Everyday Sexism and why we should all be feminists

Welcome to my third blog in three weeks. Not quite so topical this week but a blog I've been considering writing for a while. Anyway a couple of months ago I read a book called Everyday Sexism. I'm a feminist so naturally the book interested me.  

It all stemmed from an woman called Laura Bates who started this Everyday Sexism project in 2012 to highlight her own experiences and encouraged others to send their experiences in to her website and facebook page. She got so many responses that it went viral worldwide. She then started regularly speaking in schools, colleges and universities and started writing articles for newspapers. This has now culminated in a book that highlights a lot of experiences of women around the world and is backed up with stats and puts sexism in various contexts.

In her book, Laura covers subjects such as harassment on the street, public transport and the workplace. Did you know for instance that in 2012 43% of women in London aged 18-34 experienced sexual harassment. (Source: Yougov).

She also covers gender stereotyping  at an early age to encourage children to stick to traditional gender roles. One of the examples used in the book was a woman tweeting in to her that 'Every time a girl sees science toys under a boys sign, she is told science in not suitable for her'. From a boys perspective, a mother messaged in to the project saying how she received a lot of negative comments about her son pushing around a doll in a pushchair.'

Furthermore she also discusses sexism in the media. It's pointed out that women write only a fifth of newspaper articles in the UK. (Source: Women in Journalism Study 2012). The lack of representation of women in politics is also highlighted (Only 147 out 650 MPs are women).

Double Discrimination is also seen as a key issue. One stat pointed out is that in the UK almost 1 in 5 black, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi women is unemployed compared to 1 in 14 white women.  (Source: APPG on Race and Community 2012)

These are just some of the many example whereby women experience everyday sexism. There are many more in the book and in a wider variety of contexts across the world. This isn't just a book review, but more of a blog about how Everyday Sexism has reiterated to me the importance of the fight against sexism and how we can all get involved. There is no excuse not to be a feminist. It is purely about gender equality regardless of the negative connotation the word has had attached to it.

So I urge everyone, regardless of what type of book you usually read, to read Everyday Sexism. Especially to those that think sexism basically doesn't exist any more. This could really open your mind. Yes we have made certain strides in the fight for gender equality but the Everyday Sexism project proves how much more we need to do. 

Tories slave labour policies back with a vengeance. But there is hope.

Hello All,

Thank you to those who read my last blog. Although I'm not seeing any comments so either people didn't find it interesting enough to comment or they found it so good they were speechless (I wish). 

Anyway on to this week's politics rant. What a week it's been. The biggest headline of the week's politics is the Conservative plan to force the unemployed young to do work experience for their benefits. This is specifically meant for 18-21 year olds that have not been in education, work or training for six months before they claim benefits.

Now first of all, this is just a re-hash of the workfare scheme which forced young unemployed people to work in places like Tesco for benefits. I remember doing this and remember how degrading it was. And secondly the most obvious question arises. If the job centre can find young unemployed NEETS work to do, why shouldn't they get paid the minimum wage for it? They are adults after all so surely the minimum wage law should apply to them right? Back in 2013 the court of appeal said that the government's workfare scheme was unlawful as it broke the minimum wage law. The government then quickly rushed through a law in parliament that basically said the workfare scheme was lawful. Once again no opposition from the Labour Party. Another reason not to vote for them.

It begs the question though, why are they so desperate to keep this workfare scheme when actually it will keep the benefit bill at a high level. It certainly won't save money. If these young people were paid the minimum wage (at a living wage rate) for the job they were doing, it wouldn't cost the government anything and would bring in extra tax revenue. Any logical person will come to that conclusion.

So the one conclusion I can get from this, is that the Tories are trying to take us back to the Victorian era where we had slave labour for young people. And  doesn't it show the contempt this government has for young adults. Not only this, they have they trebled tuition fees, scrapped EMA and massively cut funding for careers services like Connexions.  It's as if they don't want the young to vote at all. 

So I say one last thing to those 18-24 year olds that are disillusioned with politics and don't want to get involved.  Please do. Don't let the Tories beat us into submission. Whether it is taking direct action against the government policies or registering to vote, please get involved. There are organisations like 38 degrees, UK Uncut and People's Assembly Against Austerity that are fighting against these cruel government policies. Also please make sure you register to vote and if you are unsure who to vote for and believe there are no choices, then go to voteforpolicies.org.uk and take the survey on whose policies you agree with most, and vote for that party. You may be surprised with the result.

Why I will not be voting labour at the general election.

Hello again to those that have read my blogs before and to the vast majority of you that haven't, welcome!

I know I've said before that I want to do these weekly but I never seem to get round to it. Hopefully I'll keep my promises this time. (Subject to me actually making the effort)

Anyway, on with the blog. To those that have read my blogs before you will be aware that I am a member of the green party so the title of the blog should come as no surprise to you. But there are also many other reasons I won't vote labour.

Firstly Ed Balls has time and again said that he will stick to the government's spending plans for 2015/16. So what's the difference?

Not much as it seems. Shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt came out recently and said that the Green Party education policies were a 'throwback to the 1970s'. Yet the only difference between him and Gove's education policies is that he would get rid of unqualified teachers and make teachers sign an oath like doctors do. Never mind dealing the failure of academies and free schools and a system which just focuses on testing rather than teaching kids.

In addition to this, Andy Burnham has promised to repeal the health and social care act but hasn't promised to get rid of the internal market system that has been undermining the NHS since the 1980s.

When you see Labour's welfare policies, it is hard to tell the difference between them and the Tories. Both have plans to cut benefits for young adults. Speaking of which, Labour's higher education policy is again only a slight tweak on the current system. Promising the radical action of cutting tuition fees from £9000 to £6000 a year.

What about the recent HSBC scandal which saw millions of pounds of tax taken from this country? This apparently started in 2007 when Ed Balls was city minister and this continued to happen under this government.

And last but not least, Labour's stance on fracking. The only difference is that they would have slightly better regulation on it rather getting rid of the dangerous practice altogether.

So when you take all this into account you can see that although are slight differences in policy both offer pretty much the same deal.  Austerity, similar education policies and environmental policies that are very damaging.

I live in a Tory/Labour marginal so I guess you could say that by voting Green I'm splitting the vote on the left and letting in the Tories. But I would argue that Labour aren't really on the left anymore so that's an irrelevant argument.

The only people that are to blame for the Tories getting in are the people that vote Conservative. And of course Labour, who fail to offer anything like a genuine alternative.

But wait lee, I hear you say, why don't you join Labour and help change them from the inside?

Ah I wish it were that simple. The only way I can really influence Labour policy from the inside is if I work my way up in the party and join the national executive committee. And failing that as a normal member I would only get a third of the vote on policy and leader change anyway. Unlike the Greens in which anyone can come up with policy and every member gets a vote.

To sum up, that's why Labour are shit and don't deserve my vote at the next election.

Unelected Monarchy influences Government. Time to Abolish?

Hi all. My second ever blog. Sorry it's been a while. Anyway onto the topic at hand.

For years I've been told the monarchy has "no real power" and that I'm "unpatriotic" for being a republican and that they should make me "Proud to be British". So when I see the BBC report that told of Prince Charles trying to influence government policy with his push for grammar schools and homeopathy and John Major admitting that the queen has influenced him on policy, it reaffirms my stance.  The simple fact is the monarchy has power but no accountability.

I hear you say what about big business and charities that lobby the government on policy all the time? And yeah I would agree that does need more control. But considering the Queen meets the Prime Minister on a weekly basis to discuss Government policy and minutes of these meetings aren't published, she clearly has the most access to the government and can have a direct influence so it is not the same. No member of the public or pressure group has that amount of influence or access to the government.

Also the one other way whereby the royals are so unaccountable is that the letters that Prince Charles writes to government ministers have been blocked from being publicly available by the Attorney General because releasing the letters would "undermine the principle of the heir being politically neutral".  This is yet another reason why we shouldn't have a monarchy and have a head of state who is elected and can be held accountable by the public.

When you get that plus past government ministers like Blunkett saying that he didn't mind Charles trying to influence government policy and Michael Meacher saying that together him and Charles tried to ensure that "we increased our influence within government" to "persuade Tony Blair to change course" , it really shows if we are going to abolish the monarchy that we have to do it by grassroots level. That means supporting pressure groups such as Republic and as a Green Party member I believe we as a party should be more vocal about our policy of abolishing the monarchy when issues like this come up. But I suppose that is an internal party debate that can be had at another time.  So yeah to sum up:

Vive la République !

Link to story - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28066081 

The debate surounding "Health Tourism"

Greetings fellow bloggers.This is my first blog so you will have to forgive me if it looks crap or structured badly. These series of posts will be my rants about the current issues surrounding the wonderfully corrupt world of POLITICS!!!.

So straight on to the matter at hand. "Health Tourism". What does that actually mean? Well what that conjures up in my mind is a bunch of tourists going round NHS hospitals and GP surgeries on tours and taking pictures of sick people. But in the current political debate this means people coming from other countries and using NHS services to get treated and then going back to their country of origin. 

So where has this issue suddenly come from. Well our beloved Health Secretary has just announced that People from outside Europe staying for up to five years will face an annual charge of at least £200.

Residency rules will also be tightened on free treatment and more services, such as access to GPs, will be chargeable. 

Apparently the government doesn't know how much "health tourism" costs but figures mooted have been anything from £12m to £200m. So the government don't how much it costs yet they are willing to pluck a random figure (£200 per year) as a charge rate. Obviously not thought through at all. If you read the BBC article where I got this information from, people outside the EEA have to pay anyway but the rules aren't enforced enough. So rather than just pick random figures to charge people why not just enforce the current rules that are already there? As usual with this government, their policies are ill thought out and they will probably do a u-turn on this.

According to Owen Jones costs could be up to £500m to administer this policy. So even if it cost £200m a year, the government will still lose money.  Also the NHS budget is over £100bn a year so even if it was £200m, that is a very small percentage of the costs of the NHS. But regardless of all the costs, why is healthcare a product in which you charge people for? All doctors have signed up to a worldwide Hippocratic Oath in which they have to treat patients no matter what. As Dr Clare Gerada has pointed out "My first duty is to my patient - I don't ask where they're from or whether they've got a credit card or whether they can pay"

Some people like Diane Abbott have called this policy "xenophobic". However Nadine Dorries said that this is purely about financial costs towards the NHS and that it is not fair that people that haven't paid into the system get the same access that people who have. I actually put this point to her on twitter. "You say that only people that pay into NHS should get treatment. what about people on JSA who don't earn enough to pay NI?". Now she hasn't got back to me on this but if she did believe this at least she be would be consistent. Consistently wrong but still consistent

But after all the debate surrounding this you can probably tell that I am against policy purely because I believe healthcare is a fundamental human right that everyone should have access to free at the point of use and that the doctors should stick to the Hippocratic Oath that they signed up to when they first became doctors. 

What I also believe is that Jeremy Hunt is distracting us from the government's back-door privatisation of the NHS by blaming immigrants for the failings of the NHS even though 40% of the workforce in the NHS are immigrants so we rely on them to provide the services we need. Let's not get distracted by this absurd policy and take the fight to the government for destroying our NHS with £20bn cuts leading to closures of A & E services. Like with the welfare "reforms", the government are trying to turn us against each other rather than against them.