Earthquakes Caused By Promiscuous Women

An Iranian cleric has said:

Many women who do not dress modestly lead young men astray and spread adultery in society which increases earthquakes.

Wow, I never knew my V neck top could cause such problems. I always thought earthquakes were caused by the movement of the earth's tectonic plates. How laughable of me. This could even challenge the notion that the earth is round.

Emmeline Pankhurst

I'm currently reading the biography of Emmeline Pankhurst and came across this wonderful photograph of her. She's being arrested after leading a protest to parliament, armed with a rolled resolution for women's suffrage and a few lilies of the valley. What really strikes me about it is, the look on her face, such pride and defiance.

We are here, not because we are law-breakers; we are here in our efforts to become law-makers.

Wonderful, I hope I always look as proud on my way to vote.

Vatican Wants Anglicans

Are you an Anglican dismayed at the growing role that women have in the church?

Are you disgusted by woman Bishops?

Do you feel it's scandalous that the church has become more accepting of "gays"?

Then join the Roman Catholic Church today.

Terms and conditions apply. See www.vatican/holysee/terms for details.

Women Can Wear Trousers

I never realised that the Islamic authority in Cario were so fashion aware:

Egypt's top Islamic authority defended women's rights to wear trousers in public following a high profile court case in neighbouring Sudan were women were flogged for dressing in pants, the local press reported Wednesday.

Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa said in response to a question during a public lecture that trousers covering women's bodies are permitted, though they should be loose and not see through. He specified that "stretch" pants were in particular unacceptable.

Good call sir, stretch pants, particularly the sparkly, pink or animal print ones are unacceptable. It's not the 1980s ladies, it's about 1900, two world wars to prove you are just as capable as a man and a social revolution later, and then you may be able to wear those leggings. In the mean time, they're not the most protective choice of clothing for the flogging, not such absurd advice from Grand Stylist Mufti after all.

Harriet Harman - It's Raining Men

I really wish Harriet Harman wouldn't presume she speaks for all of female kind, while making sweeping generalisations. Giving women the opportunity to get into politics is one thing, it's another thing entirely to stack the cards so that regardless of ability women gain. How can anyone respect that? And why would women want that? Earning things in life is so much more rewarding, to know it was you who did it, you achieved it.

Yet there in lies the problem with parliament, how many people regardless of gender got the job on merit lately? Harriet Harman should be arguing for that, as it won't matter how many women hold those posts if they didn't deserve it, likewise for anyone. I don't adhere to the idea that a feminist is a women who lacks ambition. Harriet needs to roll up her sleeves and stop complaining, it's starting to sound like an excuse, you can't legislate for every equality in life.

Prostitution Legalise it?

I was reading this news article about the police trying to shut down some flats that were being used by prostitutes. The local residents stepped in to support the women, who say it is 10 times safer than working on the streets. Has the time come to ask the question whether prostitution* should be legalise?

Currently under the law in the UK** prostitution is not illegal, however the laws surrounding it are - soliciting (advertising sexual services), streetwalking, brothels (where more than one person sells sex in an apartment) and kerb crawling.

Though I'm sure for many the idea of selling sex is unthinkable, but for some it's a choice and others it's not, either due to being sold into it or circumstances they find themselves in. The police need to target the real crime, exploitation and human trafficking. Yet while prostitution is illegal and underground this can't be done effectively, nor can the situation be improved for the people that work within it.

Prostitution will never go away, laws vilifying it always has and always will just push it out of sight and is that really the right thing to do? For me omitting people from society rather than helping them is far worst than paying for sex ever will be. As it's easier to start again or get help when you are apart of society than on the fringe of it.

By decriminalising brothels or empowering the sex workers with rights. We give them access to full and equal protection under the law. Most importantly we get people off the streets where they are most vulnerable, as how can you report a crime when you are criminalised? Essentially there needs to be a shift so that laws focus on protecting people, not the state passing moral judgement. If an individual wants to judge, go ahead, yet that should not be the role of the state in 21st century.


*I use prostitution as a board term for ease.
** Different laws apply in Scotland.

Gordon's Women

The Labour ladies have turned on Brown again, this time in "Gordon's Women" on radio 4. The programme explores whether or not Gordon has a problem working with women. I don't think it's a solely a female issue, Brown's problem is working with people that criticise him in general. This has increased as he's become more vulnerable, illustrated by his cabinet reshuffle being basically an act of putting up the barricades.

Opinion in the programme was divided, yet it's public opinion that matters. Does the term "window dressing" resonate with female voters? Deborah Matison, who studies public opinion for Gordon Brown didn't seem to think so, she said:

Women voters see him as a strong reliable sort of guy.

I'm not so sure she's really tapping into public opinion there, I think I would be inclined to call her bluff.

To Burqa or not To Burqa

France's parliamentary inquiry into a burqa* ban has started a debate on this veil, which has crossed the channel into Britain. Sarkozy said:

The burqa is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience. We cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity.

His comments do reflect the assumption most people would have. Yet does Sarkozy have a point and should we in the UK be having this debate on banning?

The burqa is not specifically mentioned in the Quran, the principle of female and male modesty are. Different scholars adopted different interpretations of the original texts and how much of the male or female body should be covered. There for the religious precedent is for modesty not the form it takes.

In a book I read** the female character describes wearing a burqa as protective, a world within a world. I was always struck by that description. I don't presume it's as simple as protection, it's far more complex including that for some women it's a choice, a sign of devotion. The problem is distinguishing between it being the choice of a woman or of a man.

In a western country wearing one will always be inescapably a political issue, it has too much stigma attached. Nor could a western culture embrace the association it has for excluding women from society. So where do you draw a line? Do you draw a line?

There are situations and environments were wearing one is being asked to be treated as an exception, showing your identity or banks for example, a cohesive society can't work like that, compromise can't be one way. Being able to enforce the rules in place already seems a fair balance. As I don't welcome setting the precedent for our government having the power to dictate on clothing.

Yet the public calls for a ban in this country aren't really about the burqa, as it's just a symptom, a prefect symbol of exclusion from British society in all it's forms. Behind this a much more important debate to have, what drivers it. The increasing fear people have over Britishness being eroded, one manifestation we've seen is the growing vote for the BNP.

Multiculturalism will never work if fears are ignored, it will just become a collection of cultures clashing and will continue to until the loudest voice is heard. A burqa debate could be a spring board to having that bigger one about immigration and culture, as nationalism grows when people feel vulnerable. It is far better that debate isn't just made by people who use it to divide.



* I use burqa as a board term covering all variations of face covering veils for ease.
** A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini.

Jacqui Smith - Is it cos I'm a Woman?

Jacqui Smith is playing the woman card again, better get my lighter out and bra ready.

She said she had been annoyed by being described as "stroppy" on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme – saying she had never heard a man described as that. "A lot of language that has been used, not only about me but about other women politicians as well, I just don't think would be used about men actually," she said. (read article)

Actually I think a man would be called a lot worst, David Blunkett was. But don't let the anti liberty or being out of your depth issue get in the way of what clearly is disgraceful persecution. I'm going to put down my lighter though.

Stilettos Against Gordon Brown

Caroline Flint's so called stiletto stabbing resignation was pointed enough, yet she did an interview saying, women in Brown's government were used as:

a smokescreen, a way of making it look like you've got a lot of women around the table without letting them influence anything.

Others in the Labour Party are saying the complete reverse, clearly Flint's angry yet she does have a point when coupled with her "inner circle" comment. Hence most women who are promoted having questionable ability, though oblivious loyalty.

What bothers me about these "Blair Babes" is they set the benchmark for women in politics, which has become more like a competition to make the front bench like some sort of GAP advert, rather than being capable and outstanding. That damages women, as how can people take them seriously or praise their contribution?

Will it be a stiletto that finishes him? Harriet Harman is clearly the one to watch, as Peter Mandelson in the reshuffle was made First Secretary of State, which is an alternative title to Deputy Prime Minister. What is Harman then? Brown clarified by saying she would still deputies him in the Commons, yet he fails to mention that Mandelson can only speak in the Lords. Not at all patronizing.

If Harman had any respect for women and herself she'd take off her stiletto too. It's not good enough to be promoted for just being a loyal Labour woman or sidelined because you're not. Otherwise you might as well just put lipstick on a man.