Women's Views on News |
- Disability: the Cinderella of feminism?
- Cold comfort in Palestinian hunger-striker Hana Shalabi’s release
- Fears of female genital mutilation revival in Egypt
- Crawling off a train: disability in the UK in 2012
| Disability: the Cinderella of feminism? Posted: 02 Apr 2012 10:00 AM PDT
Today, I wrote an article about the appalling situation Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson found herself in recently when she had to throw her wheelchair onto a rail station platform and crawl after it. I contacted Philippa of the feminist blog site the F-Word for her comments on this situation from her point of view as a disabled person: see WVoN post here. During the conversation, we touched on disability as a feminist issue, something I had already come across in a blog post written by s.e.smith. Smith talks about ‘intersectionality - the idea that overlapping and interconnecting systems of oppression are involved pretty much anywhere you feel like looking’: ‘The short version of the reason that disability is a feminist issue is that some people with disabilities are women. I know, shocking! But I'm here to tell you that it's true.’ This is something Philippa concurs with: ‘I think it is basically the fact that if it affects women it is a feminist issue. Fundamentally, just like I think racism is a feminist issue because it affects women, feminism should be always advocating for people who are disadvantaged in one way or another. It is about social justice really.’ Obvious, right? Well, maybe not. As Philippa says, although there are pockets of feminist spaces that try hard to be inclusive, there are also those that are not. And this usually takes the form of a woman's disability being seen as secondary: ‘Something that I have come across when I have tried to talk about disability in a feminist context is that disability can be seen as a “diversion” from proper feminist issues. ‘For example, if a disabled woman is attacked, talking about the disability aspect of the attack should not be seen as a diversion – it is a key part of what is happening.’ And, it seems, the biggest problem is also obvious – access. As someone with a minor knee disability I am hyper-sensitive to non-accessible places – lots of steps, long walks from public transport to venues and, as I get older, heavy doors that are difficult to open. This also resonated with Philippa who said: ‘The other aspect is that in practical terms lots of feminist groups meet in upstairs rooms and pubs and, while I fully appreciated that they use those spaces because they may be free, and accessible spaces often cost, I also think this is increasingly unacceptable. ‘I think a feminist group that does not take accessibility into account is not only NOT representing lots of women, it is physically not letting lots of women in.’ This is a theme that is echoed in the blogosphere. With this quote a Corkfeminista blogger with a disabled son, hits the nail firmly on the head: ‘I'd love to join everyone for an evening of story-sharing at the Metropole Hotel [to celebrate International Women's Day] but I can't, and why I can't is part of my story…the story of disability as the Cinderella of feminism.’ Thinking that electronic communications could help address this for those who find it difficult to leave the house, I asked Philippa if, in her experience, e-comms were an adequate substitute for attending events in person: ‘Disabled people are doing some amazing campaign work online. What has been going on with Twitter in the disability community has been amazing: for example, it is really including people who might not be able to sit up in bed but can tweet. ‘The creativity I have seen in the online activism is brilliant. Also, a lot of the feminist conferences will have a hash tag, live tweeting and video-links which is good.’ However, Philippa does not feel that e-comms can replace the actual attendance at an event: ‘I don't think “you can’t come but you can watch” is an acceptable compromise.’ And, for the Corkfeminista blogger, the pressures of disability caring means that there is 'precious little time for online presence.': ’80% of unpaid disability carers in Ireland who are women frequently remain isolated and unheard and the 20% who are men suffer the same fate for engaging in what State and society alike still consider to be low-status women's work.’ So what can feminist groups do to address this? Philippa suggests the following would be a place to start:
An example of a well-planned conference is Intersect in Bristol on 19th May. Beginning with an open debate entitled 'How do we create a more inclusive feminism?', the conference has been set up in response to feedback from groups who feel excluded from mainstream feminism. And, in keeping with the theme of the conference, there is a dedicated accessibility page which outlines the following about the venue: ‘Hamilton House is fully wheelchair-accessible, with a ramp to the front door and internal lift. We are aiming to provide British Sign Language interpreters throughout the conference. ‘The conference will be live-streamed so that people who can’t attend may still watch and anyone watching online (or anyone at the conference who does not wish to speak publicly) may tweet questions to the speakers during the Q&A sessions.’ Further: ‘INTERSECT will be a safe space. This means it will be an event where everyone can feel welcome and respected. ‘No form of discrimination will be tolerated and may result in your removal from the conference. ‘Do not use aggressive, disrespectful, oppressive or exclusionary language. ‘If you disagree with someone’s ideas, do not attack them personally. ‘Be mindful of people’s personal and emotional boundaries. ‘Be aware of the privileges you possess and listen to people with other perspectives.’ Today I have written about only two issues in relation to disability and feminism, but there are many more. As Philippa points out – how much more difficult it must be to escape domestic violence if the abuser is also a carer and could withhold meds, and communicating with an outside agency is difficult due to deafness, for example. Then there are refuges not being accessible, the impossibility of fighting back against rape if you are unable to move without pain, difficulties attending healthcare appointments, the list goes on and on. But in essence – how much more difficult just to be HEARD when you have a disability that makes accessing mainstream events and communications difficult. Surely, as feminists, we owe it to our disabled sisters to make sure that not only are their voices heard, but that their physical presence is encouraged? Only then can we call ourselves a truly intersectional movement.  |
| Cold comfort in Palestinian hunger-striker Hana Shalabi’s release Posted: 02 Apr 2012 07:30 AM PDT
Palestinian hunger-striker Hana Shalabi arrived in Gaza on Sunday after her release from Israeli detention last week. As part of a deal with the Israeli authorities she will be exiled in the Gaza Strip for three years, away from her West Bank home. Shalabi had been on hunger strike for 43 days since being captured in February by Israeli forces in the West Bank. She ended her strike last Thursday. WVoN previously reported on the humilating forced strip searches she experienced during her imprisonment. Shalabi began her strike in protest against Israel’s policy of holding Palestinians it considers to be a security threat in what it calls ’administrative detention’. Prisoners can be held indefinitely in this legal limbo without being charged. Shalabi had been held in administrative detention for two years previously and was released in October 2011 in the prisoner swap that also saw Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit gain his freedom. She is allegedly involved with Islamic Jihad but has never been charged with an offence. Shalabi’s protest followed the recent hunger strike of Palestinian prisoner Khader Adnan, who was also being held in administrative detention. Adnan’s strike lasted for 66 days until he struck a deal with the Israeli security forces that will see him released later this month. Israel’s practice of imprisoning Palestinians without charge or trial has been condemned by human rights groups, including Amnesty. More than 300 Palestinians, including 20 members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, are currently being held by Israel under administrative detention. Amnesty, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, and the Palestinian prisoners’ advocacy group Addameer have expressed concern about the conditions of Shalabi’s release which they suggest amount to a forcible deportation, in breach of the Geneva Convention on human rights. Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states that an Occupying Power is forbidden from transferring citizens of an occupied territory to the territory of another country. Although the Gaza Strip and the West Bank are recognised under international law as a single territorial unit, Palestinians are barred by the Israeli authorities from moving between the two areas. This means that Shalabi will be unable to return to her West Bank home or to visit her family for the period of her three-year exile. Neither will they be able to visit her. It is, in effect, a forcible deportation, which continues to punish Shalabi and her family for crimes of which she has neither been charged nor convicted. Ann Harrison, Amnesty International Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa, cast doubt on the legitimacy of the deal made by Shalabi with the authorities. “The fact that Hana Shalabi was denied access to her independent lawyers raises serious concerns about her deportation to the Gaza Strip,” she said. Harrison added that the deal struck by Shalabi with the authorities may set a harmful precedent in future negotiations over prisoners’ rights. “There is a real risk that Hana Shalabi's deportation could mean that other administrative detainees may be pressured to agree to similar deals and be coerced into agreeing to be deported to the Gaza Strip,” she said. As Richard Falk, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, points out, “To call this release 'freedom' is to make a mockery of the word, even to call it 'release' is misleading.”  |
| Fears of female genital mutilation revival in Egypt Posted: 02 Apr 2012 03:00 AM PDT
Azza El Garf, a prominent member of the Freedom and Justice Party, the political wing of the Muslim Brotherhood and one of just 11 female parliamentarians in Egypt, has publicly denounced the 2008 ban on genital cutting (or female genital cutting, ‘FGM’) for Egyptian women. “It is a personal decision and each woman can decide based on her needs. If she needs it, she can go to a doctor”, El Garf said, adding that the Muslim Brotherhood refers to FGM as beautification plastic surgery. El Garf maintains that it is a woman’s choice, and hers alone, to choose to undergo the currently outlawed procedure in consultation with a medically-trained professional. The reality however, for most women and girls who undergo FGM, is that it is often characterized by a lack of choice. In 2005, a UNICEF report on FGM reported the practice was almost universal among Egyptian women of reproductive age, with an astounding 97 per cent having undergone the procedure. That figure has declined little since then. Outside Egypt, the procedure is usually performed on girls between the ages of 9 to 12 years, prior to the onset of puberty, but the UNICEF report recorded the average age of girls undergoing FGM in Egypt was lower, at seven to 11 years old. Children are not likely to be asked for their view, as Newsnight‘s Sue Lloyd-Roberts discovered when interviewing an Egyptian mother; ‘”Of course she must be circumcised,” said Olla, referring to the timid 11-year-old girl sitting beside her. ‘I asked Olla if I could find out from the child herself, her daughter Raaja, who sat shaking with fear, what she thought. ‘”There is no need to ask her,” her mother declared. “She doesn’t understand what we are talking about”.’ Initially, the Egyptian government banned FGM in hospitals in 1996, but because licensed practitioners were still allowed to perform the surgery elsewhere, the practice continued. The Egyptian government implemented a full legal ban in 2007, following the death of Badour Shaker, a 12-year-old child who overdosed on anesthesia in an illegal clinic after the procedure. FGM, or female circumcision as it is called by its proponents, is the practice of partially or totally removing the external female genitalia. It can range from the most minor procedure involving the removal of the clitoris to the most severe form, where all external genitalia are removed and the vaginal opening is stitched nearly closed. FGM is often done in unsanitary environments, using basic tools for doing the cutting and most often with the permission and assistance of mothers. In Egypt two types are commonly practiced. Type 1 involves removing the clitoris and Type 2 is the removal of the clitoris and the labia or the “lips” that surround the vagina; both mean removing those sensitive parts of female genitalia which make the sexual act a pleasurable one. Female sexual pleasure is deemed to be incompatible with the concepts of “purity”, “honour” and “tradition” which lie at the heart of FGM in Egypt. The principal justification lies in the belief that the procedure reduces the uncontrollable sexual desire of a female, thereby helping maintain a girl’s virginity prior to marriage and her fidelity thereafter, thus ensuring a daughter's future marriage prospects Despite being denounced by the Grand Mufti of Egypt, Ali Gomaa, in 2010, some religious leaders claim FGM is sanctioned by the Quran. But in reality it has no doctrinal foundation; it is practiced by both Muslims and Coptic Christians in Egypt, illustrating its cultural basis. Unlike male circumcision, female circumcision has no health benefits. Immediate complications can include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage, bacterial infection, urine retention, open sores in the genital region and injury to nearby genital tissue. Long-term, aside from reducing any sexual pleasure, side-effects of FGM can include psychological trauma, infertility and a higher risk of complications during childbirth. El Garf’s support for the legalization of female circumcision, her opposition to resurrecting the National Women’s Council and to the “liberalisation of divorce” is a reflection of her conservative values as an affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood: "Family is the most important part of life," El Garf said, adding that the husband's job was to feed his wife and care about his family because together they are one. "The woman's job is to make him happy," she added. "In Western society everybody is an individual. That system doesn’t work here." El-Garf, in line with the policies of the Muslim Brotherhood, has asserted the need for restoring the framework of ethics and values that the corrupt former regime endeavored to destroy for 30 years. Being socially conservative is one thing, but to permit the practice of FGM as part of a "cultural revivalism" in celebration of political freedom would be misguided and diminish the equality of Egyptian women at the start of a new political era.  |
| Crawling off a train: disability in the UK in 2012 Posted: 02 Apr 2012 01:00 AM PDT
Some years ago I had an operation on my knee which left me in plaster for 6 weeks and on a stick for three months. Since then I have needed to use my stick when my knee is having a bad day and I routinely watch how I walk in case I trip over bumps in the pavement. As for running? Forget it. Having a hidden disability can be problematic in that people automatically assume that you do not have one and so I don't feel comfortable sitting in the seats on public transport that are assigned to those who have a more visible disability. But I count myself lucky that although standing for a period of time may be uncomfortable, I can cope with it. Now, witness the treatment that Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who has spina bifida, experienced when recently trying to depart a train journey at midnight. Grey-Thompson, whose Paralympic career boasts numerous gold, silver and bronze medals and who is now a life peer in the House of Lords, found herself having to throw her wheelchair onto a station platform and crawl after it – yes that’s right, CRAWL AFTER IT – when she reached her destination station, because there was no-one to help her off the train. It’s bad enough that there was no help waiting for her on the platform, but worse still were the comments in reaction to this story being made public, which were compiled on a blog post by Dawn Foster (which is well worth a read just for the sheer sarcastic take down). The original story appeared in the Daily Mail in March, and sprinkled through some very sympathetic comments, were some of the most appalling comments I have ever seen. This in particular offended me to my very core: ‘It may not be PC but the railways and the underground are not a taxi service. The staff when available are always unfailingly considering of disabled people but they cannot be expected to provide a continuous butler service to everybody who travels. ‘If we equipped all trains to cope with someone with Ms G-T's disabilities why should it end there? What about people who cannot even move at all? or speak or live without apparatus? The sad fact of life is you can only go so far to accommodate diabilities. You cannot put an escalator up Everest.- Andy, Portsmouth, 26/3/2012 12:28′ Indeed Andy, why should we, as a supposedly caring society, bother to make sure that all our citizens have access to the routine day-to-day experiences in the same way as abled bodied people? After all (the hidden subtext says) it is obviously their fault that they have a disability, is it not? Well, no Andy it isn't. I asked Philippa from feminist blogging site The F-Word, whether people who make comments like this suffer from a lack of imagination in that they cannot imagine that any kind of disability would ever happen to them. Philippa, who has a disability that has demanded the use of a walking crutch for the past four years, commented: ‘In my case I had lots of disabled people in my life and so I never thought 'why me?' because I have always known that it is one of those things that just happen. Complete strangers will say to me “oh if I became disabled I would kill myself” and I am like “what?” ‘So people are not only imagining that it can't happen to them but if it does, it is worse than death – it is the worst possible thing that can happen.’ On the negative comments that the article about Grey-Thompson attracted, Philippa went on to say that there seems to be a perception that disabled people are somehow 'using up a lot of resources' and so people see them as a drain on the benefits and healthcare system. Certainly in the push to save money in the benefit system, this government appears to have targeted disabled people as ‘benefit scroungers’ and I am sure we have all seen the TV programmes where the crew will follow someone to an allotment or finds them playing golf whilst on benefits and 'out' them as scroungers. But as Philippa points out, disabled people are often advised by medical professionals to get out in the open air for exercise as it may help their condition. Horribly, because of the public perception of disability and scrounging, she says that some people now will not do this:”I know people who have been told that things like swimming and going to the gym will help their condition but they are scared to do it: they won't because they are scared that someone will report them for cheating.’ Philippa also makes the point that claiming Disability Living Allowance (DLA), contrary to media opinion, is very hard and involves filling out 28 pages of A4 sheets, which ask questions about every aspect of your life, including how you go to the toilet. ‘The impression from certain papers is that you just ring up and they give [DLA] to you for the rest of your life,’ says Philippa. Contrary to the negative comments following the Mail article, it seems to me that disabled people are having a rougher time in this recession than most of us. Take the infamous ATOS test, designed 'to judge whether benefit claimants are genuinely sick or merely skiving', which according to the Guardian, is routinely striking people off benefits: ‘Since its preliminary rollout in 2008, people with terminal cancer have been found fit to work, people with mental health problems have complained their condition is not taken seriously, people with complex illnesses report that the tick-box system is not able to cope with the nuances of their problems. ‘A revised, even more stringent version introduced this month means that blind and deaf people will no longer automatically receive sickness benefit, and are unlikely to qualify for extra help finding work.’ The Citizen’s Advice Bureau also finds the test so problematic that it states: ‘Many of these people are too ill to sign on for jobseekers’ allowance (JSA) – they are left with no money to live on and are unable to seek work.’ No money left to live on? What? Are we or are we not a civilised society? Oh no, I forgot, we have a government that is hell-bound on destroying the welfare state at any cost. The ATOS test appears to be deliberately structured as to automatically strike people off benefit – to the extent that they might as well not bother inviting people to take it. Surely it would be much easier just to stop the benefits from the ATOS offices? At least this would save disabled people, who are faced with disability-unfriendly public transport, no disabled parking and ATOS offices with steps to be negotiated, the trouble of actually turning up for the interview. But what this government and those negative commentators seem to forget is that the welfare state is YOU and ME – it is not an abstract concept that sucks money out of the economy. And, by the way, that is my money we are talking about, money I give – or used to give – with thanks, for the most respected welfare and health system in the world. And YOU and ME need to shout loudly about the injustices that are experienced by anyone who is disadvantaged in our society – the old, the disabled, the sick – because, as the famous poem by Pastor Martin Niemoller, an outspoken foe of Hitler says: First they came for the communists, Over to Phillipa for the last word, which perhaps the government and the media could bear in mind: ‘I think we (disabled people) almost need to be re-humanised a bit really.’ Shame on us all that this needs to be said in 2012.  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Women's Views on News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |