Wednesday, December 23, 2015

Women's Views on News

Women's Views on News

Cameron can’t claim to be fighting for Britain

Posted: 22 Dec 2015 06:12 AM PST

Conservative MEPs, steel, environment, tax dodging, Labour List, Glenis WillmottNot while his MEPs keep voting against the national interest.

By Glenis Willmott MEP, Leader of Labour's MEPs.

While David Cameron has been trying to dig himself out of a hole of his own making at the EU leaders' summit in Brussels this week, in Strasbourg his MEPs have been their usual regressive selves, voting against reports calling for European action to save the steel industry, save the environment and hammer tax dodgers.

The European Parliament overwhelmingly backed a Labour MEP's report aimed at tackling tax avoidance and evasion by a majority of 500-221.

Aggressive tax avoidance and evasion costs the UK economy £16 billion every year – yet Tory MEPs voted against the report.

One major highlight of the report is that it calls for mandatory, public country-by-country reporting of tax arrangements, meaning all companies that operate across borders must publicly report on where they make their profits and where they pay their taxes.

The report now goes to the European Commission, which has a year to decide on whether to adopt the recommendations.

If they do, companies that try to use tax havens to hide their profits or shift their tax will face tough new sanctions, and a common definition of tax havens will be introduced across the EU – those firms that use them will be prevented from accessing any EU money.

On the environment, Tory MEPs voted against Labour proposals on the EU's future energy policy, which seek to refocus it from fossil fuels to renewables, efficiency and infrastructure, putting consumers centre-stage.

The Energy Union report highlights the crucial role of energy efficiency and renewable energy, including a call for ambitious 2030 climate and energy national targets of at least a 40 per cent reduction for domestic CO2 emissions, at least 30 per cent increase for renewables and 40 per cent increase for energy efficiency compared to the levels of 1990.

Tory MEPs voted against the report.

They even voted against amendments that would have reflected the international deal reached at the major COP21 Paris climate change conference.

And Tory MEPs also voted against a report that recommended a level playing field for the steel industry throughout Europe and proposed limiting the dumping of cheap Chinese steel.

The report outlined the major issues facing the industry, including low steel prices, unfair competition and high energy prices, and called for the development of a level playing field for the steel industry.

Even though British and European steel production is in danger of disappearing, even though people are losing their jobs hand over fist, Tory MEPs voted against proposals for EU action.

On all these issues and more – like the fight against terrorism and the refugee crisis, which are both under discussion by EU leaders this week – it is only at EU level that we can find workable solutions, and it is Labour MEPs, not the Tories, who are at the forefront.

David Cameron claims he acts in Britain's best interests – though if that were the case I can't understand why he is not already making the case for Britain remaining in the EU. Yet his own MEPs continue to vote against measures that would be good for Britain's national interest and good for the interests of working people.

A version of this article appeared on the LabourList website on 19 December 2015.

Challenge patriarchy in schools

Posted: 22 Dec 2015 06:03 AM PST

How to solve gender inequalityHow to solve gender inequality.

On Human Rights Day and the final day of the 16 Days of Activism and in one final blog post, Scottish Women's Aid's Service Development Officer, Orlaith McAree, put forward one solution to solving gender inequality: challenging patriarchy in schooling.

Violence against women is rooted in the many ways in which females and males are shaped from birth to adopt particular roles, positions of power, behaviours, traits and responsibilities in society.

Rather than being natural, these characteristics are learned; varying across time, culture and place.

As the focus of this year's 16 Days of Action was education, McAree looked at the ways in which schools might reinforce or challenge the gender inequality in which violence against women is propagated.

Schooling and education, though crucial to achieving equality, do not operate outside of the system of patriarchy to which we're all subject.

Here are a few ways in which gender inequality is still very much present:

As is the case in wider society, the absence or dearth of women represented in educational curricula is common, with women and their contributions in the fields of history, science, literature and music and others too often overlooked;

In mixed-sex settings, girls are more likely to be interrupted by their peers, with these interruptions more likely to result in them being silenced.

Furthermore, studies have shown that girls and young women occupy far less time and space than boys, and equals that occupied by boys only when girls make up between 60-80% of the group;

The World Health Organisation (WHO) found that school is the most common setting for sexual harassment and coercion of girls and young women.

With 1 in 3 girls experiencing sexual harassment in UK schools, and almost 1 in 3 girls experiencing unwanted touching at school, this issue cannot be ignored; and

Sex and relationship education (SRE) is still not compulsory in Scottish schools, with many children and young people learning about issues like sex, relationships and consent from pornography and other unreliable sources, which foster less progressive gender role attitudes and reinforce the idea of women as sex objects.

Sexism and gender inequality are firmly embedded in all aspects of society, with schools too often reflecting this society and the inequality upon which it is built.

We all know that teachers and other school staff have a lot (usually too much) on their plates but we also know that their influence is great.

And with great influence, to coin a bit of a phrase, comes great responsibility.

If school staff would like to work in a more gender-equitable way, here are a few things they might consider asking:

Do I feel informed about gender inequality and how it might operate in school settings?

Do I discuss gender in my practice and challenge gender stereotypes?

Are women visible in, and core to, the curriculum? (Not anomalies and not just on international women's day!)

Do I seek, listen, and respond to the voices of girls and young women?

Am I informed about sexual harassment at school and its potential impact?

Does my school provide sex and relationship education which challenges gender stereotypes, promoting healthy relationships and consent?

Am I aware of gender power imbalances within group settings? Do I try to reflect upon and address these in some way?

So. There we have it. Gender inequality solved.

Surrogacy: the exploiting of women’s bodies

Posted: 22 Dec 2015 04:49 AM PST

surrogacy, exploitation, ‘She is forced by her husband to carry the surrogate child without bothering about her health’.

During a seminar organised by European Women’s Lobby (EWL) members the International Alliance of Women (IAW) in Paris recently, Veena Kohli, president of the Delhi-based All India Women's Conference (AIWC), presented the following statement on the issue of surrogacy:

Surrogacy motherhood is big business in India.

No doubt surrogacy is a technical marvel, but All India Women's Conference (AIWC) strongly feels that this is exploitation of a women's body and must be stopped immediately.

Allowing surrogacy is to make use of women's bodies and reproductive organs for the enjoyment of someone else to the detriment of the woman herself.

Women must have the right to their bodily integrity and have fundamental human rights over a supposed right for parents to have children. Children always have the right to have parents but there is no human right for parents to have children.

In the Indian context, I would like to give you the picture of "Anand" clinic in Gujarat, India.

Dr Patel is having roaring business and she says the business has taken off beyond anything she imagined.

She admits there are dangers if the surrogacy business continues to grow in India because there are little regulations by Indian medical council therefore strict rules are required to avoid exploitation of women.

The world's first baby factory is being built in India to house hundreds of poor women to be used as surrogate mothers to have children for western couples.

In "Anand" clinic, Dr Patel has 45 mothers for surrogacy and 27 are already pregnant.

Nearly 50 babies have been born during the last one year. Another 150 couples are still waiting.

In the West, a surrogate mother charges USD5000 to 7000, whereas in India it can be done at half the price. It is sheer exploitation of a poor woman who earns USD2 a day in her regular job.

Published in a 1-10-2013 by Daily Mail report, “the multi-million-pound clinic which is being built by Dr Patel at Anand will have self-catering department for western couples, a floor for surrogate mothers, delivery room, I.V.F. department, restaurant and gift shop.

“This is going to become booming trade in India, which is sheer exploitation of women bodies.”

Economic Impact – it is true that the surrogate mother is given a good amount of money which she can never dream of earning by any other means. The amount she gets is equal to ten years salary of her husband in rural India.

In one case while talking to the surrogate mother she informed that she has 5 children of her own and she is carrying a surrogate child because she was going to use that money for her daughter's wedding and for building a house.

She is forced by her husband to carry the surrogate child without bothering about her health.

This is exploitation by husband who will think that his wife is a machine for earning money.

Therefore, it can make him lazy and alcoholic and the brunt will be borne by the women.

Therefore, she is physically exploited, emotionally exploited and further suffers the economic impact also.

Social Impact – In India there is a social stigma for the surrogate mothers as she is renting her womb for money.

This is not looked up as a healthy occupation and decent way of earning money. This attitude is especially in the rural areas where it is considered an immoral act.

Emotional Trauma – no emotional feeling of the mother for the child.

As per the contract the surrogate mother has to sign an agreement that she will relinquish all parental right over the child and it is accepted that the surrogate mother will have no emotional attachment with the child.

Which seems to be very unnatural because the child in the womb imbibes the emotions and thoughts of love and care of the mother. What kind of a child will she give birth to?

Real life case as recorded by one of our members Kuljit Kaur when she interviewed a lady who was surrogate mother for the 3rd time: She was asked what she felt while giving away her first child who was a daughter. There were tears in her eyes and she said I have carried her for nine months and "how is it possible that I do not miss her".

It causes emotional imbalance and leads to the emotional cruelty to the mother.

Children are not a commodity on a market and women's rights cannot be negotiable by privileged buyers who want to rent her womb.

Childless parents may benefit by having a baby but the human rights issue is the only way to deal with this issue.

The rights of women and children and not the buyer must be the focus of this issue.

In India there is no law to govern surrogacy.

The Assisted Reproductive Technologies (Regulation) Bill has been pending for five years and the clinics have become into an industry working with loosely governed guidelines by the India Council of Medical Research.

All India Women's Conference strongly feels that in the orphanages all over the world there are abandoned and orphan children who can be adopted by the couples who cannot produce babies.

It will give a safe healthy and secure home to the child and the satisfaction to have a baby in the house to the couple.

We suggest that work on less cumbersome laws for adoption of babies should be done immediately.

We cannot have a society where another can be exploited for the desire of the other.

Kohli concluded by appealling to the President of IAW to issue a statement to the world forum to abolish surrogacy all over the world, whether it is free or not.