Did You Read it? Did You react? But Did You Act?

Misogyny in political fringe groups is apparently well and strong, detailed by the Evening Standard here

These myths, that women instigate domestic violence, that feminism is a "nazi style" institution and that rape by someone you know is simply sex, are just some of the abominable issues that help perpetuate female submission in society.

There are a plethora of government investments in advertising and classes to help women recognise domestic violence.

Yet at no point are they investing in telling people violence is not acceptable.

Feminism as a "nazi style" phenomena is one women have been fighting since the second wave feminism of the 1960s. The term feminism has become synonymous with "shaven haired, hairy armpitted lesbian" and blogs of this thought help perpetuate the myth.

Even in University, people were reluctant to call themselves "feminists", prefering the less perjorative term "equalists" or similar.

As a result, we are now raising women who believe they should be "sexy", they should base a career around having babies, and their ideal ambition is to be an "it girl" or "wag" who shops and projects "sex" as a marketable product.

Then, of course, we wonder why people do not complain when they are raped, or consider it acceptable to be struck by a man, or think that their lives are second class.

We live in a society that should have evolved beyond patriarchy. We have had many thrusts towards acheiving equality, but the negative press and colloquial network has now expanded to the blogosphere to continue to perpetuate myths and representation of gender.

I complain if someone calls me "chick", or "sweetpea" or any other derrogative femine term. And it takes courage to stand up to the image of you they then project, of an aggressive woman with no sense of humour.

The constant drip drip drip of rightwing media streams has set gender equality back another generation, and this blog demonstrates another strand to the BNP who were pretty low in the pile anyway.

But is anyone listening? With their sexist jokes and indirect discrimination of women? Or do they read this and say "oh, that's terrible" and then sit on a jury who aquits a man of rape because his victim was drunk?

Do the public read it reviled, yet not complain when they are referred to in terms of gender typecasting ("oh, it's her time of the month" et al).

I could link to a hundred blogs that rant in similar terms, so here is my tuppence worth.

Women suffer less in recessions

This is the sort of article I loathe from a feminist perspective.

The tone is derrogotary, the implications perjorative and there is the horrendous assumption that this is a good thing.

In a recent survey by the career portal and networking site, many of the female technologists questioned commented that their strong people skills set them apart from their male counterparts.

The implication is that women are more caring, sensitive and delicate. The truth is that a company is likely to keep women on above men as they get away with paying them less.

“Women bring a different set of skills to the table; skills that are vital in challenging times such as these” says Maggie Berry, Director of womenintechnology.co.uk.

Challenging times?! As opposed to times that are less challenging that render women useless?

Do women suffer less in recessions? No, they suffer more because they accept more sacrifices without challenge. And then get pushed to the back seat again when it comes to receiving honours.

Guess what, a journaist scoop.

The Mail online, becoming even more of a tabloid. They have obviously got a student in on work experience. The article screams "archive files", poor literary content and no knowledge of the legal profession whatsoever.

In particular, partly because it is bank holiday and I'm idle, and partly because poor newspaper writing irritates me;

She was writing to congratulate the women on their promotion to Queen’s Counsel – one of the most senior positions in the judiciary.

Being appointed QC is NOT to be appointed to the Judiciary. Wiki will tell you that for @*!&@#'s sake.

While one woman QC was ‘very surprised’ Mrs Blair did not pay for a stamp, another questioned the choice of notepaper.

Was she really? Or did her secretary/PA/clerk/skivvy point this out and when it emerged the letter was from the "honorable" Mrs Blair the elite decided to get a few more pennies for the estate by calling the paper?

One woman lawyer,

And lastly... how foolish of me to consider that the UK has two separate types of legal professional, plus a miscellany of impressionists such as paralegals, executives and moonlighting law students. All collectively referred to as "lawyers".
Is the journalist actually an ignorant child? Or is the role of the unidentified caller so dodgy that no one knows quite who it is? Perhaps I am being too harsh, but even I credit the public with more intelligence than this. Given that CB wrote to female barristers appointed to the Queen's Council, I would assume the woman referred to is a BARRISTER. But the article is sloppy and the writer appears to have used MS Thesaurus.

What is worth noting is;

however, took umbrage over the notes. She said: ‘Why has Cherie Blair appointed herself as a feminist guru and leader of female lawyers?’

I do concur. I have always felt Cherie's legal career was under played when she may have made a reasonable female model for the public. Instead she embraced the smug and supercilious attitude we tend to see in all female professionals in a male dominated atmosphere, as well as an arrogant and regally patronising nature taken by all "wives" in the public eye.

(On a personal note, having moved from the commendable area of employment law, she transferred into the more dubious and pro euro Human Rights carrion hunters and lost much respect I had for her) Bring on Helena Kennedy for Prime Minister, at least she

I still think it is abominable that women still have to congratulate each other on achieving something in a male dominated field.

Perturbing Rape Issues continues

This caught my eye this morning on a bank holiday liberation of ploughing through all the blogs I don't get time to read.

"Of these untested kits, at least 1,218 are from unsolved cases in which the attacker was a stranger to the victim."

The implication is that the rape is more heinous crime if the victim is attacked by someone who is a stranger, further propelling the myths of date rape and (in UK) "Kaitimaki" rape - that the woman asked for it because she knew the man etc and perpetuates the use of "bad character" evidence.

It is abysmal in this day and age the patriarchal states still maintain a hold over women sexually.

Oddly Victoria Derbyshire is discussing rape in the UK this morning as well. A lovely theme for a four day holiday.

This has in turn sparked off a debate about women making sacrifices to elevate themselves to high level jobs versus child care. Bring it on!