It may be the largest LGB rights charity in the UK (and, apparently, in Europe), but Stonewall is hardly immune to controversy. In fact, for LGBT activists, it’s a little bit like Marmite. As a member of the LGBT network at my workplace, I am involved with Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme, and that gets me the occasional sneer from other activists outside of work. When I mentioned on Twitter that I was attending last Friday’s annual Stonewall Workplace Conference, I got a link to this call to protest Theresa May’s appearance as a keynote speaker at the event. (I must admit I myself found Theresa May an… interesting choice of guest speaker, and wanting to hear what she had to say on the subject of LGB rights was a major factor in my decision to attend the event.)
The controversies that surround Stonewall range from their on-again, off-again relationship with the trans community (Stonewall Scotland include trans rights in their remit, Stonewall GB don’t; they came under fire for nominating Julie Bindel, who is known for transphobic comments, for a journalist of the year award) to them being rather late to the party when it comes to campaigning for full marriage equality. Chief Executive Ben Summerskill himself openly admits that Stonewall is not a democratic organisation and does not speak for all lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Frankly, given the diversity inherent in the LGB community, I’d be much more worried if he claimed otherwise.
What Stonewall does do very successfully is present the “respectable” face of LGB activism. It’s a bit like putting on a tie makes you trustworthy enough to give financial advice: wearing a suit, getting banks to host your champagne receptions and schmoozing with politicians suddenly makes you look like you’re part of the mainstream. And once you look like you’re part of the mainstream, people are a lot more willing to engage with you. It is not a reflection on Stonewall but on the way our society values conformity.
And so on the train back from the Workplace Conference I reflected on Stonewall’s modus operandi and their achievements. This was after all the day I had heard Theresa May – a woman with an absolutely appalling voting record on LGB rights – declare that the government she was part of was considering introducing full marriage equality for same-sex couples. She sounded a little bit like someone was holding a gun to her head, but let’s face it – this government is talking the talk, and we’re beginning to see evidence of walking the walk. Ms. May had to leave the event before the Q&A session to be in the House of Commons for the Prime Minister’s statement on Libya, so I never got to ask her what made her change her mind. With hindsight, I am glad I didn’t get the opportunity, as I was not in the right frame of mind.
See, the conclusion I have reached since is that if someone like Theresa May is both saying the right words and backing them up with the right actions, even if they’re screaming on the inside, I should perhaps not challenge them. I would still like to know what made Ms. May change her mind – not in order to be contrary but because I would like to learn from this success how to persuade others with a similar history of opinion to hers.
I do believe Stonewall’s work in reaching out to political and business leaders, making the business case for equality with employers, and making LGB activism appear cozy and safe has a lot to do with some of the conversions we have seen. Combined with being prepared to challenge discrimination in the courts, for instance on LGB people serving in the armed forces, this carrot and stick approach has allowed us to make massive progress in the area of LGB rights over the last ten or so years.
Did you know that until eight years ago, teachers could not talk about homosexuality in schools – and most of them took that to mean they could not intervene in homophobic bullying cases? Only eight years ago you could be sacked from a job just for being lesbian, gay or bisexual. Until seven years ago there was no legal recognition for same-sex couples. And four years ago it was still legal to deny someone the provision of a good or service (even when they were paying you!), again, just because of who they were. These are not things which Stonewall has achieved single-handedly – but their contribution towards the rapid change in the legal situation of LGB people in the UK is highly significant.
Do I want Stonewall to embrace trans rights across the UK? To be honest, I’d like Stonewall to listen to trans people and do whatever is right for them, whether that is backing out of the space entirely or embracing it in a way that is truly constructive. Do I think they get every single thing right in their campaigns? No, but what organisation ever does? Do I believe they should have a more collaborative approach to other LGB charities in the UK? Oh yes. But do I also believe that Stonewall does extremely valuable work on behalf of lesbian, gay and bisexual people across the UK? Unequivocally, YES.
Author Archives: elmyra
[Elsewhere] The future of TV has just arrived
Netflix, the US TV and movie streaming service has been in the news rather a lot recently. It seems Hollywood can’t quite figure out whether it should be embracing or trying to kill the company.
As Greg Sandoval points out, Netflix is posing significant commercial challenges to Hollywood’s current business models and distribution channels. It competes – with astounding success – with channels as diverse as DVD sales, movie sales to airlines, and cable and broadcast television.
Read more at ORGZine.
[WHM] The women of Station X
As a geek, Bletchley Park is one of my favourite places in the world. Today, it houses the National Museum of Computing as well as the National Codes Centre. During World War II, this top secret location was the main code-breaking site in the UK, intercepting and decoding German messages.
Bletchley often features in LGBT history as the place of work of mathematician and computing pioneer Alan Turing, who as well as being a genius was also gay and was tragically hounded to death by the state because of it. It was only in 2009 that the UK government officially apologised for the state’s actions in this matter.
What is less well known about Bletchley Park (or Station X, as it was known during the war) is that the vast majority of the 12,000 people stationed there over the course of the war (around 80%!) were women. While the senior officers and most of the mathematicians and cryptographers were men, there was a lot of manual clerical work and machine operation to be done which was performed by women. Anything from transcribing coded messages to operating Turing’s Bombe machines for decoding Enigma messages – one of the most demanding jobs on site – was done by women.
One of the ways in which women were recruited to Station X was through Times Crossword competitions. You needed people with good general knowledge, outstanding analytical and problem solving skills, and ability to work under pressure. What better way to find them than to set a challenge to solve the Times Crossword in under 12 minutes? Those who did were offered a position at Bletchley Park – and those reluctant to take it up were offered the most ghastly alternatives available, providing a good incentive to move to the relative peace and quiet of the countryside.
At its peak, there were 9,000 people stationed at Bletchley Park in January 1945, all of whom needed to stay in touch with their families. The quiet town of Bletchley couldn’t be seen to attract attention through vast quantities of post, so up to four separate addresses were set up, all of which redirected to the secret Bletchley Park post office. There was a limit on the number of letters the women could send and receive each week, and the arrival of post from their families had an appreciable effect on the women’s morale.
Women’s contributions to the war effort at Bletchley Park were not something I was aware of until I visited there a few months ago. It is definitely something that deserves a lot more attention than it gets, and therefore a perfect topic for Women’s History Month.
[Elsewhere] Who owns your Twitter username?
When you signed up to Twitter, did you read the small print? Or did you just scroll past the 10-line box of monospaced font Twitter gives you to view their Terms of Service (which are actually six-and-a-half pages long, excluding the “Twitter Rules” which are also part of the ToS), and click “Create Account”? If you’re anything like me, you probably did the latter, and thus missed the following crucial point:
Read more at ORGZine.
[Elsewhere] Maker Faire 2011
Maker Faire UK is a two-day celebration of creativity, sharing and the pure joy of making things, which took over Newcastle’s two main science venues, the Centre for Life and the Discovery Museum, over the weekend of March 12th and 13th. It’s an event with a long tradition in the US, and this year saw its third UK incarnation.
Read more at ORGZine.
What No2AV don’t tell you about the BNP
[We interrupt your Women’s History Month schedule for a public service announcement on electoral reform.]
I was unimpressed with Councillor Terence Paul’s contribution to the electoral reform debate. In a piece which is frankly insulting to the intelligence of voters – BME or otherwise – Mr Paul questions Operation Black Vote’s support of the Yes to Fairer Votes campaign. With choice quotes from Nick Griffin, Mr Paul raises the spectre of bus-loads of BNP MPs, all in our Parliament thanks to the Alternative Vote.
Leaving aside the questionable underlying premise that people whose views we find distasteful should not be represented, the argument the Councillor makes is still tenuous. It tries to create a false equivalence between the Alternative Vote and Proportional Representation by claiming, among other things, that the Yes to Fairer Votes campaign would like the former to become a stepping stone for the latter. So let’s get our facts straight.
Firstly, the Alternative Vote and Proportional Representation are not one and the same thing. Even the No to AV campaign goes to great lengths to point this out, in an attempt to divide and conquer pro-reform voters.
Secondly, neither the Yes To Fairer Votes nor the No to AV campaign have an official position on Proportional Representation. What is on the table on May 5th is a choice between First Past the Post and the Alternative Vote, and this is what the campaign is all about. Claiming that the Yes to Fairer Votes campaign wants AV to be a stepping stone to PR is a bit like claiming that everyone in the No campaign wants to keep FPTP – it is simply not true.
Thirdly – and this is the really important bit – the British National Party is actively campaigning against the Alternative Vote. Does this look to you like the action of a party which believes it will massively benefit from a change to AV?
I find it a constant source of amusement how the No campaign continues to rely on the bogeyman of the BNP for its scare tactics, while at the same time being supported by them. What is even more ludicrous are the repeated attempts to square the circle by scaring us with the prospect of the BNP in Parliament, while keeping supporters of other small parties on side. Here is my favourite quote from the No to AV website:
“AV ensures that the BNP will gain more votes and more legitimacy, while not giving any help to small parties like the Green Party.”
Quite how this will be achieved is never explained.
I, for one, have had enough of the No campaign’s attempts to create fear, uncertainty and doubt, enough of lies, half-truths and bad arguments. I believe voters deserve our respect, and to be treated as intelligent human beings. Arguments like Terence Paul’s simply don’t wash.
What is on the table are not bus-loads of BNP MPs but a small change to our voting system which will make a big difference for voters. It will give us a stronger voice and give MPs an incentive to work harder to represent us all. You can vote for that, or you can vote to keep first-past-the-post, the system which keeps MPs in jobs so safe that some of them don’t even bother to hold a surgery in their constituency.
Whichever way you choose to vote, I hope it’s on the basis of facts and truth, rather than fear.
[WHM] The census as a political tool
Earlier this week, I received my 2011 UK Census form. There are a number of things that are wrong with it. Top of the list, of course, is that it’s being administered by a US arms manufacturer which among other things raises significant questions about confidentiality. The way some of the questions are asked, as well as the questions which are omitted, are also problematic. “What is your sex?” with the options “Male” and “Female” leaves thousands of transgender and intersex people unrepresented and unaccounted for. The fact that we are still not asking about sexual orientation, despite “Civil Partnership” being one of the marital statuses available on the questionnaire, is inexcusable. While Civil Partnerships will give you a very rough idea that gay people exist in the country, not all gay people will be the marrying kind, and to top it off those of us who are bisexual are completely invisible. “Gypsy and Irish Traveller” is presented as a single ethnic sub-group under “White” – putting the census on the same level as Channel 4’s My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding when it comes to understanding of ethnic groups. Personally, I also had some fun with the questions about national identity (European) and language (English is both my third and my main language at the moment).
My own gripes with the census aside, there have been a few census-related political campaigns recently. They range from the sublimely hilarious suggestion on how to answer Question 17, to calls to boycott the census, to the BHA’s campaign to get people to make a distinction between belonging to a cultural tradition related to a religion, and being genuinely religious. So what does all of this have to do with Women’s History Month?
This is not the first time the census has been used for political campaigning. There are at least two prominent cases of the Women’s Suffrage movement using the 1911 census as a campaign tool. This Times article from 1911 documents Suffragists’ efforts to evade the census, while this 2009 article reveals the extent of the campaign, evident from the 1911 census data released in 2009. Women spoiled their census forms, for instance by writing “If I am intelligent enough to fill in this paper, I am intelligent enough to put a cross on a voting paper.” They had a point.
One woman truly stands out in this. Emily Davison is better known for giving her life for the cause of Women’s Suffrage by jumping in front of the King’s Horse at Epsom. 2 years earlier, however, she spent a night hiding in a broom cupboard in the House of Commons so that she could register that as her residence on the day of the census.
The census is an extremely powerful tool. Census data is used to allocate funding for public services, to understand current demographics and trends, to help us build a picture of who we are as a society. Completing the census or otherwise is a political act, and an act of self-expression. The Women’s Suffrage movement knew this, and clearly a lot of people today know it. Moreover, 2011 may be your last opportunity to perform this particular political act. Relish it!
[Elsewhere] Online community shames minister out of office
Much has been talked recently about what (if any) impact Twitter has on revolutions, and what Wikileaks will do for Western democracy. Mr. Morozov’s glum assessment aside, technology is having a massive impact on the relationship between the state and the individual in many areas – sometimes to the advantage of the state and sometimes otherwise.
Read more at ORGZine.
[WHM] Looking Through Lace – Past and Future of Women’s Writing
I read a lot of science fiction, as I find imagining the future is a good way of examining our past and present. As Cory Doctorow points out in his latest Locus column, explaining something to a Martian is a great tool for disentangling the mess of practical arrangement and moral judgment that tend to lead to our way of life. So today I’d like to look at an aspect of women’s history by starting from the future.
“Looking Through Lace” by Ruth Nestvold is a science fiction short story which I first encountered in Sex, The Future, & Chocolate Chip Cookies, the first James Tiptree Award anthology. Let’s take two steps back: James Tiptree, Jr. was the pen name of science fiction author Alice B. Sheldon. As it was not known until ten years into her writing career that Sheldon was a woman, she did a lot to break down perceptions and prejudice about “typically male or female” writing. The award bearing Tiptree’s name has been given out annually since 1991 to works in science fiction or fantasy which expand and explore our understanding of gender. I have read many delightful and thought-provoking pieces of writing as a result of the Tiptree award and would highly recommend books and stories which have been shortlisted or won it. One final warning before we move on: if you are planning to read “Looking Through Lace”, do it now – this post will contain spoilers.
***
Great, you’re back.
“Looking Through Lace” starts as a somewhat predictable feminist first contact story: an all-male first contact team encounters a matriarchal society. A female linguist (Toni) is quickly brought on board as the matriarchs refuse to have anything to do with the men on the team. The set-up is not dissimilar to Marion Zimmer Bradley’s “Ruins of Isis”.
At a first glance, the new culture appears to be purely oral – the contact team can’t find any evidence of written records. At the same time, the women appear to be very involved with a kind of needlework, not unlike crochet or lace making. They even bring their crochet into meetings, and finished pieces of lace are often displayed on walls as decoration. Men, it is said, are not permitted to make lace – it is not manly.
What emerges eventually is that the “lace” is actually writing – and that discovery made me physically sick. The story is set up perfectly for maximum impact: from the first contact team’s condescending attitude towards what they see as a typical female activity of lace making, their incomprehension of why men would want to engage in this in the first place, to the reversal of gender roles compared to our own history – for me everything was lined up perfectly for an insight to hit me like lightning.
For me personally, language is a key part of my identity – I am fluent in three. The subset of language that is written is hugely important in my life: I earn my living (indirectly) reading and writing things. A lot of the time – like right now – I interact with the world through reading and writing. When I’m sad, or angry, or frustrated, I write; when I’m happy, I write. (It gets me into trouble sometimes.) When I want to know something, I read up on it; when I want to relax, I read; when I want to think, I read! If I was not allowed to read and write, I would not be me: I would be materially and spiritually poorer, I would quite literally not be the same person.
This is why “Looking Through Lace” had such a powerful impact on me: it pointed me at our own history, at the countless generations of women who were not allowed to learn to read or write, whose history was taken away from them – and from us – because they had no way of recording it.
So today I would like to celebrate just a few of the remarkable women who – despite everything – did manage to write, and whose voices have remained with us through the ages.
Claudia Severa was not a philosopher, or theologian, or social commentator, or writer of fiction. What she wrote was “I shall expect you, sister. Farewell, sister, my dearest soul, as I hope to prosper, and hail.” The reason this is remarkable is that it is the oldest known Roman document written by a woman. It was found in a Roman fort called Vindolanda, about 30 miles from where I live. The Vindolanda tablets give us a remarkable insight into life on the borders of the Empire around 100CE. They show a bustling town, more than a military fort, where officers’ wives lived with their husbands, wrote to each other, and invited each other to birthday parties. The tablets are exhibited at the British museum, yet looking at its description of the Vindolanda tablets, you would hardly know this document existed.
Heloise was a 12th-century French nun, whose lengthy correspondence with her former lover Pierre Abélard ranges from emotional to spiritual and philosophical matters. The telling of Heloise’s story often focuses on her romantic relationship with Abélard, sidelining her contributions to medieval theology.
Sei Shōnagon was a Japanese courtier and social commentator in the late 10th and early 11th century. She is known as the author of the “Pillow Book”, a remarkably readable and at times extremely witty collection of diary entries, musings, observations and poems. As well as being supremely entertaining, Shōnagon gives us a brilliant insight into life at the Emperor’s court. Here is an excerpt from the Penguin edition translated by Ivan Morris:
A good lover will behave as elegantly at dawn as at any other time. He drags himself out of bed with a look of dismay on his face. That lady urges him on: “Come, my friend, it’s getting light. You don’t want anyone to find you here.” He gives a deep sigh, as if to say that the night had not been nearly long enough and that it is agony to leave. Once up, he does not instantly pull on his trousers. Instead he comes close to the lady and whispers whatever was left unsaid during the night. Even when he is dressed, he still lingers, vaguely pretending to be fastening his sash.
We learn so much about relationships between men an women in Shōnagon’s society from this one passage! Shōnagon comes across as confident, empowered, often opinionated, highly intelligent. She is an absolute delight to read.
Murasaki Shikibu was a contemporary (and rival) of Sei Shōnagon’s. Murasaki is known as the author of The Tale of Genji, generally regarded as the world’s first novel.
These four women for me showcase the full spectrum – from writing about “women’s things” which our culture doesn’t value (Claudia Severa’s birthday party invitation), right through to playing on the big stage – writing novels and making contributions to philosophy and theology. We should celebrate them and treasure them, along with the few other women whose words still reach us through the ages. We should, above all, be aware of how privileged we are to live in a time where reading and writing is not considered “un-feminine”, and we should be aware that there are still parts of the world today where wanting an education is life-threatening for a girl. We have a duty to those who have gone before us, both recorded and unrecorded, and to our less fortunate contemporaries to remember, to raise awareness, and to keep writing. This is what Women’s History Month and International Women’s Day are all about.
[Elsewhere] Copyright gone mad
Earlier this week, BoingBoing covered the story of Zazzle – an online merchandise company – taking down a badge which read “While you were reading Tolkien I was watching Evangelion”. The original story alleged that this was prompted by the Tolkien Estate claiming copyright infringement, though subsequently it has emerged that it was actually Zazzle acting on their own initiative who caused the withdrawal of the product.
Read more at ORGZine.