Women's Views on News |
- A culture of sexual coercion
- Anti-fracking protesters face injunction
- The Sun offers Page 3 Girl date as prize
| Posted: 27 Aug 2014 06:15 AM PDT
Young men are not always getting consent from young women when they have anal sex, according to a recent study published by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). For the research, part of the LSHTM’s Sixteen18 project, 130 young men and women between 16 and 18 were interviewed to assess the expectations, attitudes and experiences of anal sex between heterosexual couples and the effects these may have on health. The study was published in the BMJ Open – and showed that pain for young women during anal sex was considered normal. The interviewees did mention trying to emulate porn by having anal sex, however the researchers stressed that one of the most influential factors surrounding the practice was an oppressive peer-group environment where some men competed with each other to have anal intercourse with women. ‘Current debates about young people's sex lives often seem to focus narrowly on the impact of porn. ‘But our study suggests we need to think more widely about the lack of importance society places on women's rights, desires and concerns,' lead author on the study, Dr Cicely Marston, explained. The study also suggested that even those who were not having anal sex were still talking about it with peers, supporting an environment of harmful expectations. In group interviews, young men discussed competition and swapping stories about anal sex with other men. 'The men want to collect practices to say they've done them,' said Dr Marston. 'It was a box to tick. ‘Who the partner was was completely irrelevant.' Young women reported that they were repeatedly asked for anal sex by their male partners, and that they were sometimes put into positions where they were anally penetrated without their explicit consent. Other young women expressed gratitude to their partners when they had been allowed to decline engaging in anal sex – a low standard they had set for their partners which Dr Marston found disappointing. The researchers were keen to note that not all young men coerced their partners and in some cases anal sex had been approached through mutual consent. However, the presence of the coercive environment was the norm among the interviewees rather than the exception. "There was this idea that women basically wouldn't want to do it and that [they] needed to be persuaded," said Dr Marston. "They [the young people] also talked about it as though it was completely normal for men to repeatedly ask their girlfriends for it and repeatedly be told no, but keep asking." Anal sex among young people is on the rise. According to the National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles 2013, almost one in five 16-24 year-olds reported having had anal intercourse with an opposite-sex partner. As the participants in the LSHTM study came from diverse locations and social groups, the authors believe these findings are likely to be relevant to many young people across England. "While anal sex might not be the easiest topic to raise, we cannot afford to ignore attitudes that help normalise coercion and negatively affect both women and men," the study's co-author, Dr Ruth Lewis, said. "Anal sex is part of some young people’s sexual lives, and we believe our study makes a powerful case for more open discussion." "Our findings suggest an urgent need to act to reduce harms associated with anal sex, particularly to challenge views that normalise coercion," Dr Marston added. "Teachers, parents and wider society must discuss anal sex with young people openly and, specifically, highlight the importance of 'mutuality' – both partners listening and responding to each others' desires and concerns." Writing in the Washington Post, Dr Marston suggested there was need to challenge the culture and attitudes around the 'unmentionable' topic of anal sex, as well as providing more information to both men and women about recognising coercive behaviours. 'We often talk about educating young people about consent, but what does this mean? Does it simply boil down to teaching young men not to rape? If this is the case, it's a depressingly low bar,' she said. "When you talk about consent, you're implying that women are resisting all the time and that men have to check that the women are no longer resisting." Dr Marston continued. "Actually you should start a few steps back from that and think about why you want to do it in the first place, and have you spoken to your partner and what do they think? "It's more about mutual decision making and aiming at mutual pleasure." Writing about the research in the Daily Life, Clementine Ford notes: 'Issues of pleasure and consent should be considered central rather than peripheral to comprehensive sex education.' However, she believes this is not the only problem. 'As uncomfortable as it might make adults to think about children having anal sex, the reality is that it's not only happening, it's happening with the absence of information and sensible instruction,' which increases the risk of pain, tissue damage and infection. She's right: there are real health risks to engaging in anal sex without proper lubrication and with force. However, the most worrying aspect of the research is the fact that some men in the study appeared to even blame their partner as 'sexually naïve' if she experienced pain. "There was this idea that if you're a woman and you did experience pain, it was kind of your own fault because you weren't relaxed enough, experienced enough – you would get used to it eventually," Dr Marston explained. "There was that sense that the woman had to learn. "There was no sense that it had anything to do with the man or the technique or use of lubricants." And this uninformed, victim-blaming approach is perhaps most harrowing of all.  |
| Anti-fracking protesters face injunction Posted: 27 Aug 2014 05:00 AM PDT
Shale gas operator Cuadrilla has been accused of using 'dirty tricks' by a group of Lancashire grandparents, after serving the group of women with court papers over a land dispute. The campaigners, largely local Lancashire residents and primarily grandmothers and mothers, say that Cuadrilla is using the opportunity to gain a widespread injunction – which would cover every proposed fracking site in the region and a local landmark, Lytham Windmill – not only against them, but against all Lancashire-based campaign groups and national and international campaign groups including No Dash for Gas, Frack Off and Britain and Ireland Frack Free (BIFF). In addition to the injunction, the fracking company is also seeking to evict the campaigners, known as the ‘Lancashire Nanas’ from Preston New Road Community Protection Camp, a resident-run blockade situated on land earmarked for fracking near Little Plumpton, on the Fylde Peninsula. The camp was set up to start on 7 August and run for three weeks in order to raise public awareness in the region and show uninformed neighbours exactly where the drill site and access roads would be located if Cuadrilla gets planning permission. The residents of the camp site will be voluntarily bringing the camp to an end by 27 August as was planned from the start. The case is due to be heard at Manchester High Court on 28 August. Tina Rothery, one of the 'Nanas' and a resident of Blackpool where Cuadrilla aims to extract shale gas, said: "When we occupied the field, we did so in order to highlight a land-use dispute. "This is agricultural land in a well-populated area and not suitable for heavy industry on this scale. "The fact that Cuadrilla is taking us to court the day after we are due to have left is absurd, and can only be because they want to inhibit our right to protest in the future. "To deliver the paperwork just before a bank holiday, thus not allowing sufficient time to arrange a lawyer by the deadline for evidence on Tuesday 26th is a dirty trick." She continued, "This is pure hypocrisy from Cuadrilla, a company that will benefit from a change in trespass laws to allow drilling under our homes. "If they are allowed to do this in Lancashire it would have repercussions for people defending their communities throughout the country. "The result here will affect every other anti-fracking campaign in the UK and we know that people are and will continue to unite with us." The eviction attempt targets one of two sites that Cuadrilla is currently attempting to gain planning permission for via Lancashire County Council. The applications, if successful, would see the Fylde Peninsula host the largest UK fracking tests to date. Each of the sites require 2 years of work, 20,000 truck movements, the use of 9 million gallons of water per well and the production of 5.6 million gallons of radioactive waste. The applications are on course for being the most unpopular in British planning history with 14,000 objections already registered with several weeks to go until the consultation process ends. This is not the first time a company has tried to get a wide ranging injunction against a number of campaign groups. In 2007, British Airways Authority suffered a humiliating public backlash when it tried to get an injunction to stop campaign groups from setting up a climate camp near Heathrow Airport. Rachel Thompson, from No Dash for Gas, a group which has just held its annual, week-long Reclaim the Power camp on the same site as the 'Nanas', said, "This is the second time we have been subject to anti-democratic legal action by this billion-pound industry. "EDF were forced to back down from their attempted £5 million law suit against 21 of us, last year. "People in Lancashire and all over the country have clearly shown [they] will not allow fracking and [that] they now insist on clean, renewable energy. "This legal action is a last grasp attempt by a dying industry that has failed to gain the required social licence and refuses to know when it has been beaten." "The UK has a long and proud history of direct action. Can you imagine if a private company were able to take legal action to stop the suffragettes?"  |
| The Sun offers Page 3 Girl date as prize Posted: 27 Aug 2014 04:15 AM PDT
In a self-parodic move The Sun last week advertised a date with 'Rosie' or 'Kelly' as a reward for the lucky winner of its Fantasy Football Dream Team competition: 'Travel not included. Date will be at a location agreed with the Promoter. Choice of Page 3 Girl is subject to availability and schedule of Page 3 Girl. Date must be arranged and agreed with Promoter by no later than 6 October 2014 otherwise date will be forfeited.' Romance aside, this is surely a step too far for even those who defend the existence of The Sun's sexist relic. For as New Statesman blogger Glosswitch wrote: 'Both women and men deserve better than this. 'You can't win a person; it's only through getting to know them that your life will be enriched.' As media sexism goes, The Sun's offering of a woman as a prize is pretty extreme. To complain, tweet your thoughts to the 'news'paper. Or contact the Advertising Standards Authority.  |
| 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 | |