Another Day, Another Stupid Article About Feminism

It's the blame game again: everything which is wrong with society is the fault of Feminism for Just Not Being Good Enough. This time it's the Guardian reproducing some dire twaddle from the Associated Press. Now, I'm not going to pretend feminism is perfect because it isn't. After all, feminists are only human. We make mistakes. We make compromises that we shouldn't.  We don't always hear what our sisters are telling us.

This is because we are human and humans make mistakes.

And, yes, it would appear that feminism is an exclusively middle class movement. If you don't bother to actually look at the gains that feminism has achieved. Last time I checked, working women have the vote too. Rape in marriage is illegal, regardless of class. It was working class women who fought for the equal pay act; as feminists. We have maternity leave. And, until today, had a fairly decent welfare system designed to protect women. It wasn't feminists who destroyed the welfare system which has disproportionately affected the lives of working class women.

Here's the thing: the problem facing working class women isn't feminism. It's the Capitalist-Patriarchy which place women, especially working women, at the bottom of the pile.  It's the Capitalist-Patriarchy, under the guise of the ConDems, which gave tax breaks for childcare to middle class women and not poor women. Feminists are the ones standing up and calling the ConDems out on this. Feminists are the ones agitating for universal 24-hour subsidised {or free} childcare.

It's the Capitalist-Patriarchy which devalues women's labour within the home and underpays all employment deemed as "women's work" like childcare, nursing, teaching, and cleaning. Feminists believe in a universal living wage for everyone. Feminists fought for the welfare state and are heart-broken at its destruction. We know how much harm this will do to women.

The only way you could conclude that feminism focuses only on gender equality for middle class women is if you don't understand that feminism is a political theory which fights for the liberation of women: all women.

The real problem for working class white women are middle class and wealthy white MEN who don't want to give up their privilege and actively harm women by firing them whilst pregnant; an action which is supposed to be illegal but happens every day. It is men whining about women "stealing" their jobs. It is men, since most of parliament are male, who voted in the destruction of the British Welfare State and who destroyed our NHS. These are the things which harm working class women.

More importantly:

ALL WOMEN WORK. 

This is a fundamental tenet of feminism: not all women work in paid employment but we all work. This idea that women don't: that would be misogyny.

FFS, all women are affected by the failure of the Equal Pay Act to be implemented properly.

And, yeah, we make mistakes. Who doesn't? But, this idea that working class women are actively being harmed by feminism is misogynistic bullshit.

Read More

A Fate Worse Than Debt

By Heather Downs

The Coalition government offers nothing but more propaganda about ‘paying-off the national debt’, giving the perfect excuse to cut public spending and destroy the Welfare State. Around 70% of Coalition cuts so far have come from women. The cause of women’s equality is being pushed back 50 years.

Public sector cuts hit women the hardest.  The public sector has a better record on equality in pay and opportunities. Women make up most public sector workers, so cuts in jobs, pensions, and the pay-freeze, affect women more.  Services specifically for women, such as Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis, are being cut.  Refuges are turning away 230 women every day in Britain. Domestic Violence affects one-in-four women; 19 thousand women flee their homes every year.  Every week two women are killed by current or ex-partners in Britain.  That’s more deaths than soldiers killed in Afghanistan.   Women’s Aid estimate1 in 4 women are subjected to domestic violence in their lifetime and 1 in 4 are victims of sexual violence. If you know more than 4 women, you know someone who has experienced either sexual or domestic violence or will do so at some time in their lives.  Rape Crisis say only 1 in 10 rapes are reported.  Most victims know their attacker - less than 1% see them convicted.

Women of all classes and races are affected, but those who have least money of their own, are the least able to escape the violence.  They depend on refuges and free counselling to help them escape.  These services are under threat from government cuts.  Although Rape Crisis and Women’s Aid remain the most frequently used sources of support, funding is a constant challenge. Coalition cuts threaten the survival of these vital services.  The Condems pay hypocritical lip service to women’s equality but their cuts fall most heavily on women’s jobs, services and pensions. Cuts affect council housing and housing benefit making it more difficult to rebuild and heal disrupted, damaged lives. 

Women do the caring for free when services to the elderly, disabled, children and other vulnerable groups are cut and women’s jobs are lost. Sure Start children’s centres have been cut despite government promises.  Day centres for adults are under threat.  The childcare allowance of Tax Credits has been cut from 80% to 70%, making work unaffordable for many women if there is any paid employment available.  Child Benefit was a universal benefit paid to mothers as a way our whole society could support families with children. New means-testing only affects the middle class earning over £50,000 now – but an important principle has been broken.  Raising the tax threshold will not help low-paid people who don’t pay income-tax.  Raising the qualifying limit for Working Tax Credits will cost £1000’s to people unable to increase their hours.

Disabled women are at increased risk of domestic and sexual violence.  Given what we know about financial abuse and economic dependence being features of domestic violence, it is disturbing to learn that disabled people with partners earning over £7,500 will not receive any benefits once the one year time limit on ESA (Employment Support Allowance) is reached.  As Social Care becomes means tested, more people will depend on family members, including 'Young Carers' as the unpaid chidren of disabled parents ae euphemistically described.  All the worst aspects of the institution of the nuclear family, amplified.  If you don't like that institution, they'll put you in the other kind; cheaper, more efficient decimation of the rights and independence of disabled people

The original plan for Universal Credit would have closed all women’s refuges – that cut was defeated and women’s refuges are now exempt.  We achieved that by effective campaigning.  But now we face a new threat. Women’s Aid says the Welfare Reform Act and the introduction of Universal Credit is a huge step backwards for equality; it will deprive a woman of independent income including tax credits paid to her as a mother. As a result, women will have less control over household income.  Financial abuse is a common feature of domestic violence.  Women’s Aid has serious concerns about plans to pay Universal Credit to one member of the household.  It is estimated that in 80% of cases, it will be paid to the man of the house. Women will be left  dependent, with no money or support to escape violent men.

So what can we do?  Of course, we can get educated about what is actually happening.  We can use resources like False Economy, The Fawcett Society, Spartacus Report.   We can resist the propaganda war against benefits, public spending, the ‘all in this together’ lies of those who will never be ‘in’ anything with us.  Their real aim is to get back to the natural order of life before the Welfare State, the NHS, social security, equal pay,  the minimum wage. 

We can support others in their efforts to defend our living standards.  Public sector strikes are inconvenient, but not as inconvenient as the result of the race to the bottom in pension provision - led by non-unionised private sector employers whose own tax-free pensions are supplemented by obscene bonuses.  We can join with others in our community anti-cuts groups defending hospitals, libraries, day centres.  Coalition of Resistance, Keep our NHS Public and Campaign against Fees and Cuts have local branches.

This is a fight between two visions of society – one ruled by the free market, where atomised individuals take sole responsibility for themselves alone, competing for scarce resources, where the Welfare State is reduced to a safety net for the desperate; and the other based on social cohesion, and shared provision for the vicissitudes of life.  Aneurin Bevan on his creation of the NHS said it would only last as long as people were prepared to fight for it.  That fight is here.

Read More

Maria Miller's Visit to Mumsnet Didn't Go to Well

Not, that I had any thoughts that it would go well considering the Minister for Women is an uterus-bothering buckethead. But, we are Mumsnet. We have a reputation for intelligence, compassion and not putting up with bullshit. And, all Miller had was spin and bullshit. It was never going to go well.

I think this exchange between Miller and I is an accurate demonstration most of the chat: I ask a question, she lies, I call her a liar and she agrees with me. It was embarrassing and summed up best by Bonsoir's : 

<Thank you Maria, that was a really clear demonstration that you understand absolutely nothing about the issues for which you have responsibility. We know where we stand with you >

And, the fact that the Minister of Women wasn't aware of the Mumsnet campaign for a Miscarriage Code of Practise. Make of that what you will.

MariaMillerMP Thu 22-Nov-12 13:14:14

StewieGriffinsMom

How do you square your government's policies on women, particularly the destruction of the CSA and the benefits system, with being the Minister for Women?

We've got a strong set of policies to support women, including supporting 2 million of the lowest paid out of income tax altogether - most of whom are women - and extending help with childcare for those that work less than 16 hours a week. A first for government!

StewieGriffinsMom Thu 22-Nov-12 13:29:22

That doesn't answer my question about the CSA. The reason many single parent families headed by women live in poverty is because of men refusing to pay maintenance and a government that doesn't give a crap.

The cuts to housing benefit, income support and tax credits have disproportionately affected women forcing more women and children into poverty. 

The idea that your government is somehow helping these women is, simply, a lie. You have done anything but.

Instead, you are rewarding men who financially neglect their children.

MariaMillerMP Thu 22-Nov-12 13:35:32

StewieGriffinsMom

That doesn't answer my question about the CSA. The reason many single parent families headed by women live in poverty is because of men refusing to pay maintenance and a government that doesn't give a crap.

The cuts to housing benefit, income support and tax credits have disproportionately affected women forcing more women and children into poverty. 

The idea that your government is somehow helping these women is, simply, a lie. You have done anything but.

Instead, you are rewarding men who financially neglect their children.

StewieGriffinsMom, you are absolutely right. That's exactly why we are reforming the CSA - to make it work better in getting children the support they need.

StewieGriffinsMom Thu 22-Nov-12 13:44:00

"StewieGriffinsMom, you are absolutely right. That's exactly why we are reforming the CSA - to make it work better in getting children the support they need."

Are you agreeing with me that you are lying about your government's plans to alleviate women's poverty?

Or, are you agreeing that CSA is in complete shambles following your government's destruction of it? And, that your "fixing" has actually made it worse for resident parents?

Read More

The Right to Abortion on Demand

Yesterday was the International Day of Action for Safe and Legal Abortion. Whilst abortion is legal in the UK, it is not available on demand.* Abortion can only be carried out in the first 24 weeks of pregnancy if two doctors agree that "abortion would cause less damage to a woman's physical or mental health than continuing with the pregnancy". That's only if you're lucky enough to live on the mainland. Abortion isn't available in Northern Ireland. There are some obvious exceptions to the 24 week rule involving saving the life of the mother or preventing grave or serious injury to her; as well as the more difficult issue of aborting a fetus due to disability.** 

I find any limits on abortion problematic. I think all women should have access to abortion when they want it without having to faff about finding two doctors who agree to the procedure. Having to find two doctors just extends the unwanted pregnancy unnecessarily causing added stress. The right to decide what does and does not happen to one's own body is a fundamental issue of self-determination. I believe that women have the right to abortion at any point in their pregnancy; after all 91% of abortions in 2011 were before 13 weeks. There are very, very few abortions after the 24 week point and, no, the Sarah Catt case isn't representative of anything. She was denied an abortion and therefore chose to self-abort. Catt was also not convicted under the abortion laws; instead she was found guilty of an archaic law from the mid 19th century. Women are perfectly capable of deciding if and when they need an abortion without having to discuss it with two doctors; doctors who may or may not be anti-choicers.

The language around accessing abortion itself infantilises women. We can only have an abortion if someone else tells us we can. Not because we want one. Not because we need one. But, because someone else deems it medically necessary. Abortion should be available to women at any point in the pregnancy because the woman deems it necessary and not because someone else gave her permission to do so. I also dislike the rhetoric around "good" abortions for victims of rape versus "bad" abortions for women who have had the temerity to have consensual sex without wanting to get pregnant. Any attempts to create a hierarchy of acceptable reasons for women to have abortions just limits women's choices. It is the heart of woman-hating. This is without getting into the fact that many women have to access abortions for financial reasons. It's hardly a choice if you are having an abortion because you can not afford to feed a child. That is why we have a welfare state [or did before the ConDems destroyed it]. Limiting access to abortion gives others rights over women's bodies. It serves only as a punishment for the crime of being born with a vagina.

Whilst the anti-abortion movement in the US is far more frightening than in the UK, we are at a point where our reproductive rights are under attack. Jeremy Hunt, the new Secretary of State for Health, has voted to decrease the abortion limit from 24 to 12 weeks [and not actually explained how this will work whilst still requiring two doctors to sign off on the abortion]. Several members of the anti-abortion group Abort67 have been found not guilty of public order offences in Brighton despite their clear tactics of harassment and intimidation of women entering the BUPAS clinic. The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children have been holding protests across the UK [and roundly counter-protested under the banner SPUC OFF]. This is nothing more than a War on Women.

Today, there are rolling protests across the UK demanding:

• The right to abortion on demand 
• The decriminalisation of abortion
• Access to abortion for women in Northern Ireland 
• The global decriminalisation of abortion

There are protests in: 

• Dundee from 2-4 pm on Reform Street
• Dublin: 2 pm on O'Connell Street
• London: 2 pm at Old Palace Yard opposite Parliament

I'm going to protest today. I hope other women join us.

* This bit is fairly obvious if you live in the UK so feel free to skip it.

** Access to abortion on demand needs to be accompanied by real sexual health education in schools, increased availability of birth control and a welfare state to assist those who choose to continue with their pregnancy.

Read More

Child maintenance: Or, Why You Shouldn't Stick Your Cock in a Woman if You Aren't Prepared to be a Father

There is no birth control which is 100% effective. Most women know that every time they have PIV, they are risking pregnancy. We have sex because we enjoy it; despite the knowledge of all the possible lifetime consequences. We know the difficulties of choosing whether or not continue the pregnancy. We know that many women do not have a choice; whether it is because there is no access to abortion in their area or if poverty will force a "choice" on them. We know what pregnancy can do to our bodies in a "normal healthy" pregnancy; never mind one in which we could potentially have SPD, anaemia, gestational diabetes, hyperemesis, or pre-eclampsia. We know the all the possible consequences of giving birth; vaginally or via caesarian. We know the possibilities of post-natal depression, tearing and even the fact that domestic violence frequently starts or gets more severe during pregnancy. We know the statistics because we know the realities. We see them every day in our families and our friends. 

The real question is why do so many men (and their handmaidens) assume that men should face no consequences for fathering a child? And, why does the government support the right of these losers to fuck women with impunity whilst slut-shaming those women for having sex? Why are women the only ones who have to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions? Why does the government think it should punish some women for withholding contact from abusive men without punishing those same men for the abuse or their failure to pay maintenance? Why do men get to do whatever they want whenever they want with no legal or moral requirement for them to act like an adult?

Here's the thing: I think withholding maintenance is child abuse. If you help create a child, then you damn well better financially support them. Men who withhold maintenance to punish the mother are committing child abuse. Failure to support your child is neglect and should be legally recognised as such. If the primary carer, otherwise known as the mother, could go to prison for child neglect for failing to adequately feed and clothe their child, then why shouldn't the erstwhile "father"? These men aren't "good fathers" and the pretence that they are actively harms children. Children need good, kind men in their lives. They don't need abusive arseholes who prioritise fancy cars and booze above the basic needs of their children.

And, yeah, I think men who don't bother to financially support their child, shouldn't be allowed access. Deliberately withholding support should be a legally valid reason to deny contact. Men who use access to control their ex-partners should be prohibited from contact. Men who commit domestic violence against their partners shouldn't be allowed contact with their children. If you assault your partner, then you can't ever be a good father. Good fathers are not abusive. Children deserve the right to be raised in a happy and secure home; not one in which their "father" gets to dictate everything that happens just because he has a penis.

Failing to support your children means you aren't a real man. You deserve to be named and shamed. You are responsible for the feminisation of poverty.

You are the reason our old government had to subsidise single mothers through tax credits and income support. You are the reason that these same women will be pushed further into poverty by our current government of misogynistic arsehats. These are the people who are destroying our families; not single mothers who are desperately trying to feed and clothe their children whilst dealing with abusive men and a society that doesn't think men should be held responsible for anything. Ever.

Canada has a much better track record with child maintenance than the UK. The assumption there is that men should pay to support their children in order to prevent women's dependence on the welfare state. Perhaps our current government of nincompoops should have looked into that instead of slashing the welfare budget creating a whole new generation of vulnerable children being raised in poverty. These are the consequences for failure to pay in Canada

• Make deductions from wages (maximum of 40% gross wage); 
• MEP can take money payable to the debtor from bank accounts, mutual funds, rent or contract fees; 
• Garnish income tax refunds, GST rebates, Canada Pension Plan income, and Employment Insurance payments; 
• The debtor may be prevented from transferring any property he or she wishes to sell, and allows MEP to seize assets including vehicles, shares and bonds; 
• The debtor may have his or her driver’s licence, registration, licence plates, or abstracts restricted or suspended; 
• Recreational licences for fishing and hunting may be restricted; 
• MEP may cancel current driver’s licences for account more than 60 days in late payments; 
• Passports can be revoked; 
• MEP may prevent an owner from re-mortgaging or selling real estate without first making payments. In some cases MEP may force sale of real estate; 
• Failure to make child support payments may be registered as bad debt and affect credit; 
• If assets are being kept in the name of a company, MEP can apply for a court order allowing the company’s assets to be used to pay for the debt; 
• MEP may seize assets the debtor tries to sell; and/or 
• If assets are being put in someone else’s name to avoid collection, MEP can apply for a court order allowing for their seizure 

It's easily assessed via personal income tax which is filed yearly. Yes, there are real holes in the system and some men do get away with child financial neglect but, at least, Canada recognises that men who refuse to support their children are committing a crime which has long-term consequences for those children. The UK needs to take a real stand against abusive men and start forcing men to take responsibility for where they decide to ejaculate.

Gingerbread Campaign on CSA

Read More

Petition against Cuts to Housing Benefit for under 25s

Yeah, I'm late to the party on this one. I've been thinking about how to write my response without getting personal but I'm not sure there is a way to discuss cutting housing benefits for people under 25 without getting into the specific examples of those who will be royally fucked over by this policy. For the sake of full disclosure here, I'm one of those feckless teenagers who got pregnant and had to be supported by the state. I had literally only moved out to got to uni and then had to move back in with my mother because I was having a baby. It was the same small 3 bed I grew up in but moving back in with a child is so very different. I had a tiny bedroom which was barely big enough for my bed, a cot, and a dresser. Having live-in babysitters was helpful as it meant I could save up to go to university [which I have done and quite successfully I might add]. But, and this is the huge but, I am one of the lucky ones. I have a supportive and lovely mother who helped me financially. Her house was big enough for me to move back into. There is no history of abuse and my mother was not dependent on benefits that she would lose by having another adult move back in with her. Many people under the age of 25 in receipt of housing benefit are not as lucky as I was.


This policy ignores the realities of people's individual lives. Cameron's parents have a large house big enough from him to have lived in as an adult but most people don't. In fact, the government is already trying to force people to downsize their houses after their children turn 18. Many people won't have a house large enough for a child to move back into; especially if they are renting themselves whilst in receipt of housing benefit. This policy doesn't take into account abusive parents. You can not force an 18 year old to remain living in a house with a physically, psychologically or sexually abusive parent. You can't force an 18 year old to hide their sexuality in order to live with homophobic parents. What happens if the child's room is now being used by an elderly or disabled relative? What happens if the parents themselves are in receipt of housing benefit and have had to move to a smaller property? 


All of these scenarios and more have been made on a thousand different blogs. There is nothing I can say that hasn't been said before. All I do know is that without housing benefit [and student loans, council tax benefit and income support during the summer], I wouldn't have graduated university with several first class degrees [both undergraduate and post-graduate]. I wouldn't be a published writer [and not just one who rants on blogs and Mumsnet]. Mostly, I wouldn't be me. And, that's what these horrendous cuts to the welfare state are doing: preventing millions of children from being who they should be. 

Petition

Dear {enter the name of your MP here}, 

Stop plans to remove housing benefits from young people 

I was extremely concerned to hear about the Prime Minister's proposal to remove Housing Benefit for people under the age of 25. 80,000 young people a year experience homelessness in this country, according to Centrepoint,  the UK's leading charity for homeless young people. Centrepoint says young people rely on Housing Benefit to keep a roof over their heads. These young people do not choose to become homeless. They are often forced out of home because of domestic violence or family breakdown. 

I am worried that cutting Housing Benefit for these vulnerable young people will be disastrous, as they simply do not have a family home to go back to.For homeless young people, Housing Benefit is a short-term solution which provides the support they need to get a job and live an independent life - a life not reliant on benefits. 

I therefore fear the Prime Minister's plans would not only lead to more homelessness, but also risk higher youth unemployment.As my local MP, I urge you to speak out against these plans and persuade the Prime Minister to drop these plans.

Read More