Women's Views on News

Author brands Orange literary prize "sexist"

Acclaimed author AS Byatt has branded the Orange prize for female writers as "sexist" and claims females who pen intellectual books aren't taken seriously.

Byatt told the audience at the Edinburgh Festival that: "The Orange prize is a sexist prize," she said. "You couldn't found a prize for male writers. The Orange prize assumes there is a feminine subject matter – which I don't believe in."

She also said females find it hard to gain acceptance if they write challenging fiction. Quoted in The Guardian she says: ""If you are trying to think, there are always reviewers who take the attitude that it's like a dog standing on its hind legs, as Samuel Johnson put it: it would be better if you didn't do it."

But it is the Orange prize, which has been awarded for the past 15 years, that has brought to public attention stimulating women writers who may otherwise struggled to gain wider recognition outside or inside the publishing world, and past awards have gone to Linda Grant, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and this year's winner Barbara Kingsolver.

Byatt last night was awarded Britain's oldest literary award - the James Tait Black Memorial prize - for her latest novel, The Children's Book which is a haunting, absorbing read.

Hairy and proud

We all know the extent to which the main stream press tend to over-react when any woman in the public eye ventures out with visible evidence that she is not some hairless genetic anomaly, something actresses Mo'nique and Julia Roberts can probably relate to.

But if body hair is still a taboo for women, then facial hair is even more so. In an article in the Guardian today Julie Bindel discusses her own struggles to reach a state of acceptance of her stray facial hairs, and argues that women should overcome the stigma.

A Bristol based campaign (the catchily titled Hairy Awarey!) encourages women to just let their hair grow as it pleases with the rationale that if enough women stop conforming to myths of hairlessness, facial and body hair on women will become normal and acceptable again.

Interestingly the article also references several women's feelings of freedom and 'elation' on abandoning the razors, if they are able to get past the societal disapproval and judgement such decisions tend to entail.

Surely the point here is choice. There is something very wrong with a situation where women are judged and criticised for keeping their bodies in what is an ultimately natural state (the particularly unpleasant Daily Mail article about Mo'nique seems to imply that her lack of 'personal grooming' is somehow more important than the Golden Globe she has just won).

Hair removal, or not, should be a case of personal preference, but until it ceases to be a cause of public scandal perhaps we all have a duty to embrace and celebrate hairy women!

Health rights or abortion rights? Obama's choice

US pro-choice organisations are criticising President Obama for the implications of the new health reforms for abortion access, reports WomensEnews.

The Obama administration's stringent ban on abortion coverage in the new high-risk pools for people with pre-existing conditions who have been denied coverage in the individual market has spurred criticism among pro-choice organizations.

They say the ban harms the vulnerable women that the historic health care reform legislation was supposed to protect.

"This ban is blatantly unfair to the thousands of women who have heart disease, diabetes and other serious health conditions and who have been unable to afford and obtain the health care they need," said Donna Crane, policy director of NARAL Pro-Choice America. "Without access to abortion, these women will suffer lifelong complications for their health."

The gender pay gap - finally the truth

For those of consistently bemused at the strange persistence of inequality in wages for men and women, the answers have finally been supplied by Michael White of the Guardian, who you might remember for enlightening us all previously on the issue of why we have quite enough women in the Cabinet, thank you very much (see WVoN story).

To save you the effort (and frustration) of going through his article yourself, we've summarised Michael's main reasons for the continuing pay gap here:

It's the nature of the job: "investment banking must be a very testosterone-driven activity which requires relaxation in lap-dancing clubs, expensive motors and other toys for boys – a lifestyle that can't have much appeal for sensible women."

It's the hours needed to earn big money: "Men tend to put in more hours at work, a detail that leads to the old familiar core issue – women are both inclined and/or obliged to make their families a greater priority in the work/life balance equation."

And this last one really seems to be the crux of it - it's the fact that women keep on choosing family over a decent career, silly little things that we are, and Michael White has the answer to that one, too:

"Women aren't obliged to make that choice any more, either by society's dictates or by lack of control over their own fertility. They can work and use childminders, and they can let their partner stay at home while they become the No 1 breadwinner – an increasingly visible choice."

So that's it, all your gender pay gap questions answered. And in case you weren't sure about why women choose family over career, Michael White tells us that the answer's all in the genes, which is where women really have the advantage:

"(Women) still live significantly longer than their menfolk, a fact that would cause a lot more media outrage if the high-heeled boot were on the other foot."

Astounding.

'Don't retreat, reload' says Palin

Ah, the madness continues. Sarah Palin has hit the news again offering her support to Dr Laura, the US radio show host who resigned recently following her use of racist remarks to a caller on her show, reports the Huffington Post.

Sarah Palin sent two messages about Dr. Laura on Twitter yesterday:

Dr.Laura:don't retreat...reload! (Steps aside bc her 1st Amend.rights ceased 2exist thx 2activists trying 2silence"isn't American,not fair")

Followed by:

Dr.Laura=even more powerful & effective w/out the shackles, so watch out Constitutional obstructionists. And b thankful 4 her voice,America!

What disturbs me more, the use of text speak (Twitter is an art form, it requires less language, not a new one) or the general insanity of extreme Republican politics? No, it's too difficult - I'll get back to you on that.

You can find the background to this story, as well as two hilarious related features outlining all the offensive, inappropriate and downright idiotic things both Sarah Palin and Dr Laura have said over the years, both of which I would thoroughly recommend and which you'll find at the bottom of the page.

And I thought the Daily Mail winds me up. If I was living in the States, these two alone would have me apoplectic in seconds.

Council of Europe interview with WVoN founder

The Council of Europe, founded in 1949 to work towards European integration, now focuses much of its attention on legal standards, human rights, democratic development and the rule of law. 

In 2011, the Council plans to ask its 47 member states to sign up to a treaty committing them to taking concrete steps to tackle violence against women. 

In the lead up to that treaty, the Council is interviewing a number of women about a range of issues that affect us, including treatment in the labour market as well as domestic violence. 

You can listen to Alison Clarke, founder of Women's Views on News, being interviewed by Nigel Smith of the Council of Europe in this podcast here. 

Pulitzer winners ask for help to hold up half the sky

The Guardian's Ed Pilkington interviews the Pulitzer Prize winning team, Sheryl WuDunn and Nicholas Kristof,  behind the American bestseller 'Half the Sky', which aims to expose the systematic oppression of women all over the world, referred to the authors as 'gendercide'.

"When you hear that 60 to 100 million females are missing in the current population," says WuDunn, "And then you compare the slave trade at its peek in the 1780s, when there were 80,000 slaves transported from Africa to the New World, and you see there are now 10 times that amount of women trafficked across international borders, so you start to think you are talking about comparable weight."

The couple also have very clear views on why there is so little awareness of the global oppression of women through trafficking and human rights abuses, and they raise some issues that are very close to our hearts here at WVON.

"It's partly that our definition of what constitutes news is a legacy of the perspective of middle-aged men," says Kristof. "It may well be that one major reason why high-school girls drop out of school around the world is that they have trouble managing menstruation, and probably one reason nobody has cottoned on to this is that people who run aid organisations and write about it have never menstruated."

WVON has covered 'Half the Sky' before, when it is given a critical (in every sense) review by Germaine Greer, (we've also featured a TED video of WuDunn, here) but Greer's article is actually best read in tandem with this interview, as it explains many of the reasons why the book has been written in the way it has, particularly in terms of the writers' decision to give individual case studies instead of citing large scale statistics, and their reasons for including so many examples of localised fights and campaigns for women's rights.

"The research stresses the importance of the positive," says Kristof. "We followed research in terms of writing in a way that would engage people, and Half the Sky was a kind of experiment in trying to use these approaches to reach a broader audience. From that regard, I think it worked remarkably."

And even without reading it yet, I think he might be right. The book has sold over 300,000 copies, there's a documentary in preparation, and even a video game for young people. And readers write in every day with examples of the efforts they have made to run local campaigns, raise money and raise awareness since reading the book. I agree wholeheartedly with the authors that the global failure to treat women as human beings is one of the greatest challenges left on the planet, and one that I think links with so many other pertinent contemporary issues, including the abuse of the environment and the impacts of global capitalism. You can find out more about the book and how to get involved in helping to hold up half the sky, here.

Brazilian feminist says "we must move from a masculine to a feminine economy"

IPS news reports that 79 year old Brazilian feminist Muraro, author of 35 books, is publishing a new book in 2011 containing proposals for an economy based on cooperation and solidarity, including bartering systems and the incorporation of a gender perspective in development.

She was born nearly blind and only gained good eyesight through surgery at the age of 66. However, the fact that she was technically blind did not keep her from studying physics and economics, having five children with her husband of 23 years, becoming a driving force in Brazil's feminist movement, or opposing Brazil's 1964-1985 military dictatorship.

Mario Osavahe interviews Muraro and poses some thought provoking questions...

Q: How do you explain the fact that although women now have more years of schooling than men, they continue to earn lower wages and are hit harder by unemployment and are more likely to work in the informal sector of the economy?

A: That is improving; women are now earning almost 90 percent of what men earn. A major hurdle is the low level of female representation in the national, state and municipal legislative bodies. Women tend to vote more for men.

Osavahe further asks how can the 'feminine economy take shape' and 'does feminism also entail a different kind of science and technology?'.

Read the full interview here.

Women's rights used as propaganda by UK and US

Laurie Penney writes a very thought-provoking article over at the New Statesman today, highlighting the use of women's rights issues as a propaganda tool to justify UK and US foreign policy, including in Afghanistan and Iran.

She highlights the contradiction between the current outcry from the UK government over Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani (covered extensively on WVON over the past few weeks - also here and here) with the more routine cases of women appealing to the UK government for asylum on the grounds that to return to their country will result in a similar fate - and how frequently such cases are refused.

"Had the unfortunate Ms Ashtiani been smuggled to the UK, it is fair to assume that she too would currently be detained in Yarl's Wood (a UK immigration removal centre), subjected to the indignity of pleading for her life with a government whose professed solidarity with Iranian women has not yet overcome its prejudice against immigrants to extend support to the hundreds of women who arrive on these shores fleeing violence every year - all of whom, unlike Ms Ashtiani, we could actually do something materially to help."

Laurie Penney also raises the state of women's rights in the UK, and our own track record on preventing violence against women.

"And in at least one European country, the defence of 'provocation to murder' - the so-called 'cuckold's defence' - was enshrined in law until just two years ago, allowing husbands to plead for a reduced sentence if the wife they had killed was unfaithful. The country in question was Great Britain. Were the US or UK to launch a systemic offensive against every country brutalising its female citizens because of their sex at the level of policy and culture, it'd be World War Three on Tuesday - and we would have to start by bombing our own cities."

Seriously worth a read this article, and not only because I'm close to becoming Laurie Penney's official number one fan.

For me, the article really underlines the importance - as activists for women's rights and as human beings - of not only gazing outward in judgement of the world (particularly at countries we may have a vested interest in  pointing our fingers at, in terms of foreign policy), but also the importance of remembering to stop and ask ourselves where are we as a nation in our fight for women's rights? So much attention has been given to women's oppression lately in the nations of the burkha, but what oppression against women - including the systematic violence of rape, sexual harassment and domestic violence - are we hiding in this age of so-called sexual freedom and gender equality?

Sarah doesn't speak for me either

Emily's list, the American political action committee (PAC) dedicated to electing pro-choice Democrat candidates to office has launched its own new online campaign to counter Sarah Palin's high profile lobbying of Republican activities, reports Bloomberg today.

The campaign, called simply 'Sarah doesn't speak for me' aims to contrast the policies of right wing Republican candidates with their own preferred Democrat candidates. The website highlights the extreme views put forward by many of Sarah Palin's preferred candidates on issues including:

Hurricane Katrina - "We're not going to cry 'emergency' every time we have a Katrina" (Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn)

Social policy - "We've got to get rid of this 'protecting the weak'" (Yes, really!) (Senator Clint Didier)

Abortion - "I am hopeful that one day soon the courts will re-examine and reverse Roe v. Wade," (Governor Mary Fallin)

President of Emily's List, Stephanie Schriok was unequivocal about her reasons for launching the campaign, “Sarah Palin and her endorsed candidates are extreme and bad for America. We didn’t want women across the country to think that there’s only one voice for women. And we didn’t want Sarah Palin’s voice to go unchallenged.”

Sarah Palin has not yet passed comment on the campaign, but Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Washington Susan B. Anthony's List, which promotes pro-life candidates for office felt the campaign is a purely defensive measure that only serves to illustrate Sarah Palin's success.

“Emily’s List is running scared, and it shows. Clearly, in this ‘Year of the Pro-Life Woman,’ which Sarah Palin helped make possible, women have found their political voices.”

And I'm all for the healthy debate, although the clustering of women's political interests solely around the issue of abortion troubles me somewhat, particularly in a time when the current financial crisis is deepening the feminisation of poverty across so many western nations.

Despite this, as a left-winger myself, I love this campaign. In fact, I'm wondering how we can manage something similar over here, but 'The coalition doesn't speak for me' isn't that catchy. Any takers on 'Theresa May, but I won't stand for sexist budget cuts'? I'm taking orders for t-shirts now.