Women's Views on News |
- Low profile for sport on BBC power list
- Lib Dems plan for more women MPs
- Being childless by choice
- Cat, PhD – a new feminist superhero?
| Low profile for sport on BBC power list Posted: 26 Feb 2013 08:30 AM PST
Out of the 100 women featured on the Power List, just four were from the world of sport: Clare Balding, Karren Brady, Heather Rabbatts and Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson. The top twenty was ranked in order of power and was topped, somewhat bizarrely in my view, by HM The Queen. The other 80 were listed in alphabetical order, and the sporting four featured in this group. But what is power and how can it be measured? The Woman's Hour website’s definition was based on a list of questions: "Which women have the biggest impact on our economy, society, politics and culture? “Who has the ability to inspire change as a role model or a thinker? “Does power boil down to having the money to make things happen? “Has new technology changed what it is to be powerful?" The Woman's Hour Power List, the site continued, looked at ‘the achievements of British women across public life and offer some measure of the progress women have made in society’. It hoped to ‘shine a light on the top female politicians, business women and leaders in their field – from areas as diverse as finance, education, health, engineering and the arts’. And it asked how much power these women have in modern Britain. Anyone could be nominated via an online form. The nominees were then judged by a panel comprising Eve Pollard, former Woman’s Hour editor Jill Burridge, Baroness Oona King, writer Val McDermid, journalist Dawn O'Porter and Priti Patel MP. In addition to this, "expert witnesses" could be called to advise on specific areas. I was going to put a name forward, but I wasn't quite sure where or if sport would fit into it. I was glad to see four did actually make the list, but there could have been so many more. So, if you'll indulge me, I'd like to mention a few outstanding women from sport who I think should have made the list. But first, a look at the four women who did make it. They are a diverse group, coming at their roles from varying angles, but with a shared love of sport and a will to influence the future. Clare Balding was a figure of ridicule when she started her broadcasting career. She still has her detractors, but they are now in a minority and Balding is undoubtedly a rising star. She has gone from being “the horsey one” to being able to show a real depth of knowledge in everything she covers. Her stock rose greatly during the London Olympics when her hard work clearly paid off with universal acknowledgement as one of the best broadcasters around. Since then she seems to have gained confidence and is not afraid to make comments on wider issues pertaining to women. On the Radio 4 website Balding is quoted as saying, "I think ‘ambitious’ is one of those adjectives used for women in a derogatory way. “And, yet, I think ambition is crucial in life – you have to know what you might be capable of and push yourself slightly beyond it." Karren Brady crosses effortlessly between the worlds of business and sport. She came to public prominence when she became the first female Managing Director of a football club at Birmingham City from 1993 to 2009. Since then she has featured on Alan Sugar's "The Apprentice", while maintaining her links with football, becoming vice-chair of West Ham United in January 2010. She has spoken out against sexism in business and in sport and continues to campaign on the issue. In an interview with the Telegraph in 2012 she said, "I don't feel any shame in saying I enjoy my work. I do. “There are two things important to me: my children and my work. I won't give either up." Heather Rabbatts CBE is another woman equally at home in business and sport. After spells as chief executive at the London boroughs of Lambeth, Merton and Hammersmith and Fulham she turned her attention to football, becoming Executive Deputy Chair of Millwall FC in 2006. In 2012 she became the first female board member at the Football Association (FA). She is also a trustee of the Royal Opera House and sits on several other boards. She has broken through spectacularly in the notoriously male-dominated world of football. In an interview with The Independent following her appointment at Millwall, Rabbatts said, “Given football is the national game and such a huge part of our cultural life, women should have a bigger part in it. “When you look at the people running it on the FA Council, where the average age is about 65 and there’s only one woman out of 93, you think, "Come on guys, get real. “More and more women are going to football. Don’t you need to embrace us?" Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson competed in five Paralympic Games, winning 16 medals, of which 11 were gold. Since her retirement from competitive sport in 2007 she has carved out a career in television. She is also a non-executive director of UK Athletics and is on the board of the London Marathon. She was made a life peer in 2010, and speaks not only on disability issues, but more recently has used her time in the House of Lords to contribute to the Welfare Reform and Legal Aid Bills. So, these are the four women to whom we can look to make a difference and to fight for a greater role for women's sport and women's role within sport. As for my choices, top of the list is Sue Tibballs, CEO of the Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation (WSFF). Her profile is steadily increasing as she is called upon for a pertinent comment whenever the future of women's sport or the state of women's fitness is discussed. The WSFF website is awash with excellent initiatives to get women more active. When searching for an "expert" opinion, it is one of the first sources I turn to. Commenting on WSFF's “She Moves“ campaign, Tibballs said, “We know that women have busy lives and often lack the time or motivation to invest in getting fit and making themselves feel good. “Women are finding it harder than ever to prioritise exercise while they are facing the pressures of work, childcare and running homes… “…As a mother myself, I know that big life events like having a child or starting a new job can create real barriers to staying active, and we want to bring women together to motivate each other to stay fit and healthy." My second choice? England cricket captain Charlotte Edwards. Despite suffering surprise losses in the last two international tournaments, Edwards has been exemplary in her conduct both on and off the field. She became the first woman to join the MCC World Cricket Committee, in May 2012 and will be a real force to be reckoned with when promoting women's cricket in this traditionally conservative world. Indeed, cricket is one sport in which women are, at last, making an impact. Things are changing with pace. I considered several candidates from cricket, who could not only have the potential to be movers and shakers in the game, but could influence policy with regard to the promotion of sport and physical activity to a wider audience. These include former England captain Clare Connor, the first female member of the International Cricket Council (ICC) cricket committee, and the woman who did it all first and is still influential, Rachael Heyhoe-Flint. Now Baroness Heyhoe-Flint, she was elected to the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) in 2010. She was the first woman to be inducted to the ICC Hall of Fame. Hope Powell, the England women's football manager could also have made it onto the list. She has been instrumental in the regeneration of the women's game in this country. And finally, cyclist Lizzie Armistead. Never afraid to voice an opinion, Armistead has shown herself to be confident and erudite when discussing the gender gap in cycling. She has already taken on an unofficial role as an advocate for women's cycling equality. In a recent interview with the BBC, Armistead was forthright in her views, saying, “The sexism I have encountered in my career can get quite overwhelming and very frustrating.” The thing that strikes me is that not one of the names on the official list operates solely in sport. This is in direct contrast to my own suggestions and implies that excellence in one field is not enough when that field is sport. It is a shame that this seems to be the case as this is not the impression given by the definition quoted. However, it is good to see sport represented. Those of us who are passionate about women's sport and about sport in general can only follow the careers of these four women who did make the 100 list with interest.  |
| Lib Dems plan for more women MPs Posted: 26 Feb 2013 06:25 AM PST
Better representation of women in business, public life and politics has been a long debated issue, and there has yet to be a universally agreeable solution. One of the most heavily debated proposals for addressing the issue is the quota system, but the voices against this are loud and profuse. Many say that women sitting on, let's say, boards of directors, should be there on merit alone and that using quota systems is simply unfair. That's all well and good if you put aside the fact that there are historical and stubbornly unrelenting sexist factors that hamper women's progress in this field, not least of which are male dominated and male controlled board rooms. The same argument is heard in the political arena. Those against quota systems to bolster female participation in the political field use the same argument – that jobs should also be based solely on merit. But the political system, at least in this country, functions to serve the people and is – supposed to be – 'of the people'. But this is simply not the case. Half of the population of Britain are female, yet 75 per cent of MPs are male. How is this representative of the country's varying demographic? So news that the Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) have a mitigating proposal to increase women's presence in politics was greeted with both curiosity and trepidation. The Liberal Democrats have drawn up a consultation paper that they think will, at least in part, address the ‘women in parliament’ issue. The paper, drafted by their executive policy-making committee, looks at political reform, and, more specifically, job sharing for MPs. In their proposals, the Lib Dems say that job sharing would mean that a much wider pool of people would be able to participate in political life. They acknowledge that there is a problem of ‘pervasive systemic barriers to political participation by under-represented groups. These barriers include: cost, time and resource barriers, and presenteeist cultures and inflexible working practices in political parties and institutions, including constituency expectations, the Commons’ sitting hours, and absence of parental leave. Their paper says: ‘The rationale behind the proposal is that it could open up the role of MP to a much wider group of people than at present. ‘Research shows that one of the main barriers to increasing women’s participation in politics is perceived incompatibility with family life, while evidence from professions such as medicine, law and the senior civil service suggests that provision for part-time working significantly increases the talent pool of women progressing into senior roles.' The Lib Dems say 'job-share candidates would stand on a joint ticket and voters would choose whether or not to vote for them in the same way they decide whether or not to vote for any other candidate'. The paper – give or take any other pressing issues – is to be a main point of discussion at the Lib Dem annual spring conference in March. It may provide a breakthrough to a problem that has consistently dogged all of the main political parties. Even David Cameron has added his concern about the lack of women in public life, although his actions seem to be lagging forlornly behind his words. He admitted recently that his wife was pressing him to address the under-representation of women in civic life, and in particular his party. ‘My wife,’ he said, ‘likes to say that if you don’t have women in the top places, you are not just missing out on 50 per cent of the talent, you are missing out on a lot more than 50 per cent of the talent – and I think she probably has a point.' 'We still have a long way to go’, he continued. ‘If you look at the top businesses in Britain, there still aren’t nearly enough women in the boardroom. ‘If you look at politics in Britain, there aren’t nearly enough women around the cabinet table’. It is his cabinet table, so hollow words from a man whose cabinet contains only four full female members, and whose party is made up of a paltry 50 female MPs out of a total of 300. Sadly, the Lib Dems and Nick Clegg are equally lacking, as only seven of their 56 MPs are women. Job sharing is a bold policy which throws up a host of possible pitfalls, and there are, naturally, those who strongly disagree with the idea. They say that voters would have to consider two prospective representative rather than one, and that there could be some conflict if the two representatives disagree on vital policy matters. Critics have also pointed out that for 19 weeks of the year MPs don't actually sit in the House, which is, so they say, sufficient flexibility for women with families. Ruth Fox, director of the Hansard Society, an independent non-partisan political research and education charity (or think tank) also foresees problems in terms of division of work. 'Does one half of the team get their hands on the legislative wheel at Westminster while the other grapples with the constituency social work? ‘If so, unless the job-sharers are both women, it doesn’t take much imagination to foresee the risk that it will be the women who work locally and the men that continue to dominate at Westminster. ‘If so, rather than being a solution to women’s representation in politics, job-sharing could end up reinforcing stereotypes.' So, will it work? Only time will tell. But regardless of predictions – and political affiliations – at least the Liberal Democrats seem to be trying to address the problem. David Cameron can wax lyrical till the horses come home, but he doesn't seem to be actually doing anything. Plato once said 'One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.' Well, perhaps the same is true of being disallowed to participate.  |
| Posted: 26 Feb 2013 03:00 AM PST
Type 'childless women' into Google and it will try to complete the sentence with 'are selfish'. Not the phrase I had in mind, but apparently what other web users have been furiously punching into the search engine. It seems even today, when it is perfectly acceptable to be a single mother, and increasingly OK to be a gay mother, it is still not OK to not be a mother. Especially if you've actively decided not to be. Despite the progress we have made in the last 60 years or so, in most social circles women are still expected to get married and have children. I conformed to the first, but ever since I have had that ring on my finger, there's one question that has been on the lips of friends, family and even strangers: when will we hear the pitter-patter of tiny feet? So far, that's five years of having to make excuses and justify my choices. I know I am not alone; in the west, childlessness is on the increase. According to figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), 25 per cent of women in Britain of childbearing age will never have a baby. According to the study, just one in nine women born in 1938 never had a baby, compared to one in five women born in 1965. By 2018, a quarter of 45 year-olds are predicted to be childless. A similar picture has emerged from the United States, where one in five women in their early forties is childless. In Germany and Japan the figures are as high as one in three women. The rise in education and job opportunities for women since the 1970s – or the success of the equality movement – have been touted as the main reasons for this drop in the nation's fertility. More women are putting off motherhood until they have established their careers, got a foot or two on the property ladder and are settled in a stable relationship, which often means they have hit their forties before they are in a position to make that decision. The number of new mothers in the UK over the age of 45 has more than trebled in the last 11 years; there were 1,832 births in 2011, more than three times the number reported as recently as 2000. Justine Roberts, co-founder of Mumsnet, said: “It's no surprise that women are having children later in life: with rising childcare costs and greater competition in the workplace, some pursue their careers as a first priority, while others are just saving up to be able to afford parenthood." The drop off the fertility cliff is something which often sneaks up on women; people are living longer, life events are happening later, so by the time some women are ready for children, it might well be too late. Just this week the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) updated its IVF guidelines to recommend the upper age limit for treatment on the NHS be extended from 39 to 42. Higher education, a career, or a step on the property ladder are the often-cited socially acceptable reasons why women choose to delay motherhood, but the active choice to not have children at all is something which is rarely talked about. Dame Helen Mirren made headlines recently with her refreshingly frank take on being childless. In an interview with Vogue she said: "It was not my destiny, I kept thinking it would be, waiting for it to happen, but it never did, and I didn't care what people thought." In the past she has said famously said "motherhood holds no interest for me." Dame Helen is one of a just clutch of female role models who have spoken openly about their choice not to have children; Cameron Diaz, Tracy Emin and Oprah Winfrey are also on the list. Britain, however, is obsessed with fertility – just look at the coverage of Kate Middleton's baby bump, Coleen Rooney's baby bump, Fearne Cotton's baby bump… you get the picture. It can be no surprise then that most childless women in the media glare are repeatedly asked to justify the status of their womb. Historian Lucy Worsley caused media uproar last year when she told the Radio Times: "I have been educated out of the natural reproductive function, I get to spend my time doing things I enjoy. I don't think my life is wasted." Speaking to the Times about the media reaction to her comments, she said: "I was afraid there would be a queue of journalists outside my door at home, saying, 'Look, it has come to our attention that you have maliciously refused to have children, so we've come round with a turkey baster and we're going to sprog you up now – our editor insists.' Joking aside, she continued: "I think there is still a significant fear of a woman who chooses to remains childless." And she's right. Society and the media at large still treat women who have opted out of reproduction with suspicion. There is a sometimes not-so-silent consensus that there must be something wrong with any woman who chooses not to ‘fulfil her role’ and procreate. Even some of the most powerful women have to deal with the misogynistic view that a woman is not complete unless she is a mother. Back in 2007 Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard was referred to as 'barren' by leader of the opposition Bill Heffernan. More recently he accused the government – well, her basically – of lacking experience in child raising. Angela Merkel is often referred to as childless, but what effect this has on her ability to run a country is not clear. If the German Chancellor was a man, I doubt the status of his fertility would be a subject up for discussion. It seems that if you are a woman, you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.  |
| Cat, PhD – a new feminist superhero? Posted: 26 Feb 2013 01:30 AM PST
Legs akimbo, breasts upfront and twisted in an unfeasible and hypersexualised pose – that is the usual fate for our comic book heroines. This trope is so well recognised there's even a site dedicated to it: The Hawkeye initiative. It posts drawings where a superheroine is replaced in her provocative pose by Hawkeye – and the results show how absurd and awkward these stances are. Enter Cat, heroine of new comic My So-Called Secret Identity, who certainly won't be caught in one of those poses. In a Guardian article, her creator Will Brooker is quoted promising, 'no heroines running in stupid heels. No skimpy costumes or unrealistic proportions. No brainless, bra-less female characters or cheesecake pin-ups.' Batman scholar Brooker has spoken out previously about the depiction of women in comic books. One day, disappointed by a visit to his local comic book store, which had been plastered with women as ‘pin-ups’, he was struck by how smart and determined women lacked representation in comic books. In one interview, he explained 'I looked around at (my PhD class) full of young women – so smart, determined, keen and committed…why do we never see women like this in comics – women who are normal, likeable and just really, really clever?"' Thus the idea for Catherine Abigail Daniels – or Cat for short – was born; a PhD student living in Gloria city who fights crime using not a superpower, but her brainpower. The first issue of the digital comic launched on 18th February and is available for free online. The work is being funded through contributions, with extra profits going to 'A Way Out', a women's charity based in the north-east of England. The creative team behind the comic, is – barring Brooker – all-female. Brooker said that he had wanted to 'try to reverse the normal gender ratios’ in the male-dominated superhero comics industry. In 2011, DC Comics had been heavily criticised when, after their relaunch, the number of women they hired had gone down from 12 per cent to 1 per cent of the total. Women's low participation – and portrayal – in comic books remains an issue. The picture, however, is improving, as activists campaign in different ways for a higher inclusion of women, both as creators and as characters. Comic anthology Bayou Arcana was the first to pair an all-female artist team with an all-male writing team. Petitions have been launched to push DC into hiring more women. The very fact that people are discussing and dismantling the negative portrayal of women in comics – whether through sites like the Hawkeye Initiative or on feminist blogs dedicated to comics – is encouraging. Moreover, in 2013, we can look forward to meeting many new (re)incarnations of female superheroes. Marvel’s reboot of the X-Men series – issue #1 will appear in April – will feature an all-female superhero team. She-Hulk and Rogue will be the protagonists in two novels over the summer of 2013 : a collaboration between Hyperion Books and Marvel Comics. The true measure, however, will depend on how these superheroes are depicted – as damsels in distress, or as strong and independent females?  |
| 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 | |