30 Ideas for a Better Life - Women Take Note

The Observer Magazine last Sunday (03/01/10) ran a piece entitled '30 Ideas for a Better Life', a resolution inspired list of things to do this year. The suggestions ranged from 'Get Philosophical' to 'Take Control of Your Spending Habits' but what caught my eye was the stark juxtaposition of two aimed at women. Firstly is a entry from Sarah Pennells on 'Sound Financial Advice for Women' - Sarah runs Savvywoman, a web-site aimed at giving comprehensive and relevant financial advice to women. As Sarah notes in The Observer article:

I concentrate on the financial concerns and priorities of females in a way that resonates with them. I report and advise on issues such as how state pension changes affect women, how they have lower debts than men but become more anxious over them, and how to make immediate and long-term financial plans when child-rearing. I ask, are you and your partner even financially compatible?

A worthwhile cause and perhaps a justified resolution for this year perhaps then? But what is this then juxtaposed with? Read a little further on in the piece and you will find the idea from clinical psychologist and sex therapist Bettina Arndt of 'revitalising your sex life'. And though it is not suggested in the title itself, this again focuses on women. Because Bettina is suggesting that a focal problem in long-term relationships is 'mismatched desire', that this desire is usually lacked by the female and that these females need to basically get over it (my words not hers):

Arndt advocates a "just do it" approach for couples in a rut. Women should ignore their lack of desire and just get on it with.

So women of Britain, take note. Two ideas for a better life:

1. Get some sound financial advice
2. Lie back and think of England.

Happy New Year!

Feminism in London 09

Saturday 10th October saw Feminism in London 2009 take place at Conway Hall. Though I cannot speak for the range of panels and workshops on the day, I just wanted to discuss my own experience of the day and welcome discussion/further insights.

Opening speakers this year were Beatrice Campbell and Susie Orbach ('Fat is a Feminist Issue'). This was my first encounter of Beatrice Campbell but I thought she was absolutely marvelous. A real character and what she spoke about really hit home with me. Beatrice spoke of 'neo-patriarchy' and the suggestion that whilst in society we now have knowledge (even acknowledgement) of gender issues, we have seen no change (for instance the gender pay gap still exists though we have increased awareness of this issue). Another example was of the working mother; the fact we can now be included in full-time employment but this is coupled with childcare. Beatrice spoke of the narrative of the 'work-life balance' in society which assigns this problem to us rather than tackling the problem. Beatrice talked also about the link between masculinity and violence which is never tackled as society masks the link under the disguise of youth violence and so forth. I found her talk really interesting and refreshing. It was intriguing that on my way out after, however, I overheard two women commenting that they disliked its complexity and academic nature so it didn't appear to be to everyone's taste.

When Susie Orbach spoke I really felt wanting more. It was a shame that it seemed time ran out, it would have been good to have heard more from her. But again, the issue of violence emerged and she linked the interalisation of women's oppression though body insecurities. I definitly want to read her latest book now to find out more.

During the day I went to a slide show/talk, a workshop and one panel. The slide-show was on anti-porn and namely the pornification of culture and the 'grooming' of young children by such culture. A lot of concepts were covered like the idea of the pseudo-child in pornography, the sexualisation of father-daughter incest, the model of normalization, sexualisation of disney and compliant victimization. It pretty much confirmed feelings I had already regarding the sexualisation of culture and how it targets children but I think it really made clear my thoughts on pornography as a whole. The workshop I attended after followed a similar theme "Raising Children in the Age of Porn". I hoped to come away from this with an idea of maybe strategies for dealing with such an issue but I don't think I got as much from it that I would have liked. One idea positioned by a fellow attendee did really get me thinking though and that was the stress now, it seems, in society on childrens' physical safety (worrying about kidnapping, pregnancy, perhaps even obesity) whilst other areas they aren't as protected (exposure to tv, internet and such).

The panel was 'Motherhood and Poverty' which was good and covered quite a bit of ground. After this was the closing speakers: Mawete vo Teka Sala, Hannana Siddiqui and Finn Mackay. I must admit that by this time my eyes were getting quite droppy (I had had to get up at 4am that morning for my train to London afterall!) so though I enjoyed the first two speakers I did not make any notes nor do I have any further comements. Finn Mackay's closing speech truly perked me back up again with the sheer emotion and enthuasiasm involved, it was such a shame it had to be cut short. But it was an excellent note to close on, especially the comments on the recession and women's part in this state in response to which I ranted to my friend later that evening - "No, we didn't make the decisions that got us where we are! But look at what cost we're paying for someone else's choices!" Food for thought indeed.

Of course we're to blame!

This week's issue of Grazia magazine features an article entitled "So, is it our fault we get paid less than men?" in response to a report detailing gender pay gaps in 'the City'. In the 'YES' corner is writer and broadcaster Lowri Turner who asks "What is it about us that we accept this sort of discrimination?" (my emphasis). Turner claims that:

...like the battered wife who goes back to her abusive husband, so City women meekly trot back for more. Many even excuse the system that discriminates against them.

And that:

City women should be thumping their fists on the boardroom tables. Instead, they buy into a system that treats them shabbily. For that, they have themselves to blame.

Personally I'm confused. Am I meant to salute Turner for not falling fault to such behavior and for trying to remove the blinkers from these poor women's eyes? Or am I meant to boo in her direction for merely shifting the blame?

Edwina Currie on the pay gap...

As evil as the lure of procrasination might be, it did mean I stumbled across a gem of an interview with Edwina Currie on The One Show concerning the continuing pay gap between women and men. Such discrepencies don't seem to cause any alarm in Currie; her responses implying that this is the way it is and even, this is the way it should be. The justification behind this? The matter of choice. Edwina Currie talks about the choices women make during their careers, choices involving children (think taking a 'break' in employment when you decide to start a family*). Of course, we women make such choices so it is only right that women's pay reflects such...la di da da. The point at which Currie starts throwing around this buzzword of choice I am reminded of Catherine Hakim and her Preference Theory (basically the notion that patterns in women's employment reflect the lifestyle preferences of women rather than patriarchal structures in society). Do we see the problem here? We can talk about 'choice' and 'preference' and doll this situation up as women being active decision makers of their life, their roles, their careers because that's the easiest option isn't? It's just merely an attempt to mask the fact that despite equal pay legislation and work by the women's movement, our society, to put it simply, still sucks on this. Why pretend that this is what women want because clearly it really isn't. And of course Edwina will talk about 'choice' because it can, to an extent, be a matter of choice for women like her because of their background affording them more opportunities than perhaps the rest of us.

And all of this from day-time tv.


Laura

*Feeling the sarcasm?...

Disclaimer: I don't particularly like The One Show and I feel the fact I found myself watching this episode on demand this morning was purely a reflection of my avoiding work...


(x-posted over at Subtext)