Unfree. Yet Powerful. Exploited. Not Forgotten.

The demonstrations and resistance inside Yarl's Wood have been the most important fight in Britain for women's rights and for immigrants’ rights, because they have been inspiring - because the people in this struggle are fighting to win the most basic of demands as human beings.

March 12^th signified the National Demonstration at Yarl’s Wood, for all the men and women held like cattle inside detention-deportation centres.   For all looking to break out from under the shadow of detention.  It was for all those at the borders of Europe challenging the cynical leaders a demanding in real life the promise of democracy and freedom, of which sanctuary is fundamental.  Nearly 2000 turned up in support of this demonstration, making it the largest event against indefinite detention.

The Body Project

“In the affluent West, there is a tendency for the body to be seen as an entity which is in the process of becoming; a project which should be worked at and accomplished as part of an individual’s self-identity… [yet] Body projects still vary along social lines, especially in the case of gender.” [Shilling 1996: p.5]

Should Feminism Rebrand Itself for a Wider Audience?

It has been suggested that feminism, as we know and understand it, should rebrand itself because the brand of the movement, not the message, is turning people off and away from the realities of the feminist fight. 

Therefore, I find myself asking whether feminism should rebrand itself to appease those who dislike the brand so it can appeal to a wider audience.  And I find myself answering no.  Feminism should not need to rebrand itself to be duly accepted by the mainstream.  Feminism should be a movement with a name that continues to be unapologetic in its demand for attaining equal rights, the advancement of women and marginalised groups in society, and the restructuring of patriarchal demands.

In short, no.  Feminism should not rebrand itself.

Male Privilege

“Male privilege” is a term that is often thrown around with little thought to what it is referring or what it really means.  The term refers to white middle-upper class heterosexual males who have traditionally (before equal rights movements began) ruled and owned society, and, to an extent, this is still true today.  Life for men who match this cisgender identity tend to find that their life is easier compared to the working classes, ethnic minorities or those with a transsexual identity.  Yet when men within the boundaries for male privilege are confronted with the terminology, they become defensive, confrontational and do everything in their power to prove that they do not have an easier life than anyone else.  They will play around with the word “privilege”, haul out the dictionaries and question the meaning of the word and whether it can truly be applied to this narrow view of the male gender.  They seem to hold the misconception that discussing prejudice which has stemmed from their group is in fact another form of prejudice and it cannot be justified. 

Colour-blindness and Racist Ideology

Recently there was an interesting news item which discussed the high proportion of young Muslim men in prison. It was noted that the degree of overt institutional racism within the Met Police had reduced and other factors were to blame. This sparked my writing on this topic, as I believe that our definition and understanding of institutional racism within society has shifted and colour-blindness now appears to be a prevailing ideological perspective.

Colour-blindness, in sociological terms, is defined as ‘the disregard of racial characteristics; making no classifications, categorisations, or distinctions upon race’. This is no new phenomenon, but the existence of such attitudes has become more prominent in our society today as political correctness has extended its control over our freedom of speech. Advocates of colour-blind practices believe that treating people with no acknowledgement of race would lead to a more equal and tolerant society, whereby racial privilege would no longer exert the power it once did. However, those in opposition to such practices believe that racism and white privilege still remain defining features of many Western societies.