One way or another, this week has reminded me of why I started writing here at soisaystoher in the first place – the need for a place to discuss these issues in a little more detail than the average news soundbite allows for, and in doing so to encourage people to develop their own critical lens, something which will stand by all of us much better than stricter legislation of the magazine, clothing or entertainment industries. This is something I had the opportunity to speak about recently at the members’ meeting of the National Women’s Council of Ireland. The event focused on the presence/absence of women in the media in Ireland and included thoughts from a panel of academics, print and broadcast journalists, and bloggers like myself, as well as fantastic input and debate from the 100 or so women in attendance. All the panelists’ talks from the day are available to view on youtube – I posted mine below as a bit of a reminder of what it is this whole blogging malarky is trying to achieve.

1. His total lack of knowledge of the law on sexual offences which led him to inaccurately suggest that consensual sex between an 18 year old and a 15 year old would result in a conviction for rape. Having spent years working with young people I knew instantly that this wasn’t correct and took the opportunity to confirm my understanding of it today with a senior PSNI officer in the Public Protection Unit who deals with both child abuse and sexual crimes. He supported my suggestion that Ken Clarke had gotten the law very badly wrong…in fact the exact phrase he used was “utter tripe”. While a 15 year old is under the legal age of consent to sexual activity, any incident reported to the police would be investigated on the basis of assessing the potential vulnerabilities and the Gillick Competency of the 15 year old in question. A conviction for a sexual offence would only be pursued if they had evidence that there was some form of coercion or abuse taking place. Even under those circumstances, the conviction obtained would not be one of rape. Unless of course they had actually been, you know, raped. The charge of statutory rape only applies in the UK where a child is under 13. Not 16…13, because at this age a child is automatically considered unable to give their consent to sex due to their developmental stage. There is a myth in the public consciousness that any sex with a person under 16 is considered statutory rape and may lead to some poor lad being thrown in jail for unwittingly getting busy with a saucy little jailbait minx who tricks him into thinking she’s older. I think it’s a deliberate distortion of the law that adults tell kids to scare them out of having sex with each other – in the absence of proper sex education, fear seems to be the only tool people are willing to employ. The problem is, I can understand the general public getting this one wrong but when the justice secretary’s knowledge of the Sexual Offences Act appears to be no more nuanced than the average Daily Mail reader’s then that is pretty infuriating. Oh and when Nick Robinson asked Clarke on the Politics Show “No apology then – no resignation?” and he responded, “If someone can explain anything I have said that is factually inaccurate then of course I will consider it.” You’re welcome Mr Clarke. Now fucking resign you idiot.

2. His attempts to categorise rape in terms of how “serious” it appears. This is probably the aspect of his remarks that has incited the biggest reaction, and for very good reason. Despite his later protestations that he didn’t mean to suggest there was such a thing as a non-serious rape, the rhetoric used in his discussion of the subject very strongly suggests the kind of subtle but pervasive attitudes that shape many people’s core beliefs about rape under a variety of circumstances. No one would admit when asked that they think a man forcibly penetrating a women with his penis is ever excusable or less than “serious” but they may hold a set of assumptions about the boundaries of consent and the right of a woman to “cry rape” after an unwanted sexual experience. Clarke was heard to use language like, “forcible rape”, “a serious rape where, you know, violence and an unwilling woman…”, “rape in the ordinary conversational sense where some man has forcefully, with a bit of violence…”, “date rapes can sometimes be very confusing…they do vary extraordinarily”, and my personal favourite, “the classic rape of someone who leaps out on an unsuspecting woman and forces her to have sex…nobody is suggesting that a proper rapist is going to be let out of jail in 12 months.” It’s all there really, in his own appalling words. He’s confused as to how he gave the impression that he considers some rapes to be less serious than others. I’m confused as to how he could possibly be confused. Victims of sexual assault and rape are still fighting painfully hard to increase the understanding that most rapists are known to them, that lying there and waiting for it to be over because you are terrified of the violence that may result in your fighting back does not constitute consent and that having your body used by an opportunistic attacker when you are unable to give consent due to the effects of drugs or alcohol is a serious sexual crime and is not your fault. For Ken Clarke to reiterate the myth that to be a real victim of rape someone would have to have lept out at you is just heart-breaking.

3. His cynical attempt to make it sound like the proposals around 50% sentence reductions for early guilty pleas are to make victims feel better. While the experience of giving evidence in court is no doubt a difficult one, it seems to me that the whole process of reporting the rape to the police and pursuing a conviction is all pretty harrowing. How much worse then if you find out that your attacker has managed to get a shorter sentence for playing ball with the CPS/PPS? This happens in domestic violence cases all the time and there is evidence to suggest it actually deters women from reporting assaults more. This commenter at The Guardian Politics Blog, who describes herself as a victim of sexual assault, says it best:

On the issue of shortened sentences for an early guilty plea, victims are being spoken for, rather than spoken to. Whilst I agree that appearance in court for a rape victim is traumatic, the main issue is to have the attacker brought to justice. Trauma at a trial is only one result of rape; the anger and sense of injustice at the most basic of human rights violations is far more overwhelming.The thought of an attacker halving their sentence, after weighing-up the odds and tactically pleading guilty with the advice of a lawyer, would bring no solace to victims whatsoever. If the victim’s trauma at going to trial is the issue, then more support should be given in the form of counselling and other services.

Currently word in the tabloids is that David Cameron is backing his man, but is unlikely to include any mention of the 50% reduction proposals for sexual offences in the policy on sentencing reform due to be announced soon. I’m impressed by the public outcry. I’m glad it appears to have led to this ridiculous proposal being shelved. I just hope it helps further the public’s understanding of how far we still have to go in properly dealing with sexual violence.

I must admit to having been pretty excited about this event, in a ‘political nerd’ way. In the plethora of overly sincere promises and idealistic policy commitments that are flung around at election time, I couldn’t wait to see what the parties best efforts on this subject, one particularly close to my heart, might be. Armed with my copy of the ‘Women’s Manifesto’, produced by the Women’s Ad Hoc Policy group, made up of a range of local women’s sector lobbyists/campaigners/activists, and of course with a healthy dose of righteous feminist anger, I had plenty of pressing questions to put to the panel. On arrival at the venue in Queen’s Students Union I knew instantly that my excitement was shared by those gathered, a large number of whom, I’m delighted to say, make up the growing ranks of Belfast Feminist Network, now in it’s second year and an increasingly thriving community of young women and men passionate about fighting sexism and gender inequality. Surely a great night’s challenge and debate was about to unfold…

Two hours later and the mood was significantly more flat. Somewhere in the middle of all that potential the purpose of the evening had gotten a little bit lost. As a few of us gathered to chat about it afterwards we were still in shock at how quickly the focus on gender equality had slipped away and were desperately trying to figure out where it all went wrong. Getting people to submit questions to the chair in advance probably would have made a difference, as would more assertiveness on the part of the chair who frustratingly seemed content to let the panel meander off-topic for extended periods. A larger number of questions and challenges from the floor should have been gathered in the middle section of the event and the mixture of vague, obsequious and idealistic waffle that came from the direction of the panel should have been held up to much closer scrutiny. There were definitely interesting points raised on a couple of questions, some of the highlights having been really well summarised in the BelFemNet Twitter feed coming live from the event. We heard Anna Lo reiterate her commitment to support the extension of the 1967 Abortion Act toNorthern Irelandand her belief that our current legislation on abortion is a disgrace. Claire Bailey also made a public statement of support for the extension of the Act, claiming that politicians should not have the right to restrict the choices of Northern Irish women seeking abortions. The other panellists gave their parties’ usual non-committal, safe answers about personal conscience and how there is much debate among party members on the subject. That’s nice to know…meanwhile 40 women a week have to get on a boat or a plane and go through a tremendously difficult experience, often without the support of their friends and family and with no medical aftercare in their own communities. But sure, you folks just keep on debating it!

We also heard a range of views on how to promote more gender equal representation in our political institutions. Conall McDevitt was the most clear on his commitment to this as a fundamental sign of a healthy democracy and emphasised the need for regional shortlists to be used. Anna Lo pointed out that more women representatives are needed across the assembly and executive as women have a right to representation not just on issues perceived to be ‘women’s issues’ but in all areas of decision-making. Jennifer McCann was also clear that parties have a responsibility to field women candidates in winnable seats and not just make tokenistic gestures. Basil McCrea made a somewhat ambiguous remark about women not being treated as ‘inferiors’ needing ‘special treatment’ and appeared to miss the point that men in powerful positions such as himself need to check their privilege and understand the prejudice in the system that helped them get where they are. I was personally irritated by the over-emphasis on childcare as the main barrier to women entering politics, as was one speaker from the floor who expressed anger at this automatic assumption that women are always primary carers for children. Only Claire Bailey properly addressed the fact that maybe parties need to examine their own ideologies and look at the sexism all women face when trying to step into a role that many still see as one most suitable to a man.

So that’s what was talked about. Now for what wasn’t talked about: What budget decisions they think are most important to minimise the hugely unequal impact the cuts are set to have on women? How they would enhance our equality legislation to make it harder for employers to hide unfair payment practices that perpetuate the gender pay gap? What commitment they would make to progressing the Childcare Strategy that has been treading water for far too long? How they would work to bring our approach to violence against women in line with international standards, promoting a comprehensive strategy that recognises all forms of violence against women as part of the oppression perpetuated by misogyny and the exploitation of women’s vulnerabilities? What they think of how rape is handled here, from the victim-blaming approach in public awareness raising and prevention campaigns favoured by the DHSSPS and PSNI, through to the low conviction rates and lack of support for victims? How would they suggest the relevant departments respond to the sex industry in Northern Ireland, the grooming and abuse of young people and the trafficking of women and girls from abroad, and what legislative approach they think best tackles the demand for this exploitative industry? Whether or not they are willing to speak up for much needed relationship and sexual health education for young people in the face of opposition from religious leaders with an unhealthy influence on our education system?

Huge credit is due the QUB Feminist Society for the work that went into organising this event and I’m also impressed that the candidates came along to show their interest in gender equality. I just hope that all of these outstanding questions will continue to be asked by all of us involved in this growing feminist movement to anyone with any power or influence at every given opportunity. We should be quizzing them on our doorsteps, dropping into constituency offices, emailing them, Tweeting, making appointments for a cup of tea and a nice friendly chat. If you have any interesting conversations with candidates between now and the election on any of these subjects, or if there are questions of your own that you think I’ve missed, please comment below.

I got this message from a football loving man friend yesterday on Facebook “ffs Kellie. I was expecting a feminist diatribe from you today. Is that baby turning you soft?”

Yes, perhaps being up the duff is dulling my feminist sensibilities but whatever the reason, I definitely was remiss in not blogging about the biggest sexism in the media row to hit the UK in a long time. As if by magic, I immediately got a call from the BBC to ask if I would debate the subject on Good Morning Ulster and obviously had no choice but to agree, my conscience having been well and truly provoked. Unfortunately the segment was bumped, as happens fairly regularly with women-related issues I get asked to comment on in the media, and was relegated as yesterday’s news for the fine listeners of the Nolan Show to pick over instead. So I decided not to let my preparation for the non-existent debate go to waste and thought I would post some thoughts here on the blog.

Obviously, like most people, I welcomed the news yesterday that Sky Sports football commentators Richard Keys and Andy Gray would be disciplined for their off-air sexist comments about the capability of assistant referee Sian Massey who was officiating at Saturday’s premier league match between Liverpool and Wolverhampton Wanderers. Their crass assumption before the game that she would most likely be rubbish and make a dodgy call purely because she was a woman and therefore couldn’t possibly understand “the offside rule” was met with almost universal revulsion from every corner, EVEN the Daily Mail. Their comments were especially ironic given that Massey’s skill and ten year’s of experience led her to make an extremely tough call on Meireles run to set up Liverpool’s first goal, with undisputed accuracy. I was however, slightly concerned that Sky Sports might wait for the storm to pass, sweep it under the carpet and refuse to take their responsibility to promote fairness seriously. I hardly expected great things from the network that brought us the ‘Sky Sports Hotties’, a generation of young female sports newsreaders hired and styled purely to enhance the viewing pleasure of the assumed-to-be-male audience.

Thankfully however, Sky have imposed sanctions, with the pair of dinosaurs being suspended from their totemic role and issued with a reportedly terse warning that any repeated incidents would constitute a sackable offence. Then today came the news that having uncovered another incident of sexism recorded back in December 2010, Sky have followed through with their threat and given Andy Gray his P45. While there may be internal issues influencing this decision that go beyond Sky’s heroic commitment to anti-oppressive practice in the workplace, this is a hugely important result for women, and not just those working in the world of football. Across all professions, most people know that it is not acceptable to publicly express sexist attitudes. That is what equality legislation has achieved for us – the right to participate fully in any workplace without facing direct discrimination and public prejudice. However, as many women can testify to, what legislation hasn’t managed to eliminate is the undercurrent of hidden sexism, maintained by degrading humour, flippant assumptions, casual stereotyping, subtle jibes, sexualising of female colleagues and the conversations people have that they think they will never be held accountable for. These things create the ‘boys’ club’ culture where women are undervalued, passed over, and even ridiculed. Some have suggested Gray and Keys didn’t deserve to be punished for what they believed was a private conversation, a notion which I totally dispute. To begin with they were both wearing mics and have been working in television long enough to know that despite not being on air, this still means you are speaking to an entire production room full of people – people they clearly didn’t mind offending. The importance of making people accountable for sexist attitudes, especially in a male dominated profession like football, cannot be overstated.

Another defence I’ve come across in the last couple of days is that of the ‘just a bit of a larf’ variety, with some football fans confessing on message boards that they express similar views to Gray and Keys most weekends down the pub watching the match. I’ve also seen a number of men bemoan the unfair treatment of men in the media who they seem to think are subject to a torrent of assumptions that they are incompetent idiots. Feelings that have been ignited perhaps by Tory MP Dominic Raad’s ignorant misunderstanding of gender inequality and misrepresentation of feminism in yesterday’s press. I personally am not entirely convinced as to the volume of insults men are apparently subjected to and I think that constructed ideas about ‘man-flu’ and men being rubbish at housework are not the work of nasty feminist bigots but rather the ugly by-product of patriarchy, ultimately serving to maintain traditional gender roles as women are reminded to be martyrs as they care for their families and clean their houses with pride while men go off to work and deal with all the important stuff. Anyway, the fact is there will always be a level of humour between the sexes based on exaggerated perceptions of difference and these will prove to irritate or offend different people to varying degrees, or not at all. Even I am willing to accept that. However, what happened to Sian Massey is a far cry from Jimmy Carr getting a cheap laugh at some stereotype about women’s sexual behaviour or the gals from ‘Loose Women’ laughing about their crap ex-husbands. What happened in this case is that the ability of a professional was seriously called into question solely on the basis of gender. While working at a high level within her chosen career, before she even had a chance to make a single call, she found herself being undermined by two powerful if not particularly well-liked men in her profession. That is totally unacceptable.

And it reminds me that power is the key issue here. It is clear from the tone of the conversation recorded and released to the press that Gray and Keys spoke with no level of irony or humour. Rather they sound serious and even a little bitter. Keys’ weary sigh half way through and his statement that “the game’s gone mad” reveal that their sexism comes from a genuine desire to keep women out of football and maintain the power and status quo. Just last week UEFA discussed research into European football that showed more than 99% of senior administrators at clubs and football associations are middle-aged to elderly white men. In Northern Ireland we have seen, through the controversy surrounding the IFA in recent years that the culture of an old boys’ club is very much alive and well in the sport’s governing body here, despite major achievements in tackling sectarian, racist and to a lesser extent sexist attitudes among the fans and players. It is important that the dark little corners of football where sexism festers and produces the kind of power-mongering that prevents talented young women from pursing their dreams is exposed, just as we have seen this week. The attitude of Gray and Keys makes me wonder, if this it the kind of treatment Sian Massey received at her level, what must it be like for all of the women trying to break through in refereeing at a local level who turn up every weekend to officiate at club matches in leagues up and down the country. How many skilled referees may have dropped out before now because they just got fed up with being taunted or ridiculed or sexually harassed? It would be nice to believe that wouldn’t happen but it is with some sadness that I would have to suspect it probably does. I’m glad Gray and Keys got caught because otherwise the legacy of Sian’s contribution to Saturday’s match would have been a plethora of football blogs and sports publications pedalling subtle but just as damaging sexism as they noted how the ‘female linesman’ made a really great call. At least this way we have had the chance to say, actually what on earth has her gender got to do with anything?

Now there is just one important job for YOU to do to help bring this campaign to a great conclusion. To really show our politicians that the public demand they take action and prioritise violence against women, we need as many of you as possible to write to your own representatives and tell them what you think is required to make our communities safer places for women and girls. You may want to compose your letter based on the following suggested outline:

1. Why do you think this is an important issue?

Remind them about the 16 Days of Activism against Gender Violence. We’ve already given them lists of statistics but what about the real lives beyond the figures? What kind of violence do women face in your community? What have you seen and heard that has impacted you enough to want to write this letter? (NB Please respect the confidentiality of individuals by not sharing stories with identifying details.)

2. Join us in making these important demands:

(Feel free to copy and paste any of these that you would like to include)

- Northern Ireland needs a comprehensive violence against women strategy. The ‘Tackling Violence at Home’ and ‘Tackling Sexual Violence and Abuse’ strategies are important but fail to address the more complex and diverse problem of violence against women and girls. It is an internationally recognised issue which the UN states is “a manifestation of historically unequal power relations between men and women, which have led to domination over and discrimination against women by men and to the prevention of the full advancement of women, and that violence against women is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women are forced into a subordinate position compared with men.” If we do not produce policy that addresses violence against women in all of its forms, as both a cause and consequence of gender inequality then we will fail in our obligations under CEDAW to provide women full access to their human rights. We would like you to recommend a cross-departmental group to progress such policy.

- In the ‘Tackling Sexual Violence and Abuse’ strategy, we were assured that a Sexual Assault Referral Centre (SARC) would be open at Antrim Area Hospital by the end of 2010. This has not happened and we would like to know when this vital service will be available? In England these centres are a vital part of supporting victims of sexual violence as well as ensuring the best evidence to pursue convictions through the courts.

- There are many women who have experienced or who are experiencing violence who do not have access to Legal Aid. The initial ex-parte cost in seeking a non-molestation order is £400, and within two weeks the pursuit of a full non-molestation order can cost a further £400 or more. These extremely high costs could prevent women from seeking justice. We are asking you to support an immediate amendment to the Legal Aid rules to provide an automatic right given to all victims of gender violence to have access to legal protection and justice free of charge.

- Some of the most at risk women in Northern Ireland are those who have an insecure immigration status. Due to the ‘no recourse to public funds’ policy, when these women face violence or abuse they are often trapped by the lack of financial support available as well as their fear of deportation if their immigration status is dependent on their husband or partner. We would like to know what will be done to ensure a long term solution for women in this situation.

3. What would you like to see in your own constituency to keep women safer?

Is there a domestic violence refuge facing closure? Is the poor street lighting putting women at risk of attack? Do you have concerns that illegal brothels are trapping women in cycles of sexual violence through prostitution? Your representative needs to know about the issues specific to the community they serve.

Don’t forget to finish by thanking them for their time and asking for feedback on the questions you have raised.

Contact details for all MLAs listed by constituency are available here: http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/members/constmap_res.htm

Feel free to email them or send a real life letter. One of our members who has some lobbying experience has suggested that MLAs are particularly prone to respond to hand-written letters due to the obvious amount of personal effort involved. So if you have a bit of spare time in the next week why not give it a go!

Please try to get your letters sent before the 10^th December as this marks the end of the 16 Days of Activism. Good luck and please keep us posted about any responses you get either through the Belfast Feminist Network facebook group or by emailing belfemnet@yahoo.co.uk

Women’s bodies – NOT FOR SALE!

My adventures in feminist activism started with a billboard that presented a faceless, personless pair of boobs to encourage people to buy cars. Since the message was sent, by us, to local companies loud and clear that women deserve to be treated like human beings rather than a sum of their body parts, have we seen any real change in the way our gender is depicted in the media here? We’ve had the Hunky Dory’s furore, with some useful debate and a decisive ruling from the ASA. The outgoing Labour government showed some late commitment to tackling the hyper-sexualisation of women’s bodies through a home office report that highlighted the particular effects of the mainstreaming of porn through lads’ mags and music TV in particular. But on the other hand, feminist groups all over the UK have had to take on retail giant Marks and Spencer over their decision to profit from sexual exploitation by sub-letting property in Bristol to the infamous Hooters restaurant chain. Products like ‘POM Wonderful’ juice still think the only way to break into a new market is to place your juice bottle beside some naked ladies on every TV ad – when you run out of creativity in your marketing department you can always rely on the currency of sexism. Local company Harlequin / Burning Desires costume shop have recently drawn a snarl from my lips every time I pass their billboards advertising their sexy Halloween costumes for women, with a tacky porn0-vampire character accompanied by the truly cringeworthy tagline ‘HELLOween boys’. Because there’s nothing like drawing your pop culture references from 1994. There are many people who’ve written brilliantly on their frustration at the strict code of Halloween practice for women which apparently states ‘Thou shalt be sexy and look like a het male fantasy and we shall ensure this by not giving you any choice of costume that doesn’t allow us to view your boobs and legs through nothing but corsets and fishnets.’ My biggest problem with the whole culture is actually that it seems to say women are never funny. Men are funny – they go as crazy cavemen and whacky werewolves. Women are not allowed to be funny, therefore we should settle for sexy and shut the hell up.

One local company that has upped its game of late is the notoriously sleazy Creations furniture who seem to have finally grasped the concept that they are selling furniture and therefore a near-naked woman does not have to appear in every ad. I’m wondering did they have a spate of people expecting to get a free lady with their chest of drawers like the one in the billboard and realised they better stick to picturing the essentials? Whatever has caused this apparent enlightenment I say, well done folks. More of the same please.

The reason I bring this issue up for reflection is that a bunch of us from Belfast Feminist Network are preparing to restart Feminist Friday this evening after a bit of an extended summer break. This simple piece of activism which involves covering lads mags with positive feminist slogans and explaining to shop owners that we’d rather they didn’t sell them, is a hugely satisfying and motivating thing to be involved in. We’ll keep working in this way at the grassroots, keep pushing for the debate to be aired and keep reclaiming the idea that women’s bodies are not for sale.

Update: having braved the rain and cold tonight to take a swipe at lads’ mags I felt it worth commenting on that the stance ‘Spar’ (run by Henderson foods) has taken on the publications is truly fantastic. What it means in practice is that a massive percentage of local grocery shops and petrol stations do not stock these offensive mags. Because of that we have real choice as consumers and I can’t imagine it helps the fortunes of what is a disgustingly sexist corner of the magazine industry. It would be great for us women to find a way to show our appreciation. On the other hand, tonight I was struck by the difference between Spar and Centra on this issue. While we have invariably found pleasant and sympathetic sales staff in all the Centra stores, any managers we have come into contact with aggressively defend the sales of lads’ mags and dismiss our feedback with rudeness and disdain. One particular manager prides himself on having the highest sales of one of these mags in all of Northern Ireland. I’m increasingly feeling that a focused campaign to single out the attitude of Centra and compare it to the progressive policy and practice of Spar might be in order.

Understanding sexual violence.

This morning’s lead headline in the local radio and television news was the announcement that the PSNI and DHSSPS are relaunching their ‘Be SMART’ anti-rape and sexual violence campaign as a response to rising numbers of this type of crime being reported – a 10% increase in the last 6 months. My heart sank. In an earlier post I expressed my complete disgust at the pink version of this public awareness flyer that is riddled with victim blaming ‘advice’ and the very clear implication that if you are raped then you have not been smart enough to stop it. However, as the police officer interviewed began to speak the first words out of his mouth were,

“This campaign is designed to encourage people to better understand the issue of consent” (slight paraphrasing perhaps as I can’t access iPlayer to check it.)

The fact that this was his starting point left me feeling that at least progress is being made. There is a blue version of the Be SMART flyer which carefully outlines advice for men on how to ensure they have consent for any sexual act and helping reinforce the fact that consent cannot be assumed under the new legal framework in the Sexual Offences Order (2009). Hope at least that some of the feminist discourse extremely visible in the UK and Ireland over the last year, which challenges victim-blaming assumptions about the ‘causes’ of rape, may finally be filtering through. Policy makers and law-enforcers are starting to realise that it is simply unacceptable for the focus of rape prevention work to be on demanding that women engage in fewer ‘risky’ behaviours. The conversation must begin at the point of men’s behaviour and their abuse of the physical, mental or emotional power that enables them to rape. I have to admit that this is heartening.

It would also be naïve however to think that this is any more than a baby step in the right direction. Until we see an increase in the conviction rates for rape and other serious sexual offences and we see the number of these attacks significantly decreasing then we definitely have more to work at than to celebrate. Even the ongoing confusion of messages shows how far we have yet to travel – while the BBC’s Good Morning Ulster report may have provided space for a coherent and appropriate interview to be aired, their local news website features the same story with a very different focus. Here the discussion of consent has been sidelined in favour of what appears to be a regressive focus on the implications of drinking too much:

“We, as a police service, want this campaign to encourage people to make more informed, responsible and healthy decisions about their alcohol intake and also to think about the possible harmful consequences of impaired judgement.”  Det Ch Insp Don Glass

This leaves me with so many questions, like when you say ‘people’, do you mean women? Is it women who need to watch our alcohol intake? Or do you understand that for many who are attacked their attacker is the drunk one, just too big or intimidating to fend off? When you say ‘impaired judgement’ do you understand how offensive it is to make rape sound like nothing more than a one night stand we cringe about the next morning? Do you have any idea how much damage these few simple lines can do in the mind of a rape victim, already riddled with the voices of prejudice and stereotyping that our culture tortures them with? Do you give a shit about improving reporting and conviction rates when you come off with patronising bollocks like this? And then there’s this little piece of nonsense:

“Sex without consent is rape and the consequences for being convicted can have a devastating effect on both the victim and accused.”

No actually, I think you’ll find the consequences of an attacker NOT being convicted can have a devastating effect on the victim, something you should perhaps be a little more concerned about.

I’ve said it before and I’ll keep on saying it until they wise up and treat us like adults – everyone, male and female, should be encouraged to be aware of our own personal safety. But when the overwhelming majority of all communications from the authorities tasked with protecting women from rape focus on telling us to be more careful then that is sustaining the problem. It puts people off reporting, it creates a myth that women raped by someone they know/flirt with/be polite to have only themselves to blame. It provides a protective layer of secrecy and shame that allows rapists to safely manipulate and abuse women again and again and again because they will get away with it. The only way this will change is when we leave the victim blaming out of it and throw all our efforts into convicting more rapists. End of.

Update: A very similar story was announced in London today, with that city reporting a horrifying 37% increase in reported sexual attacks in the last year. Notice the difference in how this trend is being responded to however – when will we have this level of insight and commitment to equality? http://www.womensviewsonnews.org/wvon/2010/10/rape-education-in-london-schools/

And so it began. I’ve been reluctant to blog on the issue of the Comprehensive Spending Review and all of the drama and debate it has unleashed, largely due to the complete media saturation and a need to sit back and find the useful messages in all the frenzy. In the days that followed the UK coalition government’s announcement of the deepest cuts to the state’s public spending budget in (apparently) living memory, two things have by consensus become painfully clear:

1. The Con-Dem’s definition of the word ‘fair’ which they have applied to the CSR does not seem to match any other definition in common use in the English language. All news outlets were reporting the particular impact on the most vulnerable in society by Wednesday’s late night news slot, and by the following day the Institute of Fiscal studies had given its official seal of disapproval by pronouncing that, on balance, the plans outlined in the CSR were ‘regressive’, hitting the poorest hardest.

2. The extent and nature of the cuts in public spending are set to disproportionately disadvantage women. Due to the enduring social and economic inequalities women face in our developed western society, many of the benefits that our government intend to slash are those which more women depend on than men. Not only that but approximately 65% of public servants are women, with women particularly over-populating the lower grade positions that are likely to be culled first. In fact the Fawcett Society, who have been courageously fighting the government’s complete disdain for gender equality through their legal challenge to the proposed budget, suggest that there will be a triple impact on women, the third dimension being the burden created by the care gap which the removal of vital public services for children and the elderly will leave. And let’s not forget that hidden in the midst of all the big announcements was the one where the government scrapped the Women’s National Commission – the strongest voice for the autonomous women’s movement that exists in the UK. They have opted to turn off the key voice that holds them accountable for how they treat women, just as they begin to unveil how badly they intend to treat women. Interesting tactic.

For both of these reasons I am convinced that the economic decisions the government are currently making present a serious feminist issue and fighting the cuts with protest, creative alternatives and raising the voice of opposition from the people is a feminist response. Wherever patriarchal bullying and self-interest heap further oppression on those who deserve support towards approaching equality, feminists should be there saying ‘NO!’ This was a word the crowd yelled repeatedly at Saturday’s trade union rally against the cuts (that and ‘OUT, OUT, OUT!’ every time Sammy Wilson’s name was mentioned) and it was heartening to know that at least 5000 people in Northern Ireland believe democracy doesn’t end when you put an X beside a politician’s name.

One final concern that is emerging about how the Con-Dem approach will affect women’s equality and our position in society is the knowledge that capitalism does not like feminism. In fact, as one activist friend said to me on Friday night, ‘the exploitation of women is the cornerstone of capitalism – because it demands us all to be bunny girls.’ Strangely ominous given that last week also saw the announcement that after 30 years, the Playboy club will return to London with Hugh being able to bring his brand (and bunnies) to an existing bar and gambling club in Mayfair. From sleazy backstreet strip clubs to Mayfair casinos, sex trafficking auctions to meat-market beauty pageants – the Tories will be selling women’s bodies and the Lib Dems will be convincing us we’re just exercising our hard-earned freedom! Listen, if we thought our gender identities were being increasingly squeezed and forced into hyper-sexualised vs hyper-masculine dichotomies over the last decade we’d better brace ourselves for the onslaught to come. I’m just glad we saw this coming and started networking feminist activists already. There is much work to be done!

UPDATE: Noticed today’s announcement that universal pension provision will be improved, in particular allowing for full provision for people who haven’t worked the full 30 years? I can’t help laughing at the PR machine trying to spin this as such a big victory for women as it is often women who receive lower pensions, having taken a number of years off work to raise children. Any chance you could stop patronising us and do something meaningful like take a progressive approach to paternity leave and tackling the gender pay gap so that families can actually succeed in achieving goals of shared care, meaning men and women can both choose to take time out for parenting? No? Didn’t think so.

Over the next couple of weeks as soisaystoher approaches its first birthday I am going to try and review the main issues that have been discussed here this year and try and put some perspective on what has actually been done. Have there been positive changes in any of the areas our blog posts have highlighted or are we struggling to get off square one?

It would also be good to plan some actions for November/December as we focus on the 16 Days of Activism against Gender Violence. Last year I wanted to do something but alone it felt impossible to make an impact. This year alone is not a word that describes my feminist experience I’m glad to say, and so I know we can come up with some ideas to remind the people of Northern Ireland that violence against women is all of our responsibility. A quick scan of today’s news alone brings a terrible reminder of the ‘two women a week’ statistic that describes the number of women who die at the hands of partners or ex-partners in the UK.

Just around the corner from me in East Belfast a 38 year old man has been beating his girlfriend. She has reported his abuse to the police on numerous occasions over recent months only to later withdraw her complaints. Right now she is lying in a hospital bed recovering after he tried to beat her to death, covering 70% of her body in bruises, and when that didn’t work he tried to smother her. The police are shocked and horrified. They’ve never seen injuries like this. I wonder if they’ve learnt anything about the terror that prevents domestic abuse victims from following through with complaints and the responsibility on them to fully investigate and provide adequate follow up and support? If she had died would any of them have been held to account? The (female) judge thankfully remanded this bastard in custody as she understood the likelihood that he would try to cause further harm. I drove down Templemore Avenue today. It is a small street of terrace houses, much like my own. I can hear my neighbours sneeze. I’m bloody sure somebody heard this woman receiving regular beatings and her story made me vow never to turn away from someone in the grip of abuse or fail to speak up when apologists try to make our society believe violence against women isn’t real. Read the full story from the BBC.

The title of my blog post is a quote from Roger West, a grandfather from Nottingham who is speaking in today’s Belfast Telegraph after his 21 year old daughter was murdered by a violent man in her own home. I can’t read this story without feeling like I am crumbling inside. We can’t crumble however. Crumbling is not an option. For every woman who has suffered because a man fails to understand that she is a human being, equal to him in her personhood, not there to serve or please or obey.

Miss West’s father Roger West paid tribute to his daughter as being like “summer warmth on a cold day”.

Mr West, from Nottingham, said: “The most important thing in the world to Sara was her family. If she loved someone, she would do absolutely anything for that person.”

He said the 21-year-old, who has two sisters, was a proud mother to son Joshua, who is nearly nine weeks old.

“She lost a baby last year, and she was devastated,” he said.

“When Joshua came along her world completely changed – all of a sudden, her dreams had come true and she was so proud and happy.

“She spoke about going to college to become a midwife – she had the rest of her life ahead of her. It’s hard to cope and it does not seem real right now. She was like summer warmth on a cold day – she was a girl who would make any dad proud.”

Read more here.

(Post originally appeared in UK Feminista here.)

As the Facebook group for Belfast Feminist Network hit 200 members and our fortnightly meetings began to attract more keen new people with each one, we decided to host a public awareness raising evening on the subject of the sex industry. In fact it was something we’d had in the pipeline for a while as we discussed feminist activities on the issue in other parts of the UK and Ireland. We wanted to learn more about this industry as it is currently playing out in Northern Ireland. Given the cultural peculiarities of this place, it is really important that we don’t try to import campaigns and activist strategies from other places without doing everything we can to find out what’s really happening for women and girls involved in the sex industry in our own towns and cities.

The event was advertised as:

Understanding the sex industry in Northern Ireland.

How do young people get into prostitution?
What happens to trafficked women and girls?
Is the law failing to protect exploited people?
Does the sex industry promote violence against women?
_________________________________________________

Awareness raising event
Queen’s University Students’ Union
Club room 2 (3rd floor)
Tuesday 7th September, 7:30pm
_________________________________________________

This event is open to anyone who would like to become more informed about the impact of the sex industry on women and girls in our communities. As feminist activists we would like to begin shaping a challenge to the exploitation this industry is built on and have invited a panel of experienced professionals to share their insights and field our many questions. We are very excited about hearing from these women, all of whom are passionate about protecting vulnerable people from sexual exploitation. Please join us and share this invitation with anyone you think might be interested.

Helen Beckett: Barnardos Safe Choices Service
Anna Lo: Alliance Party MLA, South Belfast
Patricia Campbell: Amnesty International (replaced by Ciarnan Helferty due to illness)
Rebecca Dudley: Human rights researcher and training consultant

We partnered with QUB’s student Amnesty group and between us managed to get the word out so that over 70 people turned up! Pretty astounding and totally caught us out with not enough chairs :O)

The input from the speakers on the night was amazing – so much experience and insight from people who work at the forefront of advocating for, supporting and uncovering the experiences of women and girls who have been sexually exploited. The questions and comments from the floor unpacked the issues even further and made us humbly aware of the depth of experience and knowledge of those who had chosen to come along and be part of the conversation.

It’s worth noting that the meeting took place just a few days after the police anti-trafficking brothel raids on 3rd September, during which 7 Belfast brothels were uncovered and 15 people removed. This had generated a large amount of media coverage and so unsurprisingly much of the evening’s discussion focused on this particular form of sexual exploitation. Anna Lo spoke very movingly of the experiences of young Chinese women she has spent time with, reminding us all of the people behind the headlines. Ciarnan Helferty from Amnesty talked passionately about the need to tackle poverty and oppression of women internationally if we hope to effectively address the issue of trafficking. He also shared with everyone copies of the Northern Ireland section of the June 2010 report by the Anti Trafficking Monitoring Group. Human rights specialist Rebecca Dudley also highlighted the horror of trafficking but was keen to remind us that a focus on the experiences of these women should not distract us from the many layers of exploitation that can lead women and girls into prostitution from our own communities. As Catherine MacKinnon said in 1993, “If prostitution is a free choice, why are the women with the fewest choices the ones most often found doing it?” Helen Beckett gave an update on the work of Barnardos Safe Choices project and the experiences of children and young people who have been groomed and sexually exploited. The research attached to the service provided to young people is in its early stages but will be extremely important in helping unravel the path into prostitution that many women take, beginning for many with people exploiting their vulnerability.

Of all the issues covered there were a couple of points that emerged as potential areas for the Belfast Feminist Network to take forward in the immediate future:

1. The support available to trafficked women after they have been removed from brothels is completely failing them. Women’s Aid receive government funding to provide housing for them for 45 days during which time they must decide whether or not to testify against their abusers. Those who feel they are unable to work with the police are then left completely destitute – Women’s Aid currently fundraise as much as they can to continue to support them as they try to recover but this in not sustainable. Not enough consideration is being given to the complexities of fear and trauma these women face and many disappear and are driven back into the hands of the traffickers because we aren’t properly meeting their needs. This is compounded by the ‘no recourse to public funds’ policy which means there is no support available at all to those who need to stay in the UK while they try to rebuild their lives.

2. The system for identifying people who have been trafficked is ‘not fit for purpose’ and allows traffickers to further control their vicitms by convincing them they will be viewed as illegal immigrants and criminals should they go to the authorities. In order to send a clear message to victims that they can seek help there must be a new approach to how trafficked people’s immigration status is assessed. The low numbers of people identified as having been trafficked (just 25 in total in Northern Ireland) are a completely inadequate reflection of the real picture, which those working with victims can testify to. At the heart of the problem is the fact that the National Referral Mechanism depends on decisions made by the UK Border Agency, whose primary concern is controlling immigration; a concern that can conflict with their ability to objectively identify and protect victims. Critics of the system suggest that there is an underlying belief that women lie about being trafficked in order to stay in the country and that the whole system needs to be completely transformed if it is to meet the obligations of the Council of Europe Convention on Action Against Human Trafficking.

3. It is cash from the pockets of Northern Irish men that continues to fund the industry we are trying to challenge. We have to smash the veneer of discretion that allows men to pay for sex with the frightened and abused foreign women and vulnerable young people we heard about at this meeting. None of the panelists had much faith in the effectiveness of recent legislative changes making it illegal to pay for sex where force or coercion has been involved. One mentioned the risk of driving the brothels further underground, making it even harder to get help to the women under the control of pimps and traffickers. Another noted that while well-intentioned it is a half-hearted piece of legislation that will be difficult to properly enforce. While the best way to tackle the demand side of this industry may be hard to agree on, it is clear that we must find ways to challenge the misogyny that it is built on.

So there you go. If all of that hasn’t completely exhausted you, there was also a piece in the Belfast Telegraph which covered the event and was really effective at putting across the feminist approach to the issue. It is here: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/sex-slavery-the-northern-ireland-connection-14941886.html

To finish, our discussion at this meeting left me in no doubt that the government’s refusal to sign up to the EU trafficking law because we apparently already do this really well is laughable. Keep the pressure on!

Amazingly however, Hanna’s House wasn’t the thing that happened this weekend that most inspired my commitment to the cause and my sisters. As incredible as the experience was it was thoroughly trumped by one simple text I received from a friend as I got ready for bed last night. She sent me a picture of a tattoo she had done earlier in the day; in elegant and simple black lettering it said one word: Shine. Her text included the question ‘Do you know the meaning of it?’ and instantly I did. This friend, who is about to begin her second year studying at university in England to pursue her passion of film-making, is someone I met when she was 11 years old the year I began my first job as a community youth worker. She came to my after school club every day for 5 years, to torture me initially, then to enjoy the space, then to use it to study and get support and later to give her time to support the younger children needing her support and mentoring. During my time there I facilitated a young women’s group, time set aside for them to relax, to be in charge, to have fun, to discuss issues, to get away on residentials and clear their heads. It was at one of these residentials that I introduced the girls to an idea which some 5 or 6 years later inspired the aforementioned tattoo.

It was the weekend of mother’s day and I took the group to Enniskillen for the weekend. We stayed in The Clinton centre and used the evening time to talk a little about being a woman, our relationships with each other and with the other women in our lives. In the week running up to the event I had secretly visited each of their mums and asked them to write a short note for their daughter, describing some of the things they love about them and encouraging them to be proud of themselves. This was an incredible experience, not at all easy for me or for the women I’m sure – some were delighted to do it and filled the page with words that came naturally and were obviously a part of their everyday interactions with their daughters. Others confessed they don’t say these things often enough, and some struggled to find the words at all. Despite the complications of some of these relationships, the words were offered in sincerity, the envelopes opened, the gifts enthusiastically read, smiled at, laughed at a little, cried over, shared and hopefully remembered. I also offered my own gift to each of them that night, on a wallet sized card which contained just the word Shine on one side and on the other, the words of Marianne Wilson’s speech that reads:

“Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented and fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be?

You are a child of God. Your playing small doesn’t serve the world. There’s nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won’t feel insecure around you. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It’s not just in some of us; it’s in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.”

It was this card that my friend had carried with her and eventually decided to permanently write onto her body as a reminder that she is not afraid to be the best she can, and she will celebrate with her sisters in their successes and achievements. The whole group of young women I worked with and got to know through that first youth work job are such an inspiration to me. The way they accepted and trusted me (eventually…they bloody well made me work for it in the first year or two), the fact that I was allowed to support them, challenge them and be equally as challenged by them and the things they taught me, has formed the basis of the way I’ve worked with people ever since. And now I get to call them friends which is the greatest privilege of all. As I was reminded last night of the time I spent with them I realised that what I was doing back then was feminist work, before I even knew what that was. All I knew was that these girls deserved more than the social order of things dictated they should achieve. I knew they were capable of overcoming the barriers facing them and I knew that their futures were dependent on them believing that for themselves. I had 5 years with them to try and reinforce that message every single day, they had each other and many had great supportive women in their families so it’s not hard to see how they’ve grown up into such fantastic young women.

So, just as I was trying to imagine my feminist future I found myself reflecting on the first feminist activities I ever undertook (not counting beating Stephen Crooks in a race round the block aged 11) and I would like to carry the lessons of that time with me. Being a feminist is first and foremost about believing in women and trusting each other enough to help and be helped.