You keep using Humanism. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I have written this rant a thousand times. My children can recite it word for word. Heck, given the power of speech, I bet the first words out the cat's mouth would be: For the love of catnip, stop squawking about humanism.

Nothing annoys me more than people disavowing the political theory of feminism because they want to be "humanists". Honestly, does no one google anymore? Humanism has an actual political definition which is predicated on the notion of rational thought; and that "rational thought" excluded women because we're all emotional and hysterical and shit. In fact, dating of the humanist movement usually starts around the Renaissance which is a period not known for its feminist writers. How anyone who grew up in a "Western" country with access to free secondary school education can get confused about the definition of humanism is completely beyond me.

For the last freaking time, and the welfare of my children:

HUMANISM DOES NOT MEAN EQUALITY BETWEEN THE SEXES.

It just doesn't. It doesn't matter what celebrity is babbling on about how they aren't feminists because they are humanists and humanists believe in equality. They are wrong. And, frankly, their agents need to have a chat with them about their knowledge of history. 

These are the very basic definitions as outlined in Collins' School Dictionary which I've borrowed from my primary school child:  

• Humanism is the belief in mankind's ability to achieve happiness and fulfilment without the need for religion.

• Feminism is the belief that women should have the same rights and opportunities as men.

See: THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING

Not even close. 

This is the definition of humanism as taken from the Oxford Dictionaries Online:

A rationalist outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.

• (often Humanism) a Renaissance cultural movement which turned away from medieval scholasticism and revived interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought.

• (among some contemporary writers) a system of thought criticized as being centred on the notion of the rational, autonomous self and ignoring the conditioned nature of the individual.

If you feel the need to quibble with this definition of humanism, do feel free to google yourself. Wikipedia's got a pretty decent history of humanism. Or check out the British Humanist Association definition:

• trusts to the scientific method when it comes to understanding how the universe works and rejects the idea of the supernatural (and is therefore an atheist or agnostic)


• makes their ethical decisions based on reason, empathy, and a concern for human beings and other sentient animals

• believes that, in the absence of an afterlife and any discernible purpose to the universe, human beings can act to give their own lives meaning by seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same.

Not a word about feminism anywhere on their website.

Because humanism is NOT feminism.

Feminism, at least liberal feminism, is about equality between men and women. If you don't want to use the word feminist, use equalist. That term sets my teeth on edge but by using you won't be publicly embarrassed of your poor knowledge of history. [My feminism is about the liberation of women from male violence since we technically already have equality before the law in the UK but those laws are never enforced].

To be clear, you can be a feminist and a humanist but not a humanist because you're afraid someone might think you hate men if you call yourself a feminist. And, come on, if feminism is about equality between men and women, then men who think feminists are "man-haters" are clearly misogynistic losers.

Do you really want to be taking the advice on your political beliefs from a man who thinks women are inherently inferior to men and lie about rape? 

Really?

Read More

Silent Sunday Round-Up: Inspiring and Rage Inducing Blogs Written by Women

What do I blame myself for by Barbara Carregonnen

Language Check: Gaslighting by PseudoDeviant

How to be the perfect victim: A How-To Guide for Good Girls at Week Woman

Campaign4consent at Jelly and Lilipop

The Myth of Shared Girlhood by Not a Zero Sum Game

Feminism with Fizz at Trouble and Strife

Picking Sides at One Woman's Thoughts

My Breasts and Page 3 at One Woman's Thoughts

White domination, challenge and the feminist movement: #solidarityisforwhitewomen and what it meant for me by Chitra Nagarajan

On race, feminism and activism: my speech for UK Feminista Summer School 2013 by Renie D Lodge

Read More

This is a hate crime:

I know some mansplainers' going to come along and tell me I'm over-reacting and I'm too stupid to understand the law on this issue. I've been blocking dudes all day who think sharing images of a 17 year old, who is legally too young to consent to an image of her engaged in fellatio, is a 'slut' who deserves all the abuse directed at her.

I'm sure they will agree with the Crown Attorney of Ontario that sending death threats to an autistic child is rude but not a hate crime.

Here's the thing: I don't actually give a shit what the law actually states in either case. Recording images of other people engaged in sexual acts, even if both are adults, without consent is sexual violence. Telling the family of a child with autism to "move away or euthanise him" is a hate crime. The fact that the law is on the side of violent, abusive arseholes is disgusting.

The law has been created by men to protect male interests. 

We need to rewrite our legal codes to protect victims of crimes and vulnerable people. 

Anyone who sends a letter like the above to a the family of a child with autism deserves to prosecuted to the full extent of the law as a hate crime.

Anything else is simply not good enough.

Read More

#slanegirl and why this isn't about female sexual desire

The #slanegirl hashtag refers to photographs of a teenage girl performing oral sex on at least two men in the audience of the Eminem concert at Slane Castle in Ireland. I do not know the exact details since it's hard to shift through the rumours, of which there are many, and I do not want to accidentally come across the images. I do believe that photographing anyone without their consent is wrong: I don't care if this is a child skipping in puddles, a celebrity picking their nose or Prince Harry naked. Taking photos without consent and then distributing them is unacceptable and feeds into bullying culture, particularly since most of the images shared without consent are of people in embarrassing situations.

This situation isn't just the sharing of embarrassing photos: it's sexual violence. Sharing photos of people engaged in sex, even if they are in public venue, is sexual violence. I don't care if that isn't the position of the law. It's what the law should be.  The distribution of images of sex without the full consent of all participants is sexual violence.

The fact that the photos are of a teenage girl makes this crime child sexual abuse since a teenager cannot legally consent to sex with an adult nor can they consent to their images being shared publicly. If it were images of an adult woman performing a sex act, it would still be a case of sexual violence. This is without investigating the issue of consent due to substance misuse or the fact that these images have been shared online.

Every single person who has shared or retweeted these images has committed sexual violence. The people who first put the images online deserve to be prosecuted, as does every single  person who has shared them including the people who claimed to be sharing them to demonstrate their "moral outrage" at the images being placed online. 

I hope every single person who has helped to repeatedly sexually violate this young girl gets prosecuted and ends up with a criminal record. 

That said, I am equally concerned about the positive discussions of the article #Slanegirl and the shaming of female desire on Twitter.* The article claims to be a challenge to the shaming of female sexuality but that's not quite what is happening in the piece. Ignoring the deliberate misrepresentation of radical feminist discourse of female sexuality**, which is disgraceful, the piece assumes that the young girl was an active participant in the act. As yet, we have no confirmation of this 'fact'. In fact current media reports put the young girl below the age of consent which would make this a story of child sexual abuse. It doesn't matter if the young girl was an active participant, the fact that adult men were involved makes this a crime. The Irish Independent is also suggesting that the young girl was sexually assaulted at the concert in an attack separate to that which is seen in the photos uploaded. This is a story of the sexual violation of a young girl. It is not the time to 'celebrate' female sexual desire.

Shaming women for enjoying sex is misogyny. It is about reinforcing patriarchal control of women's bodies and creating a dichotomy of good and bad women. However, whether or not individual women enjoy specific sexual acts cannot be separated from a political analysis of the treatment of women as a class. The bodies of women and children are objectified and pornified daily. Suggesting that adult men using the body of a teenage girl for their sexual gratification is something we should celebrate as an example of female sexual desire completely decontextualises sexual violence. It ignores the reality of women's lives and it belittles the pain this young girl is experiencing due to the abuse. It is rape culture.

Teenagers exploring their sexuality together is a different situation to adult men preying on young teenage girls. It is a constant in our culture and it occurs daily. The only difference now is that the authorities seem to be taking the abuse seriously. This is not to say that teenagers engaged in public sexual acts aren't problematic but that this situation involving a young child is not a celebration of female sexual desire. It's just another story of the abuse of a young girl by men and those who seek to minimise the responsibility of sexually abusive men.

This is rape culture.

A child has been sexually violated. Repeatedly. 

It is not a story of female sexual desire. This is a story of sexual violence.

* The comments underneath the article are a disgusting display of male violence, misogyny and the shaming of women. 

*This particular blogger has an obsession with radical feminism and has been caught on numerous occasions making outright lies about radical feminist theory. 

Read More

Marks & Spencer's uses Womanism to Sell Knickers: Or, why Google is your friend

Here's a hint to all those folks working in advertising: before you launch a new campaign, you should probably google just to make sure that new word you're "inventing" doesn't already mean something else. It's really not that hard: go to www.google.com and type in the word. Then hit search. 

This simple piece of information prevents all kinds of embarrassing booboos: say, for instance, using the term "womanism" to describe your company.

You could even go straight to Wikipedia and type in, for instance, womanism and discover that it's already an actual thing.

Even if you don't have a history of tokenism when employing non-white women in your advertising campaigns, it's probably best to stay from using a term that's existed for a couple of hundred years but whose current definition involves the acknowledgment of the erasure of women of colour from mainstream 1st and 2nd wave feminism. Not to mention their current marginalisation from media representations of feminism [see: Guardian's coverage of UK Feminista Summer School which focuses only on white woman as if no women of colour were involved].

Really, it's not that hard to double check to see if you're making a huge fuck-up in your new campaign. Surely, there's an unpaid intern running about with a smart phone who could check for you if you're too busy being a super-important advertiser to check whether or not you're supporting the White Supremacy. 

And, Vagenda, whilst I thank you for raising awareness of this disgraceful event, I do think the swipe at intersectional feminism was a tad unnecessary.

Read More

Proud to be an Extremist Feminist Activist

I had completely forgotten I wrote this response to a dreadful piece in the Huffington Post on the "Modern Face of Feminism". I wrote the rant in my joural whilst on the train to the best feminist weekend I've ever had [soon to be published as RadFem Couch Surfing]! It's a month late but I'm still so cranky at it so I'm publishing it anyways: 

This is the delightful conclusion to a rather dire attempt to start a debate on what it means to be a feminist in the newly emerging 4th wave [if you actually believe this is a thing]:

Modern-day feminism has multiple facets – from populism and pop culture to new-media and new activism – but it would seem the common denominator is inclusivity. No longer the preserve of extreme activists and intellectual theorists, feminism is shedding its stigma and going mainstream.

Feminism's apparently going Mainstream and dumping the extreme activists and intellectual theorists.

I just have a few, shall we say, quibbles here. What, precisely, is an "extremist activist"? Is it a feminist who campaigned to make rape in marriage illegal? Or, the feminists who campaigned for refuges for women fleeing violent male partners? Or, the feminists campaigning for rape crisis centres? Equal Pay? Affordable childcare? Maternity pay? 

Were suffragettes extremists for fighting for the right to vote? They were certainly labelled as such a 100 years ago. Feminists fighting for the Equal Pay act were considered as extremists by many, as were the feminists campaigning to raise the age of consent to protect children from adult male sexual predators. Hell, Caroline Criado-Perez has been described as an extremist for forcing the Bank of England to recognise already existing legislation. I can't quite work out what 'extreme' means when campaigning to force the government to recognise its own legislation.

What makes an activist an "extremist"? Is it their methods of activism or their goals? Who gets to decide what feminist activism counts as extremism? The men who denied women suffrage? The men who created a legal system which didn't recognise rape in marriage since women's number one duty as a possession was to fulfil their husband's every 'need'.  If feminists are extremists for fighting for the legal rights of women within the law, what does that say about our culture? Why are still perpetuating damaging myths labelling feminists as "extreme" when feminists have never campaigned for anything more than the legal recognition that women are human too and deserve to live a life without being subjected to male violence.

As for the brief snide attack on feminist academics and theorists, well, that was clearly written by someone who hadn't bothered to read much of their own university required reading. A lot of academic writing is drivel: see almost every book on history written by white men and pretty much the entire genre of post-modernism which seems to be predicated on an inability to use words with less than 7 syllables. Feminist academics are researching domestic violence, rape, women's history, genocide, maternal mortality. They aren't exactly The New Adventures of the Famous Five and I'm not sure the Dr Seuss' Tales of Women's Experience in Genocide is, shall we say, the kindest way to write about women's lived experiences. 

I honestly get so bored of these articles on feminism which are either shrieking about how we live in a post-feminist world [because 2 women a week in the UK who are murdered by their male partners don't count at all] or are yowling about a New Wave of Feminism. It would be nice if the media stopped publishing this drivel as "news" and started publishing factually-correct articles on feminism. It's not like the Huffington Post would have to look hard for great feminist writers. They've already got Soraya Chemaly.


So, I'm proud to be an Extremist Feminist Activists since I believe that universal suffrage and whiny men no longer being allowed to treat their wives and children as chattel are, you know, positive improvements in humanity. 

Read More

Silent Sunday Round-Up: Inspiring and Rage Inducing Blogs witten by women

This little Mummy went to market at One Woman's Thoughts

Ariel Castro is not misunderstood by Allison Boydell at Everyday Victim Blaming

On Hugo Schwyzer, White Supremacist Mainstream Feminism and Its Abuse of Women of Colour at Gradient Lair

The end is nigh and the proof lies in breast cancer awareness campaigns at Feminist Current

Feminist, Ally or Cunt: which one are you? at GoddessDeeva

Is Masculinity to blame for men who murder their children by Joanne Bailey

Psychoanalyst victim blames: it takes two to gaslight by @LizJ73 at Everyday Victim Blaming

The press blogger, the feminist campaigner and Jack of Kent at It's Not a Zero Sum Game

Liberals want more lies in Lovelace at Feminist Current

Simone Jabakhanji - Infertility, suicide and male violence by K Ingala Smith

Five Ways that staying safe costs women by Soraya Chemaly at Salon

Read More

@misogyny_online : A Response

The other day I blogged about what I see as concerted attacks on the twitter account @misogyny_online. I blogged in anger and published without pausing to reread. My choice of words was harsh but I was angry and distressed watching a group of women who were trying to help other women get caught in the middle of a political discussion that they did not understand [or even know about].

@misogyny_online is not my twitter account but I do know several of the women involved and I can see how hurt and distressed they are. And, this hurts me. I don't like seeing women I love in pain. I don't like watching my sisters, who are only trying to help other women, have their efforts rubbished for walking into a long-standing political disagreement that they were not fully aware of. 

And, so, my words were unnecessarily harsh and many of the women who I labelled "attackers" had no intention of actually doing that [although I would like to point out how many trans*activists, none of whom are trans*, were clearly harassing in order to make trouble. I don't need to name since it's always the same group of women who identify as 'cis' who like to cause fights by co-opting the political struggles of other women as their own and then speak over the very people they claim to be helping]. However, when numerous people are tweeting the same thing at one person [or one person making multiple tweets about the same issue] it does feel like an attack. This may not be the intention of the person tweeting but it is how it feels.

We need to take more care, especially on social media, of how other women are feeling. We cannot work from the assumption that the woman we are talking to are not vulnerable. We cannot assume that the women on the other side of the computer have taken a specific stance because of malice or internalised misogyny. Sometimes women are struggling to keep their heads above water that they do react  in a way which is anti-women. Sometimes women are struggling with internalised misogyny and don't understand the effects their words will have on other women. And, sometimes women are just being malicious.

But, we cannot know, for certain, what position women are coming from, especially if we have never spoken or interacted with them before. 

When we react with anger or by using abusive words, we have no idea what type of response we are triggering in women. We cannot know if the words we use are similar to that of an abusive father or husband. We cannot know if the woman experienced extreme bullying as a child and is still trying to deal with that. We cannot replicate patterns of male violence with our language or our behaviour.

We have to be better than this.

It isn't fair and it will never be fair whilst we are living in a capitalist-patriarchy but we need to keep reminding ourselves that we have no idea who the women behind social media accounts really are. The only assumption we can make is that almost every woman we speak to has been a victim of male violence: whether that is street harassment, rape or domestic violence we cannot know. But, nearly every woman we speak to will be desperately trying to remain sane in a culture which hates women. 

We are all struggling and we all make mistakes. Our politics may be different but we need to focus on the common enemy: male violence. 

I apologise for the harm my harsh words caused the other day. I am not going to remove the blog because my point still stands. We need to acknowledge the good intentions of other women. We need to acknowledge that women are human and make mistakes and we need to acknowledge that most of us are victims of male violence desperately trying to fight for our sisters.

Women are not perfect and we need to stop expecting perfection from each other.

Read More

White Male Commits Sex Crime but We Should Feel Sorry For Him:

A male teacher at a Sidney high school has been arrested for filming up the skirts of several of his female students as well women at the local train station.  

Yet, according to the principal of the high school where Robert Emmett taught, we are supposed to feel compassion for Emmett and his family. Not the women Emmett sexually assaulted by taking sexual photographs without permission but the man who committed the offence. We are supposed to have sympathy for the "emotional devastation" Emmett feels at being arrested for illegally filming at least 3 of his teenage students. 

The only people I have any sympathy for are the women and teenage girls that Emmett sexually assaulted and his children who have to live with the knowledge of their father's crimes.

Frankly, if a teacher at my children's school was arrested for such a crime and the principal was wittering on about the "emotional devastation" of the perpetrator, I would be removing them from the school immediately.

A principal who absolves a male member of staff of personal responsibility for sexual violence is not a man who deserves to keep his job, nor is he a man who should be trusted around teenage girls. 

I have to wonder about what the principal believes is acceptable behaviour with female pupils if he is so willing to ignore the safety of his female students.

Read More

Hugo Schwyzer is not a Feminist Redux:

Last Friday, Hugo Schwyzer, the so-called feminist, had what appears to be a very public meltdown on Twitter having claimed to be leaving social media forever because of mean, nasty feminists holding him publicly accountable for the violence he has perpetrated against women. I did not write about Schwyzer because I am still not sure that he genuinely had a meltdown or if the past two weeks have been nothing more than his normal manipulative, sociopathic behaviour. I didn't write about his recent behaviour because I didn't want to give him any more attention.

I was wrong. 

I was guilty of that which I railed against last year [below]: of ignoring Schwyzer's racism. And, it never even occurred to me that that was what I was doing. 

Yesterday, I witnessed a number of women of colour, including @thetrudz, calling out the white feminists who have supported Schwyzer over the years. And, I witnessed the silence of those very feminists. Those who did answer said what I had thought: that writing about Schwyzer just encouraged his manipulative behaviour. I made this about Schwyzer without thinking of the women who Schwyzer has hurt. They are who we should be writing and thinking about: the women who have been manipulated and abused by Schwyzer. I ignored the racism inherent in the worship of Schwyzer and I ignored my own role in perpetuating the white supremacist patriarchy by supporting the silencing of my sisters voices.

In ignoring Schwyzer, I had ignored the lives of women he has abused, many of whom are women of colour. For this I am sorry.

@thetrudz has storified her tweets here.

I wrote this last year and I stand by it. 

Normally, I'm not one for telling people whether or not they can self-define as feminists. I think it's rude and pointless. We all come to feminism from different perspectives and are all at different points of our feminist journey. It's counter-productive to insist on the right to label, or not, others. That said, there some pretty basic tenets of feminism that aren't negotiable. Perpetrators of domestic violence, rape and other forms of MVAW aren't feminists. I do think it is possible for men who express anti-feminist statements to change. I don't think violent men can change enough to ever be feminists. 

This is why I am genuinely perplexed by the fawning that Hugo Schwyzer receives. He has consistently minimised his history of violence against women. Schwyzer writes of being an "accidental rapist" and"accidentally endangering" a former partner in a murder-suicide attempt.

I have no time for men who seek to minimise their personal history of MVAW by claiming personality disorders or drug addiction. Being a feminist means taking responsibility for one's actions and the consequences therein. Claiming that an episode of MVAW was "drug-fuelled" isn't taking responsibility. It is minimising one's responsibility. There is a huge difference between the statements "I am a recovering drug addict but my addiction does not minimise my culpability for the violence I committed" and "it was accidental VAW because I was stoned".

One is forgivable because it involves genuine remorse. The other is not.

Real male feminist/ feminist allies get this. They understand that their behaviour has no excuse, that it would remain unforgivable for many women and they don't insist on trying to get women to forgive them. They take responsibility for their actions and words quietly and without requiring cookies and blowjobs for being good boys. 

Hugo Schwyzer needs to start listening to women. He needs to start acknowledging that there are valid reasons that women find him frightening and then he needs to stop trying to intimidate them into silence. When he stops trying to silence women, I might be willing to engage with his work. As long as he continues to embrace the silencing of women who disagree with him, Schwyzer will never be a feminist. 

And, let's be realistic here, if Mike Tyson, who has a similar history of domestic violence and rape, were to start referring to himself as a feminist whilst blithering on about hegemonic masculinity, no feminists would be lining up behind him to stroke his ego and insist on his admittance to feminist spaces. We'd be laughing our asses off at him. Schwyzer is allowed in because he's white. That's a huge problem that white feminists need to address because we are silencing our sisters by allowing Schwyzer to continue pontificating as if he were the Messiah of Feminism.

Read More

The attacks on @misogyny_online

In the past week, I've seen attacks on @misogyny_online by both radical feminists and trans*activists. I am finding these attacks both distressing and, frankly, utterly ridiculous.

I am not a member of @misogyny_online although I do know the person who started the account. I am involved with the blog I will not put up with this which does host some of the tweets submitted to @misogyny_online. I am not the person who started the blog although I am now listed as an "author" on the blog. As with @misogyny_online, the creator of I will not put up with this wishes to remain anonymous. Considering the amount of abusive tweets directed at both women, I'm not surprised they wish to remain anonymous.

I wish I had never become involved with the blog because I am utterly disgusted at the attacks on both the blog and the twitter account. Both were started by woman horrified and angry at the violence and misogynistic attacks on Caroline Criado-Perez. The first post on I will not put up with this was a selection of the tweets Criado-Perez was receiving. The first tweet by misogyny_online was a misogynistic slur directed at @bugbrennan by @SixOfCaprica. @misogyny_online was promptly attacked by a group of women who identify as 'cis' and who claim to be transactivists. Two days of accusations of transphobia resulting in @misogyny_online writing a womanfesto which was immediately written off as lesbophobic. These are women with no knowledge of the history and critical differences in theory between radical feminists and trans*activists but who have berated and belittled by both.

Two women were horrified at the treatment of another woman and stood up to do something about it. One woman started a blog to record the abuse and another woman started a twitter account to record the abuse. 

Two women who tried to help another woman and who have been treated like dirt for two weeks because of it.

Because they wanted to do something to show their support for Caroline Criado-Perez, they have been harassed, insulted and generally treated like shit. 

My politics are different than those of the members of @misogyny_online but disagreeing with someone's political position is not an acceptable reason to harass them.

For fucks sake, they are trying to help. Two women trying to help and all they get is whining and harassment.

None of you attacking know who is behind either account. You don't know their politics, their lives, their experiences and you have no fucking idea whether or not they are vulnerable. Instead of asking questions or trying to support or helping, you are attacking women.

Well, I do know who the women are and neither of them deserve the abuse that has been thrown at them this week. Frankly, no woman deserves the abuse directed at them

I know writing this will result in subtweeting and attacks on me but that won't be a fucking change will it. It's what always happens. Goddess forbid any woman try to act like a human being with compassion and empathy and a mind of their own. Either we fall in line or we're treated like scum.

Oppression doesn't give anyone a free pass to act like an asshole and it doesn't give anyone the right to attack other women because you disagree with them.

@misogyny_online and I will not put up with this were started by two women to record the misogynistic violence directed at other women. Instead, they are being attacked by trans*activists and radical feminists.

Read More

A Night for Lewis

[Reblogged from A Night out for Lewis]

Tickets are now on sale at £20 per person and include arrival drink, buffet, disco. We have an amazing amount of raffle prizes that have been donated

2 night Bed & Breakfast at DeVere New Place Hotel
Man Utd Shirt Signed by Rio Ferdinand (Auction)
Watch By Sekonda (Auction)
£30 John Lewis Vouchers by Louise Gunn
family skate for up to 5 people by Planet Ice Gosport
One Hour Donutting Session by Alpine Snowsports Southampton
2 family swim vouchers by Gosport Leisure Centre
1 month complimentary membership for 2 by Everyone Active – Fareham Leisure Centre
2 kid/teen or toddler sessions by Playzone Portsmouth
1 family voucher by SeaCity Museum Southampton
4 free discover sessions (kayak/canoe/climb or archery) by Woodmill Outdoor Activities Centre
2 tickets to Jack & The Beanstalk Pantomime at Fernham Hall Fareham
8 x 25 people passes by Ministry of Paintball (Auction)
8 x 2 people passes by Ministry of Paintball
8 x 5 people passes by Ministry of Paintball
Cupcakes by Cupcakes’mmm’Cookies
Dimplex Studio G 2.5kW Speaker style ceramic tower heater with 76° oscillation by GDC Group
Morphy Richards Iron by GDC Group
25% off at Grand Cafe in Southampton
3 course lunch for 2 at Hotel Terraavina
Dinner for 2 at Tylnely Hall
Dinner for 2 at Elmers Court
Signed One Direction photo (AUCTION)
4 Tickets to the Aladdin Pantomime at The Pavilion Theatre, Bournemouth
2 vouchers for access to Premier Enclosure at Fontwell Race Course
Lotus Formula 1 Shirt
Various Oriflame Products
2 tickets to Havant Comedy Club
Months family swim pass at Fleming Park Leisure Centre
2 complimentary tickets to Harbour Lights Picture House
£20 Gift Voucher for Winchester Hotel & Spa
£10 Voucher for Create A Pic Prints
£20 voucher for Perfect Picture Canvases
Signed Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy Radio Show Programme (AUCTION)
Signed Sarah Millican Programme (AUCTION)
Signed Julian Clary Programme (AUCTION)
Signed Hairy Bikers Programme (AUCTION)

with more still coming in!

Raffle Tickets will be on sale from end Aug/beg september!

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SHARE INVITE AND COME!!

Read More

Silent Sunday: Round Up of Inspiring and Rage Inducing Blogs by Women

How anti-blackness shapes heterosexual Black men's dating preferences by Gradient Lair

"Colourblind" friendships don't exist. Line in the sand moments on race remind me of this at Gradient Lair

#UKBA Papers please. #Racist Van at Media Diversity UK

Acting White: Bounty and Coconuts at Media Diversity UK

Fight violence with love by Roseannastar

Guilt at One Woman's Thoughts

Agnostic Atheist, But Not Interested In White Supremacist Atheism at Gradient Lair

My Response To 2 Comments On My Essay Where I Reject White Supremacist Atheism at Gradient Lair

Ignore this post if you're not on twitter at Not a Zero Sum Game

Myths and Beliefs that explode my head by Rebecca Mott

Sweeping it under the carpet: depression, prozac and Giles Fraser by Glosswatch

The Butterflies or unpeeling the politics of love: part 1 at Witchwind

Grooming and pimping into heterosexuality: the politics of love part II at Witchwind

Read More

Blame the perpetrator, not the victim:

The following was originally published as a twitlonger by Everyday Victim Blaming. I'm posting because it is an important piece of writing that should not get lost in the Twitter-verse: 

I am another EVB volunteer, taking over from this morning's debate regarding this tweet from @mwilliamsthomas :

"The story about the 12yr girl being raped in London in early hours of Sunday morning is horrific. But what was she doing out at that time?"

The subsequent debate and defence of this tweet has troubled me greatly so I have asked to share may thoughts.

Regarding Mark's tweet, speaking as a child survivor, I need to emphasize that if I were that 12yr old girl reading that tweet – I would assume that either myself or those who were responsible for my care were being blamed instead of the people raping me. The focus from the perpetrators is shifted immediately. This is NOT ok.

The person responsible for rape is the rapist. Some of us had wonderful parenting – it didn’t stop us being raped. Many survivors are raped in their home. I share concerns regarding a 12 year old being out late at night. But surely the focus on this particular story – and where our energies should focus - is the fact that a child was raped.

Victim blaming can be subtle – as can be shifting the focus onto others. The only person responsible for raping this young girl is the rapist. Questions regarding caring responsibilities/safeguarding should be asked – but they shouldn’t be your biggest concern. It shouldn’t be your first question if you truly are victim-centered. This is BASIC.

Furthermore, people who support/work with victims can victim-blame. As can victims themselves. Working for victims rights does NOT make you immune from victim-blaming.

Please LISTEN to the voices of victims and survivors when we ASK you to reflect on your language and behaviour. Don't let defence be your first response - try to reflect why/how you may be victim-blaming. Thank you.

Read More

White Dude Has Tantrum As Woman Behaves Inappropriately

I was screencapping the abuse directed at Caroline Criado-perez when I came across the following conversation. It still making me giggle: the misogyny, the arrogance, the entitlement and the sheer gaul of this man [who I've never of before] telling off Criado-Perez for not behaving as he thought she should is just unbelievable. 

Hanrahan had a mini tantrum on twitter because Criado-Perez didn't boycott twitter on the day that Caitlin Moran decided everyone should boycott twitter because of misogynistic abuse directed at Criado-Perez. Now, I get that this is a little bit complicated but I missed the memo where  Moran got to decide what other feminists did or did not do on their Sunday. I definitely saw Moran calling for a boycott. I don't remember Moran pulling a sermon on the Mount thing and threatening all women to participate on pain of death by lightening.

But, hey, Hanrahan didn't let the little fact that Criado-Perez was clear that she did not want to participate in the boycott stop him from whining about her ungrateful behaviour. Honestly, he did everything but demand Criado-Perez sit in the naughty corner with a dunces hat. 

The tweets below aren't in proper order but the essence of his whining is quite clear:

\

Read More

Expose: David Cameron is the Everyday Victim Blaming Project!

I know this isn't exactly shocking news. After all, Cameron has already confused his job of Prime Minister of the United Kingdom with being Kronos. It's not really that far of a stretch for him to think he's also running the Everyday Victim Blaming Project. 

Tonight, Cameron has managed to imply that he personally convinced the Attorney General to review the sentence of convicted child sex offender Neil Wilson for being unduly lenient; that Cameron has personally convinced the CPS to remove the prosecutor Robert Colover from cases involving sexual offences pending review; and has implemented a judicial review of the judge Nigel Peters. How Cameron found the time in between destroying the NHS, removing the Welfare State and trashing the economy is quite beyond me. 

Cameron seems to think that the British public are all completely stupid and won't notice the fact that the Everyday Victim Blaming feminist collective have been tweeting, blogging and posting about this case since it came to their attention on Monday afternoon. Cameron thinks no one will notice that it isn't his name on the change.org petition. He's also managed to miss the nearly 40 000 people who signed the petition because they were angry at a 13 year old child being blamed for being a victim of sexual violence. 

Of course, the media is already colluding with Cameron in his delusions but that's hardly a bombshell since the BBC has barely managed to actually report the complete destruction of the NHS. Frankly, Cameron and his posse of Titan-wannabees can have all the delusions they would like because we know the truth.

Today's announcements have nothing to do with Cameron and everything to do with feminist activism.

It was the women of Everyday Victim Blaming who made this case national news.

It was women and men standing up for a child victim of sexual violence which made the media care about this case.

This is what feminist activism is: kicking the shit out of the Patriarchy whilst they pretend it was their idea.

Read More

A 13 year old girl is a "Sexual Predator" because she was sexually assaulted.

This is the point we have arrived at: a 13 year old child is sexually assaulted by an adult male and the judge and prosecutor both hold the child responsible for being sexually assaulted. According to Court New UK, the judge labelled the child a "sexual predator" who "egged on" her abuser. Neil Wilson, who is 41 years old, pled guilty and received a suspended sentence despite sexually assaulting a child and being found in possession of extreme pornographic images depicting both child sexual abuse and bestiality.

A 41 year old man gets a suspended sentence for assaulting a child and she gets labelled a sexual predator.

Anyone who doubts there is a war on women in our culture is suffering from a terminal case of cognitive dissonance. 

Everyday Victim Blaming have started a petition here. Below is the text:

Yesterday, a man walked free from Snaresbrook Crown Court despite pleading guilty to ‘sexual activity with a child’ after the prosecutor Robert Colover and judge Nigel Peters described the thirteen year-old victim as a “sexual predator”. 

I'm a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. I could have been that 13 year old girl who the judge and prosecutor descrbed as 'predatory'. Now, I work with other women who have survived similar experiences. I have seen first hand how this kind of victim blaming prevents women from coming forward and protects men who commit these crimes. 

It’s unacceptable that the Crown Prosecutor - the person who this young girl was relying on to help get her justice - used this kind of language in court. It’s a sad fact that this kind of attitude is commonplace within society and the legal establishment. We need to make a stand and send a clear message: It’s never the child’s fault. 

I’m calling on the Crown Prosecution Service to look at the language used by Robert Colover and meet urgently with our organisation and other groups working with victims of rape and sexual assault to ensure this never happens again.

Please sign and share this petition. We need to stand up and protect our children from the violent sexual predators who abuse them and the men support sexual predators by minimising personal responsibility.

If you think a 13 year old child is somehow responsible for their sexual abuse, then you are as guilty as the men who perpetrated the violence. You help support a rape culture which dehumanises women and children. You help make it easier for children and women to be sexually abused.

This case doesn't just demonstrate the guilt of Neil Wilson. It demonstrates the complicity of the Crown Prosecution Services and the judge in the continuing sexual abuse of the child.

You can make a formal complaint about the low crown court sentence here and a formal judicial complaint here.

POSTSCRIPT: Since i wrote this piece, the Attorney General has agreed to review this case for an unduly lenient sentence. The CPS has also announced that they will not be using this particular prosecuting attorney for any cases involving sexual violence pending a review. There also appears to be a judicial review of the actions of the judge as well.

The feminist activism of Everyday Victim Blaming project is directly responsible for this outcome. They lobbied for the national press to notice this miscarriage of justice. They started the petition at change.org and it was supporters of EVB who complained to the Attorney General and CPS. This is a victory for feminism, not that you would notice in the mainstream press who are busy congratulating themselves and David Cameron for doing absolutely nothing.

Read More

Men Who Just Don't Get Misogyny But Think They Do

Last night, I tweeted some examples of misogynistic abuse to the new twitter account: @misogyny_online. They've been collating images of some of the abuse directed at Caroline Criado-Perez in the past two weeks. I took just 15 minutes and trawled through some of the messages Caroline received yesterday. There was the usual threats of extreme violence and abusive messages and one totally clueless man genuinely suggesting that Caroline shut down her account for a few days because that's what he does with trolls. I forwarded this tweet to @misogyny_online as a demonstration of "men who just don't get the reality of misogyny but think they do" as this group of men are as harmful as those deliberately sending abusive messages because they minimise the reality of misogynistic violence whilst simultaneously blaming women for being victims of male violence. 

I didn't screencap @Slinky_Anthony 's responses to me last night and he's since closed his account so I cannot share what he posted at me. His response to my retweet went straight through the usual male response when challenged:

• The "how dare you challenge me"whine
• The "how dare you be so aggressive" whine
• "Don't you understand I'm trying to help" whine
• The "I'm a supporter of Caroline and I was totally being nice" whine 
• "You're a bad feminist for being mean to me by disagreeing with me" whine
• "You're a feminazi because you disagree with me" range of insults
• Tweets twitter demanding I be suspended for "ranting" 
• Brings in a female friend as evidence he's not an asshole
• Tweeted Caroline to whine some more
• More tweets demanding I be suspended

At this point, I blocked him. 

I've screencapped my tweets to him so you can decide for yourself whether or not I was acting like an aggressive, mean feminazi by challenging him. 

This dude may not have tweeted Caroline rape or death threats but what he did was support those men who did by silencing Caroline. And, frankly, considering yesterday was #shoutingback, it was somewhat ironic that this dude started the day by suggesting Caroline log off twitter so the trolls would stop.

Telling a woman to be quiet in the face of harassment serves only to support their abusers. It tells abusive men that it is acceptable to shut a woman up by threatening to rape or murder her. This is not the action of a man who understands the reality of the misogynistic abuse women face every single day. It's the actions of a man who equates multiple threats of rape with some whiny teenagers being rude to him.

If you are genuinely a male feminist ally, tell the abusive men to shut up and leave twitter; not the women they are abusing. 

If you are genuinely a male feminist ally, listen when a woman tells you you're actions are silencing.

If you react to a woman calling you on your behaviour with whinging, insults and threats to have their account suspended, you aren't a male feminist ally. It really is that simple.

Read More