Pages

Sunday, December 22, 2019

JK Rowling weighs in behind Maya Forstater

Judgement over Maya Forstater case causes a storm, in large part because JK Rowling tweeted "IStandwithMaya" over the judge deciding there's no protection for someone holding a reasonable and sincere belief (not relevant to the job) as protected under the Equality Act. JKR's tweet has 34 000 'comments' and getting on for 200 000 'likes'.


There are reports in the national media, mainly taking off from JK Rowling as in the Telegraph. 
   Judge Tayler characterized Forstater’s comments as proving that “she considers there are two sexes, male and female, there is no spectrum in sex and there are no circumstances whatsoever in which a person can change from one sex to another, or to being of neither sex.” Is this not a reasonable belief? One that’s commonly held and worthy of protection? The judge also noted that “she would generally seek to be polite to trans persons and would usually seek to respect their choice of pronoun but would not feel bound to.” Again, is this not a reasonable position?


The judge himself notes that Forstater’s approach “is largely that currently adopted by the law, which still treats sex as binary as defined on a birth certificate.” And yet he decides that the answer to whether one should be protected from being fired, simply for politely expressing a belief in biological sex, is no.


The judge  dressed it up :
“Even paying due regard to the qualified right to freedom of expression, people cannot expect to be protected if their core belief involves violating others’ dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for them”. 
  In context, he thinks a belief in biological sex violates the dignity of Trans-people, yet does not consider the problem that trans-belief in an internal male/female identity violates the dignity of believers in biological sex.     Nor did he consider the reality that trans-activists have created an intimidating and offensive social media environment for those adhering to a belief in biology.  Thus JK Rowling was subjected to flurry of abusive responses to her tweet.

Thus, the judgement gives reign to extremist religious groups to object to the hostile environment of poking fun at believers in Christ or Allah. Creationists can object to the hostile environment generated by teaching Darwin and science-based biological evolution.  

 J. K. Rowling is right. The judgement must be supported to Appeal and overturned.

Wednesday, December 11, 2019

Maya Forstater: first Legal Case that EqAct protects Sincere Beliefs


Are sincerely-held beliefs protected (like religious beliefs) under the Equality Act?
Maya Forstater was sacked in March 2019 by a US development charity after using her personal Twitter account to express the view that “male people are not women”. There was no claim that Maya pushed her views at work, simply that some workplace colleagues complained at her holding such views, with the employing body being pro-LGBT.  
The legal Appeal over her dismissal was widely reported, including by the quality papers.

  The Tribunal sat for over a week in November and has to decide whether the statement is a belief that should be protected under the Equality Act 2010, or just a personal opinion. Evidence was taken from philosophy and law professors, as well as a lifelong transwoman who lived as a woman but insisted she was still male in experiences from early life and because each of her cells had the male sex chromosome.
  “I believe that sex matters,” Ms Forstater wrote in her witness statement to the tribunal. “This belief is based on things that I regard as fundamental scientific facts, as well as basic logical constructs.
  “I have always believed that sex is a material reality, that being female or male is an immutable biological act, and that sex matters, and I always will.”
  To prove a sincere belief, it has to be shared by many, evidenced by a body of writings and supported by established authorities. Being tenable logically and scientifically are additional, which religions don’t necessarily share, but humanists can claim.
Links to reports and documents for the case are found here.
Ms Forstater's Appeal was crowd-funded (well over-subscribed), including by Martina Navratilova who was also sacked by the BBC for similarly 'offending' transgender activists. After decision in December, the case may well move on to a higher Court.

Monday, December 2, 2019

Welsh Govt attempt to get compulsory pro-trans RSE

Response to Welsh Gov. Consultation:  https://gov.wales/ensuring-access-full-curriculum
“Ensuring Access to the full curriculum”              November 2019
As a humanist and feminist, I endorse RSE reflecting the internationally recognised World Health Organisation (WHO) standards for sexuality education. This definition seeks to encourage schools to take a joined up approach to education around relationships and sexuality.
Including under s.26 understanding gender  is wrong  as the term ‘gender’ is socially constructed. It's much misused, including by WG. Missing from s.26 is· understanding puberty and the sexual human.  The item · the human body and development  fails to express this; it looks to refer to a biological description rather than hormones, feelings and emotions, which must be included in RSE.
  It's evident as in other places in the document that the Welsh Government is aiming to get its views of transgender and "LGBTQI+" (adopted from Stonewall) taken on board in the RSE curriculum.  Telling a child they can choose their sex or they may be 'born in the wrong body' is not just unscientific but also dangerous.  It encourages children onto the transgender pathway with huge consequences for their future that they cannot possibly understand.
Welsh people cannot possibly trust the WG and its many politicians and institutions who've declared themselves Stonewall allies to decide on a curriculum free from indoctrination.  You shouldn't trust yourselves to do it.  Whatever emerges will be controversial, which you cannot dismiss by promising "handled carefully".  It follows you have to allow people to choose to withdraw their children when they object to materials - as they objected to certain books in the Birmingham schools - though their Headteacher and LGBT advisor Andrew Moffatt insisted on keeping them.

I concentrate on the  EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT   https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/consultations/2019-10/integrated-impact-assessment-ensuring-access-to-the-full-curriculum.pdf
This ignores the impact on girls as female sex, as in Stonewall's transgenderism, and is thus in breach of basic law.
    The sex-based rights of women are set out in the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 18 December 1979 (CEDAW).  It obliges the WG to take “appropriate measures, including legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men.’’ (Article 3). 

Article 5 of the CEDAW states, “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures: (a) To modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.’’
   Nowhere do you mention combating gender stereotypes in the RSE syllabus.

Gender refers to “the roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society at a given time considers appropriate for men and women… These attributes, opportunities and relationships are socially constructed and are learned through socialization processes.’’ (Gender Equality Glossary, UN Women).
   The concept of ‘gender identity’ would makes socially constructed stereotypes into an innate condition, thereby undermining women’s sex-based rights and in effect breaching CEDAW.   Rights relating to sexual orientation are compatible with women’s sex-based rights, and are necessary to enable lesbians, whose sexual orientation is towards other women, to fully exercise their sex-based rights.

We have no confidence that the WG, being allied with Stonewall, is capable of determining a curriculum that fully accords with CEDAW.

Your heading 
Gender Reassignment (the act of transitioning and Transgender people)   is false - the Equality Act 2010 and recent guidance on it defines the protected characteristic GR as transsexuals. Most 'transgender' people are hardly 'transitioning' and don't intend to undergo the surgical operations.
   You would "encourage schools to consider how they provide support and learning to LGBTQI+"  This is a quite different group to transsexuals (=GR) who are not given EqAct  'protection'.

You state 
"Research put forward in the Stonewall School Report Cymru (2017) shows LGBTQI+ identifying young people are still more likely to suffer poor mental health, self-harm and depression. The changes to RSE in the curriculum look to combat this by helping all learners feel emotionally and physically safe and secure so they are able to achieve their full potential."
  That 'research' by an advocacy group has been much criticised (see Transgendertrend) so cannot be used to determine changes to the curriculum. Many teenagers have mental issues, the LGBTQI+ "group" is Stonewall's fiction.  Pushing transgenderism in the curriculum is likely to worsen emotional states.  Tavistock statistics indicate that accepting teenagers onto the trans-pathway may worsen self harm and suicide ideation (Transgendertrend).  Moreover, it's proving to be emotionally upsetting for many girls to endure male-bodies in their school washrooms etc.; forcing on them the idea that they must accept this has emotional consequences and safety risks that you and Stonewall wrongly ignore.

You admit "there has been contention around these proposals and that could, if not handled carefully, have a negative impact on learners either in general or in the specific context of an individual school."  Are you alleging they were not handled carefully in Birmingham?  It's likely that some schools/governors in Wales will likewise be unable to handle parent protests "carefully", so Wales should keep the parents' right of withdrawal.

Religion, belief and non-belief
You accept "for RE, a decision to not to include a right to withdraw in the new curriculum will have a negative impact on some religious groups. Based on the evidence we have been able to gather, it will be a particular issue for Jehovah’s Witnesses and humanists".
This appears to be the only reference to humanists in the document.  Cardiff humanists are an active public group, so why did you talk only to Jehovah Witnesses and not to us humanists?
  Your excuse that some religious groups “may have option to send their children to a faith school” is unacceptable. You need some alternative for all.
  You admit "There is no current equivalent option for parents of other faiths to send their child to a school where RSE (or RE) will be taught in a way which reflects the tenets of their faith, while being pluralistic, within the maintained school system in Wales. [Such schools could be established following a school organisation proposal]"  There is no practical proposal for this - maintain the right-to-withdraw until there are options for the large majority, including anti-trans humanists.
  
You use the protected characteristic  Sex / Gender  and write of  "disadvantage based on gender"

That’s a travesty!  The Equality Act 2010 defines the p.c. as Sex.  This Equality Assessment has to follow that definition.  Under-18s cannot change their gender (Gender Recognition Act); this section has to be concerned solely with disadvantage based on Sex.
Boys who claim a female ’gender identity’ are being enabled to access opportunities and protections set aside for girls.. This constitutes a form of discrimination against females, and endangers women’s fundamental rights to safety, dignity and equality.  This assessment has to admit this 'impact' on girls. 

The WG is in breach of CEDAW (above) by adopting Stonewall’s conflation of their notion of gender with sex;  sex is defined by the UN “the physical and biological characteristics that distinguish males from females.’’ (Gender Equality Glossary, UN Women). 
   You have apparently engaged with Jehovah Witnesses, but not with Women’s groups concerned about protecting the rights of women and girls, Fair Play for Women etc. Your bias against girls/women in ignoring our rights is outrageous.  I refer you to the Declaration on Women’s sex-based rights, that's been well publicised and supported since launched in March. Your whole section has to be withdrawn and reconsidered.

Sexual orientation (Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual)
I strongly object to the inclusion of  “TQI+ learners” under sexual orientation.  This is a Stonewall fiction.  LGB does not include sexual fetishes.  The Welsh provision for Trans caters only for over-18s, like the GRAct, so not school "learners".  

It's factually wrong that the rights of LGBTQI+ people to be treated with equality are protected in law.  I take issue with Stonewall-influenced training which shows in this false statement by you.  It detracts from the real need of the LGB group for recognition of their Protected Characteristic, uncontaminated by TQI+.  Further, your misrepresentation of the law (according to Stonewall) looks deliberate - did you never check this basic point?
   
You have engaged with Jehovah Witnesses, but not with LGB groups (eg. LGB Alliance, Lesbian Rights Alliance); these do not accept that Stonewall any longer represents LGB or L alone.  Why did you not try to engage with them?

Human Rights and UN Conventions
Your insertion of transgenderism  into the curriculum. as also traditional RE, breaches Article 9 on freedom of thought, conscience and  religion. 
Cults propagating such views have to be excluded from our schools, though their beliefs may be discussed like beliefs in astrology and an after-life.  Welsh RSE can cover serious religions, but give priority to humanism as a belief system rooted in a scientific approach. 
Not including a Right to Withdraw and the pluralism requirement:
You say "The Welsh Government considers the proposals for RE and RSE are compliant with the Convention Rights".  But you haven't considered the rights of girls impacted by your promotion of transgender ideas and even fellow 'learners', and you haven't considered that this is indoctrination, breaching Article 9 as interpreted by the ECHR.

Therefore, the parents’ right-to-withdraw must be preserved and strengthened.

Anne Greagsby (completed posthumously)

Saturday, December 29, 2018

What is feminism?

Munroe Bergdorf mansplaining feminism...
You might have thought that the #MeToo campaign, in which women have been speaking out about the universality of sexual assault and rape, would make people more sympathetic to concerns about female safety. You would be wrong: nothing makes you look more liberal these days than shouting at women who express anxiety based on their experiences.

But then, as with experts, apparently we’ve all had enough of lived experience now. When a 19-year-old trans woman was elected a Labour woman’s officer last year, a Labour councillor explained that “lived experience as a woman” was not a pre-requisite to be a woman’s officer. Biology, too, has been deemed terribly passe. “Inclusive feminism,” Plaid Cymru’s Leanne Wood wrote when considering why self-identifying trans women should be allowed into women’s refuges, understands that “gender is a complex and deeply personal thing, and is about so much more than outdated ideas of biology.” On the day of this year’s Women’s March, trans model Munroe Bergdorf tweeted that to “center reproductive systems” at the demonstrations was “reductive and exclusionary”.



FAIRPLAY FOR WOMEN have written a series of short posts to guide you through some of the basic concepts in feminism and to help explain why modern transgender theory is concerning for some women.
tl:dr – The words gender and sex do not mean the same thing!


Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Efforts to establish a Peace Institute in Wales


The 2012 Initiative for an Academi Heddwch plus historical summary of campaigning for a Welsh Peace Institute, which fell apart.

Stephen Thomas records that the WCIA initiated the idea of a Welsh Peace Institute in 2008 (e-mail* to Ben Gregory, Kelvin Mason, Jill Evans MEP and Jill Gough CND Cymru). 
Stephen introduced it at the Peace Festival in Bangor 18-19th October, where Jill Evans spoke in support [1]. Jill saw the Military Academy to be built in St Athan as the catalyst for the idea of a Peace Academy [2], a view echoed by Adam Price MP who had nevertheless argued for Wales to win the project in the Westminster committee [3]. Peter Sutch of Cardiff University formulated an alternative educational/academic concept* in Nov. Nic Wheeler of UCW Aberystwyth was interested, came to the 4th July 2009 Cynefin y Werin meeting, but later backed off.

A coordinating group met in Bangor alongside the October 2009 Festival and agreed to take it up through Cynefin y Werin, with a first meeting in Aberystwyth on 14th March 2009 (reported by Kelvin Mason in Peace News, April 2009 [4]). Invitations* to a working group ‘Project Meeting’ on 4th July were sent out by Jill Gough (CND Cymru) on behalf of Cynefin y Werin. It heard cases from Robin Gwyndaf and John Cox on the title, adopting 'Academi Heddwch' but preferring 'Peace Institute' as the English form. The meeting agreed on mobilising around a Petition to the Senedd Committee and was keen to seek broad support, from organisations far from 'peace' groups, and to avoid any identification with CND. Campaigning for the Academi would be non-partisan and aim for support from all political parties. Several people volunteered to form an interim steering group to progress the Petition.

The Petitions Committee application [5] submitted in Sept. 2009 with 1500 signatories led to a cool response* from Rhodri Morgan, who suggested a university-based collaborative institute, focussing on social science based research. Nevertheless, the Petitioners continued to press for a broader concept:
“a Peace Institute concerned with Peace and Human Rights, comparable with those supported by state governments in Flanders, Catalonia and elsewhere in Europe”

Representatives of the Flanders Peace Institute were brought over to give oral evidence* to the Committee in Feb.2010). Public meetings in Carmarthen and Bangor heard addresses from the Flanders representatives, with a lecture in Aberystwyth. With the new Assembly elected in 2010, Carwyn Jones was asked for his view* – in August 2011, he endorsed Rhodri Morgan’s position, declared there's no WG funding, but still asked for a detailed and fully costed proposal.

Stephen Thomas was losing patience with the Petitions Committee by Sept. 2011, and suggested* another way, for Cynefin y Werin to sponsor peer-reviewed credible research into Welsh situations and issues, and disseminate this publicly. But his proposal was given limited circulation and shelved by those still hoping of Senedd progress, so another year was lost.
Then in October 2011 the Petitions Committee decided on hearings into the Petition and put out a call for evidence. Robin Gwyndaf played a big role in encouraging Welsh organisations to respond to the Petitions Committee call for evidence, as is evident in the ~70 submissions and his personal evidence with a published article (see http://Academiheddwchcymru.blogspot.com). The final output from the Petitions committee was very disappointing when it came in January 2012.

It stalled the Senedd process with their decision to:
  1. Forward the petition and information gathered so far to the Cross-Party Group on Human Rights and request that the working up of a concept for the establishment of such an institution is placed on future agendas;
  2. Forward the consultation responses gathered to the petitioners to work up a concept in parallel and suggest that they lobby individual Members to hold a Member-led debate in Plenary on the subject.
Neither of these happened; John Cox hoped (*, p.78) a Senedd All-Party Group on Peace would be formed in 2013, which “may make it possible to progress this matter”.  

Stephen Thomas sent out an invitation (4th October, below) to the 9th October 2012 meeting,
(held following the presentation of the anti-Drone petition, led by Mererid Hopwood).
His motivation was the call from Cardiff UNA for a
one-day conference (as broad-based as possible), to discuss the nature, role and duties of a Wales Peace Institute and to agree arrangements for its structure and funding'.
Stephen wrote in his invitation email (4th October 2012)
..convening a meeting of those at the Cardiff UNA gathering who expressed a personal wish to be involved in the next step of the process (8 people). ...also invite those who gathered a couple of times last autumn to give the Academi Heddwch project a push forward then.
Stephen explained the intention was
the creation of a diverging process from the discussion process on the issue within certain parts of the National Assembly for Wales

A further meeting on 16 October set up a Steering group to organise the ‘broad-based’ conference under the name Academi Heddwch Cymru/Wales Peace Academy for 23rd March 2013 in Aberystwyth. An important target of this separate initiative was to create a body that would establish the Academi Heddwch as a project within the 2014 commemoration of the Centenary of the start of World War I. However, conference preparations were stalled in February by Cox and Gwyndaf opposed to an independent membership body that would bid for WW1 funds. A semi-formal committee was chosen to continue under Cox and friends. This hardly functioned and they let the WCIA include 'peace' projects in a large and successful bid for resources. 

The WCIA accounts shows they did not even spend the money, with £238k remaining in 2018 in the "Wales for Peace" account.  John Cox's committee had not functioned. while Stephen Thomas and Robin Gwyndaf had wound up Cynefin y Werin (opposed by Max Wallis), so there was no-one to salvage anything for pursuing the Academi Heddwch goal. 


NOTES

* denotes documents within John Cox's 84-page dossier ('summary'), dated 1 Feb.2013
[1] report of Bangor festival by Phil Steele 
[2] ** see also Jill Evans’s speech in November 2009 
[3] “I did back the campaign to bring the training facility to Wales. This was based on the economical benefits .here  
[4] Kelvin Mason report of Aberystwyth meeting in March 2009 
[5] Petition Wording: We call upon the National Assembly for Wales to investigate the potential for and practicality of Wales having a Peace Institute concerned with Peace and Human Rights, comparable with those supported by state governments in Flanders, Catalonia and elsewhere in Europe
National Assembly for Wales P-03-262 Academi Heddwch Cymru / Wales Peace Institute
Lead petitioner: Welsh Centre for International Affairs, Cymdeithas y Cynod, Cynefin y Werin and CND Cymru. Number of signatures: 1525

From Stephen Thomas, Cynefin y Werin, 4th October 2012

Annwyl Bawb / Dear All,

As some of you know, I spoke to the Cardiff and district branch of the United Nations Association 10 days ago on 'The Prospects for an Academi Heddwch/Peace Institute for Wales'. It was their choice of topic for noting the International Day of Peace.

At the end of that meeting a resolution was passed, with no objections: '..welcoming a one-day conference (as broad-based as possible), to discuss the nature, role and duties of a Wales Peace Institute and to agree arrangements for its structure and funding'. It was hoped that the conference could be arranged by Cynefin y Werin and could take place 'before the revived enthusiasm for a Welsh Peace Institute becomes dissipated with the passage of time'.

Cynefin y Werin has acted - in the first instance by convening a meeting of those at the Cardiff UNA gathering who expressed a personal wish to be involved in the next step of the process (8 people). Cynefin y Werin thought it correct and necessary also to invite to that meeting those who gathered a couple of times last autumn to give the Academi Heddwch project a push forward then.

Hence your inclusion on the invitation to attend this forthcoming meeting at: 2.30 pm, Tuesday 9 October at Coffee Mania Crema CafĂ© , Millennium Centre, Cardiff Bay (city centre end of the building).

From this it is aimed to obtain a structure to organise a subsequent conference in (?) spring 2013. Cynefin y Werin has committed itself to providing funding for that conference. It is not intended to detract from what may continue of the discussion process on the issue within certain parts of the National Assembly for Wales: but at the very least the creation of a diverging process was now felt to be worth pursuing.

Please let me know if you are able to come Tuesday next week; and of any matters that you wish to input to the process if you are not going to be there.

Hwyl / Regards

Stephen



PRESS ITEMS
Wales Peace Festival18-19 October 2008
Phil Steele’s report re Wales peace Festival Speaking out in Wrexham Peace & Justice News
Stephen Thomas of the Welsh Centre for International Affairs, after an interview on Radio Cymru, kicked off the first day with a lucid discussion of peace building, credibility and reform within the United Nations. Jill Evans MEP, Chair of CND Cymru, raised issues of nuclear proliferation and security in the Middle East, with special reference to Palestine. She floated the idea of founding a Wales Peace Institute, a proposal which received support from the floor. See here 

A small meeting was held upstairs at the Anglesey Arms to discuss the future of the Wales Peace Festivals, the future direction of Cynefin y Werin, wider collaboration with other movements and organisations in Wales, and the idea of a Wales Peace Institute. It was agreed to progress these discussions at a meeting in Aberystwyth in the New Year. Kelvin Mason of Aberystwyth Peace Network chaired the meeting, James Maiden of Cynefin y Werin took the minutes.  see here 

Instituting peace in Wales News | March 2009

. A meeting of the Cynefin Y Werin networkin March will aim to take this idea forward. ...

Peace Institute a step closerhttp://peacenews.info/node/4131/peace-institute-step-closer News | April 2009

... that Saturday afternoon, and top of the agenda was a Wales Peace Institute. Some of us had been working towards this meeting since the …

The PeaceInstitute- Jill Evans MEP - Plaid Ymlaen - Plaid Forward 

Nov 20, 2009 –The catalyst for the idea of a peace Academy was the shock and...
Cymdeithas y Cymod, the Welsh Centre for International Affairs, Cynefin y Werin and...

A peace institute for Wales?http://peacenews.info/node/4117/peace-institute-wales News | December 2009
... calling for the National Assembly of Wales to create a Peace Institute comparable with those in Flanders, Catalonia, Finland, Norway and … 

CNDCymru » Wales Peace Institute – Presentation to  Feb 19, 2010

A Wales Peace Institute could advise and inform the Assembly on policies...Y Senedd Meeting with Nelly Maes and Tomas Baum all welcome...Stephen Thomas of the Welsh Centre for International Affairs commented:
‘Much work is already being done in various parts of Wales in the field of encouraging peace and preventing violent conflict. There is teaching at schools and universities, academic research, and campaigning on peace matters. It is fitting to seek to strengthen the efforts of so many organisations and individuals, through the co-ordination that would be provided by a national Peace Institute.’
See here 

Lecture by the President of the Flemish Peace Institute. 24 February 2010. L-R: Mr. Penri James;...The lecture was part of a visit to Wales in support of calls locally for a Wales Peace Institute.
http://www.aber.ac.uk/en/interpol/research/research-centres-and-institutes/ddmi/events/seminars/title-91698-en.html
L-R: Mr. Penri James; Jill Evans, MEP; and Professor Nicholas Wheeler, DDMI Director. Photo by Syd Morgan.
Nelly Maes, president of the Flemish Peace Institute, spoke at the David Davies Memorial Institute(DDMI) in Aberystwyth ... part of a visit to Wales in support of calls for a Wales
Peace Institute. On 23 February, Maes and Tomas Baum, director of the Flemish …

A Nonviolence Research Network? News | October 2010

Regular readers of this page will know that the Cynefin Y Werin network is pursuing a major project to establish a Peace Institute … Regular readers of this page will know that the Cynefin Y Werin network is pursuing a major project to establish a Peace Institute (Academi Heddwch), working with academics and others in Wales. The Peace Institute is likely to be based on the model of the Flemish Peace Institute. Delegates from Cynefin Y Werin have visited Brussels and speakers from the institute undertook a speaking tour of Wales. The Wales project has the rhetorical support of the Welsh Assembly government but the prospects of any material support from that quarter seem extremely unlikely.

... posted its official decision on the ambition for a Peace Institute (Academi Heddwch) in Wales. “The committee agreed to: undertake ..

Re-energisinga network: Cynefin y Werin Feature | August 2011

... The task of pursuing these questions was taken on board by Cynefiny Werin
(Common Ground) “a network of organisations which promotes equality, ...

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Women in the Russian Revolution

To mark International Women's Day, /Links International Journal of
Socialist Renewal/ is publishing an excerpt from Resistance Books'
/Comrades in arms: Women in the Russian Revolution/, by Kathy Fairfax,
and making available the entire pamphlet to download in PDF format.
By *Kathy Fairfax*

The popular image of the Russian Revolution is of a revolution made by
men. Ask the person in the street to name a figure from the Russian
Revolution and most could come up with Lenin, Stalin, maybe Trotsky. A
few might have heard of Zinoviev, Kamenev or Bukharin. But how many
would name Kollontai, Armand or Krupskaya? How many know of the women
who helped make revolution in Russia? How many know about the thousands
of female Bolsheviks who marched through the streets of Petrograd in
1917 or shouted revolutionary speeches to cheering crowds or wrote and
distributed pamphlets calling for revolution? In fact, women
revolutionaries inspired the working class the world over and
inaugurated a new era in world history.

Excerpt and download at http://links.org.au/node/934

Subscribe free to /Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal/ -
at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Let's turn this International Women's Day into a day of protest against sexual apartheid!

Let's turn this International Women's Day into a day of protest against sexual apartheid!

The hundredth anniversary of March 8, International Women's Day, is on its way. On this momentous occasion, we proclaim 2008 as the year against sexual apartheid. We call on people everywhere to condemn sexual apartheid and the political Islamic movement that perpetrates
it, and to support egalitarian movements that courageously challenge it.

We invite all to sign the below declaration and call for an end to sexual apartheid.

Declaration
We, the undersigned, unequivocally oppose sexual apartheid and the subjugation of millions of women living under Islamic rules and laws.

We condemn regimes and the political Islamic movement that perpetrate sexual apartheid, including in Iran.

We support the legitimate struggle of millions of women and men for freedom, equality and universal rights.

Sexual apartheid, like racial apartheid, has no place in the 21 Century.http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/initi

Monday, February 16, 2009

72% of women are opposed to nuclear power

womens views on nuclear power.

WEN say The government’s decision to give the green light to new nuclear power stations flies in the face of women’s views.

72% of women are opposed to nuclear power.1 A recent survey for WEN2 found that 58% would prefer to live near any other form of power station than nuclear and 86% think the government should prioritise investment in renewable energy as the top measure to tackle climate change. Women have been excluded from the decision making process and our voices are being ignored.

1. WEN, European Commission and Guardian-ICM polls quoted in WEN’s Response to the DTI Energy Review 2006

2. Joint WEN/NFWI survey to inform the Women’s Manifesto on Climate Change 2006.


and another survey...
shows 80% of women are very concerned about climate change. Ninety eight percent of the respondents are keen to see the UK demonstrating world leadership in tackling climate change but 97% don’t think the Government and industry are doing enough.

Women want more green products and carbon labelling of goods (85%), lower prices for environmentally friendly products (85%) and more government grants and incentives for energy efficiency and micro-generation to reduce carbon emissions.

Cardiff Council are certainly not doing enough as the Lib Dems and Plaid carry on with new labour plans to destroy our parks through commercialisation and buld roads and carparks in the park for articulated lorries and sky tv vans!

More on that here


Friday, January 23, 2009

Gov sneaky move to limit your privacy and liberty

I am concerned about the threat to my liberty and privacy by the Coroners and Justice Bill being rushed through Parliament and you should be too.

Clause 152 of the Bill
is due for its first debate in the Commons on Monday 26th January and would convert the Data Protection Act into its exact opposite. It would allow ministers to make 'Information Sharing Orders', that can alter any Act of Parliament and cancel all rules of confidentiality in order to allow information obtained for one purpose to be used for another.

Write to your mp and ask him/her to p
lease read Part 8 (clauses 151 - 154) of the Coroners and Justice Bill, and oppose the massive enabling powers in the "Information sharing" clause. The Bill contains a number of controversial provisions, but could appear mainly to be about reforming inquests and sentencing. It is due its Second Reading in the Commons on 26th January 2009.

These clauses be given proper Parliamentary scrutiny as this will affect every single one of your constituents, unlike the rest of the Bill. I am concerned that the government will set a timetable that will cut off debate before these proposals - which are at the end of the Bill - are discussed.
The government must keep limits and monitor the information available to officials.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Iraq, women and shoes!

Brilliant protest here

With one hurl of his shoes, Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zaidi brought the plight of the Iraqi people to the world's attention. "This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq!," he shouted to Bush. We, too, feel anguish for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq and we were moved by al-Zaidi's passionate outcry.

That's why we moved into action to defend him. On Tuesday we confronted the Iraqi Ambassador to the U.S. when he was at a public event. We also took a letter to the Iraqi Embassy, signed by groups around the country, calling for Al-Zaidi's release.

And yesterday, CODEPINK gathered outside the White House and around the country to display shoes representing innocent Iraqis who have died since Bush's illegal occupation of Iraq. In Washington DC we also had a shoe-throwing contest at a paper maché George Bush.(See FLICKR photos).

It's outrageous that Al-Zaidi could get several years in prison for insulting George Bush, who is directly responsible for the deaths of 1.5 million Iraqis and 4,200 U.S. troops, and for the displacement of 5 million Iraqis. The one who should be in jail is Bush, not Muntadar al-Zaidi. Please join us in calling on the Iraqi government to release al-Zaidi without charges. We're bringing the petition with your signature directly to the Iraqi Embassy. Please click here to sign it today

Saturday, December 13, 2008

In the Office, Nice Girls Finish Last

great article and so true

In the Office, Nice Girls Finish Last
By Tana Ganeva, AlterNet
Posted on December 13, 2008, Printed on December 13, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/story/112128/

Picture this: You're a young woman at your first job. You worked hard to get a decent education, believing it was the path to success. You also have a vague sense that the feminist battles of past years have left few political or legal barriers to workplace equality -- if pop culture is to be believed, the only thing left for feminism to do is finally determine whether "do-me" heels are concessions to the patriarchy or an expression of liberated female sexuality.

So, bright-eyed and optimistic, you embark on what you imagine will be a smooth rise to the top of your chosen profession, limited only by your own skills and dedication to hard work.

Instead, you find yourself lingering in entry- or midlevel positions, despite all your work and devotion to the organization. You figure everyone has to pay their dues -- until you begin to notice that male counterparts are speeding past you with better work assignments, more opportunities for advancement and faster promotions.

If this sounds familiar, that's because it's quite common. Despite significant advances in recent decades, women continue to lag behind men in income and career advancement. Regardless of class, race, educational level and profession, women make less money than their male counterparts -- an average of 77 cents on the dollar. Women make up 2.4 percent of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies (and get paid less than those peers), less than one-fifth of partners in law firms (minority women fare significantly worse, accounting for 2 percent of law partners), and continue to be significantly underrepresented in politics.

Confronted with a complex problem that defies easy, sound-bite explanations, the media -- and many experts -- have taken the time-tested approach of pinning the blame on women themselves. An array of myths, like "opt-out revolution," have sprung up to explain why women have yet to achieve true equality in the workplace. The general assumption behind these shortsighted ideas is that women can't "cut it" in today's competitive work environment.

However, a growing number of studies show that women are more likely than men to be devoted to their employers and to see hard work as the best way to get ahead. But women, conditioned from an early age to be communal and "nice," are generally hesitant to boast about their efforts and are less likely than men to push for raises and promotions. In a workplace that rewards aggressiveness and self-promotion, women often go unrecognized for their contributions.

A 2004 study conducted by International Survey Research measured the attitudes and behaviors men and women displayed at the workplace and found a noteworthy discrepancy between the priorities of male and female employees. Female executives were primarily concerned with the well-being of the company, smooth employee relations and a well-run workplace. Men cared much more about getting ahead.

The study found that career development was the top priority for men, with "personal reward" as their second most-important goal. Women put "working relationships" first, "customer quality focus" second, and "communications" third.

According to Kim Morris, the study's project director, "[Women] tend to focus less than men on their advancement. They assume that focusing primarily on the health of the organization will result in recognition and promotions."

Women are also less likely than men to grease their career paths by touting their skills and bragging about their accomplishments.

A 2008 study by psychologist Shannon L. Goodson compared the office behaviors of professional men and women, drawing from an industry questionnaire about workplace attitudes. Goodson found that women were far less likely to draw attention to their achievements and promote their skills and abilities to co-workers and supervisors, whereas men had relatively little trouble bringing attention to their work. At times, men even lied about their accomplishments, taking credit for contributions that were not entirely theirs.

"We found that women typically are concerned about being seen as pushy and intrusive, and they may hesitate to ask for the raise, ask for a promotion or do anything that makes them stand out and appear to be boastful," says Goodson.

In a culture that offers up sweet-voiced Disney princesses as role models for young girls, it's hardly surprising that many women have trouble being aggressive in the pursuit of advancement or blustering about their achievements. According to career counselor Karyl Innis, who has seen this dynamic play out in her work, "you have to roll it all the way back to how little girls are brought up and often they're told to work hard; they're told nice girls don't do this, little girls don't do that. And largely they're being told, 'don't put yourself out there, don't brag.' "

Meanwhile, men have been primed to pursue their self-interest from childhood. Economist Linda Babcock found that men are far more aggressive when they www.womendontask.com negotiate raises and promotions. According to Babcock, men "are encouraged to go for it growing up. The world is their oyster, they're in charge, they're encouraged to take risks, and they just have so much more practice initiating negotiations growing up and with so much more encouragement from our society that this is an acceptable thing for them to do. So they get more practice. It's not as if women are missing a negotiation gene or something!"

In fact, Babcock's research reveals that women are great negotiators -- just not for themselves. "[Women] negotiate for their family members, they negotiate for the causes they believe in. So it's not that we don't have these skills. It's that society has told us that it’s not appropriate for us to use them for ourselves -- because that would be selfish or greedy."

Furthermore, women who buck gender expectations by engaging in what's considered "masculine" behavior face a whole other set of problems in the workplace: when they shed the buffers of femininity, they risk being vilified as bitches. (See: the Hillary Clinton nutcracker, and all the other creative ways some male commentators vented their anxieties about what Clinton would do to their genitals.)

While aggressive self-promotion might make women appear more competent, it poses its own hazard. According to social psychologist Peter Glick, who has done extensive research on the subtle ways gender expectations affect workplace relations, "There's a very strong prescriptive stereotype that women should be nice. The problem is that some of these self-promoting behaviors that are about "me, me, me" can be seen as not being nice … this can effect decisions, like who you want to promote, who you want to work with, who gets resources."

This double-standard is not lost on women who perceive, in the behavior of co-workers and supervisors, that being aggressive does not pan out for them in the same way that it does for men.

In a series of experiments, Harvard psychologist Hannah Bowles (with Linda Babcock and Lei Lai) asked participants to evaluate potential job candidates based on a script that had them either aggressively push for more money or accept the initial salary offer. Not surprisingly, Bowles found that evaluators were more likely to want to hire aggressive men than aggressive women. But her results also showed that women who had previously been evaluators in the experiment were far less likely than men to negotiate when they switched roles, suggesting that their experience in the experiment affected their future behavior.

"I was frustrated with the implications of, ‘Wow, women need more confidence, women need to negotiate more like men,' " says Bowles. "I think it's pretty clear that part of women's hesitance is reasonable in that they're correctly reading society's perceptions of women who try to negotiate."

And it’s not only women who suffer in a corporate culture that privileges aggressive self-promotion over talent and hard work. Firms also lose out in myriad ways when skilled, hard-working women don't get ahead. Mary Boughton, senior director of Catalyst Western Region (a nonprofit devoted to expanding opportunities for women in business), points out: "The ability to recruit/advance a diverse workforce is crucial because diversity leads to agility, open-mindedness and a willingness to change and overcome bias."

One possible advantage of diversity in the workplace, of course, is that if more women held leadership positions, corporate work culture could become more sensitive to the particular problems women face as they attempt to scale the career ladder.

And that's not only good for women, but for companies, too, since organizations that lack the mechanisms to notice and reward hard work may end up filling their leadership ranks with underqualified individuals (Michael "heck of a job" Brown, anyone?) After all, is rewarding self-promotion over quality work really the best way to discover and cultivate talent -- male or female? If an employee spends more time bragging about his or her accomplishments than actually accomplishing things, it's easy to see how the company suffers.

"Is pushiness your criteria for excellent worker? Well, maybe in some organizational contexts it is, but for most there's a broader array of talents that you want to be promoting," says Bowles. "You can have someone who really serves the organization and the people that work for them. So, does your system advance people who are 'other-oriented' as well as people who are 'self-oriented?' "

Babcock concludes that the modern workplace is hardly a magical meritocracy where the best workers soar to the highest positions.

"We really think and want to believe that the workplace is fair, and if you just work hard and do a good job that it will be rewarded. And I wish that were true -- that the world we lived in were like that."

Tana Ganeva is an editorial assistant at AlterNet.
© 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/112128/