Did you know that China has a greater percentage of women in politics than the USA does?
23.4% of politicians in China are female.
Many other countries have surprisingly high rates of women in politics.
Rwanda leads the world, with 63.8% of politicians are female.
Andorra is #2, with exactly 50% of politicians are female.
Cuba is #3, with 48.9% of politicians are female.
Canada is #55 with 25.1%.
The UK is #64 with 22.6%.
The United States is tied with San Marino for #85, with 18.3%.
You can browse the detailed stats by visiting http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm
Keeping in mind there is only about 190 countries in the world, so the the USA is really in the middle - halfway, which means it is getting beaten by countries like the Czech Republic, Bosnia, Peru, Croatia, Vietnam...
So what countries is the USA beating in terms of women in politics?
The United Arab Emirates. Oh and the DPRK (aka, North Korea). So the USA is only slightly better than UAE (a country that uses bits and pieces of Sharia law, where women are still flogged or stoned in public) and only beating North Korea by 2%, a country so backwards and scary they could declare nuclear war at the drop of a pin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_North_Korea
And to be fair, the UK and Canada isn't much better.
For example lets compare heads of state...
The United States has NEVER had a female president. Not once since 1776.
The UK had Margaret Thatcher (who was so conservative it defies belief), who was the first and only female PM in British history.
And then there is Canada's Kim Campbell - who didn't even win an election. She was placed in the PM's chair by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, who was leaving politics. She was only in power from June 25th to November 4th 1993. Less than 5 months.
What this tells us is that the USA, the UK and Canada really has barely only scratched the surface when it comes to women's equality and women in politics.
It tells me that more women in these countries need to be entering politics. It tells me that women in these countries are being discouraged from entering politics, and that means their voices are not being heard because they are being shouted down by men who still think women belong in the kitchen.
Sorry guys.
Women belong in the House. And the Senate. And the Oval Office.
Get used to it.
Anita Sarkeesian Vs Sexism in the Gaming Industry
Guest Post By Sheelah Kolhatkar
One night in October, before the media critic Anita Sarkeesian was scheduled to give a speech at Utah State University, someone e-mailed the school, threatening to commit mass murder. “This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” the message read. “I have at my disposal a semiautomatic rifle, multiple pistols, and a collection of pipe bombs,” it went on. “I will write my manifesto in her spilled blood, and you will all bear witness to what feminist lies and poison have done to the men of America.” The message mentioned Marc Lépine, a man who shot and killed 14 women at an engineering college in Montreal in 1989 before killing himself.
Sarkeesian had been invited by the university’s Center for Women and Gender to give a talk about sexism in the video game industry, which has lately become the kind of topic that generates death threats, in large part because of Sarkeesian’s work. As her plane made its way toward Salt Lake City, school officials quickly discussed the e-mail with police and decided it was safe for the talk to go on—it wasn’t the first time someone had promised to create havoc at one of her appearances, they reasoned, and nothing too terrible had happened before. The “terror threat,” as it was called, was reported in a local newspaper, and Sarkeesian learned about it after she got off the plane and checked Twitter. Her friends were e-mailing: “Are you OK?” She was too scared to leave the airport and called the school. After learning that the event staff couldn’t screen for weapons because of Utah’s concealed-carry laws, she canceled her talk, got back on a plane, and returned to California.
“Harassment is the background radiation of my life,” says Sarkeesian. “It is a factor in every decision I make. Any time I tweet something, or make a post, I’m always thinking about it. When I post our videos, it’s a consideration. It affects where I go, and how I behave, and how I feel walking down the street every day.”
The strange part is that Sarkeesian is essentially an academic who has spent the past two years putting together a scholarly criticism of video games as a medium, through a series called “Tropes vs Women in Video Games,” published on her website Feminist Frequency. She finds disturbing, recurring themes in the ways that women are depicted in games, from blockbusters such as Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty to obscure titles such as Splatterhouse and MediEvil 2.
The Utah State incident raised her profile yet again, landing her on the front page of the New York Times the following day. She broke 200,000 followers on Twitter and is in demand on the speaking circuit, where she talks about online harassment almost as much as she does video games, deconstructing and dissecting it like one of her game motifs. “Tropes vs Women in Video Games” was on track to become the kind of minor academic work that professors make their assistants churn out to help them get tenure. But it tapped something that was waiting to explode. And it might change an industry that’s by some measures now larger than Hollywood.
Petite and fair, with long, shiny hair the color of merlot, chunky boots, and nails painted gold, Sarkeesian, 31, telegraphs an earnest grad student—part activist, part literary theory major. She was studying for her master’s at York University in Toronto when, as a kind of hobby, she started making videos about women in popular culture. Her degree was in social and political thought—her thesis was called “I’ll Make a Man Out of You: Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television”—and she was interested in creating something that might make feminism more accessible. After graduating in 2010, she produced “Tropes vs Women,” a series of six videos about movies and television, looking at the show Glee, rap lyrics, the marketing of toys for boys and girls, and so on. She hoped that by focusing on “tropes”—storytelling devices—through popular culture she could help viewers become more critical consumers of media.
In 2012, Sarkeesian was invited to speak about creating strong female characters at Bungie, the game studio near Seattle that made the Halo series. She got surprisingly good feedback and decided to push her thinking into video games, which she’s loved since playing on a Game Boy as a kid. Sarkeesian started a fundraising campaign on Kickstarter: “Have you ever noticed that with a few notable exceptions, basically all female characters in video games fall into a small handful of clichés and stereotypes?” she asked at the start of her pitch.
She set a goal of $6,000 and reached it in less than 24 hours. Two weeks later, after passing the $22,000 mark, she posted a video describing the project on YouTube, and it started to draw the attention of hard-core gamers. Thousands of comments flooded YouTube, Kickstarter, and Sarkeesian’s own website. Some asked why she wasn’t looking at male characters and argued that the things she was pointing out weren’t sexist, necessarily, but realistic or historically accurate. But many comments were couched in vicious language: “I hate ovaries with brains big enough to post videos,” “f--- you feminist f---s you already have equality. In fact you have better s--- than most males be glad what you got bitch,” and “get back in the kitchen, if you hate it go make your own games.” Sarkeesian took screen grabs of the comments and posted them, which in turn drove more comments, and more people to contribute money on Kickstarter. The campaign ultimately raised $158,922 from 6,968 backers during the 30 days it was open.
Then Sarkeesian got to work. There are games stacked in piles around her San Francisco home, where she has a Wii; a WiiU; a PlayStation 2, 3, and 4; an Xbox 360; Xbox One; PS Vita; Nintendo 3DS XL; iPhone; iPad; and a gaming PC spilling out of various Ikea shelves and TV stands. The place is a jungle of cables and wires—she has three power strips behind her TV—and also includes capture equipment to record segments of games, as well as a recording studio where she creates the scripted portions of her videos.
Each video can require hundreds of hours of game playing, which she does herself or with the help of her co-producer, Jonathan McIntosh, who’s created his own share of viral cultural critiques. Getting the right snippet of a game—the appearance of a particular character, for example—can require playing it 10 or 15 times to drive the narrative up to the desired point and in such a way that the footage will be clear to anyone watching it later. A common joke among gamers, Sarkeesian says, is that even when you’re inhabiting one of the rare playable female characters, you can leer at her butt up close—you’re playing a woman and checking her out at the same time. At one point, Sarkeesian spent two days replaying every game to satisfy a hunch that first-person characters had the capacity to stare at the butts of female characters, but not at the backsides of men. She was right.
Some of the images of women she assembled were subtly diminishing—a princess trapped in a crystal, for example—but many were brutal. In a clip from Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood, a marquee game made by Ubisoft Entertainment and introduced with a national TV campaign, the throat of a barely dressed maiden is slashed. Women are beaten and kicked in other games. They are slung over horses, dumped in trunks, and run over with sports cars. Often, when they are killed, a player is rewarded with money. Each trope video opens with a similar disclaimer: “I need to stress that this video comes with a content warning and is not recommended for children,” Sarkeesian says to the camera. “This episode includes game footage of hypersexualized female characters as well as extremely graphic depictions of violence against women.”
The videos last about 20 minutes to 30 minutes each, with Sarkeesian narrating, often using dense terminology imported from feminist theory (“building off of philosopher Martha Nussbaum’s work on objectification theory …,” etc.). She focuses on the darkest, most violent and sexualized parts of the games and the limited range of their female characters, whom she terms “nonplayable sex objects”—often barely dressed streetwalkers, pole dancers, and barmaids spilling out of their corsets; helpless mistresses outfitted in shredded dress-bits with double-D cleavage; and the ongoing parade of women who are stabbed, shot, and mutilated in service of plots about heavily armed male antiheroes.
The first three videos in the series examine the “damsels in distress” trope and the ways in which women appear not as characters with power to take action but as victims in need of rescue and “a core incentive or motivation for the protagonist’s quest.” Sarkeesian draws an engaging line through history, from Perseus and Andromeda, to King Kong and Fay Wray, to Popeye and Olive Oyl, to Super Mario and Princess Peach. Two more installments look at a second trope, “women as background decoration.” They open with a clip from a Sega game called Binary Domain, set in a purple-hued brothel. “Sorry, all booked up,” says a hooker breathily, puffing on a cigarillo. “Too bad, too, ’cause I would’ve given a stud like you a free sample.” As Sarkeesian illustrates through clips of Grand Theft Auto and other games where “whore” is often a synonym for “woman,” the nonplayable females are just elements sprinkled into the environments to make them edgier and more titillating to men. There are more trope videos coming, including one about women as rewards and another about women as erotic sidekicks.
Each time a new video comes out, the harassment spikes. People impersonate Sarkeesian, creating fake accounts with her photo. Some spread false information. There was an effort to get the IRS to investigate the nonprofit status of Feminist Frequency. She gets private messages and pictures showing her image being raped by video game characters, some with her face Photoshopped onto porn stills, in addition to the standard threats and insults.
In August an independent video game designer named Zoe Quinn was swept up in a separate Internet storm when her ex-boyfriend posted a rambling 9,000-word essay about their relationship on several online forums. Quinn was best known for a game called Depression Quest, about suffering through mental illness, something she has experienced. The angry boyfriend’s post led to accusations that Quinn had a romantic relationship with a video game critic for the gaming website Kotaku. Although Depression Quest is available for free and the critic never reviewed the game, Quinn became the target of rape and death threats, obscene calls to her father, and online petitions to try to sabotage her career.
The campaign grew and morphed and got a name, “gamergate.” Very few people came out looking good in the ensuing hashtag war—an example of social media at its worst, with childish insults, sarcasm, disingenuousness, and threats of rape and other violence. Quinn fled her home in Boston and hasn’t been back in months. She periodically gets reports that strangers are lurking outside. She’s working with criminal prosecutors and the FBI on some of the more serious threats, but she says that her life has been practically destroyed. “I talk to my therapist,” Quinn says, via Skype from London. “She says, ‘I don’t even know what to tell you, this is so f---ing far outside anything I’m aware of.’ ” Other women involved in game development were affected as well.
When Sarkeesian released a new trope video in the weeks after the Quinn incident, the threats against Sarkeesian escalated yet again. “In several hours I’m going to drive a truck loaded with ammonium nitrate into your apartment,” someone tweeted to her, including what was purported to be her home address. “I’m sitting outside your apartment … with a loaded gun,” read another Twitter message, which also included a home address. “The moment you step outside, I’m going to blow you away.” Sarkeesian was “doxxed,” online slang for when a person’s personal information, such as phone numbers and bank data, are made public with an implicit invitation for further stalking, and people called and menaced her parents. The FBI got involved.
Unfortunately, law enforcement hasn’t shown a willingness to take online threats seriously, says Danielle Citron, a law professor at the University of Maryland and the author of Hate Crimes in Cyberspace. There have been some successes prosecuting so-called revenge porn websites, for example, which encourage the posting of nude photographs of ex-wives and girlfriends, and often demand money to take the pictures down. But in other cases, the FBI and police say that virtual threats aren’t as serious as other types of threats, urging the victims to not look at their e-mail if they don’t like what’s there. “The Internet brings out the best and the worst in us,” Citron says. “Anonymity lets us be our true selves, so the domestic violence victim or the LGBT person can communicate in a way they couldn’t before. But the trolls and the stalkers also act with impunity, because they can.”
McIntosh, Sarkeesian’s male co-producer, was also harassed online, but nowhere near as vehemently, and it had a less sexist tone. “It’s really important that women be free to share their opinions online without being shouted down,” he says. “In the video game industry right now, women don’t want to speak. There’s a real fear, and it really is silencing people.”
Sales of video games already exceed Hollywood’s box office revenue, with console games generating $25 billion in the U.S. in 2013, compared with $10.9 billion for movies. Video games may someday surpass Hollywood in cultural and economic relevance, but the industry will first have to develop an inclusiveness and breadth of artistic expression that reaches beyond guys in their man caves. In March 2013, game designer Cliff Bleszinski, a creative force behind Gears of War, the post-apocalyptic game that features female soldiers who fight alongside men, acknowledged as much when he wrote on his website of a “cancer” plaguing the industry.
“[I]f we’re going to grow up as an industry, we’re going to need the consumer to grow up a bit as well,” he wrote. “The latent racism, homophobia, and misogyny online are black marks on an otherwise great hobby. Anonymity is the gasoline on the fire of hate that flares up on forums, chat rooms, and Xbox Live on a daily basis.”
The industry’s main trade group, the Entertainment Software Association, tries to emphasize how mainstream the industry is, even as many of the games themselves undermine its message. The ESA trumpets the fact that the proportion of women playing all video games—not just on Xbox-style consoles, but also on tablets and other devices—has grown to 45 percent, and that 51 percent of U.S. households own at least one video game console. The range of games being produced overall has grown, with a far broader swath of the population engaging in online play as it’s become a fixture of smartphones and iPads. But a single hit console game, such as Call of Duty, can generate more than $1 billion in revenue a year, and anything that might disturb that revenue stream presents obvious economic risk. A clip from the latest installment in the Grand Theft Auto franchise, produced by Rockstar Games, a subsidiary of Take-Two Interactive, features a first-person character who picks up a sickly looking hooker on the street, has sex with her in his car, then gets annoyed with her chattering and punches her in the face before running her over and driving away.
In October the ESA issued a statement. “Threats of violence and harassment are wrong,” it read. “They have to stop. There is no place in the video game community—or our society—for personal attacks and threats.” Most of the individual game companies in whose name the war is being waged haven’t spoken about it. When asked to comment, a spokesman for Take-Two Interactive referred to the ESA’s statement, while one for Activision Blizzard, which makes World of Warcraft among other titles, pointed out that the company’s co-founder Mike Morhaime recently said at a conference that the industry should “take a stand” against online harassment. Ubisoft did not respond to requests. John Reseburg, a spokesman for Electronic Arts, says: “We strongly support the ESA’s position, and believe there is absolutely no place in games for threats, harassment, and abuse. It is behavior that simply must stop. As a company, we are focused on continuing to take steps internally to protect our employees and make sure they feel safe.”
At the Electronic Entertainment Expo this year, an Electronic Arts executive addressed the question of why so many games seem to exclude women. “My thesis is that it’s a male-dominated business,” said Patrick Söderlund, an executive vice president at the company, which publishes a much-praised game called Mirror’s Edge featuring a ninjalike woman protagonist and several other titles with strong female characters. “I’m not sure that flies, but I think it overall may have something to do with it—that boys tend to design for boys and women for women. I’m just happy that we have a game with a female heroine.”
“As a woman with a background in technology—I started in computer science—the issue I’ve seen is the lack of balance,” says Robin Hunicke, an independent game designer who began her career at Electronic Arts working on The Sims. “There’s a ratio issue, in technology and computer science and the sciences in general. But the lack of balance creates problems, and the problems begin with that skewed ratio.”
“Major publishers need to enforce a zero-tolerance policy of sexism and racism and homophobia,” says Sarkeesian. “Developers need to start moving away from the entitled macho-male power fantasy in their games. They need to recognize that there are wider stories that they can tell.” She has drawn up her own schematic for such a game. It would start with a princess trapped in a tower. But no one would come to rescue her. Eventually, she would have to break out herself.
On Oct. 30, Sarkeesian is drinking tea at a cafe near Columbus Circle in Manhattan the morning after she appeared on The Colbert Report. It had gone relatively smoothly, although the comedown was almost as intense as the buildup. “I couldn’t sleep last night,” she says. “I woke up at 3 a.m., and my mind was racing.”
“I speak for all gamers when I say the media should stop talking to critics like Anita Sarkeeeeeesian,” Colbert had said by way of introduction. “Let’s call this what it is,” he went on in his pretend right-wing pundit character. “You and the other feminazis in the gamer world are coming for our balls, to snip ’em off, put ’em into a little felt purse, and take ’em away so we have to play your nonviolent games.”
“No, that’s not true,” Sarkeesian said, with an uncertain smile.
“It’s a culture war!” Colbert replied, grinning. “It’s a subculture war!”
The segment ended with Colbert asking if, as a man, he was “allowed” to be a feminist. “Do you believe that women should have equal rights to men and that we should fight for those rights?” Sarkeesian said. “Yes,” Colbert replied. “Great!” Sarkeesian said. “Then you’re a feminist.”
As online hatred has continued to pour in, Sarkeesian’s voice has only gotten louder. The morning of her Colbert appearance, the New York Times published an op-ed she’d written, “It’s Game Over for ‘Gamers.’ ” In it she tries to cast a hopeful spin on the way the culture of video games is evolving as more people who aren’t young men have started to play them.
“People are talking about women and games seriously; people are taking the critiques seriously,” Sarkeesian says as she stirs her tea. “It’s been a huge shift. This discussion is becoming more mainstream.”
A blond woman sitting at the next table before an array of New York City street maps begins squirming excitedly in her seat. “Are you talking about the article about gaming in the New York Times yesterday? I read it!” she says excitedly. “Did you write that? It was great!”
Sarkeesian, looking a bit embarrassed, says yes. She turns back around on her stool. “On any given day,” she says, “I can feel super hopeful or super depressed.”
One night in October, before the media critic Anita Sarkeesian was scheduled to give a speech at Utah State University, someone e-mailed the school, threatening to commit mass murder. “This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” the message read. “I have at my disposal a semiautomatic rifle, multiple pistols, and a collection of pipe bombs,” it went on. “I will write my manifesto in her spilled blood, and you will all bear witness to what feminist lies and poison have done to the men of America.” The message mentioned Marc Lépine, a man who shot and killed 14 women at an engineering college in Montreal in 1989 before killing himself.
Sarkeesian had been invited by the university’s Center for Women and Gender to give a talk about sexism in the video game industry, which has lately become the kind of topic that generates death threats, in large part because of Sarkeesian’s work. As her plane made its way toward Salt Lake City, school officials quickly discussed the e-mail with police and decided it was safe for the talk to go on—it wasn’t the first time someone had promised to create havoc at one of her appearances, they reasoned, and nothing too terrible had happened before. The “terror threat,” as it was called, was reported in a local newspaper, and Sarkeesian learned about it after she got off the plane and checked Twitter. Her friends were e-mailing: “Are you OK?” She was too scared to leave the airport and called the school. After learning that the event staff couldn’t screen for weapons because of Utah’s concealed-carry laws, she canceled her talk, got back on a plane, and returned to California.
“Harassment is the background radiation of my life,” says Sarkeesian. “It is a factor in every decision I make. Any time I tweet something, or make a post, I’m always thinking about it. When I post our videos, it’s a consideration. It affects where I go, and how I behave, and how I feel walking down the street every day.”
The strange part is that Sarkeesian is essentially an academic who has spent the past two years putting together a scholarly criticism of video games as a medium, through a series called “Tropes vs Women in Video Games,” published on her website Feminist Frequency. She finds disturbing, recurring themes in the ways that women are depicted in games, from blockbusters such as Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty to obscure titles such as Splatterhouse and MediEvil 2.
The Utah State incident raised her profile yet again, landing her on the front page of the New York Times the following day. She broke 200,000 followers on Twitter and is in demand on the speaking circuit, where she talks about online harassment almost as much as she does video games, deconstructing and dissecting it like one of her game motifs. “Tropes vs Women in Video Games” was on track to become the kind of minor academic work that professors make their assistants churn out to help them get tenure. But it tapped something that was waiting to explode. And it might change an industry that’s by some measures now larger than Hollywood.
Petite and fair, with long, shiny hair the color of merlot, chunky boots, and nails painted gold, Sarkeesian, 31, telegraphs an earnest grad student—part activist, part literary theory major. She was studying for her master’s at York University in Toronto when, as a kind of hobby, she started making videos about women in popular culture. Her degree was in social and political thought—her thesis was called “I’ll Make a Man Out of You: Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television”—and she was interested in creating something that might make feminism more accessible. After graduating in 2010, she produced “Tropes vs Women,” a series of six videos about movies and television, looking at the show Glee, rap lyrics, the marketing of toys for boys and girls, and so on. She hoped that by focusing on “tropes”—storytelling devices—through popular culture she could help viewers become more critical consumers of media.
In 2012, Sarkeesian was invited to speak about creating strong female characters at Bungie, the game studio near Seattle that made the Halo series. She got surprisingly good feedback and decided to push her thinking into video games, which she’s loved since playing on a Game Boy as a kid. Sarkeesian started a fundraising campaign on Kickstarter: “Have you ever noticed that with a few notable exceptions, basically all female characters in video games fall into a small handful of clichés and stereotypes?” she asked at the start of her pitch.
She set a goal of $6,000 and reached it in less than 24 hours. Two weeks later, after passing the $22,000 mark, she posted a video describing the project on YouTube, and it started to draw the attention of hard-core gamers. Thousands of comments flooded YouTube, Kickstarter, and Sarkeesian’s own website. Some asked why she wasn’t looking at male characters and argued that the things she was pointing out weren’t sexist, necessarily, but realistic or historically accurate. But many comments were couched in vicious language: “I hate ovaries with brains big enough to post videos,” “f--- you feminist f---s you already have equality. In fact you have better s--- than most males be glad what you got bitch,” and “get back in the kitchen, if you hate it go make your own games.” Sarkeesian took screen grabs of the comments and posted them, which in turn drove more comments, and more people to contribute money on Kickstarter. The campaign ultimately raised $158,922 from 6,968 backers during the 30 days it was open.
Then Sarkeesian got to work. There are games stacked in piles around her San Francisco home, where she has a Wii; a WiiU; a PlayStation 2, 3, and 4; an Xbox 360; Xbox One; PS Vita; Nintendo 3DS XL; iPhone; iPad; and a gaming PC spilling out of various Ikea shelves and TV stands. The place is a jungle of cables and wires—she has three power strips behind her TV—and also includes capture equipment to record segments of games, as well as a recording studio where she creates the scripted portions of her videos.
Each video can require hundreds of hours of game playing, which she does herself or with the help of her co-producer, Jonathan McIntosh, who’s created his own share of viral cultural critiques. Getting the right snippet of a game—the appearance of a particular character, for example—can require playing it 10 or 15 times to drive the narrative up to the desired point and in such a way that the footage will be clear to anyone watching it later. A common joke among gamers, Sarkeesian says, is that even when you’re inhabiting one of the rare playable female characters, you can leer at her butt up close—you’re playing a woman and checking her out at the same time. At one point, Sarkeesian spent two days replaying every game to satisfy a hunch that first-person characters had the capacity to stare at the butts of female characters, but not at the backsides of men. She was right.
Some of the images of women she assembled were subtly diminishing—a princess trapped in a crystal, for example—but many were brutal. In a clip from Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood, a marquee game made by Ubisoft Entertainment and introduced with a national TV campaign, the throat of a barely dressed maiden is slashed. Women are beaten and kicked in other games. They are slung over horses, dumped in trunks, and run over with sports cars. Often, when they are killed, a player is rewarded with money. Each trope video opens with a similar disclaimer: “I need to stress that this video comes with a content warning and is not recommended for children,” Sarkeesian says to the camera. “This episode includes game footage of hypersexualized female characters as well as extremely graphic depictions of violence against women.”
The videos last about 20 minutes to 30 minutes each, with Sarkeesian narrating, often using dense terminology imported from feminist theory (“building off of philosopher Martha Nussbaum’s work on objectification theory …,” etc.). She focuses on the darkest, most violent and sexualized parts of the games and the limited range of their female characters, whom she terms “nonplayable sex objects”—often barely dressed streetwalkers, pole dancers, and barmaids spilling out of their corsets; helpless mistresses outfitted in shredded dress-bits with double-D cleavage; and the ongoing parade of women who are stabbed, shot, and mutilated in service of plots about heavily armed male antiheroes.
The first three videos in the series examine the “damsels in distress” trope and the ways in which women appear not as characters with power to take action but as victims in need of rescue and “a core incentive or motivation for the protagonist’s quest.” Sarkeesian draws an engaging line through history, from Perseus and Andromeda, to King Kong and Fay Wray, to Popeye and Olive Oyl, to Super Mario and Princess Peach. Two more installments look at a second trope, “women as background decoration.” They open with a clip from a Sega game called Binary Domain, set in a purple-hued brothel. “Sorry, all booked up,” says a hooker breathily, puffing on a cigarillo. “Too bad, too, ’cause I would’ve given a stud like you a free sample.” As Sarkeesian illustrates through clips of Grand Theft Auto and other games where “whore” is often a synonym for “woman,” the nonplayable females are just elements sprinkled into the environments to make them edgier and more titillating to men. There are more trope videos coming, including one about women as rewards and another about women as erotic sidekicks.
Each time a new video comes out, the harassment spikes. People impersonate Sarkeesian, creating fake accounts with her photo. Some spread false information. There was an effort to get the IRS to investigate the nonprofit status of Feminist Frequency. She gets private messages and pictures showing her image being raped by video game characters, some with her face Photoshopped onto porn stills, in addition to the standard threats and insults.
In August an independent video game designer named Zoe Quinn was swept up in a separate Internet storm when her ex-boyfriend posted a rambling 9,000-word essay about their relationship on several online forums. Quinn was best known for a game called Depression Quest, about suffering through mental illness, something she has experienced. The angry boyfriend’s post led to accusations that Quinn had a romantic relationship with a video game critic for the gaming website Kotaku. Although Depression Quest is available for free and the critic never reviewed the game, Quinn became the target of rape and death threats, obscene calls to her father, and online petitions to try to sabotage her career.
The campaign grew and morphed and got a name, “gamergate.” Very few people came out looking good in the ensuing hashtag war—an example of social media at its worst, with childish insults, sarcasm, disingenuousness, and threats of rape and other violence. Quinn fled her home in Boston and hasn’t been back in months. She periodically gets reports that strangers are lurking outside. She’s working with criminal prosecutors and the FBI on some of the more serious threats, but she says that her life has been practically destroyed. “I talk to my therapist,” Quinn says, via Skype from London. “She says, ‘I don’t even know what to tell you, this is so f---ing far outside anything I’m aware of.’ ” Other women involved in game development were affected as well.
When Sarkeesian released a new trope video in the weeks after the Quinn incident, the threats against Sarkeesian escalated yet again. “In several hours I’m going to drive a truck loaded with ammonium nitrate into your apartment,” someone tweeted to her, including what was purported to be her home address. “I’m sitting outside your apartment … with a loaded gun,” read another Twitter message, which also included a home address. “The moment you step outside, I’m going to blow you away.” Sarkeesian was “doxxed,” online slang for when a person’s personal information, such as phone numbers and bank data, are made public with an implicit invitation for further stalking, and people called and menaced her parents. The FBI got involved.
Unfortunately, law enforcement hasn’t shown a willingness to take online threats seriously, says Danielle Citron, a law professor at the University of Maryland and the author of Hate Crimes in Cyberspace. There have been some successes prosecuting so-called revenge porn websites, for example, which encourage the posting of nude photographs of ex-wives and girlfriends, and often demand money to take the pictures down. But in other cases, the FBI and police say that virtual threats aren’t as serious as other types of threats, urging the victims to not look at their e-mail if they don’t like what’s there. “The Internet brings out the best and the worst in us,” Citron says. “Anonymity lets us be our true selves, so the domestic violence victim or the LGBT person can communicate in a way they couldn’t before. But the trolls and the stalkers also act with impunity, because they can.”
McIntosh, Sarkeesian’s male co-producer, was also harassed online, but nowhere near as vehemently, and it had a less sexist tone. “It’s really important that women be free to share their opinions online without being shouted down,” he says. “In the video game industry right now, women don’t want to speak. There’s a real fear, and it really is silencing people.”
Sales of video games already exceed Hollywood’s box office revenue, with console games generating $25 billion in the U.S. in 2013, compared with $10.9 billion for movies. Video games may someday surpass Hollywood in cultural and economic relevance, but the industry will first have to develop an inclusiveness and breadth of artistic expression that reaches beyond guys in their man caves. In March 2013, game designer Cliff Bleszinski, a creative force behind Gears of War, the post-apocalyptic game that features female soldiers who fight alongside men, acknowledged as much when he wrote on his website of a “cancer” plaguing the industry.
“[I]f we’re going to grow up as an industry, we’re going to need the consumer to grow up a bit as well,” he wrote. “The latent racism, homophobia, and misogyny online are black marks on an otherwise great hobby. Anonymity is the gasoline on the fire of hate that flares up on forums, chat rooms, and Xbox Live on a daily basis.”
The industry’s main trade group, the Entertainment Software Association, tries to emphasize how mainstream the industry is, even as many of the games themselves undermine its message. The ESA trumpets the fact that the proportion of women playing all video games—not just on Xbox-style consoles, but also on tablets and other devices—has grown to 45 percent, and that 51 percent of U.S. households own at least one video game console. The range of games being produced overall has grown, with a far broader swath of the population engaging in online play as it’s become a fixture of smartphones and iPads. But a single hit console game, such as Call of Duty, can generate more than $1 billion in revenue a year, and anything that might disturb that revenue stream presents obvious economic risk. A clip from the latest installment in the Grand Theft Auto franchise, produced by Rockstar Games, a subsidiary of Take-Two Interactive, features a first-person character who picks up a sickly looking hooker on the street, has sex with her in his car, then gets annoyed with her chattering and punches her in the face before running her over and driving away.
In October the ESA issued a statement. “Threats of violence and harassment are wrong,” it read. “They have to stop. There is no place in the video game community—or our society—for personal attacks and threats.” Most of the individual game companies in whose name the war is being waged haven’t spoken about it. When asked to comment, a spokesman for Take-Two Interactive referred to the ESA’s statement, while one for Activision Blizzard, which makes World of Warcraft among other titles, pointed out that the company’s co-founder Mike Morhaime recently said at a conference that the industry should “take a stand” against online harassment. Ubisoft did not respond to requests. John Reseburg, a spokesman for Electronic Arts, says: “We strongly support the ESA’s position, and believe there is absolutely no place in games for threats, harassment, and abuse. It is behavior that simply must stop. As a company, we are focused on continuing to take steps internally to protect our employees and make sure they feel safe.”
At the Electronic Entertainment Expo this year, an Electronic Arts executive addressed the question of why so many games seem to exclude women. “My thesis is that it’s a male-dominated business,” said Patrick Söderlund, an executive vice president at the company, which publishes a much-praised game called Mirror’s Edge featuring a ninjalike woman protagonist and several other titles with strong female characters. “I’m not sure that flies, but I think it overall may have something to do with it—that boys tend to design for boys and women for women. I’m just happy that we have a game with a female heroine.”
“As a woman with a background in technology—I started in computer science—the issue I’ve seen is the lack of balance,” says Robin Hunicke, an independent game designer who began her career at Electronic Arts working on The Sims. “There’s a ratio issue, in technology and computer science and the sciences in general. But the lack of balance creates problems, and the problems begin with that skewed ratio.”
“Major publishers need to enforce a zero-tolerance policy of sexism and racism and homophobia,” says Sarkeesian. “Developers need to start moving away from the entitled macho-male power fantasy in their games. They need to recognize that there are wider stories that they can tell.” She has drawn up her own schematic for such a game. It would start with a princess trapped in a tower. But no one would come to rescue her. Eventually, she would have to break out herself.
On Oct. 30, Sarkeesian is drinking tea at a cafe near Columbus Circle in Manhattan the morning after she appeared on The Colbert Report. It had gone relatively smoothly, although the comedown was almost as intense as the buildup. “I couldn’t sleep last night,” she says. “I woke up at 3 a.m., and my mind was racing.”
“I speak for all gamers when I say the media should stop talking to critics like Anita Sarkeeeeeesian,” Colbert had said by way of introduction. “Let’s call this what it is,” he went on in his pretend right-wing pundit character. “You and the other feminazis in the gamer world are coming for our balls, to snip ’em off, put ’em into a little felt purse, and take ’em away so we have to play your nonviolent games.”
“No, that’s not true,” Sarkeesian said, with an uncertain smile.
“It’s a culture war!” Colbert replied, grinning. “It’s a subculture war!”
The segment ended with Colbert asking if, as a man, he was “allowed” to be a feminist. “Do you believe that women should have equal rights to men and that we should fight for those rights?” Sarkeesian said. “Yes,” Colbert replied. “Great!” Sarkeesian said. “Then you’re a feminist.”
As online hatred has continued to pour in, Sarkeesian’s voice has only gotten louder. The morning of her Colbert appearance, the New York Times published an op-ed she’d written, “It’s Game Over for ‘Gamers.’ ” In it she tries to cast a hopeful spin on the way the culture of video games is evolving as more people who aren’t young men have started to play them.
“People are talking about women and games seriously; people are taking the critiques seriously,” Sarkeesian says as she stirs her tea. “It’s been a huge shift. This discussion is becoming more mainstream.”
A blond woman sitting at the next table before an array of New York City street maps begins squirming excitedly in her seat. “Are you talking about the article about gaming in the New York Times yesterday? I read it!” she says excitedly. “Did you write that? It was great!”
Sarkeesian, looking a bit embarrassed, says yes. She turns back around on her stool. “On any given day,” she says, “I can feel super hopeful or super depressed.”
Year 2000 Women - Amazonian Superwomen?
Back in the 1950s Associated Press writer Dorothy Roe made a series of predictions for the fantastic future of what she thought women and gender equality would be like 50 years later in the year 2000. Among her prognostications about greater gender parity was the belief that women of the future would evolve into Amazonian Superwomen.
Below is part of the text written by Dorothy Roe:
The woman of the year 2000 will be an outsize Diana, anthropologists and beauty experts predict. She will be more than six feet tall, wear a size 11 shoe, have shoulders like a wrestler and muscles like a truck driver.
Chances are she will be doing a man's job, and for this reason will dress to fit her role.
Her hair will be cropped short, so as not to get in the way. She probably will wear the most functional clothes in the daytime, go frilly only after dark.
Slacks probably will be her usual workaday costume. These will be of synthetic fiber, treated to keep her warm in winter and cool in summer, admit the beneficial ultra-violet rays and keep out the burning ones. They will be light weight and equipped with pockets for food capsules, which she will eat instead of meat and potatoes.
According to 1950s futurists, women of the year 2000 would be giantesses. Her proportions will be perfect, though Amazonian, because science will have perfected a balanced ration of vitamins, proteins and minerals that will produce the maximum bodily efficiency, the minimum of fat.
She will go in for all kinds of sports – probably will compete with men athletes in football, baseball, prizefighting and wrestling.
She'll be in on all the high-level groups of finance, business and government.
She may even be president.
So they would be Amazonian giantessses who like to go "frilly only after dark".
Wow. I wish such a turn of events had come true.
such a magnificent turn of phrase — it sounds like the Victorian equivalent of Skinemax, which would consist solely of a salacious sousaphone solo.
The illustration above is from a December 24, 1949 Associated Press piece by weight-loss entrepreneur Ann Delafield. In this similar article, Delafield cited sunshine as a catalyst for women becoming Amazons. Except for two problems. As a biochemist I know that sunshine makes almost no difference on growth patterns, and two, even if that was true modern women spend way more time indoors than any previous generation.
The difference between 1900 and 1950 was largely due to better food and healthier conditions. The difference between now and 1950 also has other factors like rising rates of anorexia, obesity and the fact that women are still loath to enter male dominated fields.
Despite the 60 years that have passed since the 1950s Wonder Woman is still running around in her tight clothes and showing lots of skin. Some things never change apparently.
How to deal with an abusive boyfriend
Want to know how to deal with an abusive boyfriend?
Step One
Resist.
Step Two
Seek help.
Step Three
Kick the bastard in the balls and walk away.
* Note - Helps if the person doing the kicking is a taekwondo champion. See the video below. :)
Step One
Resist.
Step Two
Seek help.
Step Three
Kick the bastard in the balls and walk away.
* Note - Helps if the person doing the kicking is a taekwondo champion. See the video below. :)
Don't let haters get you down
By Suzanne MacNevin
I want to apologize to every fat person I have ever made fun of. Including Rob Ford.
Historically I thought that my "tough love" approach with the obesity epidemic was my way of promoting fitness and motivating fat people to stop coddling themselves, get off the sofa, and start exercising / eating healthy.
I thought that obese people needed both positive and negative reinforcement in order to motivate themselves to change.
What I have since realized is that obese people have no shortage of negative reinforcement, what they really need is more positive.
Furthermore I have also realized I was being a hater.
Not that I hate fat people. What I hated was what you stood for. Laziness and gluttony. It was nothing against the people themselves, but an indictment of their lack of willpower and a society that feeds upon laziness and gluttony, turning people into food addicts.
I came to this epiphany while I was chatting online with a friend in Canada, a personal trainer who lives in Toronto who uses sports to help motivate his clients to lose weight.
What he said was "Haters are going to hate and you can't let haters get you down. You have to stay up, keep going forward, keep trying harder, because quitting will only let the haters win - and you cannot let them win. You have to take your own hate for the haters and turn that into positive action - but you are never going to do that unless you have the support of people who are not haters and tell you to 'go for it!' "
And that was when my brain just clicked. I realized that my brand of negative reinforcement wasn't very supportive. My mindset was all screwed up and my friend had opened a window in my brain, letting a flood of light in and suddenly I could see clearly.
So now I feel I need to spread three messages.
One, I apologize. I am very sorry for all the times I made fun of fat people. I know that isn't a very good apology, but it is sincere.
Two, to other haters out there: Please realize that your hate only drags other people down.
Three, to all the people out there who are feeling a lack of motivation: You can do it. I believe in you.
Note - I want to point out that my friend was speaking broadly about haters and motivation. He wasn't speaking about exercising, the conversation turned in this direction because of some jackass who hates him just for the sake of hating him (and is probably just jealous of his physique). If you have encountered this type of person you know what they are like. The hardcore haters will find any excuse to hate people - even perfectly likable people who can speak so eloquently about turning hate into positivity.
But what he said was truly profound because it applied to all kinds of hate and to many different activities - not just motivating yourself to exercise. It also easily applies to sexism, racism, and any of discrimination.
With that said I am going back to all my old articles and blog posts on the topics of obesity, exercising, etc and re-writing them so they are more supportive. It will take awhile but I will do it. So I apologize if you read any of my old articles in which I make fun of lazy fat people and defended my negative reinforcement. It will take some time and effort to re-write everything.
And you can do it too. You just have to set your mind to it and ignore the haters!
I want to apologize to every fat person I have ever made fun of. Including Rob Ford.
Historically I thought that my "tough love" approach with the obesity epidemic was my way of promoting fitness and motivating fat people to stop coddling themselves, get off the sofa, and start exercising / eating healthy.
I thought that obese people needed both positive and negative reinforcement in order to motivate themselves to change.
What I have since realized is that obese people have no shortage of negative reinforcement, what they really need is more positive.
Furthermore I have also realized I was being a hater.
Not that I hate fat people. What I hated was what you stood for. Laziness and gluttony. It was nothing against the people themselves, but an indictment of their lack of willpower and a society that feeds upon laziness and gluttony, turning people into food addicts.
I came to this epiphany while I was chatting online with a friend in Canada, a personal trainer who lives in Toronto who uses sports to help motivate his clients to lose weight.
What he said was "Haters are going to hate and you can't let haters get you down. You have to stay up, keep going forward, keep trying harder, because quitting will only let the haters win - and you cannot let them win. You have to take your own hate for the haters and turn that into positive action - but you are never going to do that unless you have the support of people who are not haters and tell you to 'go for it!' "
And that was when my brain just clicked. I realized that my brand of negative reinforcement wasn't very supportive. My mindset was all screwed up and my friend had opened a window in my brain, letting a flood of light in and suddenly I could see clearly.
So now I feel I need to spread three messages.
One, I apologize. I am very sorry for all the times I made fun of fat people. I know that isn't a very good apology, but it is sincere.
Two, to other haters out there: Please realize that your hate only drags other people down.
Three, to all the people out there who are feeling a lack of motivation: You can do it. I believe in you.
Note - I want to point out that my friend was speaking broadly about haters and motivation. He wasn't speaking about exercising, the conversation turned in this direction because of some jackass who hates him just for the sake of hating him (and is probably just jealous of his physique). If you have encountered this type of person you know what they are like. The hardcore haters will find any excuse to hate people - even perfectly likable people who can speak so eloquently about turning hate into positivity.
But what he said was truly profound because it applied to all kinds of hate and to many different activities - not just motivating yourself to exercise. It also easily applies to sexism, racism, and any of discrimination.
With that said I am going back to all my old articles and blog posts on the topics of obesity, exercising, etc and re-writing them so they are more supportive. It will take awhile but I will do it. So I apologize if you read any of my old articles in which I make fun of lazy fat people and defended my negative reinforcement. It will take some time and effort to re-write everything.
And you can do it too. You just have to set your mind to it and ignore the haters!
Busy, busy and more busy
Some of you may have been wondering why I have not updated suzannemacnevin.com recently.
Well the truth is I am busy working my cute little *** off to make ends meet.
I call it the bane of all activists, artists and do-gooders. You still have to make a living regardless of your political, social or even artistic goals. I am not a starving writer by any means, but I certainly do feel like one sometimes.
This means little time to write, to organize, to paint, or whatever it is you do.
Being busy all the time is also emotionally frustrating. You want to be doing other things, but you are so busy from working that when you come home you just want to sit around eating ice cream and watching old Seinfeld episodes.
Why? Because laughter requires almost no brain power.
And when you are emotionally and creatively spent, working on artwork, writing or social activism ends up taking a backseat to the simple need of going to work, coming home and just chilling before you fall asleep and have to do it all over again.
For me this feels like patriarchy is winning. As if all the rapists, anti-feminists, deadbeat daddies, femicide murderers and other pricks in the world are getting away with whatever they are doing simply because I am too busy to talk about them and raise awareness.
As if the entire weight of the world rests on my tiny shoulders.
But then I realize that there is many more like me. You, my loyal readers, other feminist writers / activists who are fighting the good fight - fighting for freedom for all women. There are millions of feminist websites out there all pushing for equal rights for women and men.
And so I apologize that this is one of very few posts in 2014 so far. But I am still here. Still thinking the good fight even though I am not always able (time wise) to write about it.
And when I find more time I will be back to write more, spreading truth, justice and the feminist way!
Well the truth is I am busy working my cute little *** off to make ends meet.
I call it the bane of all activists, artists and do-gooders. You still have to make a living regardless of your political, social or even artistic goals. I am not a starving writer by any means, but I certainly do feel like one sometimes.
This means little time to write, to organize, to paint, or whatever it is you do.
Being busy all the time is also emotionally frustrating. You want to be doing other things, but you are so busy from working that when you come home you just want to sit around eating ice cream and watching old Seinfeld episodes.
Why? Because laughter requires almost no brain power.
And when you are emotionally and creatively spent, working on artwork, writing or social activism ends up taking a backseat to the simple need of going to work, coming home and just chilling before you fall asleep and have to do it all over again.
For me this feels like patriarchy is winning. As if all the rapists, anti-feminists, deadbeat daddies, femicide murderers and other pricks in the world are getting away with whatever they are doing simply because I am too busy to talk about them and raise awareness.
As if the entire weight of the world rests on my tiny shoulders.
But then I realize that there is many more like me. You, my loyal readers, other feminist writers / activists who are fighting the good fight - fighting for freedom for all women. There are millions of feminist websites out there all pushing for equal rights for women and men.
And so I apologize that this is one of very few posts in 2014 so far. But I am still here. Still thinking the good fight even though I am not always able (time wise) to write about it.
And when I find more time I will be back to write more, spreading truth, justice and the feminist way!
8-Year-Old Girl Forced to Leave Christian School for being a Tomboy
Below is a story a friend sent me about a girl who was forced to leave her Christian school because she dressed and behaved like a boy. In other words, a typical tomboy. Tomboys are actually quite normal and tend to be the girls who get really into sports and other more male dominated activities.
What I find deplorable however is how the school has chosen to openly discriminate against tomboys - as if being a tomboy is a sin. Shame on them!
Source: ABC News
Eight-year old Sunnie Kahle likes to have short hair, wear sneakers and play sports. That’s also the reason why her school said she was no longer welcome there and her grandparents had to pull her out. The family received a letter from Timberlake Christian School telling them that if their girl did not comply by the school’s biblical standards, then she would not be allowed to enroll for the next academic year. Kahle’s grandparents pulled her out immediately and got her admitted to a public school.[Note, by Bible standards all modest women are supposed to cover their hair in public. I wonder how many young girls at their school actually do that???]
According to Kahle’s grandparents, she is like any other girl who goes to Timberlake Christian School.[Of which the girl in question is none of those things. She is not sexually immoral. She is not homosexual. And being a tomboy is not "alternative".]
“She cries every morning to get on the bus, she cries when she comes home because she wants to go back to Timberlake Christian with her friends,” said Doris Thompson.
The letter received by Thompson states that fellow students have been confused about whether Kahle is a boy or a girl and that the administrators can refuse enrollment to a student based on grounds of sexual immorality, being homosexual or other alternative gender identities.
“You're probably aware that Timberlake Christian School is a religious, Bible believing institution providing education in a distinctly Christian environment… We believe that unless Sunnie as well as her family clearly understand that God has made her female and her dress and behavior need to follow suit with her God-ordained identity, that TCS is not the best place for her future education,” read Thompson.[Where in the Bible does it say women cannot wear pants and do sports???]
Doris and Carroll Thompson, Kahle’s grandparents adopted and raised the little girl when she was even younger.
“How do you label a child, eight years old, or discriminate against an eight year old child? It just don't happen,” said Thompson.
According to an administrator at Timberlake Christian School, the problem with Kahle goes “far beyond her hair length” and that the little girl is a good student, but that “things disturbed the classroom environment.”
“How do you tell a child when she wants to wear pants and a shirt, and go out and play in the mud and so forth, how do you tell her, no you can't, you've got to wear a pink bow in your hair, and you've got to let your hair grow out long, how do you do that? I can't do that,” said Thompson.
School administrators clarified that they had not accused Kahle of being anyone or anything and simply asked her family to make sure she follows the guidelines set forth for every student but the Thompsons say that they do not wish to re-enroll Kahle at the Timberlake Christian School.
[Apparently Timberlake Virginia is full of religious nutjobs who don't know that being a tomboy is perfectly natural - and that discriminating against women because they are tomboys is just like discriminating against women with red hair (because they might be witches, oh no!) or discriminating against women because they want to study science (because science is not in the Bible, oh no! And yet apparently it is okay for men to study science...) or discriminating against women because they happen to think for themselves (women can think? Oh no!)... Anywho, I rest my case.]
Patrick Stewart, speaking out versus Violence Against Women
Patrick Stewart is not just a Starfleet captain, X-Men’s Charles Xavier and an actor admired by millions of fans
The actor is also
deeply involved in work that helps women who are victims of violence. At
the recent Texas Comicpalooza, in reply to a question, he talked about
how his father’s violence towards his mother inspired him. He also
explains how he only recently discovered that his father suffered from
PTSD dating back to his father's involvement in World War II.
Nobody is Immune to Breast Cancer
Wonder Woman, She-Hulk, Storm and Catwoman are not immune to breast cancer.
What makes you think that you are immune to a disease that effects millions of women?
Regular breast self exams can help detect lumps early on and save your life.
What makes you think that you are immune to a disease that effects millions of women?
Regular breast self exams can help detect lumps early on and save your life.
Did Pussy Riot started a new wave of Feminism?
Hi Suzanne,
Hey Sandra!
A new wave of transnational feminism? No, I don't think that has been started.
Did you hear about this in the news?
"A 15-year-old girl in the Maldives who was allegedly raped by her stepfather has been sentenced to 100 lashes for having premarital sex.
Her stepfather hasn't faced trial for accusations he raped the teen and killed their baby, BBC reported.
The girl and her stepfather were charged in June 2012, Amnesty International stated, after the body of a baby was found outside their house on Feydhoo Island. The human rights group said the stepfather had allegedly sexually abused the girl for years.
Zaima Nasheed, a spokeswoman for the juvenile court, told BBC the girl was also placed under house arrest for eight months and defended the punishment saying the girl had willingly acted outside the law.
Under Maldivian law, the girl won't receive her punishment until she turns 18, Amnesty International said.
"Flogging is a violation of the absolute prohibition on torture and other cruel inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment," Amnesty International said prior to the sentencing.
The nation of islands is located southwest of Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean."
If a new wave had started people would be more worried about things like that and try and stop it.
Now back to your question...
No, there is no "new wave". If anything its the old adage "two steps forward, three steps backwards". Now I am not saying we aren't making progress, we are making progress. But it is a very slow process.
And if we want to make radical / rapid progress then we need to start thinking outside the box and going for more radical thinking.
Which is funny because I don't consider myself to be a radical feminist. Or a militant one. But the older I get the more I wonder if there is radical / militant alternatives.
Take for example Japanese whalers. I think we should be ramming their ships and sinking them. Torpedoes if necessary. Then rescue the survivors. Make it clear that whaling as an industry has to stop and that whalers will be dealt with the same way we deal with pirates off the coast of Somalia - we kill them. If we are killing pirates for hijacking oil tankers, why aren't we killing whalers for killing whales?
Now I realize that is a controversial thought. But lets apply that same logic to rapists. 99% of the world's rapists are walking around free. Why? Because only 10% of women report sexual assaults to the police. A tiny percentage of them goes to court. And convictions are rare, even when there is physical evidence. So it really is no surprise so many rapists walk free.
Plus, even if we do convict them... we later release them years later, back in to society. And many sexual offenders are repeat offenders. So the only permanent solution is to remove them from normal society entirely - which is why I think we should build a penal colony on Greenland or some other remote island and send all of the world's rapists there. Yes, it is an unusual solution, but it would work.
So if you're looking for a new wave of international feminism then it should be happening in the courts and in politics first - and it will require some radical new laws to deal with people not fit to live with the rest of society.
And then there is the matter of conviction rates. James Holmes (the Batman cinema massacre) may be forced to take a truth serum during his trial. If we can do that for mass murderers, why can't we do that for rapists? We evidently have the technology to get the truth out of people using drugs, why aren't we using this technology to improve our justice system?
On the topic of Russia, the Pussy Riot case is evidently motivated by politics - the silencing of political enemies. It isn't so much that Pussy Riot is a feminist group. They're a political group, and the Russian government wants to silence them. But it backfired and now the media spotlight has hold of it.
My name is Sandra Dwyer. I am a final year student doing Social Science in Cork University. As part of my research project, I am covering the Pussy Riot case in Russia, while drawing on the possibility of what some people have coined the term a new wave of transnational feminism. I read alot of the work on 'feminist ezine', which has greatly assisted any material I address on feminism. I think your opinion on this subject would add great depth to my work. I have a few specific questions, but in general terms, I am mainly concerned with your opinion on the entire situation that has taken place in Russia, and if you do think that these women have in fact started a new wave of transnational feminism?
I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Very kind regards,
Sandra.
Hey Sandra!
A new wave of transnational feminism? No, I don't think that has been started.
Did you hear about this in the news?
"A 15-year-old girl in the Maldives who was allegedly raped by her stepfather has been sentenced to 100 lashes for having premarital sex.
Her stepfather hasn't faced trial for accusations he raped the teen and killed their baby, BBC reported.
The girl and her stepfather were charged in June 2012, Amnesty International stated, after the body of a baby was found outside their house on Feydhoo Island. The human rights group said the stepfather had allegedly sexually abused the girl for years.
Zaima Nasheed, a spokeswoman for the juvenile court, told BBC the girl was also placed under house arrest for eight months and defended the punishment saying the girl had willingly acted outside the law.
Under Maldivian law, the girl won't receive her punishment until she turns 18, Amnesty International said.
"Flogging is a violation of the absolute prohibition on torture and other cruel inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment," Amnesty International said prior to the sentencing.
The nation of islands is located southwest of Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean."
If a new wave had started people would be more worried about things like that and try and stop it.
Now back to your question...
No, there is no "new wave". If anything its the old adage "two steps forward, three steps backwards". Now I am not saying we aren't making progress, we are making progress. But it is a very slow process.
And if we want to make radical / rapid progress then we need to start thinking outside the box and going for more radical thinking.
Which is funny because I don't consider myself to be a radical feminist. Or a militant one. But the older I get the more I wonder if there is radical / militant alternatives.
Take for example Japanese whalers. I think we should be ramming their ships and sinking them. Torpedoes if necessary. Then rescue the survivors. Make it clear that whaling as an industry has to stop and that whalers will be dealt with the same way we deal with pirates off the coast of Somalia - we kill them. If we are killing pirates for hijacking oil tankers, why aren't we killing whalers for killing whales?
Now I realize that is a controversial thought. But lets apply that same logic to rapists. 99% of the world's rapists are walking around free. Why? Because only 10% of women report sexual assaults to the police. A tiny percentage of them goes to court. And convictions are rare, even when there is physical evidence. So it really is no surprise so many rapists walk free.
Plus, even if we do convict them... we later release them years later, back in to society. And many sexual offenders are repeat offenders. So the only permanent solution is to remove them from normal society entirely - which is why I think we should build a penal colony on Greenland or some other remote island and send all of the world's rapists there. Yes, it is an unusual solution, but it would work.
So if you're looking for a new wave of international feminism then it should be happening in the courts and in politics first - and it will require some radical new laws to deal with people not fit to live with the rest of society.
And then there is the matter of conviction rates. James Holmes (the Batman cinema massacre) may be forced to take a truth serum during his trial. If we can do that for mass murderers, why can't we do that for rapists? We evidently have the technology to get the truth out of people using drugs, why aren't we using this technology to improve our justice system?
On the topic of Russia, the Pussy Riot case is evidently motivated by politics - the silencing of political enemies. It isn't so much that Pussy Riot is a feminist group. They're a political group, and the Russian government wants to silence them. But it backfired and now the media spotlight has hold of it.
It would be nice if things backfired more often. Karmic, really.
Sincerely,
Suzanne MacNevin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Topics
Abortion and Pregnancy
Abuse and Rape
Art and Videos
Being Fashionable
Book Reviews
Bra Burning
Britain and Canada
Career and Education
Censorship and Privacy
Christianity
Criminals and the Failing Justice System
Don't you just love the USA?
Equality for Everyone
Exercise and Sports
Feminists and the History of Feminism
Films Music and Entertainment
Home Life
Interesting Facts
Lesbians Gays and your Sex Life
Love and Relationships
Marriage and Divorce
Money and Economics
Now that is Funny
Old Feminist Truths Posts
Patriarchal Pricks
Political Upheaval
Quotes are Awesome
Religion makes my head hurt
Self Defense
Sex is Complicated
Sexism in Marketing
Slavery
Social Media
Superheroines
Suzy's Recipes
Technology will be the Ruin of us All
The Media Spotlight
Thought Provoking
Video Games
Wall Street
War and the Armed Forces
We are all Beautiful
Your Body is a Temple