It should come as no surprise that yesterday’s talks in London ended in deadlock. The template for the Syria crisis is not new.
The Syrian National Coalition (SNC), the main opposition group, is right to be reticent about entering into peace talks with Assad. After ten years of genocide, Darfuris have grown weary of so called peace talks. President Al Bashir has signed every one of them and reneged on every one of them.
The SNC knows that when the media’s gaze is deflected by peace talks, violence on the ground will intensify (as it did in Rwanda, Bosnia and still does in Sudan). They will know too that, although “peace talks” and “dictator” is an oxymoron, the opposition contingent that refuses to participate will be labelled “obstructive”. They’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
Hague and Kerry’s “what can we do” routine is disingenuous. Adopting a piggy in the middle routine won’t wash. The UN’s Responsibility to Protect Mandate bestows upon them a duty to act when civilians are being slaughtered by a brutal dictator. Not that UN mandates count for anything anymore.
This month the IMF is considering wiping clean US$42 Billion of Sudan’s external debt. Much of this debt was given over to profligate military expenditures used in a sustained and prolonged genocidal campaign. More again was squandered on the regime’s self enrichment.
The international community must deal with economic and human rights issues simultaneously. The Save Darfur Coalition is arguing for the full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and significant structural reforms, which would fundamentally change the repressive systems in Sudan.
To provide debt relief in the absence of these conditions being met, would confer legitimacy, and financial resources, for the regime to continue its campaign of rape, starvation, murder and displacement.
If they are to be considered credible moderators of peace, Hague and Kerry must veto Sudan's IMF bid. And, at some point, they will have to stand up to the other elephant in the room. Assad. The question is, how many innocent lives will be lost while they gather splinters sitting on that jaded, fragile fence.
Thursday 24 October 2013
Saturday 19 October 2013
It's not Gloria De Piero's Boobs That Are Controversial. It's Her Brain
On Thursday Labour MP, Gloria De Piero, made the news. Not because of her policies but because of her boobs. It seems a national newspaper offered thousands of pounds to unearth topless pictures taken when she was 15. Days earlier her appointment as shadow minister for women and equalities was announced. That’ll teach a working class woman to have notions above her station.
On Tuesday representatives from Lose the Lad’s mags campaign, including actress Ramola Garai, spoke at a sold out event in parliament. They argued that, having lad’s mags on sale in family spaces, such as Tesco, was contributing to a culture wherein the sexualisation of women and young girls, is considered normal.
Glamour models are ubiquitous. Women, like De Piero, who dare to make a bid for power, using their brains rather than their bodies, however, are either invisible or pilloried by the press. The two stories are inextricably linked.
Initially, the press wasn’t that interested in the Lose the Lad’s Mags story. Then Dominic Smith, grandiloquent editor of Nuts, entered the fray. There’s nothing like a bit of agro to prick the malestream media’s interest.
In an interview with Green MP Caroline Lucas, on Radio 5 Live, Smith seemed flummoxed by Lucas’ use of “big” words, like “culture” and “objectification”. I can see how such vocabulary, coming from a woman, can be discombobulating (gratuitous big word alert) to a man who surrounds himself with compliant teenagers whose brains are sadly often surplus to other anatomical requirements. Smith then used Lucas’ linguistic dexterity to accuse her, and the entire campaign, of being middle class, therefore irrelevant.
I’m a feminist, from a working class background, with a penchant for big words myself (I collected them as a child). I grew up on the “wrong” side of the Liffey and, whilst there were many things we couldn’t afford (hence collecting words as opposed to dolls), education wasn’t one of them. That was free.
It’s because of my education that I can intellectually deconstruct the propaganda peddled by Smith and other purveyors of porn. It’s not just patronising to imply that the only choice open to girls from working class backgrounds, is to get their kit off for male titillation, it’s also cods wallop.
By refusing to engage with the intellectual discourse on the grounds that it’s “middle class”, lad’s mags’ apologists are copping out. When surveys produce data indicating that 63% of teenagers aspire to be glamour models as opposed to doctors, teachers, or, God forbid (in the non denominational sense), politicians, like De Piero, alarm bells should be ringing.
Supporters of lad’s mags say they’re not pornographic (and Tetley isn’t tea). That they’re no worse than women’s magazines. I loathe most women’s magazines. Many are guilty of multitudinous crimes against women, but they’re not porn. Lad’s mags offer free videos of women dressed like schoolgirls, stripping, they contain adverts that lead into hardcore porn and the back pages are awash with numbers for sex chat lines.
Also worth noting, women’s magazines tend to put other women on the front cover. If they serially featured teenage boys in tongs (or naked), leaving nothing to the imagination, with splayed legs and fondling his bits, there would be a public outcry. Sexualised images of women and girls are so pervasive now that we’ve become desensitised to them (see Porn on the High Street? It’s Just a Bit of Harmless Fun!).
It’s reported that half of school girls are considering plastic surgery to make themselves thinner and prettier, 90% of eating disorders are amongst females, teenage gang rape is on the increase and 1 in 3 girls have reported unwelcome sexual touching at school. Camden Girls School made similar points in a documentary, which persuaded their local Tesco to remove lad’s mags.
Portraying women as sex objects perpetuates gender inequalities. Objectification is dehumanising. That’s the point. It’s much easier to abuse (or discriminate against) a non person reduced to mere body parts. Tits and ass usually. The sex industry, which includes lad’s rags, has vested interests in normalising the objectification of women. To them women, and girls, are just commodities. To be bought and sold - in your local Tesco.
On Tuesday representatives from Lose the Lad’s mags campaign, including actress Ramola Garai, spoke at a sold out event in parliament. They argued that, having lad’s mags on sale in family spaces, such as Tesco, was contributing to a culture wherein the sexualisation of women and young girls, is considered normal.
Glamour models are ubiquitous. Women, like De Piero, who dare to make a bid for power, using their brains rather than their bodies, however, are either invisible or pilloried by the press. The two stories are inextricably linked.
Initially, the press wasn’t that interested in the Lose the Lad’s Mags story. Then Dominic Smith, grandiloquent editor of Nuts, entered the fray. There’s nothing like a bit of agro to prick the malestream media’s interest.
In an interview with Green MP Caroline Lucas, on Radio 5 Live, Smith seemed flummoxed by Lucas’ use of “big” words, like “culture” and “objectification”. I can see how such vocabulary, coming from a woman, can be discombobulating (gratuitous big word alert) to a man who surrounds himself with compliant teenagers whose brains are sadly often surplus to other anatomical requirements. Smith then used Lucas’ linguistic dexterity to accuse her, and the entire campaign, of being middle class, therefore irrelevant.
I’m a feminist, from a working class background, with a penchant for big words myself (I collected them as a child). I grew up on the “wrong” side of the Liffey and, whilst there were many things we couldn’t afford (hence collecting words as opposed to dolls), education wasn’t one of them. That was free.
It’s because of my education that I can intellectually deconstruct the propaganda peddled by Smith and other purveyors of porn. It’s not just patronising to imply that the only choice open to girls from working class backgrounds, is to get their kit off for male titillation, it’s also cods wallop.
By refusing to engage with the intellectual discourse on the grounds that it’s “middle class”, lad’s mags’ apologists are copping out. When surveys produce data indicating that 63% of teenagers aspire to be glamour models as opposed to doctors, teachers, or, God forbid (in the non denominational sense), politicians, like De Piero, alarm bells should be ringing.
Supporters of lad’s mags say they’re not pornographic (and Tetley isn’t tea). That they’re no worse than women’s magazines. I loathe most women’s magazines. Many are guilty of multitudinous crimes against women, but they’re not porn. Lad’s mags offer free videos of women dressed like schoolgirls, stripping, they contain adverts that lead into hardcore porn and the back pages are awash with numbers for sex chat lines.
Also worth noting, women’s magazines tend to put other women on the front cover. If they serially featured teenage boys in tongs (or naked), leaving nothing to the imagination, with splayed legs and fondling his bits, there would be a public outcry. Sexualised images of women and girls are so pervasive now that we’ve become desensitised to them (see Porn on the High Street? It’s Just a Bit of Harmless Fun!).
It’s reported that half of school girls are considering plastic surgery to make themselves thinner and prettier, 90% of eating disorders are amongst females, teenage gang rape is on the increase and 1 in 3 girls have reported unwelcome sexual touching at school. Camden Girls School made similar points in a documentary, which persuaded their local Tesco to remove lad’s mags.
Portraying women as sex objects perpetuates gender inequalities. Objectification is dehumanising. That’s the point. It’s much easier to abuse (or discriminate against) a non person reduced to mere body parts. Tits and ass usually. The sex industry, which includes lad’s rags, has vested interests in normalising the objectification of women. To them women, and girls, are just commodities. To be bought and sold - in your local Tesco.
Friday 11 October 2013
Another Slap in the Face for Struggling Families
* This piece was published today in Open Democracy. Link will soon be uploaded to "Press" section of my website.
On Sunday morning, I sat bleary eyed in the Sunday Morning Live studios alongside Peter Hitchens and Yvonne Ridley. The topic we discussed was marriage and whether it provides better outcomes for children. Within moments of coming off air, I was bombarded with messages. Apart from one person fulminating about my going to hell in a hand basket, along with Sinead O’Connor and Madonna, the rest were vehemently opposed to the idea of incentivising people to get married.
In reality, only 1/3 of married couples would be eligible for the marriage tax allowance, at a cost of £700m to tax payers. Households with a traditional 1950’s breadwinner and homemaker stand to gain the most. According to the campaign group Don’t Judge my Family, this policy would discriminate against widows and widowers, people leaving abusive relationships, working parents, people who choose not to marry and the 1 in 4 children growing up in single parent families.
Ian Duncan Smith pontificates about children born to married couples having better outcomes. That’s true, not because of marriage itself, but rather because married couples tend to be better educated and enjoy higher incomes. He’s conflating correlation with causation.
A far more relevant, detrimental, determinant of children’s outcomes is poverty. According to Barnardos there are 3.6m children in Britain living in poverty and 2.5m families in fuel poverty. Crippling benefits cuts are condemning Britain’s poorest children to growing up in a cycle of poverty, with increased risk of chronic illness, malnutrition and poor educational attainment.
Freezing child benefit for the third year running will do nothing to help these children. Nor will this government’s decision to break the link between benefits and inflation. Energy prices alone are set to increase by 10% this year, that’s three times the rate of inflation. Meanwhile, one of the big 6 energy companies SSE awarded 4 executives £5 million in bonuses this year, despite being fined a record £105 million for prolonged and extreme mis-selling. To add insult to injury, SSE announced an excruciating price hike yesterday.
Austerity measures, targeting the most vulnerable in society, have left families, on average, £900 worse off a year. Bribing these couples with the chance to recoup £200 (of the £900 stolen from them), in exchange for getting married, is like stealing someone’s car and offering them a bus pass as compensation.
While the poor get poorer, government policies ensure the rich get richer. Cutting the top rate of tax from 50p to 45p has made millionaires in this country hundreds of thousands of pounds better off. Big businesses are still exploiting tax loopholes which the government has neglected to close, at a loss of billions to the exchequer annually.
I was in Greece recently to speak at an international women’s summit hosted by the European Sustainability Academy. It emerged that the biggest barrier to women achieving their potential, was not the pay gap, quotas in favour of men, or even child care. It was domestic violence. Despite Greece having one of the lowest divorce rates in Europe, domestic violence is rampant.
I grew up in Ireland, where divorce has only been legal since 1997. For many, family life wasn’t so much The Waltons as Psycho. Domestic violence always existed. The only difference is, historically, there were no women’s refuges. There were however, lots of Tupperware parties, which was a 1970’s version of the Irish Women’s Movement.
Children who are exposed to abuse are more likely to repeat the cycle in adulthood. We must teach children that it’s not OK to be abused or humiliated, especially by someone claiming to love them. And, that sometimes the right thing to do is walk away.
There’s a Greek saying, When poverty comes in the front door, happiness goes out the window. Families around the country are struggling to feed their children, unable to pay heating bills and living in fear of eviction. Headlines about marriage couldn’t be more disconnected from their reality. Hasn’t anyone at Tory HQ ever heard of Mazlow’s hierarchy of needs?
On Sunday morning, I sat bleary eyed in the Sunday Morning Live studios alongside Peter Hitchens and Yvonne Ridley. The topic we discussed was marriage and whether it provides better outcomes for children. Within moments of coming off air, I was bombarded with messages. Apart from one person fulminating about my going to hell in a hand basket, along with Sinead O’Connor and Madonna, the rest were vehemently opposed to the idea of incentivising people to get married.
In reality, only 1/3 of married couples would be eligible for the marriage tax allowance, at a cost of £700m to tax payers. Households with a traditional 1950’s breadwinner and homemaker stand to gain the most. According to the campaign group Don’t Judge my Family, this policy would discriminate against widows and widowers, people leaving abusive relationships, working parents, people who choose not to marry and the 1 in 4 children growing up in single parent families.
Ian Duncan Smith pontificates about children born to married couples having better outcomes. That’s true, not because of marriage itself, but rather because married couples tend to be better educated and enjoy higher incomes. He’s conflating correlation with causation.
A far more relevant, detrimental, determinant of children’s outcomes is poverty. According to Barnardos there are 3.6m children in Britain living in poverty and 2.5m families in fuel poverty. Crippling benefits cuts are condemning Britain’s poorest children to growing up in a cycle of poverty, with increased risk of chronic illness, malnutrition and poor educational attainment.
Freezing child benefit for the third year running will do nothing to help these children. Nor will this government’s decision to break the link between benefits and inflation. Energy prices alone are set to increase by 10% this year, that’s three times the rate of inflation. Meanwhile, one of the big 6 energy companies SSE awarded 4 executives £5 million in bonuses this year, despite being fined a record £105 million for prolonged and extreme mis-selling. To add insult to injury, SSE announced an excruciating price hike yesterday.
Austerity measures, targeting the most vulnerable in society, have left families, on average, £900 worse off a year. Bribing these couples with the chance to recoup £200 (of the £900 stolen from them), in exchange for getting married, is like stealing someone’s car and offering them a bus pass as compensation.
While the poor get poorer, government policies ensure the rich get richer. Cutting the top rate of tax from 50p to 45p has made millionaires in this country hundreds of thousands of pounds better off. Big businesses are still exploiting tax loopholes which the government has neglected to close, at a loss of billions to the exchequer annually.
I was in Greece recently to speak at an international women’s summit hosted by the European Sustainability Academy. It emerged that the biggest barrier to women achieving their potential, was not the pay gap, quotas in favour of men, or even child care. It was domestic violence. Despite Greece having one of the lowest divorce rates in Europe, domestic violence is rampant.
I grew up in Ireland, where divorce has only been legal since 1997. For many, family life wasn’t so much The Waltons as Psycho. Domestic violence always existed. The only difference is, historically, there were no women’s refuges. There were however, lots of Tupperware parties, which was a 1970’s version of the Irish Women’s Movement.
Children who are exposed to abuse are more likely to repeat the cycle in adulthood. We must teach children that it’s not OK to be abused or humiliated, especially by someone claiming to love them. And, that sometimes the right thing to do is walk away.
There’s a Greek saying, When poverty comes in the front door, happiness goes out the window. Families around the country are struggling to feed their children, unable to pay heating bills and living in fear of eviction. Headlines about marriage couldn’t be more disconnected from their reality. Hasn’t anyone at Tory HQ ever heard of Mazlow’s hierarchy of needs?
Monday 7 October 2013
The Marriage Tax Allowance is a Red Herring
I was a guest on the BBC’s Sunday Morning Live yesterday. Pitched against The Daily Mail columnist, Peter Hitchens, & lived to tell the tale. Although our moral compasses are diametrically opposed, I have to admire the fact that he has one. A moral compass that is. Thoroughly enjoyed the sparring. Seems like an affable man underneath all that moral indignation.
The topic we discussed was marriage & whether it provides better outcomes for children. It was spurred largely by the Tory’s ill conceived marriage tax allowance which, in my opinion, is a red herring. It keeps us from talking about the real issues, such as, the fact that poverty is a far greater determinant of children’s outcomes.
The Tory's austerity measures, together with their refusal to rein in energy companies, has driven 2.5m families into fuel poverty, when there are already 3m children living in poverty in the UK. That's the story this sound bite is designed to obfuscate.
You can see Peter & I lock horns on BBC iplayer. It will also be uploaded on my website within the next few days.
* Samira Ahmed is effortlessly personable & inclusive. A veritable mistress of her craft.
The topic we discussed was marriage & whether it provides better outcomes for children. It was spurred largely by the Tory’s ill conceived marriage tax allowance which, in my opinion, is a red herring. It keeps us from talking about the real issues, such as, the fact that poverty is a far greater determinant of children’s outcomes.
The Tory's austerity measures, together with their refusal to rein in energy companies, has driven 2.5m families into fuel poverty, when there are already 3m children living in poverty in the UK. That's the story this sound bite is designed to obfuscate.
You can see Peter & I lock horns on BBC iplayer. It will also be uploaded on my website within the next few days.
* Samira Ahmed is effortlessly personable & inclusive. A veritable mistress of her craft.
Thursday 3 October 2013
Britain is Failing Victims of Female Genital Mutilation
Betty Makoni is the kind of woman I want to be when I grow up. She is fearless, wise and funny. Her heart is as big as the continent she hails from. Africa.
I met Betty last week at an International Women’s Empowerment Summit, hosted by the European Sustainability Academy in Crete. Dispensing with the usual formalities of speech making, Betty stood up and announced, “I was raped when I was 6, my mother died after being beaten by my father when I was 9. I shouldn’t be here”.
The fact that Betty survived her childhood is a miracle. Her story though, is not about her abuse, but what she did about it.
She channelled her anger into creating a charity, the “Girl child network”, that has to date rescued in excess of 450,000 girls, across 6 African countries, from sexual violence. Providing a safe place to heal, become educated and empowered.
She came to international attention when she won a CNN hero award (presented by Nicole Kidman) for her work, which originated in her native Zimbabwe. Betty used her global platform to draw the world’s attention to the fact that rape is strategically employed as a weapon of war. Despite this being recognised by the UN as a crime against humanity since 2008, the numbers of prosecutions are negligible.
A strong, unapologetic woman who won’t be silenced is a threat anywhere in the world, but even more so in Mugabe’s Zimbabwe. Death threats forced Betty to live in exile in the UK, where she continues fund raising for her pan African charity. She is now a gender based violence expert for the Foreign Office and campaigns against Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). Although the British government recently pledged £35 million to combating FGM abroad, there is a crisis much closer to home.
A few weeks ago, Betty caused controversy by speaking out about the disturbing prevalence of FGM in the UK. She maintains that it’s not uncommon for babies and young girls to be taken overseas to be “stitched up” or attend “cutting parties” in the UK, where group rates are offered to reduce costs.
She also highlighted another type of FGM which doesn’t involve cutting or stitching but rather pulling the labia and clitoris out, or “elongating”. A torturous process she herself was subjected to as a child. According to Betty, this form of FGM, although prevalent in the UK, is considered unpalatable for publication in the British media.
It’s estimated that more than 20,000 girls in the UK are at risk of FGM. Despite the fact that it has been classed as a serious criminal offence in the UK since 1985, there have been no prosecutions. This contrasts with France where there have been 100. A recent NSPCC survey also indicated that 1 in 6 teachers weren’t aware that FGM is illegal and didn’t consider it to be child abuse.
Whilst I welcome the government’s investment in tackling FGM overseas, we must do much more to combat this form of child abuse in the UK. Betty Makoni is not a victim, she’s a survivor. It’s thanks to her that FGM is even on the political agenda. It’s up to the rest of us to make sure it stays there.
I met Betty last week at an International Women’s Empowerment Summit, hosted by the European Sustainability Academy in Crete. Dispensing with the usual formalities of speech making, Betty stood up and announced, “I was raped when I was 6, my mother died after being beaten by my father when I was 9. I shouldn’t be here”.
The fact that Betty survived her childhood is a miracle. Her story though, is not about her abuse, but what she did about it.
She channelled her anger into creating a charity, the “Girl child network”, that has to date rescued in excess of 450,000 girls, across 6 African countries, from sexual violence. Providing a safe place to heal, become educated and empowered.
She came to international attention when she won a CNN hero award (presented by Nicole Kidman) for her work, which originated in her native Zimbabwe. Betty used her global platform to draw the world’s attention to the fact that rape is strategically employed as a weapon of war. Despite this being recognised by the UN as a crime against humanity since 2008, the numbers of prosecutions are negligible.
A strong, unapologetic woman who won’t be silenced is a threat anywhere in the world, but even more so in Mugabe’s Zimbabwe. Death threats forced Betty to live in exile in the UK, where she continues fund raising for her pan African charity. She is now a gender based violence expert for the Foreign Office and campaigns against Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). Although the British government recently pledged £35 million to combating FGM abroad, there is a crisis much closer to home.
A few weeks ago, Betty caused controversy by speaking out about the disturbing prevalence of FGM in the UK. She maintains that it’s not uncommon for babies and young girls to be taken overseas to be “stitched up” or attend “cutting parties” in the UK, where group rates are offered to reduce costs.
She also highlighted another type of FGM which doesn’t involve cutting or stitching but rather pulling the labia and clitoris out, or “elongating”. A torturous process she herself was subjected to as a child. According to Betty, this form of FGM, although prevalent in the UK, is considered unpalatable for publication in the British media.
It’s estimated that more than 20,000 girls in the UK are at risk of FGM. Despite the fact that it has been classed as a serious criminal offence in the UK since 1985, there have been no prosecutions. This contrasts with France where there have been 100. A recent NSPCC survey also indicated that 1 in 6 teachers weren’t aware that FGM is illegal and didn’t consider it to be child abuse.
Whilst I welcome the government’s investment in tackling FGM overseas, we must do much more to combat this form of child abuse in the UK. Betty Makoni is not a victim, she’s a survivor. It’s thanks to her that FGM is even on the political agenda. It’s up to the rest of us to make sure it stays there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)