Ex-barrister Laura Perrins confronts Nick Clegg over the government’s new childcare policy.
The source is a Daily Mail article so the language is a bit hyperbolic, and it’s pushing the ‘traditional family’ mantra which pisses me off, but it’s an interesting read. I certainly agree that the work of stay at home mums is underappreciated, and there have been major cuts to child benefits recently which emphasises this.
However since childcare is so expensive I also see the need for financial help to be given to mothers who need to put their children into childcare during working hours. At the moment childcare costs so much that for women in low paid work, it’s often cheaper to stay at home. As I mentioned before the emphasis is on ‘traditional’ families. There is no discussion about what this means for single mothers.
This week Mervyn King, the Governor of the Bank of England, announced Winston Churchill will replace social reformer Elizabeth Fry as the face of £5 notes. This means that, other than the Queen, there will be no women featuring on our English bank notes.
An all-male line-up on our banknotes sends out the damaging message that no woman has done anything important enough to appear.
New measures have been put into place to combat sexual exploitation among certain age groups across the UK.
This is just happening in the London area right now, but I share Jenny Jones’s concerns that by merging these two units focus may be taken away from both issues. The rape unit is the notorious Sapphire unit, which is still struggling to redeem itself after the scandal last year.
The Government is on the verge of repealing an essential part of equality legislation; Laura has the details and information on what you can do to try and stop it
This is really concerning. I would really advise clicking through to read the article in full, but here’s some important info:
Clause 57 proposes to repeal Section 3 of the Equality Act 2006, the legislation that created the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). Section 3 outlines the purpose of the EHRC (its “General Duty”):
The Commission shall exercise its functions under this Part with a view to encouraging and supporting the development of a society in which-
(a) people’s ability to achieve their potential is not limited by prejudice or discrimination,
(b) there is respect for and protection of each individual’s human rights,
(c) there is respect for the dignity and worth of each individual,
(d) each individual has an equal opportunity to participate in society, and
(e) there is mutual respect between groups based on understanding and valuing of diversity and on shared respect for equality and human rights.
…
Lawyers might be too polite to say so but such clauses also act like a burglar alarm for the rest of the legislation. It is difficult to stealthily change the effect of the detailed clauses in the legislation if the effect of removing or amending clauses creates a conflict with the purpose of the whole. The only way around that would be to amend the purpose clause… and that is a dead give-away.
Removing the General Duty clause may not have immediate effect, therefore. However, the danger is in what the removal facilitates by stealth at a later date.
So by removing Section 3, the government would more easily be able to chip away at the laws designed to help us work towards a fairer society free of discrimination, where every individual’s rights are respected. Which is, quite frankly, disgusting.
I am going to be contacting my local MP about this. If you’re in England please consider doing the same.
Through their report on lad culture in higher education, the National Union of Students is calling for action on sexism in universities. Kelley Temple discusses the extent and impact of lad culture on women students
Which meant that I saw a white, straight, gender-conforming bloke with long hair and a shit t-shirt on breakfast tv this morning explaining that although he’s never got much hassle, if he ever did it would be as bad as racism, homophobia, or attacks on trans people (and no-one explained to him the concept of systematic oppression).
Its as if they couldn’t even have looked at the request (which came from the mother of a goth woman who’d been murdered by 5 violent teenage males) and decide to do something against people being attacked for their appearance whatever it is - which might help women facing street harassment where their clothing is mentioned whether dressed in a mini-skirt or a tracksuit - and would definitely help gender-conforming people, and could be to protect people who stand out from the norm in all different ways. I’m not proposing this, its just an observation.
Oh, and attacking women because of misogyny is still not a hate crime.
I’m very concerned about the amount of media exposure the British MRA political party ‘Justice for Men and Boys’ has been getting lately, and the tone some of that exposure is taking. I have mixed feelings about giving groups like this platform because it obviously has the power to gain the group support, but when framed in the right way it also may help people to be more aware of the dangers such groups pose.
This is a hate group which is currently being treated as a legitimate political party, and I find the lack of media awareness about this group disturbing.
I therefore was encouraged to hear party leader Mike Buchanan taken down very well on Women’s Hour the other day. Some people have raised concerns about such a discussion being argued between two men, especially one on Women’s Hour. I think it would have been a good idea to have John O’Farrell lead the counter argument on a different part of the BBC and have a woman arguing on this topic instead (they had Laura Bates briefly on the Jeremy Vine Show but, though she argued excellently, she didn’t have much time to state her points). However, I do find it encouraging to see men, (and there have been quite a few) condemning this group since this is a political hate group formed by, and supposedly arguing for, the rights of men, and O’Farrell is absolutely on the ball with all of his points. Lucy Heller’s questions also very effectively tease out the bile behind Buchanan’s reasonable façade.
Special bonus for the quote:
“There is already a man’s party. It’s called the Conservative Party, the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrat Party.”
At WISE, our mission is to increase the gender balance in the UK’s STEM [science, technology, engineering, and mathematics] workforce, pushing the presence of female employees from 13% as it stands now, to 30% by 2020.
Our services are designed to build and sustain the pipeline of female talent in STEM from classroom to boardroom, boosting the talent pool to drive economic growth.
WISE, which has nearly 30 years experience of inspiring girls to pursue STEM subjects, now incorporates the UKRC, which had a contract from the Government from 2004-12 to increase opportunities for women in science, engineering and technology through support services to business, education and women returners.
It’s always ‘great’ to be reminded that not only are girls and boys expected to act in completely opposite ways, but that the boy’s actions are more important than the girl’s :/ . Even the top comments on youtube are saying this is horrible stereotyping crap.
Also pay attention to the little details like what the parents are doing in the background.
