#DropThePlus Campaign…

Today someone complimented my cardigan and was asked where I had purchased it. I explained I got it online from Forever 21 and it was from their Plus Size range that I had recently discovered. I usually call these separate sections like the Forever 21 Plus Size and the New Look Inspire range – “The Fat Bit” which offends a lot of people.  I call it the Fat Bit because that is what is purpose is for, retail companies have to clothe everyone which is why we have different brands and shops that target different people depending on Gender, Sexuality, Age, Class and for some time now Size. These clothes shop offer the larger lady a limited range of clothes that are deemed socially acceptable to wear so that we are always one step behind the latest fashion trend – particularly for an affordable brand of clothing. We are then directed towards the second floor with the Mens, accessories of Child sections of the shop or towards the back of the shop in a dimly lit corner of the room so that  ‘Fat’ people do not ruin the general splendor of the rest of the room.

I do not understand how the way someone looks can affect anyone else. How can it make you so irate that you need to subject a group of people in society to mockery and abuse, in order to other yourself from a group that you deem unworthy, because they do not fit a constructed norm.*cough cough* *Katie Hopkins* The positives of campaigns like this and the positive promotion of plus size models fills me absolute joy, I can not believe that there are separate sections. I love the fact that there are particular brands of larger sizes that have been thought about, to cater for a larger body and a different shaped body – however most of the time im not so thrilled by the price tag. I do not appreciate however being restricted and limited by the same thing. Why can I not buy the same dress that my friend wears in a size 14 (the average uk size)  In a larger size? How is someone deemed to fat to wear an item of clothing? Is there a scale that I am not aware of….

Take out the argument of economic arguments about healthcare, NO – not every person who may carry a bit of weight is going to be rushed into hospital becasue they’re fat and have diabities of heart problems, no one is pointing fingers at smokers or alcholics about their stain on the  NHS. It is a fallback argument for people who spit venom and hatred on a group of women that have been outcast. It is not just having effects of the generation of women who are buying plus size clothing it affects the younger generations that are growing up in a society that are filled with messages of hate. Girls are constantly thrown constructed images of women with sexual, health and psychological normalities applied to them. How about the message of “As long as your happy, It doesn’t matter what you look like?” without being cliché – the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Even when society promotes plus sizes as positive we are slammed with puns and slurs – Fatkini’s or larger than life?

Never be ashamed for who you are, what you look like, there is always going to someone or something telling you that you shouldnt be happy with the way that you look, feel, or say. Never say sorry for that.

Check out #DropThePlus campaign by clicking the link 🙂  It sounds awesome.

Fat and proud….

X

Anna Richardson and Revenge Porn

Tonight I watched Channel 4’s documentary, Revenge Porn in which Anna Richardson speaks to the victims and the perpetrators of revenge porn, and investigates the platforms that allows for people to upload explicit photos of others. Such websites are for the purpose of “seeking revenge”, being abusive and humiliating those who are depicted in the photos.

Revenge Porn in the context of this documentary was the act of someone using photos that they had been sent, in one case filmed without consent, and posting them online, on websites without the persons consent that are involved. An example used in the programme was Ex’s using old nudes that their previous partner had sent them giving it the term “revenge porn”.

Anna Richardson, who is well-known for her “entertaining” programme on the taboo subject of sex on Channel 4, like her previous series The Sex Education Show, where she offers candid information and advice on the subject. I thought it was somehow ironic that she has been the center of a subject that she has little experience of the topic, until she proceeds to in the documentary , take nude photos of herself enhance them so that her face is not recognisable, creating a fake profile with a different name and story to her own uploads them to a revenge porn website to ” understand what she is investigate”. I fully appreciate that it took, to a degree, guts, courage, bravery (and so on) to upload your naked body for a community of online people who you do not know, and comment on these picture in order to humiliate and abuse you, I acknowledge that. I would have found more condescending if she hadn’t of carried this out then I already found her, I still do not think this was necessary to create a succesful documentary about the experiences of Revenge Porn.

Firstly, she did not have to post those pictures so that she could experience what the people she interviewed was feeling to create a succesful documentary on the subject. Secondly she can not have experience the same emotions that those people were feeling in the same way, Anna Richardson had the power of choice and authority over the images that she chose to put up, she could not experience the loss of that authority or choice.

Authority is such a big theme in this programme, for me it has so many issues – authority in this programme to tell and document this topic has been given to a privileged white woman (although I would have been more angered if this documentary was voiced by a man) who can have no full understanding of what it is like to be in that position. Instead of having an in-depth documentation and researched programme about individuals sharing their own experience and investigation the industry that is created, we receive experiences that are mediated through the authoritative voice of a privileged woman who has no full understanding of what she is mediating, instead we have this mediation and her own manipulated story of what she is “investigating” and the focus is shifted from experiences of others and centered around Anna Richardson. I feel that in a way her creating the profile with the pictures manipulates the audience to empathise with her which I find sick (which is a production issue not necessarily down to Anna Richardson) when the audience should be empathizing with those who have not been paid to create the documentary and post picture of their own free will on a revenge porn website. I suppose it derives from part of this celebrity culture where the authority voice of the white privileged women means that it is acceptable to talk about and gives the topic authority where is the documentary had been produced with a faceless narrator or a faceless journalist it may not have had the same authority or publication.

For me, I feel I would have gained a lot more from having experiences told to me from people who had experienced the loss of their choice in comparison to a privileged woman who has been given a platform, been paid and chosen to take pictures and put them online, plus towards the end of the programme we understand that the pictures were then taken down mysteriously by the website for reasons unknown.

Again, I am not fully bashing Anna Richardson, as I do think that to some degree she has risen awareness of what can happen to people and some people may benefit from information from the programme.

As i was watching the programme, I was on social media looking at the hashtag RevengePorn and some of the reactions were absolutely disgusting and vile they do not even worth mentioning. I found others quite infuriating, a lot of the tweets I saw involved things like “It’s a female problem” or “educate the younger female generation”. This frankly, pissed me off. It is not or ever will be a female problem. END OF. I have tried to be gender neutral throughout this post because it involves everyone on every side. Females and Males can be the victim just as much as the perpetrator, in the case that they showed where a girl posted a video of her best friend who also was a girl, there a lots of different situations that means you can not make a generalised statement as a fact, according to the programme it did seem however, that a large majority of the shaming was carried out by men on images of women, doesn’t mean to say it doesn’t happen the other way round. Also, age, when did this become a factor in deciding an issue that is rooted in society carried down through generations? You could argue that an older generation may know less about technology, so are less likely to know where pictures may end up? It is not a younger generations problem – yes by all means educate them – but educate everyone so everyone is aware male and female, young and old.

Another reaction went along the lines of “if someone sends nudes to someone else, you should expect them to end up on the internet, therefore its their own fault” HELL NO! If you DID NOT get permission or consent to do anything other than look at them on your phone or app or whatever you are receiving them on, then you are a criminal and can be persecuted by law. Just because someone sends a nude does not mean it is acceptable for it to be posted for an entire community online to see. In my eyes it’s like saying that if a woman is wearing a revealing top or skirt or looks at you, she wanted it. NO its called RAPE. Same thing, it is ABUSE to use someone else image especially for the sole person of humiliations.

What frustrates me more is the fact that the platforms that the images are being posted on and allows for people to make comments that are sexual, threatening and violent are not illegal and therefore are allowed to exist. it is not “just how things are” or “how the internet works” it is wrong plain and simple and if you feel like you would like to learn more about how to stop revenge porn then there is a campaign and a website that you can find out more from. >>> End Revenge Porn

B x

Women in the Workplace.

I study sociology at university and one of my assignments is to make a research plan, which we get to choose, we can look at anything we want as long as it is relevant. Which is hard because sociology is such a big field. Anyway, I have chosen to look at “Do women hold fewer positions of power in the workplace than men?”. Firstly because I found this article that annoyed me, secondly I was kinda interested if women do actually hold fewer positions of power than men and if it was so then why? And thirdly because how uneducated my generation are on the understanding of Feminism.

Lets look at the third reason first – Backwards thinking here bear with me! Sooooooo, there was this status on Facebook, which as we know produces some total crap sometimes, but it was about feminism. The post went along the lines of “I don’t want to step on anyone’s toes but where has this riding tide of feminism come from?” Stop! Lets just pause – NO just NO! Well lets see it isn’t all of a sudden! The first wave of feminism was a hell of a long time ago and there has been two more since then and women still struggle for the equal rights of women – so no its not all of a sudden! There is just more awareness of it, which may I add is a bloody good thing considering how uneduatced people seem to be! It then goes on to say “Just because Emma Watson has suddenly decided she hates men or whatever we don’t all have to agree, I think equality should be advertised, but maybe I’m in the small minority.” This is when I was on the floor half way between crying and laughing! So yes people are entitled to their opinions but at the same time if you are publicly airing your views at least do a little research! Not claiming to be an expert in this area at all but I’m pretty sure that Emma Watson was not on about man hating? I am pretty sure her point was that there should be equality between men and women? So in between quiet sobs and reading through the 130 post debate, it started me thinking about how women themselves do not understand the point in modern feminism, so how we will ever bring about a more equal society, in the case of gender or otherwise, if the group of people who are being repressed don’t understand their situation? I think by the end of the debate the whole point was lost and the debate had moved on to god knows what but whatever they were arguing about it definitely was not to do with Feminism!

The article was from the BBC in 2011 – and while it did trigger my thought process and my Research Proposal, it also made me question the society that we live in, in a kind of *face palm* sort of way! Here’s the link if you want to look at it – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/12560121 but basically its about women do not hold a representative quantity of power seats in companies so they’ve made a report to say that by 2015 25% of board members of companies have to women. So my first though was oh cool…but when you think about it so wrong on like so many levels but fundamentally for me there are two things wrong – firstly that WE HAVE TO MAKE A REPORT TO ALLOW WOMEN TO HAVE THE SAME JOBS AS MEN! And secondly what if men are actually doing a better job than women! What if an individual who happens to be male is better doing it than a women? Which is a possibility – probably not in every case seeing as “Currently 18 FTSE 100 companies have no female directors at all and nearly half of all FTSE 250 companies do not have a woman in the boardroom” which is so so so wrong because I doubt that in all of these companies all the men are better at their jobs than women! It confuses the hell out me that we can live in a society that values one group of people than another….whether that gender or age or race! The facts annoyed me rather than the article itself probably. And then it led me to think well now the women put in to the power positions will know that they have only been given the right to these jobs because a report was created to say that a woman had to fill the boardroom or director position – even though most of them will have probably earned it – the only reason why they are getting it is a report! So I’m divided I want to feel empowered that there is something being down to ensure the progression of women in positions of power in the workplace but also I feel patronized because the only reason why I’m going to be able to achieve that position in the future is because a report said that the company I work for has to fill a quote. I suppose change has to start somewhere right?

As a consequence to the article, it made me think why there are so few women in these positions. I suppose some are mothers which rock on because that’s equally as hard as becoming a women in power! Some probably leave their career half way to do this and than some don’t come back into the job market which again rock on! But that is the only legitimate reason I could think of why there are fewer women then men that are represented in these positions of power. The only thing I could think of was that its harder for women to climb the corporate ladder, which seems so unbelievable because statistically women do better in education so it isn’t that women are qualified to be in the positions, so why then is it harder in the workplace, is it because there is a stigma attached to women in powerful positions? Is it because of the patriarchal  organization of companies that means for women these positions are impregnable? It really frustrates me because I’m going to university to get a degree to try and better myself and I suppose one day fill roles where i am a women in power but will i ever be able to achieve this because of the society i live in? so whats the point of my 25 years spent in education and my 50 grand debt at the end of my degree?

So the research proposal should be great…when I actually tackle it! It’s easy to write 1000 words on a blog when your rambling and the unlikelihood of it being read in comparison the terrifying marker at uni!

x

Patriachal Pirates!

 

I do love the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, yes even the sequels. Main attraction was of course Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom however the action comedy does have a certain cheesy “cant help but watch it again and again” sort of motion to it! Anyway, I love them, even the 4th movie in the collection, which does not star the damsel in distress Elizabeth Swan and dashing Will Turner.

So automatically I see the film is on Tv and put it on while I’m surfing the internet, giggling away to myself at the cheesy bits that we all so dearly love to hate but yet can’t! Bearing in mind i have seen this film at least 5 times before if not more, I was suprised and shocked by one bit in the film in particular. (Spoiler Alert) So the basic storyline of the film is that Jack Sparrow gets fooled into joining Blackbeard’s crew by a former lover, Angelica, who is also the daughter of Blackbeard. So they want to go the Fountain of Youth and drink from it  (something to do with Blackbeard eternal soul) in which they believe Captain Jack Sparrow knows some of the details to do with the ritual so that the water works and gives black beard more years. One item in the ritual is a tear from a mermaid, who are not anything like the ones in the “Little Mermaid” (which i happen to love), there evil basically and like to seduce sailors who sing and then eat them from what i understand. So to back track, earlier on in the film Angelica saves this Missionary who then unintentionally helps capture this mermaid, he saves her several times throughout the movie. Shes stuck in a glass coffin while they travel across the island to the fountain and she cant breathe so breaks open the lid so she can breathe, then again when the coffin breaks he carries her because she cant walk because she’s never had legs before. ok so basically there is sexual tension and they both like each other and as Blackbeard puts it they “fancy” each other. The Missionary gets all protective over the mermaid and gets angry with Blackbeard when he calls the mermaid it and Phillip shouts that she has a name and then proceeds to give her a name.

This is the bit that annoyed me the way that he gives her a name, like she hasn’t got a name, and if she hasn’t, like she cant be asked before you assume she hasn’t got a name? The way that the man assigns her a name annoyed me! My feminist side was angered! I then realised that this was just another thing that showed the patriarchal ideals in movie making, whether this be the historical understanding of the time or the movie making industry. I also didnt understand how she could be this “monster” and still then be delegated a name by a man to which she should have been more powerful against,if the other mermaids are anything to go by. Another example would be the way that she is represented as hard by not giving up the tear even though they “kill” Phillip, and then on his miraculous return from the dead she cries which in my opinion such a stereotypical way of the media showing how weak and emotional women are, if these mermaids are evil then why try to feminize them? Why not use a mermaid scale or tooth? A tear has a feminine connotation. They use the mermaid as way of creating a romance story which means they use the way that the mermaid has been created in a more humanistic and feminine way to do this.

I’m not completely unaware of the fact that they use men as an object of attraction, the main reason I watch it is because Johnny Depp is in it! The way that this mermaid is depicted could have been portrayed completely different and could have been just as successful in my opinion that is what really annoyed me! I’m still a massive fan and I know its not the only movie to have such stereotypical representations of women or patriarchal ideas, but it did annoy me!

I still have a soft spot for rum, pirate hats, open seas and unopened treasures! Film number 5 comes out in 2016, I will still be going to see it 😀