Up the Women! UK General Election Opposition Debate

Something amazing is happening in British Politics and I am SO happy I am alive to see it. This photo was taken last night after the opposition Leaders television debate when all three anti-austerity, left wing  WOMEN leaders had a celebratory hug after their oratory successes. The hashtag of #UptheWomen then blew up twitter. This is an anti-patriarchy, anti-establishment movement and I can't wait to see how it works out. These women are brilliant role models for other young women encouraged to go into politics and this is how we will see real change in our system. This is the peaceful revolution, it's starting. If there are more women in politics our voices will be heard, represented and respected. Maybe I'm embroiled in feminist euphoria but I like to be an optimist sometimes! 

Cuba ought to protect its women after Obama/Castro Summit

Last week, history was made when Obama and Castro shook hands at an international summit in Panama. Following almost 60 years of diplomatic estrangement after the Cuban revolution and missile crisis of the Cold War, the US is reopening diplomatic, economic and migration relations with Cuba. This historic occasion will have huge repercussions for the citizens of Cuba given its geopolitical location in ‘America’s backyard.’ In a colonial hangover from the 20^th Century, the Carribean Islands are prime tourist destinations for many American tourists. One of Cuba’s main exports is tourism and if US citizens are allowed to travel there again it will undoubtedly become its most profitable export. Travel and tourism are explicitly gendered topics, as outlined in Cynthia Enloe’s (2014) chapter: Lady Travellers, Beauty Queens, Stewardesses, and Chamber Maids: The International Gendered Politics of Tourism. They are also truly international topics in an era of globalisation. To begin with, women travelling unaccompanied still inspires tension in some countries in the world, particularly with children. However, most specifically for Cuba, the industry of tourism is highly gendered and a place where private sphere gender roles are played out in the public sphere. For example, whilst waiters and valet drivers will be expected to be men, chambermaids are overwhelming female. In fact, the tourist industry itself is overwhelmingly dominated by women as many of the jobs are ‘women’s work’ but also relatively part-time and flexible. This is a result of the expectation that women will perform domestic tasks in the home and therefore also in the workplace. Whilst a cataclysmic invasion of American tourist companies and American tourists alike may advantage Cuban women as a result of an increase of ‘suitable’ employment there is always a large risk of both exploitation of women’s labour and perpetuation of domestic gender roles. Whilst tourism is often seen to be a prosperous development model, as with all development involving foreign direct investment, it comes with large risks of exploitation, repatriation of profits and mistreatment of workers. Women are always more at risk of these situations.

Similarly, there is absolutely a racially sexualised undertone to the tourist industry. Implicitly in roles such as airline stewardesses and explicitly through sex tourism. Women are in certain positions of tourist service are expected to look a certain way and their appearance’s are commodified and sexualised. This is overtly sexist and the employment of almost purely ‘beautiful’ women and ‘camp’ men by airlines for steward positions is obscene. Furthermore, there are deeply racist and mysognistic ideas attached to sex tourism. Should Cuba be open to American tourism it seems inevitable that we shall also see a rise in the sex industry for tourists in Cuba. Whilst I will not comment on whether or not sex work is good or bad for feminism, I will say that it is unregulated and often dangerous. Particularly, when some western men have preconceived ideals of what they can ‘do to’ foreign women compared to what they can ‘do with’ their wives. This is the virgin/whore dichotomy on an international level and is deeply racist in that it assumes foreign women to be more submissive and sexually adventurous/promiscuous under the male gaze. Whilst many other trade industries will likely be affected by reopening Cuban-US relations, tourism looks likely to be increased more than most. It is also more gendered than most industries. The Cuban government ought to be aware of this and protect women from exploitation and dangerous sex work conditions.

Hilary Clinton invites the Patriarchy for a Re-Match in 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EGranwN_uk

 Tomorrow, Hilary Clinton is expected to announce her candidacy for the democratic seat in the US elections 2016. This is extremely exciting news for feminists, women and men alike because Hilary Clinton is not just a woman; she is a self-proclaimed feminist woman. This news prompted a discussion around my dinner table at home trying to name as many elected (so the Queen doesn’t count) female heads of state we could name. I think we managed about 1 or 2. Having a female president in the US would hopefully increase this number due to role model systems. Then there is the very basic issue of representation; at long last women would (hopefully) be represented in the highest rungs of American governance. This might (hopefully) bring even a marginal end to slut-shaming, rape, poverty, domestic violence, prejudice and a myriad of other problems women face in America. In pursuing a feminist agenda, Clinton is also (hopefully) implicitly perusing an LGBT rights, anti-racist, anti-inequality agenda. There are a lot of hopefuls in that paragraph and perhaps I expect too much but as a woman AND a feminist I would like to remain optimistic for the time being. Here are just a couple of times Clinton turned the patriarchy on its head: in 2008 when she lost to Obama she said:

“We may not have smashed the biggest glass ceiling of all time but there are about 18 million dents in it!”

And when asked how she would beat Jeb Bush she responded:

“If I want a front page cover I just have to change my haircut”

When on the campaign trail with Bill Clinton:

“I suppose I could’ve stayed home and baked cookies and had teas but what I decided to do was to fulfil my profession which I entered before my husband was even in public life”

She has campaigned for women and girls rights her entire life and contrary to stereotypical assumptions about women in politics foreign policy (although I may not agree with it) is her strong suit. In 2011 only 6% of the worlds defence ministers were women and it is continually a role that is dominated, even more than most, by men. Her campaign ticket will orbit around her experience in this department and the White House more generally, given her position as a secretary of state during which she covered thousands of miles flying all around the globe.

Despite spending her entire life fighting off pubic scandals surrounding her confidence (as a woman), her husband and her refusal to sit at home and ‘bake cookies’ it is important that we understand Clinton as her own woman and not simply as an extension of her husband or these scandals. She has built herself an empire of support in the White House and on the streets however, her policy agenda is extremely vague at the present. With the official announcement of her campaign her policies will surely become clear. Clear and (I hope) feminist policies that will tackle gender inequality head on. As the US clings on to its hegemony in the world order, with a woman at its helm, women’s rights fights would guide the way for the rest of the world to follow suit. With some bookies placing her odds at up to 91% this seems optimistically possible. Although there is a long way to go before April 2016.

Despite the inevitability of sexism along the way in both the media and real life experiences of her campaign, it will be fascinating to see how the White House would get shaken up with a woman at its helm. Firstly, the patriarchal construction of First Lady, which is a loaded, out-dated and oppressive term that expects a woman to quite literally stand in the shadows of a man and keep her mouth shut, would have to be abolished. I would highly doubt Bill Clinton would be referred to as the “First Gentleman” and thus it would force the administration to come up with a more equal and respectful term such as “honorary companion” or something similar. These are the sorts of traditions that would be forced to be done away with and although they may seem insignificant they are small steps towards a more representative and equal ‘land of the free.’ (I write that with my tongue very much in my cheek!)