international women's day

You know the Baroque: I'm not really into these international this-n-that days, with the possible exception of International Pirates Day (Q: Why are pirates called pirates? A: Because they arrrrrrrrr). And I won't be going to any International Women's Day events nor will I listen to any Women's events on Radio 4, or whatever they do. I think I saw something about an all-women poetry reading which I won't be attending; I'm a little wary of anything where people get to feel smug about how misunderstood they are. (I'm be home watching Ghost Club.)
But today is a day to realise that:
Convictions for reported rapes in the UK have plummeted from from (what we then called "only") around 30% in the 1980s to an appalling 5.7% now - the lowest in Europe. More women are reporting rape than ever before. Most are raped by people they know. And juries are reluctant to convict if the victim had been drinking. (It's worth knowing this, girls: go to a party and you have no protection in the courts if something happens later.)
In some countries rape qualifies as "adultery" for which the woman can be punished.
The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, aka "Mr Reasonable", has even made his famous remark about "some aspects of" sharia law being "inevitable" in Britain. Yeah, right. Here in Baroque Mansions we deliberately stayed away from that one. But it's just civil matters, you know. Still within UK law. Well, sharia is not fair to women, either as law or, more importantly as the sensibility under which people live (as we, under British law, live within its sensibility; come on, this isn't rocket science); I saw this even in my limited capacity working for years in a Muslim neighbourhood. Sharia courts are far more likely to rule in favour of the male-dominated sensibility, according to the religious texts. Read this. Really: read it.
Let's not forget about the case (in 2002) of Amina Lawal - she was sentenced to stoning (to death) in Nigeria because she had a baby two years after separating from her husband! The male partner in question was not prosecuted, "for lack of evidence." Oh - and her defending lawyers won on appeal (she is now remarried) on a sharia-based defence that it is apparently possible for an embryo to lie dormant for up to five years, thereby "proving" that the baby "must be" her ex-husband's.
Also, in the UK! The Department for Work and Pensions has recently ruled that it will pay additional benefits to Muslim men [sic] who have up to four wives! Yes! Just as long as those marriages were contracted in countries where polygyny is legal. Even though polygamy is illegal here.
Er - don't you think it's funny that they're not talking about paying the benefits to the women?
Worldwide, women are still paid on average 16% less than men. Apparently the pay gap is even wider for highly educated women. (Get that! Mind you, I suppose Martin Amis and the footballers have pushed men's average hourly pay right up.) In Britain they get 17% less. In Japan apparently they get 49% less. (Yes, that's a 4.)
Of the 1.2billion people estimated to live in poverty, 70% are women and children. In the developing world a woman dies from pregnancy or childbirth complications every minute.
AIDS is rising faster in women than it is in men:
"Women now make up nearly half of the 37.2 million adults aged 15-49 living with HIV worldwide.
In sub-Saharan Africa about 60% of those with HIV are women. And among young people aged 15-24, 75% of those with HIV are girls and women. Only a quarter are the boys.
Over the past two years alone, the number of women infected in East Asia has increased by 56%.
In Eastern Europe and Central Asia the number has increased by 48%." (figures from here)
According to the UN, for women to be "adequately represented" by their governments, 30% of government representatives should be female. Thirty countries have reached this figure (including Burundi, Guyana and Rwanda) and only three countries - Chile, Spain and Sweden - in the world have achieved gender parity. In the UK 18% of MPs are female. In the USA, only 14% of seats in Congress are held by women.
41 million girls in the developing world are being deprived of an education. How will they ever get into parliament, so they can make it illegal for men to infect their wives with HIV?








7 comments:
It's amazing how things have changed in the past 25 years or so.
Back in the early 80s, when I was a young political activist, everything had to be seen in the context of gender. The political atmosphere could be stifling in its over-sensitivity, and some manifestations of the zeitgeist were comic in their absurdity.
A generation on and it is trendy if not de rigueur to mock "wimmin's issues". In the mainstream media and blogosphere we encounter this all the time from former leftists who have since turned into curmudgeonly and reactionary, even sexist middle-aged conservatives. And that's just the women! Sad creatures all.
Now, as you point out, armed with statistics in addition to a justifiably sarcastic tongue, rapes are up, domestic abuse of women is rife, and bishops talk of the 'inevitability' of sharia law. Fucking hell, we appear to be regressing.
Happy International Women's Day!
Francis, you are a tonic - & loved your post, not surprisingly.
What is that picture you used on your blog? It is SCARY.
Welcome to the revolution, Ms. B. Though it sounds as though you've entered it somewhat unwillingly, mainly in response to statistics.
International Women's Day may sound like yet another tiresome 'Something or Other Day' but the swing of the pendulum towards political apathy amongst younger women means we are as much in need of it as ever ... if only because their apathy leaves the way open for the stealthy return and/or reinforcement of gender tyranny and oppression.
As you yourself noted a short while ago, those in British poetry - as a quick 'for instance' - who insist most vehemently that there is NO difference between the sexes in terms of success, respect and critical treatment are almost exclusively men. Yet both statistics and common sense tell us this apparent equality must be imagined.
We may have been allowed to enter the holy space that is poetry, but we still have to stand at the back, respectfully, and watch what we say - when we're allowed to say anything at all, that is.
Women everywhere, wake up!
"We (women) may have been allowed to enter the holy space that is poetry, but we still have to stand at the back, respectfully, and watch what we say - when we're allowed to say anything at all, that is."
The only thing you missed out Holland was !!!
Wo/men "everywhere, wake up!"
You are still trapped in last century Jane, and i think promoting your exclusional angle as a purely political thing, talking yourself up as a self appointed gatekeeper, arrogating yourself a role as spokesperson for your sex, half the worlds population, and sound no different from the male bores you have in mind when you try and ,ake out about women being excluded.
How are you excluded?
You are the poet laureate of Warwick, and from my rerading there are numerous women all selling wonderfully well and getting the message across, about personal inclusion of women into the holy space you drone on about as a priestess pretender, trancey wancey, excluded is what you did tyo me on your gulag coz you couldn't take hinest competition, so forgive me for thinking your sisterhood act as nought but the usual drone Hollando..
And there we have the two sides of the equation!
Guys, you all know what the Baroque Comments Policy is. I've had this kind of bother recently too, and ended up hiding all conmments to my recent Wallace Stevens post as a result. No personal comments about other people!
Argh!
Now: Jane, darling, I was raised in that revolution. I'm not really sure why you think I'm a reluctant convert to anything. I actually agree with everything you say except yor first two sentences! And as for the statistics, I think they speak louder than words...
This is just SO depressing - brilliant Independent article btw, ta for the link. My immediate reaction to the archbish was "that cannot be right considering the position of women in countries where sharia IS law", and then I started to think my way around it, to give it some head room and to turn it over some more. And I became more vigorous in my response: "for heaven's sake, archbish, don't be an unutterable fool, don't give this idea wings, SHUT UP! WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?"
Just to reassure jura watchmaker ... not all of us who were trying to make a bit of a difference in the '70s and '80s have given up trying. And, honestly, we haven't all turned into 'curmudgeonly, reactionary and even sexist middle-aged Conservatives'. Or even curmudgeonly, reactionary and sexist OAPs.
Post a Comment