Women's Views on News |
- Women could be bishops by November 2015
- Miss World bikini ban not victory for feminism
- ‘Kick Off Your Career’ launched
- Don’t let them scrap Equality Duty
- Is the Left too soft on religious extremists?
| Women could be bishops by November 2015 Posted: 18 Jul 2013 08:24 AM PDT
Reactions were largely negative when the motion that would have made it lawful for women to be consecrated to the office of bishop in the Church of England was defeated in November 2012. The Right Reverend Justin Welby, the then Bishop of Durham and soon-to-be Archbishop of Canterbury, called it a ‘very grim day’. he wasn’t the only one. With the majority of voting members of the Church's synod supporting the bill, the result left many members devastated. Writing for WVoN, Reverend Biddi Kings said that ‘As an ordained woman priest I share the distress, dismay and disappointment of the overwhelming majority who feel this legislation is long overdue in a society and an organisation where supposedly we espouse equality of opportunity for all people.’ In the November 2012 vote, the House of Bishops voted 44 for and three against with two abstentions, while the House of Clergy voted 148 for and 45 against. The House of Laity is where the motion was defeated, with the vote failing to reach the necessary two-thirds majority; 132 voted for and 74 against. In recognition of the deep divisions the vote exposed, the House of Bishops held an emergency meeting in December 2012. A working group composed of members of all three houses was formed and tasked with producing new draft legislation for consideration at the July 2013 General Synod meeting. Church of England rules state that any measures for additional consideration must be different than previous versions. Much of the controversy in previous debates had revolved around how best to placate opponents of women becoming bishops, and various methods included in the draft legislation were considered. In May 2013, the House of Bishops recommended the simplest version of the motion to allow women to become bishops. The simplified draft removed ‘arrangements for those who, as a matter of theological conviction, are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests’ and agreed to address those points in separate documents or meetings. As part of its five-day General Synod meeting, held in York from 5 to 9 July 2013, members participated in a full-day private consultation session dedicated to working through issues surrounding the disagreements over women bishops. The consultation was followed by a debate, after which members voted. The result was a ‘yes’ to reintroducing draft legislation at the next General Synod, which will be held in November this year. The November meeting will be the last meeting for this Synod; elections begin early in 2014 for new members to the group. Campaigning is likely to be fierce as the timetable in the recently approved draft legislation states July or November 2015 as the recommended deadline for Final Approval. As part of its ‘commitment to admitting women to the episcopate as a matter of urgency’, the House of Bishops has already begun allowing women priests to attend and speak at its meetings. At least forty-seven years after the debate began over the role of women's leadership in the Church, women now make up approximately one third of the Church of England's priests.  |
| Miss World bikini ban not victory for feminism Posted: 18 Jul 2013 06:16 AM PDT
Miss World. Yes, it does still exist. The 62-year old pony show for women which was set up in the early 1950s, at a time when a woman’s place was most certainly in the home, or as a pretty accessory on her husband’s arm, does still exist. And it is, apparently, still going strong. According to the organisers, it is Britain’s most successful ever international television show, pulling in global audiences in excess of one billion. Thankfully, Britain has moved on; the last time the show was broadcast on mainstream British TV was in 2001, although the charade – sorry parade – was held in London just two years ago, and contestants from the UK still vie for the title every year. This year’s host nation is Indonesia, and in a move supposed to ‘respect’ the culture of the majority Muslim country, organisers have opted to ban bikinis. Instead of bikinis, contestants in the ‘beach fashion’ round will wear specially-designed one-piece costumes and traditional Balinese sarongs. I’m all for bikini-wearing women on the beach, at the swimming pool, in the garden – women should be able to wear what the hell they like without worrying about the effect it will have on men, but don’t line us up for people (men) to evaluate our worth as the sum of our parts. Anything that strengthens the notion that women can only really be valued based on their looks is bad news in my book. I find it hard to figure out why on earth, in 2013, Miss World is still a ‘thing’. And considering it started life as a bikini show for The Festival of Britain, it could be seen as a victory that those same bikinis and that kind of evaluation should be banned. But while the feminist protesters of the 1970s can lay claim to having a hand in the disappearance of the pageant from mainstream British television, this latest move seems to have nothing whatsoever to do with feminist aims. Critics suggest the move is in response to pressure from conservative Muslim factions, and born out of fear that the pageant could be targeted by extremists when it takes place in September. The country’s top Muslim clerical body, the Indonesian Ulema Council, had called for the contest to be cancelled, saying it promoted “hedonism, materialism, and consumerism,” and is nothing but “an excuse to show women’s body parts that should remain covered.” Banning bikinis from Miss World is like banning me from eating Marmite; it makes absolutely no difference because its vile anyway. But anyone who suggests that religious conservatives have a lot in common with feminists on this issue are missing the point. We may see all see the world as a better place without the Miss prefix, but our motivations are very, very different. The head of the hardline Islam Reformist Movement Garis said of the pageant: “They will still wear outfits that will encourage sex and immoral acts." Indonesia is a secular country and most of its Muslims are ‘moderate’, but according to Policymic, extremists are growing in number and influence. Last year Lady GaGa was forced to cancel a sold-out gig in the capital Jakarta, after local and national police were unable to guarantee her safety. Extremists had threatened violence if the concert went ahead, calling Lady Gaga a “devil’s messenger” who wears only a “bra and panties”. Ah, the bikini issue again. Miss World and Lady GaGa are just the tip of the iceberg here; other female performers, Beyonce, J.Lo for example, have also been forced to ‘tone it down’ on tours to the country. It all smacks so clearly of the desire to control women; what they wear and how they behave. Miss World may be stuck in the 1950s, and, like page three, be one of those sexist ‘traditions’ that for some unfathomable reason are still with us in 2013, but any move which dictates what a woman can or can’t wear has to be a step further away from equality.  |
| ‘Kick Off Your Career’ launched Posted: 18 Jul 2013 04:00 AM PDT The Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation (WSFF) and the Football Association (FA) are joining forces to encourage women to turn their passion for football into a career. I know what you're thinking – another day, another initiative to get women and girls into sport. But the ‘Kick Off Your Career’ campaign is not just about getting fit by playing football. It encompasses sports medicine, administration, management, law and more. In fact, it's all about getting more women into every aspect of football. There can be no doubt that a lot of women and girls are passionate about football. This may be men's, women's, local, national or international. Some would certainly be keen to develop this interest into a career. But where do you start? The pathway to being a professional footballer may be difficult, but at least it's fairly clear. But what if you would like to be an administrator, journalist or development officer? This is where the ‘Kick Off Your Career’ campaign comes in. In a downloadable 36-page document, launched this week, 20 women who have made their mark in the world of football are interviewed. These include top broadcaster Jacqui Oatley, England’s team doctor Pippa Bennett, the director of governance at the Premier League Jane Purdon and the FA’s regional coach Marieanne Spacey. Each woman tells the story of how she got to be where she is today; the reader cannot help but be inspired. At the end of the document there are some useful websites and contact details for those wishing to find out more. The FA has shown considerable commitment to women's football in recent years. And we may still have some way to go to catch up with the Scandinavian model, but in England today over 1.4 million women and girls play football on a regular basis. There are 5,143 registered girls' teams and 1,437 adult teams. The FA’s General Secretary Alex Horne said, “We have achieved a lot in terms of developing women's football in the past twenty years but know that we are only really starting this work. "'Kick Off Your Career' is part of that plan to increase women in all parts of the industry and shows how on our twentieth anniversary we are firmly looking forward and that women's football is a cornerstone of the next phase of The FA's development." For their part, the WSFF have been at the forefront of promoting opportunities for women in sport for a number of years. They are clearly proud to be part of the initiative. According to their website, “The message for girls is clear: ‘It's your game too, come and join the team’.” It's a heartening view for anyone – including me – who has struggled to find their way in sports journalism, or any other aspect of sport, to know that paths are being cleared at last and true encouragement is there, rather than the lip service paid in the past. Sue Tibballs, chief executive of the WSFF, said of the campaign, "At WSFF we passionately believe that women should have the support and opportunity to pursue the career of their choice. “These inspiring stories show girls that football is an industry where women can succeed at the highest levels and in a variety of roles. “Female leadership in sport is something that WSFF campaigns hard for and I truly believe that encouraging more girls to pursue careers in football – from coaching to journalism to management – will improve the game for women." The document is worth a read even if you're not intent on a career in football. Although some women are relatively well known and enjoy a high profile, such as Hope Powell or Kelly Smith, it is just good to know that there many other women out there making careers in this traditionally male domain. Sue Hough, chair of the FA Women's Committee sums it up in her foreword. "I would say to all girls who love football that here really is a role for you in our national game,” she writes. "Read these inspirational stories of women who have played football and turned their passion into their career and we'll pass you the ball.” The Kick off your Career document is available as a downloadable PDF. Check out the links on the Football Association and WSFF websites for details.  |
| Don’t let them scrap Equality Duty Posted: 18 Jul 2013 03:00 AM PDT
The Fawcett Society, an organisation which campaigns for women's equality and rights at home, at work and in public life, has warned the UK government against taking a 'dramatic backwards step' when it comes to women's equality and rights. In a report published on 16 July, 'Red Tape, Red Line: five reasons why government should not "drop its duty" to tackle women's inequality' Fawcett considers the way in which different laws and organisations concerned with progressing equality and / or preventing discrimination have come about in the last 50 years. It then goes on to examine what has happened since May 2010 when the Coalition government took power. The report exposes: The abolition or weakening of key institutions concerned with progressing equality in the UK An on-going reduction in legal requirements with regards to equalities and so a greater reliance on voluntary action to prevent discrimination The dangers of abolishing or weakening the Public Sector Equality Duty, which is currently under 'wholesale review' It then sets out alternative actions the UK government could take instead if it genuinely wanted to improve its own effectiveness and that of the wider public sector in tackling discrimination against women and other groups. Ceri Goddard, chief executive of the Fawcett Society, said: "From the establishment of the Women's National Commission in 1969 to the Equality Act in 2010, the UK has slowly strengthened its mechanisms and measures to proactively progress equality – including gender equality. "But the organisations, laws and practices that together make up the UK's 'equalities architecture' are now being weakened. "Over the past three years, key bodies tasked with working to make the UK a more equal place – such as the government's own Equalities Office and the independent Equality and Human Rights Commission – have had their funding slashed and powers reduced. "At the same time, the legislative framework around equality has been steadily chipped away – with everything from the power of employment tribunals to equal pay law weakened. "Most recently, some of the key processes associated with good equality practice have been labelled 'red tape’. "Now, the Equality Duty is under threat. "A legacy of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, the duty is designed to tackle institutional discrimination and ensure public services treat people fairly and meet different people's needs. "It requires that all public bodies, including the government, consider what the impact of their decisions might be on different groups – including women. "But less than two years after it came into force, the government has chosen to 'review' the equality duty. "This follows its use in legal challenges at both a national and local level when public bodies – including the Treasury – have made policy decisions that have dramatically and negatively affected women and other groups who have been traditionally marginalised in policy making. "Dropping the duty would not only send a clear signal of how low down the priority list government sees tackling inequality, it could actually end up generating more not less bureaucracy and expense. "It is basic common sense that prevention is better than cure and the duty as stands is designed to deliver this. "The government is plotting a new and dangerous course when it comes to equality," Goddard continued, "Stripping back legislation, undermining key organisations, and now proposing a fundamental shift in the role of the state when it comes to progressing a fairer society. "After three years of steadily dismantling the UK's equality architecture, this is a red line they must not cross. "If they are not careful it won't be red tape they cut, it will be women's rights. "This is no minor legal policy skirmish, this review strikes at the heart of a key question within the coalition; how much should government do to tackle inequality? "The fact they are even questioning such a basic duty is hugely concerning. "If we see a proposal to water down the equality duty, it will be the reactionaries not the progressives in government who will be claiming victory." Do you care about public services treating disabled people, women, black and ethnic minority people, older people, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people equally? Are you or your family affected by discriminatory stop and search practices, by not being able to get into college or hospital buildings or by 'one size fits all' services that don't meet your needs? The Public Sector Equality Duty is the only law designed to tackle institutional discrimination and make sure public services meet everyone's needs. We could lose the only law that challenges institutional discrimination and makes public bodies deliver services that meet everyone's needs. Please join us in telling the government that the Equality Duty matters. Follow #savetheequalityduty.  |
| Is the Left too soft on religious extremists? Posted: 18 Jul 2013 01:09 AM PDT
A new book by left-wing American feminist writer Meredith Tax argues that the Left in the UK and America is often too ready to embrace right-wing Islam – to the detriment of women and others in the Islamic world who are struggling for equal rights. Author of “Woman and Her Mind: The Story of Everyday Life”, an essay considered a founding document of the US women's liberation movement, Tax is currently US director and head writer of the Centre for Secular Space, a London-based thinktank formed to oppose fundamentalism, strengthen secular voices and promote universality in human rights. In her new book ‘Double Bind, the Muslim Right, the Anglo-American Left and Universal Human Rights’ Tax argues that there are a range of political Islamic organisations who want to establish Islamic states, governed by Sharia law, and they systematically discriminate against women, along with sexual and religious minorities. These organisations include 'moderate' organisations like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Justice and Development Party in Turkey and Ennahda in Tunisia and transnational networks such as Hizb ut-Tahrir who seek to achieve this gradually by working through elections, educational propaganda, charity and organising. Then there are militant groups or 'salafis' such as the Taliban or al Qaeda which may run for office but also enforce some version of Sharia law through street violence; and a much smaller militant wing of salafi-jihadis that endorses military means and practices violence against civilians. Tax argues that many of the more violent groups have their origins in the Cold War, when the USA and Saudi Arabia funded and armed Afghan warlords to combat the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. She argues that since 9/11 the world has been caught up in paradigm of terror/torture. "The US kidnaps, tortures and uses drones to assassinate those it considers to be terrorists, often killing civilians at the same time. "Militant Islamists kidnap and assassinate both officials and civilians and blow themselves up along with anyone nearby. "And while national security experts analyse terrorists and human rights organisations defend those accused of terrorism, very few people – mainly feminists – have addressed terrorism in terms of the human rights of civilians." She argues that while it is critically important for human rights activists to track state violations like detention without trial, torture and kidnappings, committed in the name of counter terrorism, ‘It is also incumbent upon human rights organisations to scrutinise the ideology of groups they defend and to make it clear that while they may defend the human rights of those accused of terrorism, they do not support their beliefs.’ She uses the example of Moazzam Begg, a UK citizen and former detainee of Guantanamo Bay, who has written for the Guardian and accepted as a human rights partner by groups like Amnesty International and Reprieve. Tax argues that he is not a human rights activist, nor is his organisation, Cageprisoners, a human rights organisation, as it claims. She claims Cageprisoners has called for the release of terrorists like Aafia Siddiqui, who was tried and convicted by a jury, and that it invited Anwar al Awlaki, who the USA claims was a leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and was later killed in a US drone attack, to address a dinner in 2009. In a sermon on 'the qualities of great women' al Awlaki said of the four women mentioned in the Hadith: "They were either good wives or good mothers. "This is something that might not pass well with feminists or sisters who are feminised or affected by that thought. "These four women were not great because of their activism or their career or their knowledge. They were either good wives or mothers. "Khadeja was outstanding because of her support for her husband,” he said. “It wasn't because she was a businesswoman that did not factor in." Tax argues that, in the last ten years left wing organisations have allied with conservative Muslim organisations that stand for religious discrimination, oppose gay rights and subordinate women. She cites the example of the Socialist Workers Party, which formed the Respect Party with Islamists and stood candidates for elections following the outbreak of the Gulf War in 2003. Tax criticises left-wing leaders like Hugo Chavez for embracing Iranian president Ahmadinejad while he was on a visit to Tehran in 2006 and London’s former mayor Ken Livingstone and George Galloway MP for offering an official welcome to the Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. Tax argues people like Livingstone and Galloway assume that these right-wing Muslims represent the views of all Muslims – which they do not. She writes, ‘This support for the Muslim Right has undermined struggles for secular democracy in the Global South.’ She also argues that right-wing Muslims are not necessarily anti-imperialist or progressive, and wars like the Iraq War and the Palestinian conflict are about territory and resources and are nothing to do with religion. Tax argues that people who criticise aspects of Islam are not necessarily Islamophobic, Orientalists or allies of US Imperialism and should not be labelled as such, and terrorism is not a legitimate way of defeating oppression. She writes that ‘Those who wish to transform society need to do so in ways that mobilise the positive transformational strengths of masses of people, rather than use methods of violence, dogmatism and authoritarianism’ and instead advocates 'anti imperialism combined with solidarity'. Tax urges readers to ally themselves with progressive organisations in Afghanistan and elsewhere, which fight for women's rights and genuine democracy. ‘Democratic government,’ she points out, ‘is based on the idea that the state is delegated by the people rather than coming from God.’ She argues for the defence of 'secular space', and urges readers to resist religious encroachment on public life, as it muddles discussions about class, race and discrimination. These problems do not just arise with right-wing Islam but can also occur with conservative Christianity, Judaism or any other religious belief, and it is a pity the book focuses primarily on Islam, rather than covering conservative religion more generally. But it raises some valuable points nonetheless. The Arab Spring and recent events in Egypt and Turkey show people, even in the 'Muslim world' are keen to resist religious domination of politics. But liberals and those on the left can, often for the best of intentions, sometimes confuse right-wing religion with progressive politics. As the 2011 Census showed, Britain is becoming more secular, but last year the Guardian reported that a third of new free schools are backed by religious organisations. As society becomes more secular, we must be vigilant about religious encroachment on public life, and on women’s rights. And we must have the courage to question any religion’s values and beliefs and, if necessary, challenge them.  |
| 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 | |