Earth Hour

On Saturday 28th March the world united in order to combat climate change. 

Originating in Australia in 2007, Earth Hour consists of everyone turning off their lights for an hour between 8:30 and 9:30. 

This year was a success, with 169 countries taking part world wide. However, it worries me that so few people I know were aware of this event, let alone participated. 

With so many people denying climate change's very existence, it seems like we are ignoring the issue. Of course there is a lot being done to try and fight against global warming and reduce our CO2 omissions, but amongst young people today I do not often encounter people who are overly concerned with climate change. It seems like we are all worried by the problem, but relying on others to solve it. 

If we cannot even manage one hour then it is time that we, as the future generation, took responsibility for our actions. 

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/lights-around-world-earth-hour/ 

Written by Lili 

Picture Credit: Ellen

Women in STEM subjects: the root of the issue?

After attending a ‘Women’s Science event’ at a local university as part of celebrations of
International Women’s Day, I was rather unsettled to find that they seemed to have grasped what appeared to me to be completely the wrong end of the stick.

The intention of this event was to try to encourage more girls to get involved in STEM subjects and careers. With only 13 per cent of science, tech, engineering and maths workers being women (1), one would imagine that this initiative could only be a positive thing.

“You may think that people in STEM roles are all geeks, but look around this room, we're all normal
people!” the first speaker declared.

“You must be joking,” we all thought. “We ARE geeks. That’s why we’re here.” Evidently the audience they had invited didn’t exactly match up with the target demographic of the event. We are also ‘normal people’, and personally I was somewhat confused, verging on offended, that this woman speaking to us thought there was something wrong with being ‘geeky’ or ‘nerdy’. Although one can be a nerd or a geek regarding pretty much any subject, STEM subjects tend to have these connotations most readily, so if they’re trying to encourage more participation by girls in these subjects, I would have thought they would be telling us that being nerdy was acceptable - preferable even - rather than implying that it was only okay for men to be geeks and that we can do science without being geeks and therefore retain our femininity. I certainly believe that one can be simultaneously feminine and a geek, and I don’t think a single member of the audience thought otherwise. I’ve seen an increasing acceptance of nerdiness amongst teenagers over the past few years, but the adults don’t seem to have caught on, and thus by telling us we can do science without being nerdy, they’re actually alienating the very people they need to recruit.

Perhaps this wasn’t her true view and she was only saying this because that’s what she thought we thought. But while talking to other audience members afterwards, I discovered that we were unanimously agreed that we didn’t care about the lack of other girls in our science classes – with the majority of the audience between the ages of 15 and 18, we were all at an age where if we are interested in science, we want to do science, and we don’t care what other people think about that. Therefore if the reason for the lack of women in STEM roles is to do with girls being put off due to the perceived ‘nerdiness’ or masculinity of the subject, it’s an issue which arises at a younger age. I remember even at primary school people would think of English as a ‘girly’ subject and of maths as a ‘boyish’ subject. There’s a deeper societal issue that needs to be tackled in order to combat the imbalance in STEM; although I appreciate the sentiment, talking to teenagers who are already interested is a waste of effort.

Written by Jenny

Picture Credit: Ellen


1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-health/11401344/STEM-Is-there-any-science-
behind-the-lack-of-women-in-science.html

Similar article on women in STEM subjects: http://adamandeven.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/pi-day.html

Why Angelina Jolie is an Inspiration

Before two life saving operations, Angelina Jolie had a 87% risk of breast cancer and a 50% chance of ovarian cancer. This is much higher than the normal risk, due to her having inherited the BRCA1 gene (Breast Cancer Care). Angelina has now had a double mastectomy (the complete or partial removal of the breast) and a salpingo-oophorectomy (the complete or partial removal of the ovaries and fallopian tubes) and has had reconstructive surgery on her breasts. Jolie has been very open about her experiences and after the completion of both operations, has written a piece in The New York Times to inform other women about this risks and the options which are available. I think Jolie should be celebrated for being so open about these procedures. Many may feel that this is information one would not normally share, so it is beneficial that Jolie is using her high profile to educate women about these procedures. Jolie decided to have a double mastectomy for health reasons, but her brave decision shows women around the world that it is possible to not be defined by our bodies.

Breasts are often perceived by society as the most feminine body part, making us 'womanly'. Yet without her own, Jolie has still been able to continue her achievements, both in her personal and private life. This shows that Jolie is as successful as she is now, not because of her body, but because of her mind, her beliefs and her actions. This an important message not only for BRAC carriers, but for humankind. 

Written by Georgina

Edited by Lili

Picture credit: Ellen



http://www.breastcancercare.org.uk/breast-cancer-information/breast-awareness/am-i-risk/risk)

http://www.surgeryencyclopedia.com/Pa-St/Salpingo-Oophorectomy.html

http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2011/aug/03/forbes-list-hollywood-wage-gap

http://www.unrefugees.org/angelina-jolie-unhcr-special-envoy/

Between the Lines

The use of genders in foreign languages has long prayed upon my mind. Studying French and Spanish I am reminded daily of the fact that the masculine dominates.

Let me explain.

If the subject of the verb is, for example a group of girls and boys, then, regardless of the ratio of boys to girls, the subsequent verb and/or adjective will always be in the masculine form.

For example, referring to a group of boys and girls:

English: 'They are beautiful'

French: 'Ils sont beaux'

Spanish: 'Son guapos'

Here the adjectives in both French and Spanish are in the masculine form, thus implying masculine supremacy, as the masculine overrides the feminine every time.

This is echoed in the English language too, although to a lesser extent. An example would be when one refers to a general person as male, for example saying that "each student does his own homework" instead of using the gender neutral 'their'. Furthermore we often say things such as 'Fireman,' and 'Mankind.' This implies that it is only the masculine that matters.

The main problem I have with this is the fact that it is so engrained in our society that even from a very young age girls are made to feel secondary through this subtle use of language. 

You may think that I am making something out of nothing, but in fact there was a study done which showed that depending on the gender of certain nouns, take 'bridge' for example, people would describe it in quite different ways. In Spanish the word bridge is masculine, and therefore when Spaniards were asked to describe a bridge, they used adjectives such as: "big," "dangerous," "long," "strong," "sturdy," and "towering." Conversely, the word for bridge in German is feminine, and when asked to describe the same bridge, the Germans used adjectives like: "beautiful," "elegant," "fragile," "peaceful," "pretty," and "slender." This was true despite the fact the tests were done in English, a language without grammatical gender. The stereotypically masculine and feminine descriptions of the same bridge can only lead us to the conclusion that the language must be affecting peoples perception of the bridge. Therefore it does seem that the use of gender in a language is significant. 

Perhaps in order to combat this inherent gender supremacy and the stereotypes it plays on we should think about using gender neutral forms in our own language, for example 'humankind' and 'firefighters.' I acknowledge that the problem is less easily solved abroad, but the adoption of a neuter, gender neutral, form could be beneficial if at all viable. 


Written by Lili

Picture Credit: Ellen

https://edge.org/conversation/how-does-our-language-shape-the-way-we-think

Feminism vs. Misandry

I am about to make some obvious points that have been made many times before. I don't believe we should stop saying the obvious points until the message gets through.

1. Feminism does not equate to misandry (misandry=the hatred of men), misandry is very wrong in the same way that misogyny is very wrong. Among misandrists who call themselves feminists, many have views that may overlap with feminism (e.g. that we should eradicate the pay gap) but cannot  be called feminists as the idea of hating men directly contradicts the basic principles of feminsim.

2. Feminism is not a movement which aims to promote women above men

3. Feminism promotes gender equality

4. Feminism is beneficial to men also, in a large number of ways but focuses on the plight of women as they are in an undeniably disadvantaged position in society. This disadvantage varies in intensity from country to country and has been reduced through activism in many places but is present in all modern societies today.

5. Feminism ought to be intersectional, that is consider other factors that affect privilege such as class, race and sexuality.

6. Common responses to Feminist arguments such as "not all men" and "men get raped too" are completely missing the point. They are, of course, perfectly valid and true statements, but they do not go against feminist ideology so cannot be used to argue against it.

6. (Controversial): Feminism needs to be called feminism. Whilst terms such as egalitarianism are of course important and inclusive, we need terms to address the issues of specific groups that are at a disadvantage to another, more privileged, group. The same argument applies to, for example, the term 'black feminism', it could be argued that this comes under the term 'feminism' and is therefore unnecessary or exclusive, but 'black feminism' is important because it highlights how black women are generally subject to further discrimination than caucasian/white women.

We all need to understand that feminism does not exist to attack anyone. The criticisms are directed at society and the way it is biased in favour of certain groups, not at the groups themselves. The criticism can be directed towards individuals who promote certain privileges, such as politicians who endorse laws that discriminate against women but not at men in general. Men need to be aware of the privilege that they have and support the cause for gender equality but also know that feminists are not trying to brand them all with the same brush nor try to claim that they are individually responsible for gender inequality.

Written by Ellen

Picture Credit: Ellen

P.S. can we drop the 'battle of the sexes' idea, we are all team human, the only battle is against inequality

M ssing Characters

 Before I start watching a new TV show one of the first things I find out is whether it has a gay man in it. Some people might find it weird, surely it doesn’t matter whether there's a gay dude in it! But it does matter. It's important. So important.

I'm not saying that I don't enjoy TV shows that don't have gay men in them. The majority of TV shows I watch do not have gay men in them, but the ones that do are so much more important to me. As a child all of my friends were female because I found it very difficult to relate to boys. As I grew up and explored different media, I felt a disconnection between myself and the male role models every other boy wanted to be. I didn't want to be Luke Skywalker or David Beckham, I didn't care about them, they weren't like me.

It is hard to communicate the necessity of representation to someone for whom it is not a problem. When I look back on my childhood I am filled with great sadness. It took me a long time to come out and I cannot help but feel that if I'd had gay role models I would have come to terms with my identity far sooner and saved myself so much angst and confusion. As children the books we read and movies we watch guide us through adolescence. As boys we are meant to aspire to be these fantastical characters who's heroic exploits conquer evil in the name of good. We are told we should be heroes like Harry Potter, Indiana Jones, James Bond, we're told we should kill the baddies and get the girl. But what if I don't want the girl.

We call it a heteronormative society. It's normal to be straight, and that's just the way of life. So growing up I had no idea of anything other than that. I wasn't weird, I was normal. I didn't even know gay was anything more than an insult thrown about the playground until I was 10 years old.  As I struggled to grasp hold of my identity I became more isolated. I had been told I was going to marry a pretty girl and have lots of children, that's what men did, that's what heroes did, that's what my dad and my teachers had done, and that's what the other boys were going to do. There was no notion of marrying a boy, that was weird, that was gay. I'd met perhaps three gay men and shied away from all of them, fearing that I might be like them. In my head it was like I had a disease. The adults didn’t talk about it, the children were scared of it, I didn’t know what it was or what it meant. It went against everything I had been taught, but I knew I had it. So I walked around with it, in constant fear someone would expose me, wishing I would stop being ill.

No one had ever said it was okay.

If I had known it was okay, known I could marry a boy, known I wasn’t weird, known I could still be a hero, still kill the baddies and still fall in love, then I would have never felt so awful. If I'd had a role model who I could connect with, a role model who was like me and could have shown me I was perfect just they way I was then I never would have felt so isolated. I remember the first gay couple I ever saw on TV; Tara and Willow from Buffy The Vampire Slayer; and how much I cried when they got together. It filled me with the hope that one day I would find someone too.

It may be 2015 but not that much has changed. Millions of children are growing up scared and isolated because they don't understand themselves. In schools we get 'the sex talk' but where’s the sexuality talk? Where are the parents who sit their kids down and say 'its okay if you're a different gender'? Nobody tells these children that its okay.

That is why we need LGBT+ characters. If you're straight and cis-gender you know who you are, you know where you stand in the world, and you have role models to aspire to. But many LGBT+ individuals don’t have this security, we go through such extraordinary experiences and often don't have anyone who understands or even accepts who we are. Given the failings of many parents, the education system and society as a whole, we must look to popular media for support. The LGBT+ youth need role models, characters to empathise with; people who go through what we experience and empower us to keep fighting so we can get a happy ending too. Showcasing LGBT+ characters is not only beneficial to LGBT+ youth. LGBT+ individuals of all ages will be given further strength and hope by being able to relate to issues they’re experiencing through characters they love. The wider coverage of LGBT+ issues will also allow parents across the world to understand and support their children, and promote global acceptance and equality.


I don't want any child to feel the way I did. I don't want my children to live in a world of pain, isolation and ignorance. But I do hope that other LGBT+ individuals will be able to relate to my experience and that my pleas for representation extend out to anyone who has been oppressed or discriminated against.


That is why I find out whether a show has a gay man in it. I know I will be able to relate to him, I know he will support other gay men, and I know he will be a beacon of hope for us all.


Written by Jub

Picture credit: Ellen


Recommended TV shows with prominent LGBT+ characters:
Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Greys Anatomy, Modern Family, Happy Endings, Glee, Orange Is The New Black, Ugly Betty, The Fosters, The New Normal, Skins, The L Word, Looking, Queer As
Folk, Banana,

The Education Solution

Once again, it would appear that the Scandinavian countries have got it right. Students in Finland repeatedly out perform those in Britain. In fact, they have done best in worldwide tests in core subjects, "Finland's pupils scored the highest average results in science and reading in the whole of the developed world" (BBC News) despite only starting school at the age of 7.

Due the poor natural resources in Finland, the government realised that they needed to modernise the economy, starting with the education system. Consequently, during the 1970's the Finnish government reformed the country's education system. Instead of having a centralised system based on exams and standardised tests, they created a more localised system and began to dramatically reduce the number of exams children had to do. By abolishing standardised national exams (apart from a few samples to ensure the education system was of good quality), the Finns were able to save lots of money, which they were able to invest in increasing teacher's salaries and decreasing class sizes.

It appears that this has paid off. Every school in Finland is state funded, and these schools provide a fantastic education for every pupil. The small class sizes allow each pupil to receive personal attention from their teacher, which has proved invaluable in the development of these children. All children are taught in the same class, regardless of their ability. This has resulted in one of the smallest gaps in achievement between the most and least able pupils. Undoubtedly it also helps that "30% of children receive extra help during their first 9 years of school" (Business Insider)

Another major contributor to Finland's success is the public's attitude towards education. In Finland one of the most respected jobs is that of a teacher, and all teachers must have a master's degree. Teachers also receive excellent benefits in their job; the state recognises that teaching is very hard work, and therefore every week each teacher has 4 hours paid time off for 'professional development'. 

It is not just the teachers which are valued, but the schools themselves. Professional architects design many schools in Finland, and consequently the facilities are modern and efficient. For example in some schools the canteen is designed so that it can easily convert into a theatre for a drama class. Furthermore, the school buildings are used by the whole community. Outside of school hours schools transform into libraries and are used as communal spaces for the young and elderly alike. 

This huge involvement of all of society in the education system means that the Fins value and appreciate eduction, something which I believe is key to good schooling. Of course this would have been near impossible without government investment, however I think that if our government were to make he same commitment we could dramatically improve our county's education and therefore boost our economy and enrich society. Furthermore, currently the Finns spend "around 30% less per student than the United States." (Business Insider) Which goes to show that this would be achievable here in the UK.

Written by Lili

Picture Credit: Ellen


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8601207.stm
http://www.businessinsider.com/finland-education-school-2011-12?op=1&IR=T
http://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/19429

Demystifying the Acronym: Lesbian

This is the first follow-up post to the earlier 'Demystifying the Acronym: LGBTQIASPK' introduction.

Naturally the best place to start is the beginning. However, I think there is a lot less to demystify with the L of LGBTQIASPK because most people know that L stands for lesbian and that lesbians are women who primarily love or are attracted to other women.

So what can I demystify?

What many people don't seem to know is what it actually entails to be a lesbian. Misconceptions either stem from people believing that lesbian relationships are completely different from heterosexual relationships (some still appallingly believe that they are not relationships at all) or that they are completely the same. Lesbian relationships can and do have the same levels of love and connection that any other kind of relationship has, they are as real and valid as a the ground you stand on. However, this does not mean that you can apply everything that exists in a conventional heterosexual relationship to lesbian relationships. Questions like: "So, who is the man in the relationship?" completely miss the point and can be very offensive in the wrong context. In a sense this kind of query is understandable, we live in a hetero-normative society and therefore what most of us have been exposed to is solely heterosexual relationships. This means that often people try and understand what they don't know in terms of what they do, trying to identify who takes up the traditional gender roles that we have been conditioned to believe are necessary. One partner may present themselves in a more masculine way but this, again, varies as much as everything else within any relationship.

Further misconceptions come when people believe that all lesbian relationships are the same as each other. If you think about the variety of different types of heterosexual relationships there are, there exists the same amount of variation, if not more, in lesbian relationships. What makes lesbians lesbians is the fact that they are women who love or are attracted to other women, beyond that they are people and are as varied as the rest of us. While it might seem like I am stating the obvious, when I say 'lesbians are people' the point I'm trying to make is that being lesbian will no doubt be an important part of someone's identity but it does not fully define them. The mistake that a lot of people unfortunately make is to consider that someone's label, if it is different from the socially accepted 'norm', wholly captures who they are, what they stand for, and which stereotype they will embody. Lesbians are the same as you, they just happen to prefer women.

The stigma and social pressures that lesbian women experience throughout their lives, especially in a world where at a young age children are not taught about alternative sexualities (or genders), means that lesbians have, to a greater or lesser extent, had to deal with things that heterosexual people will never encounter in the same way. This means that when you are trying to understand what it means to be lesbian, it is important to recognise (if you are heterosexual) that their pain is not your pain, and that their experience has been different from yours.

Another important point: lesbian sex. Many people seem unable to understand how lesbians have sex or feel it is appropriate to ask about intimate details (most of the time it isn't). Probably the biggest issue with lesbian sex is the way it is portrayed in porn. Most porn depicting two women having sex is aimed at a male audience and spreads many misconceptions about what lesbian sex really is (e.g scissoring isn't as common as you might think). It is extremely important that we all realise that women having sex is not just a fetish, it is as real as any other kind of sex and should be respected at the same level. (I know I'm repeating myself but it is important!). What is lesbian sex actually like? The short answer is, again, it is as varied and dependent on the individuals as heterosexual sex. If you still can't understand how sex can work without a penis, Laci Green made a youtube video that explains much better than I could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMMjVwj_XJw.

Ultimately, we need much better education in schools about lesbian and other LGBT+ sexualities/relationships (it would help if they mentioned the existence of anything other than straight relationships for example), but in the meantime I think we all have our own responsibility to not remain ignorant about sexualities other than our own. Destroying ignorance is the first step to eradicating stigma and discrimination. The information is out there, we need to educate ourselves and at the very least simply realise that types of love and attraction other than what we personally feel are equally valid and deserving of our respect.

Written by Ellen

Picture Credits: Ellen and Lucia

NB: Please note that one of the main functions of this series of posts is to educate myself at the same time as informing others on these topics. The information and analysis is therefore as accurate as I can make it, I haven't experienced any of this firsthand. So if you feel I have inaccurately described anything in the above post please let me know in the comments and I will do my best to correct it. 

Pi Day

Happy pi day!


Did you know this is the only pi day we will ever experience in our lifetime? So called because if we write today's date in the American way, it is 3.14.15. That is to say pi, correct to four significant figures. Pretty cool coincidence I'd say, and therefore a day worth celebrating.

Unfortunately it seems as though women are not getting their fair share of mathematical pie. The world of mathematics remains a man's world. Yes there are indeed many more women pursuing careers in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects, but sadly a balance is yet to be reached, since "only 6% of maths professors in British universities are women." (The Guardian)

In the 21st century it saddens me that such under representation persists in one of the most relevant, challenging and important areas of research in this day and age.

Perhaps this lack of women choosing to study the relevant subjects at school is the root of the problem. It seems that there is an unpleasant stereotype for the sort of girl who wants to be an engineer for example, - nerdy, boring and certainly not attractive to the opposite sex (something which bothers many teenage girls). Therefore, with society subtly steering these girls away from these 'masculine' subjects, it is unsurprising that, due to many girls submitting to peer pressure, there still are not enough women in scientific careers.

Therefore, perhaps whilst admiring the novelty of pi day we could all spare a thought to those women fighting for a career in mathematics, and for those of us who feel inspired by the subject, we can look to those women in admiration and maybe even follow their example.

Written by Lili

Picture credit: Ellen

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-womens-blog-with-jane-martinson/2013/mar/11/women-maths-professors-uk-universities 

Bonus post: White Babies

To draw the picture for the previous post, "8 days difference" I googled pictures of babies to help me get the proportions right. The result was still the creepiest thing I have ever drawn. No matter, it did the job.

The think that perturbed me after I'd drawn the picture, (aside from the fact that I'd inadvertently shaded it in the colours of UKIP) is that all the reference material on Google images I had looked at was of white babies. To find pictures of non-caucasian babies you have to scroll down a long way or make your search more specific. Therefore, in a sense and according to google images, the default baby is white.

I know it seems like I am trying to find an issue in every little thing, and I know it is not a crucial issue in itself (I don't have a conspiracy theory that google is trying to subconsciously influence us or anything), but it reflects a tendency in our culture to idealise and hold up people who are born a certain way as 'ideal'. Also if white is the default or 'normal' race/skin colour from birth then surely that illustrates a deep rooted bias in society in favour of white/caucasian people that begins at a very early age.

I am not saying that we should pretend everyone is the same, it is important to recognise the differences between people. We shouldn't ignore what makes us different, our differences make us human and it is important that we all have our own racial and individual pride. However, to have one group established as 'default', automatically makes the remaining groups 'other' and therefore, unfortunately, at risk of discrimination.

Written by Ellen

Picture Credit: Ellen

8 Day's Difference

I will be 17 years and 357 days old on the 7th May 2015, the next general election, and that makes me exactly 8 days too young to vote. There has been much debate about lowering the voting age to 16, this is partly due to the success of the lower voting age in the 2014 Scottish Referendum. Some passed this off as a sly way to increase the support for the ‘Yes Scotland’ campaign as it was assumed that the younger voters would be more willing to take a chance (and they did with 71% voting for Scottish independence) (BBC) rather than a step towards increased democracy. There’s a general feeling that young people deserve the ability to vote and 43% of 16-18 year olds think that you should be able to vote from 16 (YouGov). However would a lower voting age actually encourage teenagers to take an active part in our political system?

For years the fall back argument to allowing 16 and 17 to year olds to vote is that at 16 you can get married, join the army and pay taxes. However it does feel like we are putting too much value on the ability of 16 year olds to make life changing decisions. You cannot get married without parental consent at 16, it is impossible to actually be deployed in the army until you are 18 and with compulsory education until 18, it is very unlikely that 16 and 17 year olds are earning enough to pay taxes. Moreover no matter how old you feel at 16, your parents and teachers still have a large influence over you and therefore by allowing young people to vote, we could actually hinder democracy. The newly franchised young people may just follow the footsteps of their parents rather than forming their own ideas and political wants which occurred in the Scottish referendum in 2014 with 60% of young adults voting in the same way as their parents (The Guardian). This just increases the political power of those who already have the vote. 

When Alex Salmond announced that 16 and 17 year olds would be politically franchised for the first time in the UK, there was a huge level of concern that teenage angst and apathy would just result in a disappointing turnout. Yet the exact opposite happened, nearly 100% of those Scottish teenagers who were eligible to register, did (The Guardian).  If England were to allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote in general elections, it could inspire teenagers to care about the policies which affect our everyday lives. As a generation we certainly do need to reengage with politics. In 2010 only 44% of 18-24 year olds voted (UK political), the lowest turnout of all age groups, but this isn't a new worry. In 2005, only 45% of 18-24 year olds voted (Electoral Commission). There has long been a feeling of discontent with British politics and something needs to be done. Perhaps by giving young people the vote, it would prove that our opinions do count, and that our voices are being heard and therefore this could lead to a greater voting turn out among young people. Moreover it seems as though politicians take advantage of the fact that 16 and 17 year olds are unable to vote. The last Governments have abolished the EMA (Education Maintenance Allowance) in England, increased university tuition fees to £9000 per year and increased the age at which will be able to retire (BBC Free Speech). These all directly affect young people and it is not fair. If we were able to vote, political parties would have to introduce policies that benefit young people.  

In conclusion I think that the voting age should be lowered to 16 years old because teenagers want to be able to vote, they want to have their voices heard. We are no longer happy to sit and stay silent whilst our futures hang in the balance. I do worry that if the vote is lowered to 16 years old, that the same low level of youth participation will continue, but there are definitely solutions to this in the long run. In order for the lower voting age to work, I believe that we need a better political education in schools, so that everybody knows the benefits of voting and the choices that are out there. Equally, we need politicians who want teenagers to vote and politicians who truly care about young people, so that the young people will want to vote for them.

Written by Georgina

Picture credit: Ellen

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/29279384

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_
uploads/document/hor40o6pyfFreuds_S4S_Final_Results_150216_website.pdf

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/23/first-time-voters-scottish-independence-referendum

http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout10.htm

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/47257/BESreportforTheElectoralCommission_18771-13876__E__N__S__W__.pdf

https://www.facebook.com/BBCFreeSpeech/photos/a.197145927051588.31084.195792860520228/602836769815833/?type=1&theater

Subtle Stereotypes

Standing behind the till at work on a sunny Sunday afternoon, a middle aged man with a friendly looking face walked into the shop with his two children. "Hello" he greeted me, and then, before I could reply, he cleared his throat and said "sorry, that sounded very girly." He then said "hello" again, this time in a deeper voice.

What struck me about this comment was his need to apologise for sounding slightly feminine, and this 'masculine image' he felt he needed to live up to. In our current society it is easy to claim that we have been freed from historic social constraints, and the idea that in this day and age the British public are oppressed would, I'm sure, be met with scathing remarks from many people. 

However, I believe that due to the pressure to conform which society exerts upon us, we are not completely liberated. On the contrary our culture is based upon gender stereotypes, so much so that this man I encountered did not want to appear even the slightest bit female. Perhaps this is due to the fact that women are perceived as weaker than men due to generally not being as physically strong. 

It saddens me that whilst on a train today I overheard a female university student saying to her friend "but it's harder for girls isn't it, because we're shy." This, I would argue, demonstrates how many girls feel. There exists a subtle feeling of inferiority that creeps into the minds of many girls, and weighs them down from an early age. The harsh gender stereotypes present in our society oppresses us all. 

This is not solely an issue which affects women (and members of the LGBT community), it affects men too. The pressure to behave in a 'manly' way leads to many males suppressing their emotions, perhaps a factor in the high incidences of suicide among men, "Suicide remains the most common cause of death in men under the age of 35." (Five Years On, Department Of Health, 2005)

There remains much more to be said on this issue, but for now I shall leave it at this. The pressures we face daily in our lives are so inherent that we barely notice inequality and oppression, to the extent where these views are commonplace and remain unquestioned. 

Written by Lili

Picture credit: Ellen

Five Years On, Department Of Health, 2005, http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/help-information/mental-health-statistics/suicide/

International Women's Day

So to celebrate this day, I thought I would write a short post outlining the origins and achievements of International Women's Day.

It all started in Chicago, 1908, where they celebrated the first Women's Day. A year later, in New York City, the first International Women's Day was held. It was the Socialist Party of America which organised this day, and they were primarily concerned with the rights of working women. Demands for equality were made, and oppression of women was battled. Most of all though, women campaigned for the right to vote, something which was achieved "nationally in 1920." (Wikipedia.com)

Since then women worldwide have gone on strikes and participated in demonstrations on the 8th March each year. Notably in 1914 (the year of the first official International Women's Day) British women staged a march from Bow to Trafalgar Square in support of women's suffrage; Sylvia Pankhurst, however, was arrested on her way to speak in Trafalgar Square.

In 1977 the United Nations recognised the 8th March as a global holiday, and people were encouraged to dedicate this day to promoting women's rights.

Each year since 1996 there has been a theme assigned to each day. This year it is 'Empowering Women, Empowering Humanity: Picture it!.' I personally really like the message this portrays, it highlights the fact that women's rights are relevant for all of humanity. By empowering and liberating women we will inevitably have a better society, and we should strive to achieve equality. Since this  benefits at least 49.6% of the population (although arguably men would, of course, also be better off), I cannot see this would not be a good idea.

In summary, this is a day we should all be proud of, and thankful for. Although there is still much progress to be made, as stated by Helen Pankhurst, Great-Granddaughter of Emmeline Pankhurst,  "The suffragettes of old would say that the vote was only ever the beginning," (BBC News) today gives us the opportunity to celebrate the progress we have made and to remind everyone that the fight is far from over. 

For more information check out the website: http://www.internationalwomensday.com 

Also see our page: http://www1.internationalwomensday.com/adamandeven#.VPx0VzSsVpO 

Written by Lili 


Picture Credit: Ellen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_the_United_Stateshttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31786675 https://www.ined.fr/en/everything_about_population/demographic-facts-sheets/faq/more-men-or-more-women-in-the-world/http://heavy.com/social/2015/03/international-womens-day-google-doodle-march-8-2015/ 

Yoghurt Pots, Why Not?

My Mum is suddenly keen on an idea. Buy larger yoghurt pots. If you don't have small children and you don't need to transport it anywhere, why not buy bigger ones? It means less plastic is wasted even if you diligently recycle/reuse your pots.

No effort and yet helping the environment.

Just a thought,

Ellen

P.s. or become vegan

P.p.s. Lili also points out that it's cheaper to buy in bulk 

Picture credit: Ellen

Time for Fair Play

It is true that in the last 100 years many of the issues prominent in the female society have begun to be targeted and overall conditions for many women have improved with more freedom of speech and a higher political status. However, even today there exist some sectors of society where women are not treated equally to men. Sport is one of these sectors.

A BBC Sport study from 2014 revealed ‘30% of sports - including golf, cricket and squash - pay prize money that rewards men more highly than women.’ The biggest disparities concerning this is in football, for instance ‘Arsenal won both the men's and women's FA Cup this year, but while the men were given £1.8 million, Arsenal Ladies received £5,000 for their win.' (BBC Sport) This means that the men were given a shocking 360 times more than the female team. 

We live in a society where inequalities are supposedly being phased out. However, with such a massive difference in pay between male and female sport it is evident that this is not always the case. Many argue that the reason for this shocking statistic is that there is less public attention for female sport and therefore it is not viable for them to be paid equally. However, the reason there is not as much interest in women’s sport is because female sport is repeatedly denied the opportunity of being represented in the media. Surely, the increasing interest in female tennis proves that there is a viable interest in female sport. As a result of this tennis is one of the few sports that has equal pay for women.

It is not just the matter of pay inequalities in sport that is concerning, but the seemingly conspicuous attitude that female sport is less important. At a rugby dinner last year I was appalled to see that the whole list of the female rugby players had been ‘missed’ from the guest list. How can female athletes expect to earn enough money from their careers when there is such an obvious lack of respect for what they are doing?

Pressure is now being put on schools as ‘2 million fewer women than men [play] regular sport’ (The Guardian) but what is there to motivate women to participate in sport? The prospect of a sporting career for a woman currently is practically impossible in comparison to the male ‘elite,’ so why would anyone attempt to follow such an uncertain career path? Moreover, schools themselves pay little attention to female sport in comparison to their male counterparts. I myself have seen male prospects in school P.E. having considerably more help with training than women with an equivalent ability.

If people wish for female sport to attract more of a public platform to enable equality, then the media should allow it one. Athletes around the world are being cheated out of a career on the simple premises that they are female. Despite this we are being told that for the first time in history women are on an equal status to men; I ask you to look again.

Written by Grace

Picture credit: Willow

 http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jul/25/school-pe-lessons-putting-girls-off-sport  
 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/29786682  

The Elephant in the Room

It was found in a study carried out by King's College London that "80% of obese people had never talked about their weight with their doctor." This strikes me as incredible. In the UK we have the third highest level of obesity in Europe, that is to say that "67% of men and 57% of women are either overweight or obese." (Global Burden of Disease study)  

We clearly need to tackle this problem, but with it being increasingly frowned upon to label people as fat - for fear of leading them to anorexia or similar - it is difficult to know what action it is acceptable to take. We seem to be tip-toeing around the problem in a truly English manner. For whilst there are many causes of obesity, for example the fact that "healthy food now costs three times as much as junk, study shows,” (The Independent), our unwillingness to tackle it only exacerbates the issue.

We live in a society where it has become taboo to accuse someone of being fat, and it seems to me that we are simply ignoring the problem and brushing it under the carpet. "Demand for larger women’s clothes has rocketed by 47% in five years" (The Mirror online) and I would argue that obesity is becoming more and more normalized in our current society. Whilst on the one hand it is obviously a positive thing to have people feeling comfortable with their body image, and there is evidence to support the fact that "for some people, eating in moderation is more of a challenge"(The Week). This is only beneficial up to a certain extent, and should not be an excuse for our increasingly overweight nation.

The fact that it is now acceptable and even normal to be overweight is, in my opinion, only making the problem worse. In order to tackle this concern it is necessary that we acknowledge the issue. 

If we look at the modelling industry, models suffering from eating disorders such as anorexia have been heavily criticized, to the extent that in 2006 models deemed to be too skinny were banned from participating in the Madrid Fashion Week (CNN.com). This is for obvious reasons, and of course we should not be promoting eating disorders, but those in the public eye have a responsibility to set a good example. However surely this reasoning applies to both extremes? Why is there no such action being taken against obese models? It could just as easily be argued that these women (and men?) are glorifying obesity, and what is worrying is the amount of support they have. Take plus size model Tess Munster for example, who currently has over 70,000 followers on Instagram. The difficulty is, that there is a fine line between making people feel more secure about their appearance, and promoting an unhealthy, and potentially dangerous, way of life.

Furthermore, people are so reluctant to be seen as targeting people who are overweight, that we are allowing future generations to grow up in a country where being overweight is the norm, and where people do not take good care of their bodies. I am all for promoting healthy body images, and I find it troubling how many young people are worried about their weight and appearance, however I do not think that it is justifiable or responsible for people to be promoting obesity. Instead we should be teaching and encouraging people to look after and value their bodies. It is there where we will reach an equilibrium without causing low self-esteem. 

Written by Lili

Picture Credit: Ellen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCmulICkfGQ
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/adele-style-sees-increase-in-plus-size-691834 
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/13/spain.models/
Global Burden of Disease study, published in the Lancet medical journal.  
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/10October/Pages/Healthy-food-costs-you-more-claim.aspx
'Exercise is a 'miracle cure'', The Week Magazine, 28th February 2015, Issue 1011

LGBTQIASPK: Demistifying the Acronym

Most people by now are aware of the acronym LGBT and what it stands for. However, the acronym is constantly expanding in the gay community as people try and get to grips with the colourful array of sexualities that make up the human race. The most extensive version of the acronym I have come across is: LGBTQIASPK, and the first time I came across it I had no idea what half the letters stood for. Searching the web did not help much as there seems to be no comprehensive guide that I could find explaining what each letter stood for and represented. This was frustrating as I was attempting to find out as much as possible about a community I knew very little about and yet the information was not readily available. This explains, to a small extent, the ignorance surrounding the LGBT community.

I went on to research the letters individually and decided I would do my bit to dispel the ignorance surrounding the acronym. I intend this to be the first of a series of posts where I will tackle each letter individually in depth.

For now, here is an overview of what each letter stands for:

L: Lesbian - a woman who loves/is attracted to other women

G: Gay - a man who loves/is attracted to other men

B: Bisexual - a person who loves/is attracted to both genders

T: Transgender - a person whose gender identity does not match the one they were assigned at birth

Q: Queer/Questioning -these labels allows for people who are unsure of their sexuality or simply do not want to define themselves in terms of the other letters

I: Intersex - A person whose gender is ambiguous at birth

A: Asexual- Someone who is not sexually attracted to anyone

S: Self Sexual - A cheeky addition by Betty Dodson and Carlin Ross: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Conys9LiGHg

P: Pansexual - a person who loves/is attracted to all genders

K: Kink - a controversial addition referring to people who engage in sexual activities that are not considered 'conventional'


Written by Ellen

Picture Credit: Ellen