might argue that there is nothing wrong with expressing a racial preference, and that it’s no different from favouring someone tall, or ginger or curvaceous. However, racial preferences are dependent on stereotypes, which are inherently racist. As demonstrated by my opening anecdote, there is an assumed set of sexual behaviours that supposedly come with an asian girl. We are submissive, shy, innocent. We can be your inexperienced schoolgirl or your demure geisha. But at what cost?

Beth Madeley

A response to the denigration of feminism As a response to the denigration of feminism, it has become customary to declare that it is merely necessary to consider women ‘people’, to consider them equal to men, and at most to think that they should not be denied opportunities given to men, in order to qualify as a feminist. On a basic level, I suppose this is not wrong. But it is not enough; moreover, it is harmful.

If all that is required to be a feminist is to be able to agree with these concepts, then both the impact and importance of feminism is diminished. There are many people who would agree, but in other, less outright ways, contribute to the oppression of women.

Such statements alone do not result in changes for women. If pressed, the persistent man who refuses to take a rejection as final is likely to agree that women are equal, the street harasser the same, as well as all those men ever-ready to speak over women and take any sign of disagreement as a sign that a woman is becoming angry (read: irrational). They are acting in ways that perpetuate gender-based oppression, contributing to making the world a less safe and less pleasant place for women, and in doing so they are acting explicitly against the purpose at heart of the feminist movement. And so, are they feminists?

To set such a low bar for feminism makes it more palatable to society, and allows more people to identify themselves as

feminists. In turn, this allows for increased public discussion and awareness of related issues. This can only be beneficial to the prospect of actually achieving a change in both attitudes and in turn societal structures. But to make feminism only an agreement with this basic declaration is to change it from being a political movement for the eradication of gender oppression to make it become more a question of identity – if one agrees to be a feminist within this framework, the conversation is over, nothing more is demanded. Nothing is changed.

Furthermore, to give someone a label as part of a social group is to allow them, to a certain extent, to represent the group as a whole and so to define its basic precepts. In this way, to compel others to define themselves as feminists on the basis of such a broad statement without demanding any further commitment is to weaken the movement. If the common perception of a feminist is someone who just generally believes in equality, those fighting actively against incidences of gender-based oppression are perceived as radicals and extremists, and thus feminism as a social movement is discredited and loses its effectiveness, due to the perception that if we all believe - in theory - in gender equality, then we live in a post-feminist world in which it is actually present.

Nika Bienko 3

the-f-word.indd 3

07-Sep-15 5:15:00 PM

Lolita and Cosplay:

Self-Confidence, Self- Expression, and Strange Looks

If you’re unfamiliar with the context in which I’m talking about Lolita, it has almost nothing to do with the definition that google spits out if you search it; that is to say, we’re talking about fashion, not ‘sexually precocious young girls’ as embodied in Nabokov’s infamous novel. But having said this, this definition seems to be the only thing that comes to mind when it comes to any sort of dress up.

Put simply, Lolita is an umbrella term for the varied alternative fashions that came about because of several factors. It originated in the Meiji period of Japan (18681912) and was primarily moulded by two landmark reforms. Firstly, the Tenpo Reforms, brought about

by Feudal Lord Mizano Tadakuni, which consisted of the formal shunning of pornography and erotica in art and entertainment which had never previously been considered shameful.

This led to the establishment of a new standard of modesty which was expected to be upheld and reflected in the art and fashion of the era. But when the Kansai Reforms expanded trade routes to include more of Europe and even America, and thanks to the Conventions of Kanagawa in 1854, the door to Western Trade was opened. This saw a surge in the development of youth fashion subcultures which were outspoken and exaggerated in response to the restrictive hierarchy of traditional Japanese clothing and the modest principles as a result of the Tenpo Reforms. They incorporated western motifs into their fashion, taking elements of French, English, American and other European cultures and producing unique fusion fashion.

There is a broad spectrum of styles that are classified as Lolita, such as classic, gothic, sweet, ganguro, visual kei, and fairy kei, among others. Lolita is a breed of fashion that embodies self-expression, choice, and female agency; as Dr S. Boardman, author of Tokyo Adorned, asserts, “without saying a word, their appearance has given them a voice”.

At the centre of Lolita fashion there is self-expression- it embodies the newfound freedom of the Japanese youth on a more global scale; in the same way, cosplay is about defiance through dress-up. It’s about having the confidence to wear the clothes you want without a passing glance at the people that will stare at you, and boosting your selfesteem by dressing to impress no one but yourself, the only difference being that where Lolita is about the particular style, cosplay is about a particular character.

But therein lies theproblem. See, when you dress in a way that deviates from the social construct of normality, people are going to look. They’re going to think you’re weird, going to a fancy dress party, or, in the worst case, that because you’re wearing a “costume”, it’s acceptable to touch you and make you uncomfortable. Modern society imposes an underlying sexuality to dress-up, which perverts the original element of confidence-building and the celebration of self-esteem, misconstruing it and morphing into a sexual display; a feast for the collective eyes of predators that always seem famished.

And sadly, the ‘worst case scenario’ is all too common. In July 2014 at New York Comic-con, renowned cosplayer and costume designer Yaya Han was groped twice, and before you assume she was displaying her cleavage for the world to ogle at, she was wearing a full-body outfit the first day and a cape the second. Even if she had been wearing a revealing outfit, her dress does not make it acceptable to touch her without consent. When a famous female cosplayer is sexually harassed in this way, what message does this send to young cosplayers who are just starting out? It tells them that when they wear a costume, people forget that they’re human. That no matter what they do, they’re going to be objectified, stared at, and harassed because to some people, the donning of an outfit is tantamount to the relinquishment of your human rights.

The first time I ever cosplayed, I was on holiday in a foreign country, and along with my cousin and sister I purchased a wig, slapped on some poorly-applied makeup, and hit the road.

Or rather, the train.

The memory of the journey there is underwhelming. But as soon as I put on my bright turquoise wig, our group of pastel-haired pre-teens began to gather a surplus of attention. It became difficult to walk around the convention

4

the-f-word.indd 4

07-Sep-15 5:15:00 PM

because every few minutes we would be stopped for photos (I can still feel the ghost-ache of the fixed smiles we had to hold when I think about it) and asked for our facebook accounts.

At the time, I was delighted by the attention. People were crowding round to take photos of us! I had no idea why, but in the moment I suspect I didn’t really care too much about the source of the attention, so long as I was getting it.

But on the way home, we made the executive decision to leave our wigs and makeup on. As we walked to the station, I recall that there was a gaggle of children following us, chattering questions like ‘is that your natural hair colour?’ in our ears. And on the train itself, the eyes of strangers were glued to me again, only now they had no cameras.

A man moved to let me sit, and I did, but I was no more comfortable because of all the strangers looking at me.

When I think about it now, that entire experience could have gone in a much scarier direction than it did. I only got looks; I wasn’t harassed, but in my 15 year old mind, I couldn’t help but feel like the unwanted attention was my fault for not taking off the wig and the makeup. In reality, if I was being objectified by the people that took my picture, the fault lies with them for sexualising a minor, not with me for wearing a costume.

As is the case in the perversion of the essence of Lolita, it seems somewhat disturbing that the entire concept of dress-up is reduced to the idea of precociousness- of readiness before ripeness. If a girl wears a costume and this is branded as “sexually precocious” by the pernicious public that calls her a prude for covering up and a slut for wearing spaghetti straps, it is no longer a question of ‘ripeness’ but of rottenness and rancour.

Lauren Henry

5

the-f-word.indd 5

07-Sep-15 5:15:01 PM

6

the-f-word.indd 6

07-Sep-15 5:15:05 PM

Anti-porn, pro-sex Feminism and pornography have a complex relationship.

It is one of the issues that divide the feminist community; in fact there is a polarity when it comes to feminists’ views on porn. There are those who see pornography as harmful and objectifying, and because it is also often filled with violence and otherwise illegal acts such as a rape scenes, the ever-troubling phenomenon of violence in pornography lives on. Then there are those that believe in a freedomand-liberation model that calls for freedom from societal constraints on sexuality that oppress women and men.

They see any type of censorship as detrimental because it ultimately promotes stigma and shame around sexuality.

They say we need to celebrate sexuality - especially women’s - and that trying to ban pornography would do more harm than good. They also make the argument of a black market developing if pornography were to be banned, which would ultimately create even more violence and corruption within the industry.

It seems that these two flavours of feminism are all that some people see. Anti-porn, to many, means a sexually repressed caricature of a woman who jealously hates the idea of anyone having sex, or feels threatened by the women in porn. But this is nothing more than an easy and inaccurate way of dismissing anti-porn arguments.

The most compelling feminist arguments are anti-porn, pro-sex: specifically anti-porn industry. Sex and sexuality are nothing to be ashamed of. As long as it is between consenting adults, sex is not wrong, dirty, or bad. Loving and celebrating sex is exactly why one might hate porn.

Mainstream porn is an unsatisfactory imitation of sex; body parts are generally all cut up, shaved, bleached, siliconstuffed and looking into their soul-crushed miserable eyes evokes feelings that are closer to depression than arousal.

And, let’s face it, children and teenagers get the majority of their sex education from the internet. Long before school or parents will have mentioned it, chances are they will have seen it all online - studies show that on average, children see porn for the first time at age eleven. This teaches them not only the mechanics of sex, but also how they should treat each other, and what they should find arousing. It is argued that mainstream porn removes mutuality and sensuality from sex, provides unrealistic expectations of what sex is like, and promotes violence and domination over women. Sociologist Jennifer Johnson has found that men who regularly watch porn prefer pornography to reallife sexual encounters, need to think about porn in order to maintain arousal during sex, and that porn shapes how they think they should engage in intimate behaviors.

Perhaps some of these negative effects could be avoided if we could expose young people to sex in a healthy, realistic,

and positive way that also doesn’t support a larger culture that is harmful to women.

Not only are the psychological effects damaging and the porn itself unsexy – in mainstream porn, it is almost guaranteed that there has been some kind of exploitation somewhere along the line. It is not difficult to do a quick Google search and find hundreds stories of sexual assault, abuse and coercion from women in porn, and Ronna Gradus and Jill Bauer’s documentary Hot Girls Wanted illustrates how the porn industry seeks out young women moving away from their hometown for the first time who may be easily coerced to do things they do not want to do. Women in the porn business may feel like they can’t complain about sexual assault in fear of being labeled ‘hard to work with’ and porn actresses have even more difficulties when reporting sexual assault. In addition to this, although the industry is becoming better regulated, pornography still has serious issues with the spread of STDs and HIV. Expressing your sexuality is healthy and no one should be looked down upon for engaging in sex work. However, the porn industry is about as exploitative, misogynistic and depressing as one would expect a widely unregulated, multi-billion dollar industry to be, and porn culture is harmful and unrealistic. As much as we would probably all like to find that ethically sourced, free-range, grassfed porn, it is difficult to ensure complete freedom from exploitation.

Censorship of porn is not the solution I am advocating.

Censorship is the process of obliterating voices, which can never be a good thing. Every voice should be heard.

Therefore, I would not want to criminalise pornography.

I do want an end to exploitation: these issues could be resolved if our society evolved past its outdated views about sexuality. Instead of avoiding the discussion, we could have open and healthy conversations about sexuality and provide much better sex education.

Instead of shaming porn actors and sex workers, we could have open conversations with them and try to reform the system. Sex work as a concept and erotica are not intrinsically harmful and sexist; but the porn industry as it stands is.

Sophie Quinn

7

the-f-word.indd 7

07-Sep-15 5:15:05 PM

The Middle Eastern Voice

The most enshrouded force of societal change in the Middle East is also the most powerful: the voice of women. In reality, the voice of the woman in the Middle East has been at the forefront of social and political change and revolution. The fight against power, oppression, dictatorship, and colonialism have all gone hand in hand with the fight for women’s liberation. But you may not be particularly aware of this; the common discourse within the media tends to focus on the poor treatment of women in the Middle East. We cannot completely discredit this, but I think we as feminists should also place emphasis on the ways in which women in the Middle East use and have used their voice. Women who stand up for their beliefs so much they would die for their cause. Women who challenge the Western stereotype of submissiveness and ignorance. And women who challenge their own cultural conventions and take to the streets to fight for what they believe in.

Throughout modern history, in Egypt for example, women have been at the forefront of political actions against colonialism and the monarchy. After the First World War, Hoda Sharawi founded the Egyptian feminist union who carried out the largest all-female demonstration against British occupation, and led the first women’s demonstration during the revolution of 1919 against the Egyptian monarchy. They predominantly demanded better female education, which led to primary education being made compulsory for girls. Moving into North West Africa, women in neighbouring Algeria were also taking a pivotal role in the fight against French colonialism. One of the most prominent women was Zoulika Echaib, an activist in the National Liberation Front whose husband and child were executed by the French colonial

army. She began participation in the FLN and was arrested by them, but she famously continued addressing the crowds even after her arrest and spat in the face of the soldier who tried to silence her. Does this sound like a passive woman to you?

You may be wondering how this history translates into today. The answer is more than ever, when there are dictatorial governments and oppressive regimes in the Middle East, and the media that ignores the work of women. Just as women fought in 1919 in Egypt, and 1956 in Algeria, they fight today in Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, and across the Arab and Islamic world. In modern times, the Arab Spring served as a catalyst for women using their voices in protest, and vice versa. In Tunisia, blogger Lina Ben Mhenni reported from the rural areas where the protests started, bringing them to prominence and spreading the activity. In Yemen, Tawakkol Karman is often referred to as ‘the mother of the Yemeni revolution’, and Egyptian activist Asmaa Mahfouz spread the news of the 25th January protest to allow it to be as prominent as it was.

Protest gives women the opportunity to express themselves: to rebel against convention, to attack oppressive powers and organisations, and to speak with the voice of justice, in more than one sense. The Arabic phrase ‘ ’translates into ‘the voice of the woman is revolution’. For women across the globe, there may still be a way to go to gender equality. But the fundamental thing we must do is speak out, protest, follow in the footsteps of our brave predecessors. Using our voice is an act of revolution in itself.

Gannat Fahmy

8

the-f-word.indd 8

07-Sep-15 5:15:10 PM

9

the-f-word.indd 9

07-Sep-15 5:15:12 PM

Ain’t I a woman? - The story of Sojourner Within the pages of an anthology of 100 Great Poems selected by Victoria Parker lies a speech of a woman called Sojourner Truth.

Although this name may not instantly ring any bells, I believe the life of this former female slave is a testament to the struggle that remains in today’s society against discrimination of sex and race.

Isabella Baumfree, the woman who would later be known as Sojourner Truth, was born around 1797 in New York State. Her childhood was defined by her status as a slave, with ten of her siblings sold to various different slave owners. After the death of her second owner Charles Hardenbergh, Truth was purchased

by John Neelyat the age of nine along with a herd of sheep for $100. Enduring much cruelty at Neely’s hands, she was then sold off to Martinus Schryver for $105. She eventually ended up under the ownership of John Dumont. In around 1815, Truth fell in love with Robert, a slave from a nearby farm. Although they had a daughter together, Robert’s master forbade them from seeing each other because their children would be the property of Dumont. Truth was forced by Dumont to marry Thomas, another slave, with whom she had three children: Peter, Elizabeth and Sophia.

On July 4th 1827, a new emancipation law allowed all slaves in New York to be liberated. However, Dumont had agreed to free Truth the year before, and when he failed to fulfil his promise, Truth escaped with her daughter Sophia, whilst Elizabeth and Peter remained with Dumont. Truth fled to the house of Isaac and Maria Van Wagenen, who bought her from Dumont for $20 but treated her kindly, insisting that she call them by their first names, rather than “master” and “mistress”. It was under the ownership of the Van Wagenens that Truth converted to Christianity, a decision that would transform the rest of her life. She later learnt that her (at the time) 5 year old son Peter had illegally been sold back into slavery to a plantation owner in Alabama. Truth took this issue to court and managed to secure Peter’s return to New York from the South. This marked not only a personal victory for Truth, but also one of the first cases of a black woman successfully challenging a white man in US legal history.

In 1843, she left New York with only a bag of clothes and 25 cents and changed her name to Sojourner – meaning“traveller” – Truth, planning to roam across the US as a Methodist preacher.

Despite being unable to read or write, she dictated her memoirs to her friend Olive Gilbert, which were then published by Lloyd Garrison in 1850 as The Narrative of Sojourner Truth: A Northern Slave.

At the Women’s Rights Convention in 1851 in Ohio, Truth delivered her moving “Ain’t I a woman” speech, which was later adapted into a poem by Erlene Stetson. However, her character was never affected by her prominence as a public speaker: in 1858, during a meeting in Indiana, a member of the audience accused the six-foot tall Truth of being a man and she candidly responded by opening her blouse and exposing her breasts.

Truth was one of a number of escaped slaves to use their personal struggles to push for reforms in the 19th century. In her speeches, Truth advocated not only the liberation of African-American slaves, but also equality for women, improvements to the prison system and the universal right to vote. She particularly wanted to ensure that the abolitionist movement would not neglect women once civil rights were secured for black men.

During the American Civil War (1861-1865), in which the Northern, or Unionist, and Southern, or Confederate, states battled fiercely over the abolition of slavery, Truth encouraged freed slaves to join the Union Army and fight for the liberation of the slaves in the South. In 1865, Truth campaigned against the segregation of streetcars in Washington D.C. by riding in cars designated for whites only. It is a quirk of history that 90 years later, Rosa Parks would follow in Truth’s footsteps when she refused to give up her seat on a bus in Montgomery, Alabama to a white passenger.

After a life dedicated to abolitionism and women’s rights, Sojourner died in 1883, aged 86, at her home in Michigan. Her funeral was attended by over a thousand people. Since then, Sojourner’s legacy has been honoured with commemorative postage stamps, an induction into the US Women’s Hall of Fame and a Mars rover being named after her.

Ramani Chandramohan

10

the-f-word.indd 10

07-Sep-15 5:15:14 PM

Ain’t I a Woman?

Ain’t I a woman?

That man over there say a woman needs to be helped into carriages and lifted over ditches and to have the best place everywhere.

Nobody ever helped me into carriages or over mud puddles or gives me a best place...

Inspired by Truth’s impassioned speech, I’ve re-written the poem using my own interpretation of her words: Ain’t I a woman?

That man over there say A woman needs to be told what to wear And what career to follow And who to love.

Everyone demanded my weight, my height, my size Everyone thought that I could only whine Everyone tried to push me on the assembly line…

And ain’t I a woman?

Look at me Look at my arm!

I have plowed and planted and gathered into barns and no man could head me...

And ain’t I a woman?

I could work as much and eat as much as a man — when I could get to it — and bear the lash as well and ain’t I a woman?

I have borne thirteen children and seen most all sold into slavery and when I cried out a mother’s grief none but Jesus heard me...

And ain’t I still a woman?

Look at me!

Look at my trousers!

I have turned the ignition key And studied and spoken out Even as the bullet pierced my skull…

And ain’t I a woman?

I train as hard And win as many matches as a man – When the press reports it – And get paid less for it as well And ain’t I a woman?

I have borne a single child And seen her sold into false dogmas And when I cried out at the ways of society None but another mother heard me...

And ain’t I a woman? that little man in black there say a woman can’t have as much rights as a man cause Christ wasn’t a woman Where did your Christ come from?

From God and a woman!

Man had nothing to do with him!

If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down, all alone together women ought to be able to turn it rightside up again.

And ain’t I a woman?

That little man in black there say Women shouldn’t have equal rights as men Because feminism has gone too far What is the aim of your feminism?

To make the oppressed the oppressors?

We all know better than that…

If Sojourner Truth could make this speech Alone To challenge the many guises of prejudice Together women can and should be The voice of acceptance and equality.

11

the-f-word.indd 11

07-Sep-15 5:15:17 PM

Believe victims of rape Trigger Warning: this articlec ontains discussion of rape.

Disclaimer: this article is about the repression of the female voice against the male voice, so focuses primarily on female victims and male perpetrators. It is not dismissing the reality of male victims and female perpetrators and the importance of this issue, it is just not discussed specifically in this piece.

A man is set on fire. Why was he wearing flammable clothing?

Eyewitnesses said he had purchased a lighter earlier; he probably set himself on fire. What if he’s lying, we wouldn’t want to label someone as a firestarter! Was he drinking? Why didn’t he stop, drop, and roll?

It seems ludicrous to treat any other crime as we do rape cases, and yet, this is what continues to happen even in the UK. Why, perhaps most importantly, do we seem to always assume that rape victims are lying?

In order to have a real and significant discussion about rape, it is important to lay some factual groundwork so that the problems surrounding the issue are not dismissed. 2% of rapes turn out to be false accusations, and even these statistics may be inaccurately high as of those 2%, many of the victims may have been pressured by the police, the rapist, or the rapist’s family to cover up the crime.

This means that at least 98% of all reported rapes happened. The majority of victims don’t actually report the crime to the police for a multitude of reasons, including feeling traumatised, ashamed, repressing what happened, being unaware of what ‘counts’ as rape, not wanting to go through being questioned at length about it, fearing the abuser, or wanting to protect them. Even if a case gets to court, and the vast majority don’t, defendants in rape trials stand a better chance of being acquitted than those facing other criminal charges. That is because the public perception of rape - that it is a crime committed by a stranger in a dark alley – is both wrong and hard to shift. Most victims know the people who rape them; they are targeted by acquaintances, and current and former partners. There is a 70% overlap in cases of rape and domestic violence.

The criminal justice system allows that you can never do wrong by believing the victim. Even if, against all odds, their accusation turns out to be false, all you did as the bystander was believe a vulnerable person. In order to maintain the necessary respect for the person making an allegation, and to treat the case with the gravity it deserves, the word of the victim should always be placed at a much higher level than that of their abuser; if you

12

the-f-word.indd 12

07-Sep-15 5:15:22 PM

want to ‘stay neutral’ or ‘just hear both sides’ you are playing into the hands of the abuser. Part of the problem is the juries in rape trials seem to think that ‘presuming innocent’ means that they have to assume the victim is lying. They’re allowed to assume and think whatever they want, obviously; but they have to weigh the evidence fairly. That is not nitpicking - it’s a vitally important nuance.

If you listen to some campaigners, you’d believe that innocent men live in fear of false accusations which will ruin their lives, even if charges are eventually dropped. They argue that men who face rape allegations should enjoy the same anonymity as the women or men who accuse them. This is a demand backed by many notable figures, including Conservative MPs Nigel Evans and Mark Pritchard. But these accounts - given by well-known men with easy access to the media - overshadow the untold stories of thousands of women, whose traumatic experiences will never see the light of day and who will be denied justice. This will come as no surprise to many women who, even in everyday situations, have their thoughts and experiences overshadowed by those of men. There is a tendency, in many areas, to take the male voice more seriously and, if necessary, assume the female is not telling the truth.

The legal system, and even victims, tend not to realise one crucial fact: rape is usually a serial offence – and that is particularly crucial when it comes to securing convictions. Prosecutions often fail because of a lack of witnesses, which means that the case turns on two people giving conflicting evidence. It is one person’s word against another’s; usually a man’s against a woman’s, sometimes a well-known and respected man against an unknown woman. The thing that changes that is the existence of other victims, often completely unknown to each other, whose evidence establishes a pattern of offending behaviour.

When a convicted rapist is first arrested and charged, it may be on the word of a single person. Publicity about the case, including the identity of the accused, gives other victims the courage to come forward, legally protected by anonymity if that is what they choose.

This can be seen from the spate of accusations of sexual abuse and emotional manipulation by prominent male YouTube stars, including Alex Day and Tom Milsom, that came to light in 2014.

As one victim spoke out, others gained the courage to begin to come forward, leading to a pile of evidence stacked against particular abusers. Jimmy Savile’s likely victims mounted over the months of the inquiry of his sex abuse, eventually rising to more than 450, because victims felt more supported coming out and giving evidence when others had as well. This makes it much easier to prosecute rapists and abusers.

that the victim had made statements online about her fantasies involving group sex. The revelation that she had had group sex fantasies was, in fact, the entire reason presented for the dismissal of the case. Indeed, agreeing with the prosecutor, the judge remarked that with the admission of these fantasies, “her credibility was shot to pieces.”This perhaps demonstrates the crux of the problem in treating rape: only consent counts as consent.

Not desire, or anything the victim has said or done previously that might imply willingness. Just because you, at one point or another or many points, have expressed desire to have sex with a person or a group of persons, does not automatically mean that in this instance you gave your consent. It seems that either, the victim is accused of lying about giving consent, or told that they gave consent without knowing it.

Not only is there danger of something as ludicrous as this, but a victim may also be judged against a number of assumptions of how a real victim should behave. Courts look for the ‘perfect’ case. If they do not come forward straight away, did not go to hospital afterwards, or went back to the perpetrator, they are seen as less credible, no matter how understandable the reasons for their actions may be. This again demonstrates the tendency to believe that the victim must be lying, or at least covering something up.

Even if victims do go to the police, often they drop out because of the stress of going through the courts system. A system notorious in its treatment of victims of sexual crimes: being asked what they wore, about their sexual history, if they had had drugs or alcohol, this questioning being close to as traumatising as the event itself.

The low rate of reporting rapes is undoubtedly partly due to the fact that victims don’t have confidence in this system. Defendants have a statutory right of protection but victims do not; they can be asked if they wore something revealing and have that count as evidence against them, as though this is equal to consent, and proves they are not telling the truth.

The patriarchy wields the perfect weapon of doubt, which grows stronger every time we ask ‘but what if they’re lying?’ We must stop looking for that perfect case, and we must believe victims.

We must trust their stories. Maybe that seems like a small step, but it is a tremendous intervention.

Then, and only then, can we begin to give justice to those who deserve it.

Sophie Quinn

There is a scandal around rape in this country. But it isn’t about a handful of men who have been wrongly accused, no matter how justifiably angry they are. It is about the many thousands of victims who do not get justice at all - and the main effect of giving anonymity to accused men would be to make that situation even worse. Thankfully, this anonymity is currently not legal. However, this does not stop rape cases being treated in a way that no other allegation would.

A 2010 case had a particularly disturbing outcome when a woman in the UK made allegations of a gang rape by five perpetrators and the case was taken to court. The judge ordered the jury to return a not guilty verdict when ‘evidence’ was presented showing 13

the-f-word.indd 13

07-Sep-15 5:15:22 PM

Taking up space Carving out spaces for trans and POC identities in feminism

Taking up space should be as easy as breathing, but it’s actually seriously tricky. People speaking from places of oppression often have to fight for space not only with our oppressors, but with ourselves in a mental battle between what we feel and what we know. Those socialised as female, and those who have been deprived of the privileges that come with being a cisgendered man, are denied space not only physically, but also for our thoughts, speech and opinions. This happens in literature, in the media, in politics, in the education system, in business and pretty much everywhere else, even within the places that we have built for ourselves as a reaction to the erasure, discrimination, and violence we are subjected to.

The constant denial of space for us is something we’ve internalised, whether we like it or not. This has happened to the extent that we’re afraid to occupy the space we deserve, the shapes of our own bodies, the volume of our own voices, the intelligence and audacity of our thoughts.

It is a constant, exhausting struggle to negate these ideas and carve out spaces for ourselves, and one that often goes overlooked. The very fact of us claiming our existences in spaces we’re not supposed to have; is an act of resistance. Despite knowing the power and importance of claiming one’s own existence in a place where it feels unwelcome, I find myself constantly needing to make excuses, reassurances and validations for the space I take up.

Certainly, as a mixed race, queer, non binary trans person, this mental battle is especially strong, and almost perpetual.

In particular, I have to constantly find justifications for my own place within feminism; I have to justify my right to talk actively and passionately about feminism, about feminist

issues, and about women; and often in feminist spaces I feel as though I am infiltrating. I participate in many activities for women, by women in the name of feminism, but I can’t help myself from feeling like a Gender Spy, sneaking into a space in which I am unwelcome and in which my opinion is less relevant:- a feeling which many people whose opinions really aren’t as relevant (men) somewhat frustratingly often do not have.

This isn’t to say that men have no place in feminist discourse, but more that their voices are much less of a priority than those of people who aren’t men. That seems obvious, but seeing as the idea that their opinions aren’t number one top priority is surprisingly difficult for a lot of men to swallow, I came to realise that my doubt about my right to space in feminism comes partially from gatekeeping within feminism and partly from the messages that I’ve received about my worth because of the identities I hold- my race, my weight and my gender in particular.

When you aren’t in a position of privilege, you’re constantly told that you are worth less and less space; and those socially ‘higher up’ than you in a world of white supremacy, patriarchy, homophobia and ableism will often feel entitled to space of which you are deprived.

In feminism, this sometimes collides with the resistance of patriarchal oppression, leading to a lack of intersectionality.

This is often what people mean when they refer to White Feminism; that is, not the feminism of every white feminist, but a type of feminism held specifically by White Feminists which excludes the issues of feminists of any other race.

Whilst recognising their oppression, yet not recognising their positions of privilege above women of colour, White Feminists can receive times when said WOC speak up about

14

the-f-word.indd 14

07-Sep-15 5:15:24 PM

their experiences of sexism in its intersection with racism as competitiveness or dismissal of their own problems.

This short sightedness can often lead to POC being scapegoated for criticisms of white women that actually stem from misogyny, and when the experiences of WOC and QTPOC are given the space they need within feminism, many White Feminists can see this as a slight to the legitimacy of their own identities. I’ve heard White Feminists decry the calls for greater diversity and the expression of POC experience as something which reduces them to the ‘basic/ silly white girl’ or the ‘petty white woman’ sterotype. This dismissal is perceived because White Feminists feel entitled to space which WOC deserve to share. The ‘white girl’ stereotype - unimportant and shallow, doesn’t come from an infringement on the space of white women by POC, nor does it come from reverse racism, because reverse racism doesn’t exist. It comes from the discrimination against the gender, rather than being an issue of race.

People of colour are largely overlooked within the most dominant narratives of mainstream feminism, and the intersection with between racism and sexism is frequently downplayed in favour of problems specific to white women, usually at the cost of the comfort and acceptance of POC. I know, however, the true importance of POC narratives and issues within feminism and the impact of misogynoir on POC being excluded and, in some cases, excluding our selves. I am well aware of the value of intersectional feminism, of the rightful place of the person of colour as a priority within feminism, despite our problems being blindsided by white feminists who wish to ‘speak for us’, who proclaim that we must ‘stop pitting women against one another’ whilst ignoring the privileges they have over us.

Some parallels can be drawn between the intersection of race and sexism in feminism, and the place of transgender people in feminism. As many feminist ideologies and structures were devised without alternatives to the gender binary or transgender identities in mind, claiming space within feminism as a trans person is confusing at best.

The similarity between this and race issues stems from the oppression in the form of transphobia and gatekeeping many trans people face as we involve ourselves in feminism. More often than not, trans people are faced with the irrelevant and transphobic argument that they either currently hold, or formerly held, an identity of patriarchal privilege, and therefore have no place in feminism; a stance which erases respectively the oppression they face as a transgender person, or erases their current gender identity.

Arguably, being DFAB (designated female at birth), outwardly gendered as female, being raised and socialised as female and being someone who does not benefit from patriarchal privilege, feminism is as much for me and other trans people as it is for cis women. Being DFAB has been formative for me and hugely influenced my experiences and views of life; is a part of my existence that I don’t want to reject, but nevertheless, I am not a woman.

However this most likely varies from one trans person to the next- it is up to us to decide to what extent we belong to feminism, and, in a feminism that is about creating one’s own space in terms of one’s own experience of life, where

exactly we belong. Many trans men and nonbinary people don’t think that they should be a priority within feminism because they aren’t women, and although they support its causes and are affected by the patriarchal hierarchy, they don’t think they should be part of its primary focus. That being said, the place for trans people in feminism should be there for us if we want it.

The double consciousness I and others hold about space in feminism comes in part from the internal denial of space I described earlier. I would like to believe that my place as a subject of feminism and a participant of feminism is legitimate, and can coexist with my gender identity; that my feminism is completely legitimate because the only person whose place is to question it is myself. But I still need to consciously negate all that I have internalised to see clearly where I stand, to what I have a right, and what I lack.

Feelings don’t tend to be in the habit of listening to logicand sometimes going through what I know that I know, is the mental equivalent of repeating stop excluding yourself, stop excluding yourself whilst slapping myself in the face with ineffectual facts. I still frequently feel undeserving of my place within feminism and feminist discourse, and the imposter syndrome that I have internalized is ever at odds with the knowledge I have that my existence, opinions and feminism is legitimate and important.

Feminine prerogatives of modesty and of underplaying one’s own worth, and the view of these things as essential virtues, is a key part of how people who aren’t cis men are excluded from spaces, and how we are made even to exclude ourselves. Simply deciding that one’s existence is important and valuable without the need for justification, goes against pretty much everything we’ve been taught makes us good and worthwhile people: instead we must treasure other people’s comfort and space above our own.

This applies to the power of one’s oppression- the impacts of marginalised identities multiply as they intersect. As a queer, trans POC, I’m expected to prioritise the comfort of white people, straight people and cis people in a constant act of exhausting conscientiousness. I haven’t even mentioned how this applies to those affected by ableism or classism, simply because those aren’t ways in which I’m directly oppressed, but the expectation of those who are to court the privileged is something which, from a position of my own privileges, I need to remind myself.

These seem to be the conditions for those under oppression.

We are allowed exist for the functioning of social hierarchies, but we must do it politely and unobtrusively, and we mustn’t get away of those who are higher up on the ladder. If we do know our own value, there’s no real guarantee of us being able to claim it, and claim the spaces we need for our bodies, voices and opinions.

Perhaps one of the most important things we can do is continue to interrogate the feelings we have when we take up space, and assist each other in claiming the space we really deserve. In life, and in feminism, I think we really need to help each other out- we need to make feminism something in which anyone who needs it can create their own space.

Ray Carter 15

the-f-word.indd 15

07-Sep-15 5:15:24 PM

16

the-f-word.indd 16

07-Sep-15 5:15:33 PM

MY FEMINIST INSPIRATION: the speed sisters of palestine

Hot dust, thick engine oil, shellsuits and the screech of tarmac take you slap bang into the middle of the action.

Mona Ali, 29; one of the first female Palestinian racers, Marah Zahalka, 23; who gained her racing champ crown aged 19, Noor Dauod, 25; a furiously determined team player, and Betty Saadeh, 35; the leader, and only member originating from a rich family of racers in Bethlehem, are managed by Maysoon Jayyusi, 38, and are an all-female team in one of the most male-dominated sports in nonradical Palestinian society.

occupation, seemingly only increases the Sisters’ want of glory. Mona Ali raced against the boys from her school as a teenager, and diminished every stereotype thrown at her with the squeal of a tyre: “At first, the boys wouldn’t accept me. But I told them I’d carry on racing whether they liked it or not.” The Sisters’ uncompromising attitude is only too evident: they customise street cars and race against male teams on track stretches near an Israeli military compound.

This attitude has earned fans, sponsors, and popularity on the Middle East’s ever-growing race circuit.

They are the “Speed Sisters” of Palestine. Making tracks and revving engines since 2005, these women have faced numerous oppositions from every direction imaginable. This is not unexpected in a world in which the passive, domestic female ideal is perpetuated and indoctrinated in both Western and Eastern cultures: as team manager Ms Jayyusi states, “people looked at us as though we’d just landed from space.” This cultural reluctance to accept different notions of femininity, coupled with the crippling economic deprivation of Palestine resulting from long time military

The Speed Sisters demonstrate that with gritty determination and a blind eye to anyone who may dismiss you because of your gender, you can change perceptions of women even in a conservative minded society. Ms Jayyusi characterizes this potential: “you prove that you are strong enough, not scared, that you can compete with the men. And the rest just becomes acceptable.”

Cleo Gravett

17

the-f-word.indd 17

07-Sep-15 5:15:39 PM

How to tell if a man is really a feminist 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Do they know who Simone de Beauvoir is? Or Mary Wollstonecraft? Germaine Greer?

Andrea Dworkin?

Do they know who would win in a fight between Greer and Dworkin?* It is crucial that they know all of these things.

Do they publically cry on at least a monthly basis? If you don’t know the answer to this question, try stabbing them. If they cry they’re in touch with their feminine side and you’re safe.

Break into their house and look at their bookshelf. Are all of their favourite authors women?

They probably aren’t.

Do they listen to you when you speak? This is important. If not, experiment by gluing their mouths shut. How do they feel about this?

Do they watch news read by men? If so, why not Fiona Bruce?

Real male feminists should be more than willing to go to church wearing a dress.

Shout ‘vagina’ at them during dinner. If they look shocked then they’re definitely not feminists. *Dworkin would win.

Fergus Lamb

Capitalism, feminism and morality #LikeAGirl Many of you may have already seen the recent Always marketing campaign, #LikeAGirl, which attracted lots of media coverage after it aired during the American Superbowl in February this year.

If you haven’t seen it (I suggest you look it up if you haven’t), it is an advert for sanitary pads with a very positive message about what it means to do things #likeagirl, challenging the negative connotations attached to it. In the advertisements, women, men and a young boy display what they think it looks like to run, fight and throw like a girl: badly. Then they asked young girls the same question. Except this time the girls perform the tasks properly, trying to do them to the best of their abilities, then the question “When did doing something ‘like a girl’ become an insult?” appears on the screen. The extended version then goes on the challenge the participants’ perception of what doing something like a girl means.

This advert is very close to my heart as it is one of the things that first sparked my awakening into feminism, and made me cry during the first viewing just from sheer realisation at the negative influence society has on young girls during puberty - myself included. It gives me great pleasure that a video with such a great message has been viewed by such a large audience: 58,869,764 views at time of writing. However, the fact that it is produced by

a large company calls into question the degree of good intent.

Did they produce it because they genuinely care about educating young girls? Or are they only concerned with drawing in more consumers by their heart-strings? The feminist movement’s aim has long been to dismantle patriarchy, and with it capitalism, so does this make corporate advertisements with positive messages wrong?

On its website, Always states that, “For the past 30 years, Always has been empowering girls globally, bringing puberty education to millions of adolescent girls and is on a mission to teach confidence to millions more.” They are also partnered with TedTalks to bring educational videos to young girls. Now, in light of this, does it really matter if the company is only using charity work as a promotional tool? Yes, on a moral scale it doesn’t weigh very well, but those girl are still getting educated, and Always is still doing good things, whether it’s for the right reasons or not.

Overall, I believe that there can be one means to two ends. And I’d much rather consume products from a company that at least tries to do good things, wouldn’t you?

Emma Westbrook

18

the-f-word.indd 18

07-Sep-15 5:15:46 PM

the-f-word.indd 19

07-Sep-15 5:15:52 PM

Kintsukuroi “To repair with gold”; the Japanese art of fixing broken pottery with gold lacquer to highlight that breakage and repair is part of the history of the object, adding beauty and value to its imperfections.

It doesn’t matter if something breaks many times, if it had no value in the first place.

There was this vase, second hand, and imitation probably, painted with wobbly fishscale waves in a clumsy attempt at seigaihaand we knew for sure it was British.

They were mass-made, run of the mill too common to be ‘vintage’, so we didn’t mind when the cat knocked it over and its smooth rim chipped on the kitchen floor.

It had only cost two or three poundsplus you couldn’t see the wound under foliage.

It gathered dust for a while, then was tipped from a shelf.

In the way of something else, maybe?

The cracks were only hairline.

It gained a big cleft once too, but near the top so it still held water, and was worth keeping.

None of them Were catastrophesBreakages grew less concerning, the way tears are worth less the more they are shed, since you know the hurt can’t be that bad if someone cries so often, and so easily.

Ceramic injury was its pattern now: we became accustomed to it, knew it as “The broken vase”. Normal, so that it was no one’s fault. Rather than fragile or precious, the thing was cheap, and could have been more robust.

You don’t mend cracks with powdered gold. You don’t really mend much at all, these days- you just wait for the thing to break.

Ray Carter

20

the-f-word.indd 20

07-Sep-15 5:15:54 PM

RIOT GRRRL AND INTERSECTIONALITY undeniable American right not to be offended? Being offended is part of being in the real world. I’m offended every time I see George Bush on TV!”. This tendency towards a censorious form of feminism is something I personally feel is an attitude that is becoming dangerously prevalent today. As the poet William Blake wrote, ‘without contraries is no progression’, and unless we allow ourselves to be criticized as a movement, and allow ourselves to be offended, we cannot rigorously assess what it is that is making us angry as well as resulting in a form of groupthink, meaning there cannot be the generation of new ideas, which is vital to any movement. It also creates the further problem of disillusioning people from feminism when, for example, capitalists are shouted down for expressing right-wing views whilst supporting feminism, or UKIP is banned from Pride. These views may make us uncomfortable, but that is not a reason to prevent them from being expressed.

My interest in the Riot Grrrl does seem somewhat unexpected; people who know me will agree that I am far from punk. But to me the movement represents something so much more than simply the music it produced, the art that was created, and the space it took up. In many ways, Riot Grrrl acts as microcosm for feminism, representing the anger that drives a boundless energy, its creativity and its celebration of girlhood as a positive experience to be embraced and celebrated. However, it also demonstrates the dangers of groupthink and non-intersectional feminism.

Emerging from Washington D.C. in the early 90s, Riot Grrrl refers to a punk movement that sparked a subculture of meetings, zines and activism, which protested against issues such as rape, incest and racism. Bands like Bikini Kill, Bratmobile and Huggy Bear spearheaded the movement and encouraged girls to take centre stage and their rightful place in the crowd. The Riot Grrrl Manifesto was written in 1991 by Kathleen Hanna, lead singer of Bikini Kill, and published Bikini Kill Zine 2, a series of forthright statements that outlined the focuses of the movement and refused to apologize for rebelling against the status quo of a male dominated music industry. Ending with “BECAUSE I believe with my wholeheartmindbody that girls constitute a revolutionary soul force that can, and will change the world for real”, it is both an angry celebration of being a girl and a call to arms. By the end of 90s Riot Grrrl had petered out as a collective force, but as Sara Marcus wrote in her book Girls to the Front: The True Story of the Riot Grrrl Revolution, “people grew out of Riot Grrrl, but that doesn’t diminish the movement’s value, any more than trigonometry diminishes the value of algebra”.

This is another reason why intersectionality is vital for feminism.

A valid criticism of Riot Grrrl was that it was too white, too middle class, too straight and too cisgender. By showing how all forms of discrimination are linked, intersectionality encourages us not to shut out voices of other women and listen to the experience of others. I know that my experience of being a woman, and therefore my experience of sexism, is linked with my experience of also being queer. This experience will differ from my girl friends who are black, or working class, or genderqueer and so forth.

Pretending that all women face the same issues and blocking out those who disagree was one of the main falling points for Riot Grrrl: pushing out the girls who needed feminism the most.

Of course, Riot Grrrl is not dead. Despite these problems, the movement’s spirit lives on today, through the likes of Ezra Furman, the genderfluid singer whose song “Body Was Made” protests against rape and sexual assault; through the array of blogs and publications like The F Word written by teenage girls; and in Boston on 9th April, which has been declared ‘Riot Grrrl Day’. The energy of the movement continues to excite and inspire young people today, but alongside this we should examine the negative sides of the movement, in order to move forward and develop a feminism for the twenty first century that we can be proud to claim as our own.

Victoria Baines

As with everything, the final fracturing of Riot Grrrl was not due to one simple cause, but rather due to a complex array of issues. Courtney Love, who famously disliked Kathleen Hanna and Riot Grrrl as a whole, criticized the movement for being too prescriptive and doctrinaire: “Look, you’ve got these highly intelligent imperious girls, but who told them it was their 21

the-f-word.indd 21

07-Sep-15 5:16:00 PM

22

the-f-word.indd 22

07-Sep-15 5:16:04 PM

23

the-f-word.indd 23

07-Sep-15 5:16:09 PM

Past the LG of LGBT+

When discussing the topics surrounding the LGBT+ community, it is notable how often we focus exclusively on the ‘L’ and the ‘G’ and often overlook the issues faced by the rest of the community.

In terms of sexuality, it is often perceived that the world is split into people who are straight, and people who are gay, which can lead to issues for those who identify as neither. The word ‘bisexual’ has become somewhat of a taboo. Those who identify themselves as bisexual are often met with an extensive list of remarks including ‘it’s just a phase’, ‘you’re confused’ and ‘you’re just experimenting/you just haven’t realised that you are gay yet.’

This is part of a wider phenomenon known as ‘bisexual erasure’ which can also be applied to asexuality (those who lack sexual attraction to others) and pansexuality (those who are attracted to all genders). Much like bisexuals, pansexuals are met with being told that they are confused or are yet to pick a ‘side’ while asexuals are often told that they are yet to have their sexual awakening or just haven’t met the right person. Erasure is the idea that certain sexualities are ignored in the media, whether it is by refusing to identify characters with these sexualities or wrongly identifying the sexualities of celebrities (both Angelina Jolie and Cara Delevingne are bisexual; Jolie has been labelled as straight and Delevingne has been called a lesbian even after making her sexuality public). The lack of representation in the media for the LGBT+ community overall is rather poor, which furthers ignorance around sexualities and causes problems for people with these sexualities who find it difficult to relate to characters, and may feel like they are not normal. Even ‘pro-LGBT+’ films and TV shows feature bisexual/pansexual/asexual erasure, a well-known example being ‘Orange is the New Black’.

‘Orange is the New Black’ has been an amazing breakthrough for women and those in the LGBT+ community; there are lesbian, transgender and non-binary characters that are not present in other shows, and women are portrayed in a realistic manner.

However there is one element of the show that can be rather painful for bisexuals and pansexuals to watch: the portrayal of the sexuality of the protagonist Piper Chapman. The character is shown as having relationships with men and women, however instead of using the dreaded B or P words to identify her sexuality, the writers of the show choose to provide the character with lines such as ‘I was a lesbian’. She is referred to as an ‘ex-lesbian’, and in other instances as ‘straight’ and ‘lesbian.’

This can further the idea that to be bisexual, you must be transitioning between being straight or being gay rather than just accepting bisexuality as a legitimate sexuality. This is often why celebrities like Angelina Jolie are labelled as straight; as she is married to a man, a lot of people assume that this means she has ‘turned’ straight. The reality is a person can be bisexual even if they have been with a person of the opposite or same gender for

30 years, or if they have never had a relationship with someone of the same/opposite gender at all. It is a matter of whom they are attracted to, but unfortunately it is often expected for bisexuals to prove that they are bisexual. The idea that a person has to have a balance of gender in their relationships to qualify as bisexual is ridiculous. A bisexual that has had three boyfriends and three girlfriends is just as much a bisexual as a bisexual that has had five boyfriends and one girlfriend and vice versa.

My favourite analogy for bisexuality and the idea that it is a balance of being straight or gay is this: the colour purple is a mixture of blue and red; some purples have more red in them whereas others are more blue. No matter what the measurements of blue or red are in the colour, it is still purple. We would not say that purple is red with occasional blue or blue with occasional red, just like we should not say that a bisexual is a straight person who is occasionally with a person of the same gender or that they are a gay person who is occasionally with the opposite gender.

We should respect how a person identifies themselves rather than denying their sexuality until it meets a certain criteria.

Louise Dunk The problems of being an outlier go further than just sexuality.

For those who identify as being non-binary, the same issues of erasure and misunderstanding are just as prevalent. Despite the rise of trans representation in the media, it remains heavily focused on the binary of male and female, and the gender roles that accompany it.

A common issue for many trans folk is feeling like their woman- or manhood is directly linked to their ability to ‘pass’ as the opposite gender. This implies that we are masquerading, pretending to be something we are not, which is obviously harmful and degrading.

This focus on ‘cisgender’ beauty standards is most troublesome for non-binary folk, due to being in-between these two poles.

With a lack of non-binary people in the public eye, it can be hard for questioning youths to find people to relate with and in turn discover themselves.

However, movements such as the ‘Happy Hippie Foundation’ (fronted by Miley Cyrus) are bringing these issues to the forefront, speaking up for a large range of underrepresented groups within the LGBTQ+ Community. As Louise said, we should respect how a person identifies, whether it is their gender or sexuality. We should all be able to identify freely without judgement, doctors’ approval, or the tired, old, ‘you’re just confused’ phrase. In time I hope we see a shift in popular media that encourages freedom of expression for all, not just those who identify within the binary.

Jennifer Walton

24

the-f-word.indd 24

07-Sep-15 5:16:09 PM

Women of China : Their Past and Present As someone who was born, but not raised, in China, I’ve always been fascinated by the country. The vast historical, geographical and cultural richnesshas inspired generations from both sides of its borders. Yet I am also intrigued by a personal connection accompanied by the ‘what if’s that go with it. Where would I be if I had stayed? What is it to be a girl or a woman, in a society with such a contrast of innovation and tradition?

agricultural production as part of the Great Leap Forward were in fact disastrous, resulting in a widespread famine that is estimated to have caused the deaths of at least 20 million people. This led to the enforcement of the infamous One Child Policy in 1980 after a decade of voluntary birth control initiatives run by the government. The pressure on women to have a son as their only child was intensified further.

Ancient China was not an amazing place to be if you happened to be female. Early on in China’s dynastic history discrimination against women pervaded all levels of society and remained cemented in place for over two millennia, established by the Confucian school of thought: the teachings of a highly influential scholar that were adopted as the official state doctrinefrom between 206 BCE and 220 CE. The subservience of women wasdefined as part of the natural order, or Yin and Yang, of the universe. The notion of ‘filial piety’ applied to women in the form of ‘Threefold Obedience’, where throughout her life a woman was to obey her father, then her husband, and finally her adult sons. The Empress Dowager Cíxi was one of the few women who reached a position of authority, which she gained through giving birth to two royal heirs and ruling in their place until they came of age. Despite her efforts, the imperial system collapsed just three years after her death. Threats from Western countries and Japan led to military revolt, followed by civil war which gave rise to the Communist and Republican parties. Amongst the intellectuals who challenged the antiquated social customs was the female poet and writer Qiu Jin, who was, in my opinion, one of the most inspiring forerunners of the Chinese feminist movement.

The new overwhelming preference for boys meant that the abandonment of female babies increased sharply, a practice that historically had been overlooked along with the infanticide of unwanted daughters and disabled children. State orphanages were opened rapidly to deal with the influx of female children, who were usually left by their parents within days of their birth. Almost all of them would spend their childhoods in these institutions, with the exception of a small proportion who were paired with families through international adoption.

This complete rejection of the age-old feudal system triggered the start of a century-long revolution. In 1912 the Republicans outlawed the practice of foot binding, which crippled a girl from the time she was old enough to walk for the sake of increasing her physical appeal to men. Under the Communist Party, leader Mao Zedong, who is famously quoted to have said “Women hold up half the sky”, female equality was emphasised in the communist ideology, leading to the marriage reforms of 1950 prohibiting arranged marriages and giving women the freedom to divorce their husbands.

However, despite the acceleration of economics and the adoption of a modern lifestyle, feminism is still largely regarded with indifference or aggression. Free speech is still carefully censored by the government, so China’s feminist activists have taken to performance art to raise awareness of deeply rooted issues which continue to usurp gender equality. In particular a group of five women, Wei Tingting, Wang Man, Zheng Churan, Wu Rongrong and Li Tingting are at the forefront of the rising feminist movement and have influenced recent Chinese legislation. In bridal dresses stained with fake blood they marched down a busy shopping street through Beijing, bringing attention to marital domestic violence which is all too common: A study by the UN in 2013 revealed that over 50% of Chinese men have physically or sexually abused their partners.

Major reforms were carried out across society with the fervent zeal for modernisation and determination for a better life, and Men and women alike joined Mao’s Red Army. Nevertheless, the changes were not enough to overcome four thousand years of deeply ingrained misogyny. While women were allowed to work alongside men they were often paid only half the amount for the same jobs, and what they did earn remained under the control of the head of the family. On top of this, they were still expected to complete all domestic tasks regardless of the hours they had worked. Soon many men objected to women being taught what were perceived as ‘masculine’ skills, and further outrage meant that The Marriage Reform Law was curtailed and replaced by propaganda teaching women to conform to the ‘ideal’ of a socialist housewife. In reality, the promotion of female rights was part of the Communist agenda to increase productivity and support, where maintaining stability was prioritised over eradicating inequality. Although the Cultural Revolution in 196676 attempted to destroy what was perceived as the bourgeois female model of gentleness and submissiveness, women who expressed or celebrated their femininity were attacked for being enemies of proletarian China.

After Mao died, the Cultural Revolution was officially brought to a close, and women were once again encouraged to fulfil their ‘proper’ domestic roles. Changes intended to innovate

However, more recent years have seen a reduction in healthy female girls being stranded and the male/female ratio in orphanages is nearly equal. The urban population has increased from 20% to just over 50% and with the obligation to have several children removed by the One Child policy, more women are now able to access jobs that can offer a substantial income: China currently has the most self-made female billionaires in the world.

Access to the internet and social networking websites has opened even the most remote regions to online debates and a larger diversity of new ideas, which has provoked people to question patriarchal norms in society.

Earlier in May this year there was outrage in the media when the group of five were arrested just before International Women’s Day. They had planned to protest against sexual harassment on public transport by distributing stickers on buses. Online petitions and the support of prominent political figures such as Hilary Clinton led to release all five of the activists after being detained for 37 days.

For a government that has always purported itself to be a champion of women’s rights, the apprehension that the five were treated with shows the extent to which they are considered a threat to state power. Their actions have meant that the first-ever domestic violence law is currently being formed. Additionally, their Occupy Men’s Toilets campaign in 2012 was followed by new female toilets being built to fulfil a mundane but important demand, after centuries of an unfair ratio of women’s to men’s public toilets. Their arrest has brought feminist activism in China to the attention of the world. The current women’s rights movement may still be in its infancy, but even now their achievements are taking tangible steps towards reform.

Anna Fulcher 25

the-f-word.indd 25

07-Sep-15 5:16:09 PM

LIBERATE BODY HAIR!

The liberation of women’s body hair is a topic that I feel is rarely properly addressed due to it appearing somewhat insignificant in comparison to the other vast problems in the world of feminism. It takes up so much precious time and can make one feel so self conscious just for being the way you naturally are. The fact is, the only reason that no body hair is (almost) a social must is due to advertising, (ask your self how much body hair has ever been visible in a Dove advertisement.) The oppression of body hair may seem small but symbolises to me a much larger issue where women are forbidden to be anything other than pristine and perfect.

These pieces are a colourful Kahlo-esque celebration of body hair sewn on a hand cranked singer sewing machine. It’s not a secret to have it, it’s not something to be ashamed of but merely a bit of fun combined with a bit less oppression of women’s bodies. Obviously not something to be feministically ashamed of if you make the decision to shave but equally not something to be hidden away if you don’t.

Please check out my Facebook page Frieda Ford Artist or my website friedaford.wix.com/friedaford to see more of my work, find out about my upcoming events or even order a personalised portrait yourself! I have just done a two day residency at the Turner Contemporary creating a tapestry of numerous faces throughout the day and selling my work.

Hopefully more things like that are to come.

26

the-f-word.indd 26

07-Sep-15 5:16:10 PM

27

the-f-word.indd 27

07-Sep-15 5:16:11 PM

28

the-f-word.indd 28

07-Sep-15 5:16:12 PM

sprinkle of glitter: adolescent female experience Over the last few years, a new movement has swept the culture of the trendy teen girl as Feminism has been revived to suit the internetting sparky youth: the girls who will wear their ‘this is what a feminist looks like’ t-shirt with pride and a pair of vintage Levi shorts. This growing popularity of feminism in the young, is reflected in campaigns such as This Girl Can, Emma Watson’s #heforshe, and #freethenipple.

I am reluctant to say that ‘young feminism’ has no problems, particularly in the brand of feminism aimed at the younger members of society – girls of about 12-13 years downwards.

Meghan Trainor is most definitely an artist aimed primarily at this young teen/tween age, with her very singable, catchy pop tunes and videos filled with sugary pastel colours. She also presents an image of female ‘power’ in her sassy, booty loving style. She is an artist with a lot of influence to shape how her young fans view what feminism consists of, and how it relates to them.

Trainor has been pedestalled as a ‘body image inspiration’, ever since the song which rocketed her to fame, ‘All About That Bass’, which, although controversial, is less offensive than the less well known ‘Dear Future Husband’. This song, at first sight, empowers girls to demand to be allowed to work their ‘nine to five’, and be loved for who they are. Or rather, to be loved for how Trainor presents ‘the perfect wife’: ‘if you treat me right, I’ll be the perfect wife, buying groceries, buying what you need’. Her idea of being ‘treated right’ and ‘like a lady’, is being bought ‘flowers’ and ‘rings’, having doors opened for her, and taken on dates by her strong man, while she stands simpering by the side.

She paints the stereotypical picture of a hysterical, over-emotional woman, who has to be calmed down by her man. As gender roles are still not clearly defined enough for her impressionable young listener, a man is then denounced as a ‘fail’ because he cannot hit the bell to the top of a high striker at a fairground.

And for the lucky guy who adheres to all of his roles as the man in the relationship? ‘Kisses’, and her womanly curves. In short, Trainor uses her body and sex appeal as a way to get ‘respect’.

This is surely a deeply unhealthy message to give to young girls: preaching the importance of their bodies over their brains, kindling an obsession with their appearance, and contributing to over-sexualisation of women. Female pop stars such as Trainor have nearly always been the ones who reach the highest heights, because they have the troops of girls, young and old, who idolise them as the ultimate female. Beyoncé, Madonna, Katy Perry are further examples of artists who explore ideas of female strength and empowerment, and consequently I believe they have a duty to represent feminism responsibly.

But now it is not simply these huge, media-trained celebrities who have this role. With the acceleration of the internet has come a new kind of famous idol; the person who seems to be speaking directly to you, as your closest friend, giving you kind advice on everything from make-up to anxiety. Bloggers and you-tubers such as Zoella, Tanya Burr and Louise ‘Sprinkle of Glitter’ have all found fame as the friendly accessible older sister, rather than the over glamorous celebrity. Arguably this approach is more damaging - their life is seen by the fans as a reality, rather than over-glamorised, but their videos, instagram accounts, and blogs, are very carefully put together to represent a certain image, be it of a cosy, ‘real life’ aesthetic. This gives an unrealistic expectation of what normal lives should be. It is debatable whether or not this kind of celebrity is better or worse than one such as Trainor, but due to these people’s more personal, intimate relationship with

their viewers, they perhaps have more of an influence on their fans’ lives; this including issues surrounding feminism.

One positive example I came across the other day was a letter a fan wrote to Louise ‘Sprinkle of Glitter’. Through Louise’s videos she had found more confidence in her own curvier shape; seeing her as a ‘larger beautiful role model’. I do see that in a world obsessed with appearance, particularly the appearance of girls, it may be appreciated to have a gentle help in how to make yourself feel you look your best. However, I also believe that many of the videos made for girls, by you-tubers such as Zoella and Louise, focus far too much on how to look ‘beautiful’ in the way society has told us is correct for women: instead of mocking such ideals for girls, and showing them their beauty is not measured by the length of their eyelashes (don’t worry, those of you cursed with short eyelashes, Zoella has worked tirelessly to review all the mascaras out there), they seem rather to adhere to these standards and give you ways to do so also. For instance, although Louise talks about body confidence, lots of her videos contradict the points she makes. For instance, in her ‘curvy lookbooks’ there are pictures of outfits which are ‘appropriate’ because they enhance aspects such as their boobs,and wash over bits like their stomachs.

Similarly, Zoella talks about her ‘awkward teen stage’, where she had ‘just got spots but hadn’t looked at make-up’ and ‘hadn’t touched her eyebrows’ (gasp). She is quick to gush that ‘there is of course nothing bad about these things’, but why then make a video ridiculing herself at the point when she had these traits, particularly when the majority of her fan base is at the exact age she describes as being ‘awkward’. Her many videos devoted to make up tutorials give her young fans ways to address the problem of their own ‘awkward teen stage’–including one called ‘back to school basics’–as if an even foundation coverage is an absolutely basic necessity for attending school.

To present to young girls that Zoella’s chit chat, or Trainor’s repetitive bass lines are the only options open to them as females would be very harmful - it is important to show alternative female role models. But to deny young girls their own cultural space, be it unsophisticated or inane, would be completely against the aims of feminism- equality between the sexes must surely include the right for everyone’s own development culturally. This is especially prevalent given the routine silencing of the female voice and dismissal of adolescent female experience. To be sure, we need to think very carefully about what messages these cultural influences are giving. But if these women can exert some positive influence, who cares in the slightest if they are gift wrapped, tied up with ribbon, or given a sprinkle of glitter?

Emma English

29

the-f-word.indd 29

07-Sep-15 5:16:13 PM

30

the-f-word.indd 30

07-Sep-15 5:16:24 PM

Ele Boiling

31

the-f-word.indd 31

07-Sep-15 5:16:34 PM

Filipina Feminism I, being a mix of half Filipina and half Scottish myself, am both bewildered and fascinated by my South East Asian roots. Except from hearing my mother and grandmother skyping the relatives in Tagalog around the house, irrespective of the 9 hour time difference between here and the Philippines, and can figure out when they are talking about my sister and I by the mentioning of the words ‘sikambal’ (translation: ‘the twins’), I know embarrassingly little about my own heritage. Despite this, I am loath to google anything pinoy/pinay based at the risk of being inundated with images of scantily clad Filipina women and an array of dubious sites offering me mail-order wives at the bargain price of $5000. Now, whilst I am all for body confidence (rock that bikini!) and agree that yes, my grandma (affectionately known as ‘Lola’) probably is the perfect loving housewife (with a dash of intimidating matriarch thrown in for good measure) the truth is that very few people, particularly in the Western world, recognise Filipinas as the badass, forward thinking women they are.

‘prostitutes’, ‘maids’ and ‘gold diggers’. They are in fact some of the first protofeminists who, even now, advocate a mainly matriarchal society, with women being the typical breadwinners and heads of the household, not to mention that they have already had 2 female presidents!

I, for one, am delighted to learn that the benefits of feminism are not exclusive to Western countries, and revel in the knowledge that the first Filipina feminist organisation was established in 1901 and that they were also the first women in Asia to obtain Suffrage in 1937, a mere 9 years after the same achievement in the UK. This, however, does not mean that we can slack! Oh, no, the goal of gender equality is still sitting pretty on the horizon, but knowing that women in a country with as many problems as the Philippines, from typhoons and poverty, can still crush their stereotypes as well as they do makes me want to run a little faster towards it.

Sami Henry

Instead we are stuck with stereotypes of Filipinas being ‘submissive ‘and ‘easy’. The mere mention of the notso-holy trinity of being a ‘lady in the living room, cook in the kitchen and wh*re in the bedroom’ leaves me with a horrible taste in my mouth and the need to cleanse myself with a Beyoncé music video to drown out the residual misogyny clinging to my skin like a nasty rash. The reality of Filipina women couldn’t be more different. In fact, let me wow you with some statistics: According to the Global Gender Gap Report 2014 which measures how gender equal a country is (1 being equal and 0 being unequal), the Philippines happens to rank at number 9 in the World, with 0.7814, making it the highest ranking Asian country on the list. Not only this, but it puts the next best Asian country, Singapore, to shame at 59th place. Additionally, the Philippines is ahead of many Western countries, most notably the US (20th place) and the UK which is ranked at a decidedly poor 26th place.

In fact, the Philippines has been on the path to gender equality for some time, with Filipinas practicing freedoms such as pre-marital sex, divorce, abortion and participation in trade before its Spanish colonisation in the 1500s! Many of these freedoms are restricted even today in so-called MEDCs (I’m looking at you, America) and yet Westerners have the gall to stereotype Filipinas as nothing more than

32

the-f-word.indd 32

07-Sep-15 5:16:34 PM

the-f-word.indd 33

07-Sep-15 5:16:34 PM

The Langton Feminist Society is a student run organisation promoting the advocacy of women’s rights and modern feminist issues.

To get involved with the society and The F-Word, contact langtonfeministsociety@gmail.com faceboook: /LangtonFeministSociety twitter: @LangtonFemSoc to read previous issues: issuu.com/langtonfemsoc

the-f-word.indd 34

07-Sep-15 5:16:41 PM