is it fashionable to be a feminist?
It’s International Women’s Day! Hurrah!
Many argue “Why is there an International Women’s Day and not an International Men’s day?”
To answer, whilst women in many other countries are still unable to purchase their own property, vote or even wear what they want. And even in our own ‘liberated’ country there are less than 30% of women’s faces in our Government. It is this reason entirely why there’s a need for feminism and an International Women’s Day.
Feminist. It’s often a word which is tarnished with negative connotations. Those who brand themselves a feminist are open to critique from people who describe them as “men-haters” or “feminazis”. But in a surprising turn of events, in 2014 especially, we saw a new wave of people who sold the word as a beacon of pride and not a source of embarrassment.
It was only a few years ago, I found myself in a lecture with almost a hundred others. The lecturer asked the entire group to “raise their hands if they considered themselves a feminist.” I, who undoubtedly considered myself one, looked around to see not one person with their hand raised. Embarrassed, I kept my arm to the side of me.
I unknowing of the answer, feel if the same question was put to the large group of us now, there would be a dramatic shift in hands raised.
As in 2014, Emma Watson, Beyoncé and Lena Durham are just a few of the many who stood up for feminism last year and made it seem – in a sense – “cool”.
Cherie Smith an artist from Halifax says, “There’s probably a fashionable aspect to feminism but I don’t think it matters because it’s so wonderful to see that energy being put towards something so positive.”
Millions of women now hold the term feminist as a badge of pride, and as explained earlier there is still a definite need for a belief in equal rights, when so many women around the world are suffering under repressed laws.
Even if it may seem ‘cool’ to be a feminist, there are worse trends to follow. Like the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge which encouraged thousands to join a trend for charity giving: if it’s positive then who cares what the act is labelled?
I for one just hope the energy put towards these positive trends carries on for a long time.
What do you think? Is it now fashionable to be a feminist? Comment below to have your say.
Many argue “Why is there an International Women’s Day and not an International Men’s day?”
To answer, whilst women in many other countries are still unable to purchase their own property, vote or even wear what they want. And even in our own ‘liberated’ country there are less than 30% of women’s faces in our Government. It is this reason entirely why there’s a need for feminism and an International Women’s Day.
Feminist. It’s often a word which is tarnished with negative connotations. Those who brand themselves a feminist are open to critique from people who describe them as “men-haters” or “feminazis”. But in a surprising turn of events, in 2014 especially, we saw a new wave of people who sold the word as a beacon of pride and not a source of embarrassment.
It was only a few years ago, I found myself in a lecture with almost a hundred others. The lecturer asked the entire group to “raise their hands if they considered themselves a feminist.” I, who undoubtedly considered myself one, looked around to see not one person with their hand raised. Embarrassed, I kept my arm to the side of me.
I unknowing of the answer, feel if the same question was put to the large group of us now, there would be a dramatic shift in hands raised.
As in 2014, Emma Watson, Beyoncé and Lena Durham are just a few of the many who stood up for feminism last year and made it seem – in a sense – “cool”.
Cherie Smith an artist from Halifax says, “There’s probably a fashionable aspect to feminism but I don’t think it matters because it’s so wonderful to see that energy being put towards something so positive.”
Millions of women now hold the term feminist as a badge of pride, and as explained earlier there is still a definite need for a belief in equal rights, when so many women around the world are suffering under repressed laws.
Even if it may seem ‘cool’ to be a feminist, there are worse trends to follow. Like the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge which encouraged thousands to join a trend for charity giving: if it’s positive then who cares what the act is labelled?
I for one just hope the energy put towards these positive trends carries on for a long time.
What do you think? Is it now fashionable to be a feminist? Comment below to have your say.
SHOULD A WOMAN CHANGE HER NAME AFTER MARRIAGE?
For thousands of years marriage’s primary purpose was to bind women to men. Through marriage, a woman becomes a man’s property and she would take the surname of her husband. But is it an act of love or an invasion of identity?
The hot topic recently came to light when the BBC published an article questioning the need for a surname change. In an age when the quest for love is high but the need for independence is just as sought after – what is the attitude of the general public?
As expected the general public had mixed but strong opinions on the matter. Thom Lancaster, 21 a retail assistant from Selby says, “Yes, it’s one of the few traditional values I’m all for.” In agreement, Jamie Skelton, 23 a data processor from Hull explains that “it’s the cornerstone of the marriage process.”
Not all were in agreement though, most identifiably it was suggested that it should entirely be the choice of the woman on how she wants to be recognised. “She should only if she wants to. It shouldn't be expected nor forced. Equally, if a woman chooses to, she shouldn't be mocked.” Claire Thompson, 24 said. Alex Lewis, 20 agreed: “It should be a choice; it’s traditional but I can understand why women may decide to keep their own family name.”
In an albeit different idea, some suggested that a husband and wife should double-barrel both of their surnames. Shawnee Jardine, 23 said: “I'd want a double-barrelled name that my husband would also adopt. However, if a woman chooses to, that's her prerogative.”
Viv Thom, 63, who leads in International Student Support for Student and Learning Services at Sheffield Hallam University, says: “When I was young I chose not to get married at all because I didn’t believe in marriage and I didn’t see the point in it. That seemed to me quite an important statement to make at the time, and I just wanted to challenge those conventions. If I had got married though I wouldn’t have changed my name.”
It’s often the case that women are expected to change their surname in order to suit their husband. At birth we are labelled with the identifier we call a ‘name’ so why should it be that a woman changes her identifier half way through her life?
Rosalind Brunt, 69, who is a Visiting Research Fellow in Media Studies at Sheffield Hallam University said she preferred a concept which was more popular in the seventies: “Some women would make up their own name after marriage, or with their children, they would make up a surname for their child that was neither parent. There was a fashion at one time to call your child ‘Wilde’ if you were a single woman, or you weren’t living with the man, because that used to be something illegitimate children would use.”
As there are a variety of imaginative concepts for surname changes after marriage, it’s disheartening to see the concept where the woman has to change her surname as the most popular. The belief that women should substitute their surname for marriage, exchanging their own identity for their spouse's, is - undoubtedly - sexist. And I say "undoubtedly" as not one person could argue there is a conviction for the same name-change in men.
Is it traditional for a wife to change to her husband’s surname or is it an out-dated protocol? Have your say below.
As expected the general public had mixed but strong opinions on the matter. Thom Lancaster, 21 a retail assistant from Selby says, “Yes, it’s one of the few traditional values I’m all for.” In agreement, Jamie Skelton, 23 a data processor from Hull explains that “it’s the cornerstone of the marriage process.”
Not all were in agreement though, most identifiably it was suggested that it should entirely be the choice of the woman on how she wants to be recognised. “She should only if she wants to. It shouldn't be expected nor forced. Equally, if a woman chooses to, she shouldn't be mocked.” Claire Thompson, 24 said. Alex Lewis, 20 agreed: “It should be a choice; it’s traditional but I can understand why women may decide to keep their own family name.”
In an albeit different idea, some suggested that a husband and wife should double-barrel both of their surnames. Shawnee Jardine, 23 said: “I'd want a double-barrelled name that my husband would also adopt. However, if a woman chooses to, that's her prerogative.”
Viv Thom, 63, who leads in International Student Support for Student and Learning Services at Sheffield Hallam University, says: “When I was young I chose not to get married at all because I didn’t believe in marriage and I didn’t see the point in it. That seemed to me quite an important statement to make at the time, and I just wanted to challenge those conventions. If I had got married though I wouldn’t have changed my name.”
It’s often the case that women are expected to change their surname in order to suit their husband. At birth we are labelled with the identifier we call a ‘name’ so why should it be that a woman changes her identifier half way through her life?
Rosalind Brunt, 69, who is a Visiting Research Fellow in Media Studies at Sheffield Hallam University said she preferred a concept which was more popular in the seventies: “Some women would make up their own name after marriage, or with their children, they would make up a surname for their child that was neither parent. There was a fashion at one time to call your child ‘Wilde’ if you were a single woman, or you weren’t living with the man, because that used to be something illegitimate children would use.”
As there are a variety of imaginative concepts for surname changes after marriage, it’s disheartening to see the concept where the woman has to change her surname as the most popular. The belief that women should substitute their surname for marriage, exchanging their own identity for their spouse's, is - undoubtedly - sexist. And I say "undoubtedly" as not one person could argue there is a conviction for the same name-change in men.
Is it traditional for a wife to change to her husband’s surname or is it an out-dated protocol? Have your say below.
No support for cbb sexual assault
Former Baywatch star Jeremy Jackson has been ejected from the Celebrity Big Brother house after sexually harassing glamour model Chloe Goodman.
The recently divorced actor made Goodman burst into tears when she, in an attempt to console him, misconstrued the act as flirting. He grabbed her dressing gown to reveal her breast.
The most shocking part of the incident was the reaction from Channel Five viewers; I took to Twitter to see some of the comments.
Former Big Brother winner Helen Woods tweeted, “She’s finally got the attention she was craving, anything else you want to throw in the mix @Chloe__Goodman?” Another viewer tweeted, “Chloe overreacted. She’s a page 3 model and probably had worse done to her, the stupid sl*g!”
What’s more distressing is the fact that most of the comments shaming Chloe for ‘overreacting’ and ‘attention seeking’ were from women.
Some viewers suggested that because he didn’t physically touch her, then it shouldn’t be classed as a sexual assault.
@LaurenJBatty tweeted, “Absolutely amazed by Chloe’s reaction on #CBB what a f**cking drama queen. It popped out, he didn’t grope it! Calm the f**k down!!”
In this day and age, people are still trying to justify rape culture. The phrase ‘rape culture’ was devised by feminists in the 1970s. It was coined as a way to demonstrate the ways in which society normalised male sexual violence and criticised victims of sexual assault.
Just because Goodman is a glamour model, it doesn’t give the right for someone to reveal her body in a situation where she is not comfortable. Even though Jackson didn’t assault her physically, he exposed her body in an unprovoked manner.
An obviously distressed Chloe spoke to the diary room to justify her reaction, “Basically I was just trying to help Jeremy, and he was throwing up in the toilet so I got him some toilet roll and stuff. Then suddenly out of the blue he opened up my dressing gown to expose my boob.
“I know I’ve done Page 3 and things but it’s a bit different when you don’t know the person too well.”
Fellow housemate and Loose Women presenter Nadia Sawalha, who was with Chloe in the diary room, agreed saying “That is not an excuse. The two things are not related.”
Fortunately, others were quick to defend the 21-year-old, @hanbanxx tweeted, “If and when Chloe poses topless that is HER choice, Jeremy opening her dressing gown was a violation of her body and was totally not on.”
The idea that her career choice as a glamour model gives other people the right to see her as a sexual object is totally unacceptable and further enforces the concept of a ‘rape culture’.
What are your thoughts on the matter? Did the housemate overreact or was the reaction justified? Comment below to have your say.
The recently divorced actor made Goodman burst into tears when she, in an attempt to console him, misconstrued the act as flirting. He grabbed her dressing gown to reveal her breast.
The most shocking part of the incident was the reaction from Channel Five viewers; I took to Twitter to see some of the comments.
Former Big Brother winner Helen Woods tweeted, “She’s finally got the attention she was craving, anything else you want to throw in the mix @Chloe__Goodman?” Another viewer tweeted, “Chloe overreacted. She’s a page 3 model and probably had worse done to her, the stupid sl*g!”
What’s more distressing is the fact that most of the comments shaming Chloe for ‘overreacting’ and ‘attention seeking’ were from women.
Some viewers suggested that because he didn’t physically touch her, then it shouldn’t be classed as a sexual assault.
@LaurenJBatty tweeted, “Absolutely amazed by Chloe’s reaction on #CBB what a f**cking drama queen. It popped out, he didn’t grope it! Calm the f**k down!!”
In this day and age, people are still trying to justify rape culture. The phrase ‘rape culture’ was devised by feminists in the 1970s. It was coined as a way to demonstrate the ways in which society normalised male sexual violence and criticised victims of sexual assault.
Just because Goodman is a glamour model, it doesn’t give the right for someone to reveal her body in a situation where she is not comfortable. Even though Jackson didn’t assault her physically, he exposed her body in an unprovoked manner.
An obviously distressed Chloe spoke to the diary room to justify her reaction, “Basically I was just trying to help Jeremy, and he was throwing up in the toilet so I got him some toilet roll and stuff. Then suddenly out of the blue he opened up my dressing gown to expose my boob.
“I know I’ve done Page 3 and things but it’s a bit different when you don’t know the person too well.”
Fellow housemate and Loose Women presenter Nadia Sawalha, who was with Chloe in the diary room, agreed saying “That is not an excuse. The two things are not related.”
Fortunately, others were quick to defend the 21-year-old, @hanbanxx tweeted, “If and when Chloe poses topless that is HER choice, Jeremy opening her dressing gown was a violation of her body and was totally not on.”
The idea that her career choice as a glamour model gives other people the right to see her as a sexual object is totally unacceptable and further enforces the concept of a ‘rape culture’.
What are your thoughts on the matter? Did the housemate overreact or was the reaction justified? Comment below to have your say.