Archive for the 'Feminism' Category

Guest post by Peter Murphy - Zimbabwe: Despotism or Democracy?

Peter Murphy from the Zimbabwe Information Centre writes:

Opening Remarks

This story of Zimbabwe and its political, economic and social turmoil is really a story about how women are trying to have their human right to a say in their society, about how the people want to help those millions who have HIV, about how the trade unions want to develop a prosperous, peaceful and just society, about how the professional classes want to create a way of governing that is straightforward, fair and works.

It is a story for the whole of Africa, and that is why all of Africa and in particular South Africa, Mozambique, Zambia, Tanzania and Botswana are part of this story.

As I write the people of Zimbabwe are being called out to a one-horse election that they don’t want, because it has already been drowned in blood, violence and cheating.

Between the March 29 presidential and parliamentary elections and today, almost 100 activists from the Movement for Democratic Change have been murdered, often in the most terrible way, over 3,000 have been very badly injured through torture, and now about 100,000 have been internally displaced because their homes and property have been looted or completely destroyed.

Zimbabwe now faces a chaotic regime collapse, with perhaps a minimal role for the international community in the immediate crisis.

Continue reading ‘Guest post by Peter Murphy - Zimbabwe: Despotism or Democracy?’

I left my heart in San Francisco…

Stock image courtesy of the Italian Cultural Institute.

I have to defend the town I lived in from 1996 to 2002 from the all too flippant calumny in this comment. (And incidentally Nancy Pelosi, one of whose Congressional campaigns I worked on, as well as heaps of local ones for both the Democrats and the Greens… - she’s so right in this comment about the Clinton campaign.) As I’ve said about a thousand times before, pro-Americanism or anti-Americanism is the dumb. It’s far too complex a country to condemn or praise in toto, and - incidentally - one I’m proud to be a citizen of. But I will say, as someone largely brought up in Brisneyland, that San Francisco is one part of the world where there’s enough cultural similarities that we can feel, not at home, but able to negotiate our way into feeling like this is Heimat, as it were. Or, at least, I felt that way. Continue reading ‘I left my heart in San Francisco…’

Now that Pamela Bone is dead…

Yeah, you might have noticed already. I’m in a Truthiness mood tonight, as Stephen Colbert might say. Remember all the loud denunciations I copped from Harry Clarke, Tim Blair et al et al etc. - all the feminists of total convenience - for not denouncing the female genital mutilation loudly enough? Coz it’s all about teh Islam and threats to Western Civ, etc., and that mob are all on the side of women’s rights, and that manly man of steel John Howard is taking us to war to free Afghani women from burqas. And George W. Bush is going to hunt those Al-Qaeda evildoers down. (And Islam is not a race, and some of my best friends… oops, hang on?) While Laura and Condi look after the oppressed women. Or something… Oh yeah, it isn’t 2003 any more… Remember that word fistula - you might not have read that on teh Blair blog - being a word of three syllables and all. And in Latin.

But I talked about it at the time. Now that Pamela Bone is dead (and God rest her soul, may she be blessed with eternal rest, and may perpetual light shine upon her), where are the voices with the loud condemn? What’s with that Australian crusade for women’s rights in benighted Islamic Middle Eastern countries? After all, we - Dolly Downer and John Howard and Tim Blair and Andrew Bolt and Planet Janet told us so - are all (post?) feminists now. It’s on the citizenship test, dude - and dudette a la 50s pinup style no doubt. (Ps - don’t use that politically correct, activist judge f-word though…)

Well, never mind. Here’s a post from The Global Sociology Blog for the benefit of anyone who wanted to continue highlighting the horrors perpetrated on women in the developing world even if there’s not a convenient culture wars damn the left angle in it. (And that’s not to say that women in the developed world don’t still cop a lot - but there’s something to celebrate about a very large majority of Australians agreeing - at least in theory when asked by pollsters - that women have rights over their own choices and bodies - even if that masks continued gender inequality in oh, so many ways…).

You can donate to Medicins San Frontieres here.

And you might be interested in the fact that rape has finally been recognised by the UN as a war crime, something I wrote about last year, but something the keyboard warriors seem to… well, gloss over is far too kind. Because the fact that women are overwhelmingly the victims of war seems to be recognised neither by the pro-war Right nor the “humanitarian intervention” so-called Left. Continue reading ‘Now that Pamela Bone is dead…’

Bill Henson controversy: But what about the children?

Bill Henson image from the Robert Miller Gallery.

Writing in the Australian Review of Public Affairs, Kylie Valentine proves that it is possible to say something new about the Bill Henson controversy. It struck me that one huge absence in all the debate that swirled around Henson’s images of adolescents was any contribution from the subjects themselves. Lots of adults jumped into the breach to fill this void, speculating about how the models would feel about being the subjects of this sort of art, or how they might feel at a later date. It was an entirely defensible position, of course, for the photographer’s subjects to maintain silence on grounds of privacy, and it’s worth noting that a number of Henson’s former models did speak out, though their voices seemed to be almost entirely ignored in the “debate” that took place.

Valentine picks up on this theme, and argues:

Continue reading ‘Bill Henson controversy: But what about the children?’

Laboring the point? … or liberal socialism and/or social liberalism

I was intrigued yesterday to see Assistant Treasurer Chris Bowen writing one of the more substantive pieces in the Sydney Morning Herald’s regular feast of op/eds written by pollies. Bowen argues that social liberals within the Liberal Party are as marginalised now as they were under John Howard, and concludes:

But the move to the right by the Liberal Party means that traditional small l liberals are looking for a home. As a social liberal in the Labor Party, I can tell you that it is a very welcoming home.

I’m not so sure that’s absolutely accurate, but more of that later. First, I wanted to explore why Bowen thought this was an apposite point to make at this time. He refers to the amalgamation talk with the Nationals, and certainly Barnaby Joyce’s recent musings might give some small l liberals something to ponder. But I suspect what’s prompted Bowen’s article is actually some shenanigans going on in the Senate, which aren’t unrelated to the Liberal leadership.

Continue reading ‘Laboring the point? … or liberal socialism and/or social liberalism’

“It’s the hair, stupid”, claims BBC journalist

marge-simpson-with-blue-hair-beehive2.jpg 

According to the Webb hair theory, would the woman in the picture above be a supporter of Obama or Clinton? First person to answer correctly gets a can of hairspray.

Just when you thought the BBC had been taken over by The Feminists™, along comes Justin Webb from From Our Own Correspondent and his ideas about the hairdos of women supporters of Hillary Clinton. Before he embarked on an interesting analysis of Ms Clinton’s courting of The White Racists™ (playing in a good ol’ bar near you soon), and other reasons why she lost, Webb indulged on 7 June 2008 in a bizarre rant about how Clinton’s female fans, with “faces gripped in steely determination”, don’t, to soften his words, have particularly natural hair. While Webb claimed the gals from Team Obama™ have “loose” locks that generally haven’t seen a dye bottle, the sisters of Hillary “dominate” their tresses (e.g. teasing and crimping). Although Webb might’ve been using his prerogative as a BBC journalist* to have a joke at the expense of The Hillarys™, it sounded an awful lot like a bloke with issues with assertive older women (“mummy, please don’t make me go to boarding school”).  Anyway, you can listen to Webb’s views by going to this page and clicking on the relevant link.           

*BBC journalists are known for their senses of humour.

Bookfest II (…and political fiction)

As I’ve mentioned a couple of times before, I’m currently existing in the rather strange zone of being just about to complete a first draft of my PhD thesis, which means that my social life is on hold, as are outings generally. (And I’ve just been saved from impending insanity by getting an extension from my supervisor til Monday.) Anyway, I blogged on Sunday about visiting the Lifeline Bookfest, which as a bibliophile is always one of the highlights of my bookshopping year. I did take some more time out on Monday to pop back in for an hour or so, to remedy the ommission of fiction from my previous visit - so I could relax and get back to writing, feeling as if I’d “done” Bookfest properly.

My modest haul was all Australian fiction, with the exception of a Robertson Davies novel I unaccountably no longer seemed to own - perhaps lent to one of those nasty book thiefs many years ago (I have a good memory for these things, and I’ll be chasing down my obscure Robert Graves and my Montaigne one of these days).

I can’t say I’ve ever been an enthusiastic reader of Australian prose fiction, as such, and I’m not even sure such an enthusiasm would make a lot of sense to me. Continue reading ‘Bookfest II (…and political fiction)’

“Sacred institution of marriage” may have something to learn from same-sex relationships

There’s a really fascinating article in the New York Times‘ health section by Tara Parker-Pope - accessed via Feministing:

For insights into healthy marriages, social scientists are looking in an unexpected place.

A growing body of evidence shows that same-sex couples have a great deal to teach everyone else about marriage and relationships. Most studies show surprisingly few differences between committed gay couples and committed straight couples, but the differences that do emerge have shed light on the kinds of conflicts that can endanger heterosexual relationships.

The findings offer hope that some of the most vexing problems are not necessarily entrenched in deep-rooted biological differences between men and women. And that, in turn, offers hope that the problems can be solved.

Aggregating a number of studies, the article suggests:

Continue reading ‘“Sacred institution of marriage” may have something to learn from same-sex relationships’

Inaugural Down Under Feminists’ Carnival

… has been posted at Hoyden.

Why Hillary shouldn’t be Veep

Hillary Clinton is right about one thing - the question is “where do we go now?”

So should she slot in at #2? I’m not convinced that there are a large number of women who supported Hillary who won’t back Obama. It’s more likely that there are quite a few white men around who… etc. Without dissing at all the women who really are concerned about the incredible wave of misogyny (much more culturally acceptable, it seems, than open racism) that hit the Clinton campaign, as with most of what’s gone on, there’s some positioning going on here from Clinton. Positioning for power and influence. Forget superdelegates for a moment - there are a whole host of ex-thises and thats and a sort of “government in exile” from Bill’s time in office who will be looking for gigs come January, if Obama defeats McCain. And Clinton needs to shore up her own power in the Senate and the party - one way the switcheroo from some Democratic establishment types to Obama can be read is an attempt to protect their power against voters, by going with voters. If Obama continues the movement aspect of his campaign, there really is the potential for a huge shakeup of the hierarchies - and it’s those same hierarchies Clinton will be trying to protect. “Bringing the party together” could well be code for locking the people out.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of her current manoeuvring is the suggestions that she’d like to be asked to be Vice-President, but would turn down any such offer. Continue reading ‘Why Hillary shouldn’t be Veep’

Abortion debate begins in Victoria

After sitting on it for an eternity, the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s report into abortion law reform has finally been tabled. The Age has an article here which provides a quick summary of the three proposed options. Very briefly, The first would be to, essentially, encapsulate the Menhennitt ruling into legislation, by requiring a doctor to decide that continuing a pregnancy poses harm to the mother. The second would legalize abortion on request up to 24 weeks, but require the doctor’s agreeance of harm of continuing the pregnancy beyond that. The third would remove all criminal sanctions entirely. The full report - which I haven’t yet had time to read - is here.

The Greens have come out in support of the third, most liberal option. Both major parties will be having a conscience vote; both premier John Brumby and Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu have supported decriminalization, but haven’t announced which option they will support yet. But, of course, it’s not the leaders that matter this time around. It’s all those backbenchers.

As noted the last time this came up, anti-abortion types will flood our MPs with mail. Let’s make sure they get some supporting change to stiffen their resolve a bit.

Who’s afraid of Amy Winehouse?

I’ve been critical in the past of the widespread trashing of Heather Mills-McCartney, while admitting that she’s probably her own worst enemy. A recent marketing survey found she was at the top of the list of the most hated celebs in the UK. Not surprising, probably. But what’s interesting is the top five loved celebs are all male and four of the top most hated celebs are female (Simon Cowell is on both lists). This raises the question Finlo Rohrer poses - why are the celebrities most often vilified disprortionately female? I think it’s a very interesting question. A range of answers are given in the article, including one which is not quite an answer but perhaps more of an observation - that a lot of this vilification is related to the policing of femininity (disposition, motherhood, personal appearance, weight, etc.) What do LP-ers think?

Continue reading ‘Who’s afraid of Amy Winehouse?’

Do economists buy food?

A lot of the debate about inflation targeting has been obscured by the Libs’ petrol bowser politics (and as well as it being dumb potential policy, I think it’s been dumb politics for Labor to start playing this game - however tentatively - as Mr Denmore said in comments, there’s a very simple political answer to the bowser tax wars the ALP should be employing). But I still think there’s a valuable point to make about the dissonance between elite discourses about the economy and perceptions about lived experience of the economy. The ALP, in government if not in opposition, has to keep both the policy wonks and the punters happy. And they were trying to with their claims about the budget being anti-inflationary in its fiscal impact and that much of inflation’s causes were from factors quite extraneous to influence by government policy. Even if they shot themselves in the foot by joining Brendan Nelson at the petrol pump. And I think it’s a direct result of an own goal from Kevin Rudd, when he said that he’d done “everything… possible” to address the price of petrol, and this was instantly characterised as being “complacency”, being “out of touch” and so on in the hyper-media cycle we all now deal with, including very clever Prime Ministers.

But what I wanted to raise was a thought inspired by this guest post at John Quiggin’s blog, where his guest poster Bruce Bradbury examines the much higher rate of inflation in staples rather than consumer durables:

This gap perhaps explains some of the divergence between the expressed concerns of consumers and the complacency of economists. Though consumers know that their next TV will be much better than their last one for much the same price, they are still struggling to meet their weekly supermarket and petrol station bills.

Continue reading ‘Do economists buy food?’

Susan Faludi’s The Terror Dream

I had a quick read last night of Susan Faludi’s rather stunning new book The Terror Dream: Fear and fantasy in post-9/11 America. Faludi, perhaps best known as the author of Backlash, has written a cultural history of post s11 America, a diagnosis of the temper of the times as refracted through the myths the attack on America both revived and inspired.

It’s a little odd that one of the writers at Daily Kos took aim at the book because “every trend perceived is filtered through a gender disempowerment lens” - a “criticism” which I think really does an injustice to Faludi’s aims. It’s not that she’s taking some sort of circumscribed look at gender politics post-s11 (which in itself would be a worthy project) but rather that her point is that a myth overdetermined by gendered perceptions was cranked up to explain and narrativise what was (wrongly in her view) seen as being an unprecedented series of events on September 11 2001.

Faludi, in some of the most interesting chapters of the book, traces the origins of national myths of violation and aggressive response to the shifting frontier which characterised not just the “Wild West” but also the nation’s colonial beginnings - where “attacks” by Native Americans were perceived as both unpredictable and inexplicable - and interpreted as an existential threat which could only be met by overpowering force.

The arrest and prosecution of our antagonists seemed to be only part of our concern. We were also enlisted in a symbolic war at home, a war to repair and restore our national myth of invincibility. Our retreat to the fifties reached beyond movie tropes and the era’s odd mix of national insecurity and domestic containment. It reaches back beyond the fifties themselves. For this particular reaction to 9/11—our fixation on saving little girls and restoring an invincible manhood—is not so anomalous. It belongs to a long-standing American pattern of response to threat, a response that we’ve been perfecting since our original wilderness experience.

Continue reading ‘Susan Faludi’s The Terror Dream

J. K. Rowling loudly denounced

J. K. Rowling has been invited to give the Harvard graduation day commencement address this year. For her pains, she’s received loud denunciation:

It’s no revolutionary thing to honour JK Rowling, the brains behind wizard icon Harry Potter and now a globally respected philanthropist. Indeed, she’s been invited to give Harvard’s graduation day commencement address in June. It’s a logical choice: Rowling’s story is as epic as any fantasy novel and her lone rise to genius/mogul status suits Harvard’s credo of individualistic excellence.

Or maybe she’s just a pathetic waste of space. Writing in the university paper, the Harvard Crimson, student Adam Goldenberg rips into Rowling as “a flash in the pan”, “a petty pop culture personality” who “tricked parents into letting their kids read books filled with sex, murder, and homosexual role models”. Furthermore, “writing bedtime stories is lame”.

Writing at the Graudian’s Comment is Free blog, Bidisha decries the decriers.

Continue reading ‘J. K. Rowling loudly denounced’