Sexual violence in conflict has to stop!

Yesterday was the last day of Summit in London to End Sexual Violence in Conflict. For the past few days various influencers spoke about the issues concerning atrocities during conflict and were trying to attract more attention to ending sexual violence during conflict. Speakers included famous persons such as Angelina Jolie, John Kerry and William Hague. The summit was supported by other events all over the world.

Sexual violence during conflict is somehow omitted problem by many politicians, treated as a “spoils of war” and inevitable part of warfare. There has been many misconceptions regarding conflict-related sexual violence both in the political sphere, social sphere as well as in the academic research.

The main problem is that media and influencers bring attention to the greatest atrocities that involve sexual violence during conflict. They share the terrifying stories of women raped, violated, abused and mutilated. We hear the dreadful stories and we feel horror for the victims. But such attention brought to the high profile cases has one unforeseen consequence… We’ve learned to think that sexual violence is an inseparable part of the conflict, because it happens everywhere.

WRONG!

Conflict-related sexual violence is neither inevitable nor common. It is not a widely used weapon of war. In fact, there are number of groups that do not use sexual violence against civilians. For example, in all of Africa’s conflicts from 1989 – 2009, only 29% of conflict actors perpetrated sexual violence. More, there are few groups that forbid the use of sexual violence. Research shows (Wood, 2004; 2006; 2009) that actually more strategic to the war advances is not to use sexual violence against civilians, especially when a particular group rely on supplies or support from civilians.

It is not to say that wartime sexual violence is not a serious issue. It is. And it need to be prevented. It has to stop. My argument is that if it isn’t common and evidence suggests that many conflict do not witness terrible atrocities and sexual violence perpetration, then it can be prevented. We can learn from a more positive stories and try to apply them in other contexts.

When I was writing my thesis on conflict-related sexual violence, I had many awkward conversations with people who were trying to show me that my research is pointless, because everything is already known about this subject. The major misconception I encountered is that rape committed by armed groups is a psychological response to trauma, release of stress and uncontrolled biological response. I remember one friend of mine cited her teacher, who said that soldiers rape, because during fighting the part of their brain responsible for procreation gets activated and they feel compelled to rape. It’s pure biology. And for her that response was sufficient enough.

There is much we don’t know about reasons for committing wartime rape, but for sure we know it’s not biology. If it really was biology, then EVERYBODY would rape. Everybody. All soldiers would rape anything that resembles a women and no soldier would be blameless. However the fact that majority of soldiers are able to refrain from committing rape and in fact many groups do not rape and condemn sexual violence, speaks for itself.

Also if it was a biological response, only women in the height of their reproductive time would get raped. The logic would suggest that desire and willingness to extend ones species should take part. It couldn’t be further from the truth. For example, in conflict in Sierra Leone the age of rape victims varied from 7 years of age up until 70. No women could feel safe. Majority of girls aged 12-15 were taken as brides. Many instances of sexual violence involved use of force, mutilation, humiliation and sadism.

Furthermore, it isn’t a psychological response to trauma connected to the battle and tough life of during a conflict that pushes men to rape the women. Sexual violence happened in many conflicts during periods of relative tranquillity, when there is no regular battle and the soldiers are mostly inactive. Research by Nordas and Cohen (2012) states that “sexual violence is relatively less common in the most-lethal conflicts than in conflicts with fewer annual casualties”.

It also isn’t a weapon of war directed against opposing side/culture/enemy group. Unfortunately, many conflicts see indiscriminate violence against all of the representatives of female group, regardless of their ethnicity or affiliations.

Feminists also had their say about conflict related sexual violence. Gender inequality theory says that sexual violence is not about sexual desire, but a desire of men to “exert dominance” over the female population (Gottschall, 2004). The soldiers perpetrating sexual violence “vent their contempt for women” and in the same time they enforce and perpetuate “patriarchal gender arrangements” that are beneficial to all men (Gottschall, 2004).

I can’t agree with feminists on this issue as their claims are not supported by evidence. Current warfare has seen the emergence of most gruesome ways of inflicting terror on the people. Sexual violence is no longer committed only by men on women. There are instances of men raping men, women raping men and women raping women. Also the use of rape is not consistent across conflicts, even in the settings with similar cultural backgrounds. Even in the countries with a widespread use of sexual violence not all areas are affected. For example, in DRC sexual violence was rarely committed in areas supervised by UN Peacekeepers. However other areas were not as safe.

What we do know about conflict-related sexual violence is more appalling than previous claims, but it also shows that sexual violence can be prevented. In most African conflicts, sexual violence has been perpetrated mainly by government forces. Only 30% of unorganised or semi-organised militias committed acts of sexual violence, mainly when they were supporting pro-government forces which allowed or even encouraged perpetration of rape. Most of those militias, who engaged in acts of sexual violence, widely recruited child soldiers.

Research conducted by E. J. Wood shows that the group organisation and belief system has a great impact on perpetration of sexual violence by this group. If the members of the group believe that they cannot rape (for any reason) and commanders condemn and punish perpetration of rape, the group will rarely perpetrate rape in fear of being punished. However, if a group shares a belief that rape is acceptable and commanders do allow or even encourage soldiers to rape, sexual violence will be prevalent and almost unavoidable.

We cannot forget about foreign forces and their involvement in this crime. In few conflicts where foreign security forces where involved and there was little or no control of their action outside of official manoeuvres, soldier raped and engaged in other violations, as they knew that no punishment will be imposed. For example, a high profile case from former Yugoslavia shows that UN Peacekeepers where involved in prostitution and human trafficking. In Sierra Leone, foreign forces were responsible for more rape cases than government forces.

Finally, there are armed groups who do not allow to rape. For example, Tamil Tigers, despite their wide spectrum of human rights violations, they never allowed to rape in the areas which they controlled. There has been reports stating that Tigers, who did rape a women, were severely punished in most of the cases. Evidence suggest that clear condemnation of perpetrating sexual violence and widespread group belief that sexual violence is unacceptable did have a positive impact on soldiers behaviour.

The conclusion is clear: sexual violence during conflict is not determined by “outside” forces beyond one’s control. It is deliberate and conscious decision made by individuals. No perpetrator can be excused. And as in many cases perpetration of sexual violence is granted by governments and perpetrated by their security forces, international spectators are able to put a pressure and prevent it from happening. Wartime sexual violence CAN be stopped and HAVE TO be stopped.

It is up to us whether we will allow for it to happen.

Written by Vespertilio

References:

• Gottschall, J. (2004) ‘Explaining Wartime Rape’ The Journal of Sex Research 41(2): 129-136.
• Nordas, R., Cohen, D. K. (2012a) ‘Sexual Violence by Militias in African Conflicts’ CSCW Policy Brief 01-2012.
• Nordas, R., Cohen, D. K. (2012b) ‘Sexual Violence in African Conflicts, 1989 – 2009’ CSCW Policy Brief 02-2012.
• Wood, E. J. (2004) ‘Sexual Violence During War: Explaining Variation’, Order, Conflict and Violence, Yale University, 30^th April – 1^st May. New York: Santa Fe Institute.
• Wood, E. J. (2006) ‘Variations in Sexual Violence During War’ Politics Society 34: 307-341.
•  Wood, E. J. (2009) ‘Armed Groups and Sexual Violence: When is Wartime Rape Rare?’ Politics Society 39: 131-161.

We are not here to fight you

Explaining the most common misconceptions, stereotypes and accusations towards feminists.

I was supposed to write an article where I would provide the counterarguments to the most common misconceptions regarding feminists and their cause. In the process of searching the questions and accusations, I encountered few blogs, which were clearly against feminism. They accused feminist of hypocrisy, discrimination against men, propagating mistrust, tension and hatred between sexes. Sadly, feminism is no longer perceived as rejection of patriarchal system and striving for equality. Stereotypically, feminism is perceived and thought of as a man-hating brand of gender superiority.

As a feminist, I encountered many of these accusation, I heard people saying that our claims are absurd, that we are stupid and only ugly girls can be feminists (yup, heard all of that). That women don't have it so bad, that we have a power over men and we should cherish that and stop complaining about the things we don't have. 

So my first reaction was really defensive against those blogs and people behind them. Yes, words “sexism” and “misogyny” came to my mind. Of course, after reading few lines it became apparent that they have never read anything academic that feminists produced, that they are not following top women’s rights campaigns and that basically they have never read anything about imbalances of power, politics, etc. (basically anything that some smart people wrote, other smart people confirmed or refuted. Their arguments were not properly supported by any work that had merit).

But when I got deeper into the content, it became apparent to me that they are not against feminism per se, they are just against some concepts and some claims that feminist make. Well, they are allowed to. Sure, some women who claim to be feminist are saying loads of crap, they are abusive, offensive and base their arguments on flawed presumptions. However, by clinging onto selected cases of ridiculous feminist articles and causes, anti-feminists are missing the bigger picture.

The problem is that most men opposing feminism are scared. They are simply afraid that our fight for equal rights will mean the limitations of theirs. And as some of the feminists claims concern domestic and social sphere, they believe that better situation for women will mean deterioration of theirs. And I think that’s the biggest misconception of all.

The truth is that most of the feminists love men. We love them. You won’t believe it, but men make the most amazing husbands, brothers, fathers and sons. For instance, I have the most wonderful boyfriend in the world and guess what? He is male, I love him and would do anything to help him succeed and to make his life comfortable. But I won’t sacrifice my dreams, either and I won’t put his well-being and happiness in front of mine.

We feminists want to see all men succeed and prosper, be happy and contempt. But not at our expense and not by neglecting our rights. Empowering women, bringing them to power and allowing them to aspire to great things is not a threat to men. Heck, if someone was trying to limit men’s rights (and by inference, my boyfriend’s rights), I would be the first on the barricade campaigning against it! Because this isn’t the way. By advocating for protection of our rights, we are not forcing governments or others to make a choice “x” or “y” – men’s rights or women’s rights. We are seeing this as an equation: x and y = future.

People opposing to the feminists justifications and claims for inequality can find themselves tangled in a wide variety of terms. Gender inequality, power imbalance, social construction of gender – actually, they are meaningless if you don’t know their context. Without a historical, academic and social context, those are just scare words that people use however they please without any concern for the mess they are creating around it. So I won’t go into depth of this concepts, because I’m not an expert in Women Studies or Feminists Science Studies, whatever you call it. And if you don’t study them, you should ignore them too.

It is true that some of our claims leave men out of equation. By doing this, we don’t want to see men’s rights neglected. But sometimes, by equality we mean equal right to have your needs taken care off. And sometimes we have different needs than men and in order to be healthy/happy/strong we need some type of preferential treatment and assurance that particularly those rights are protected.

Women in Malawi

Let me explain what I mean by providing an example. I remember reading about problems in humanitarian context with distribution of food. In the areas where there is severe malnutrition and the response is designed to provide people with food, people are receiving so called “food baskets”, which is a variety of pulses, flours, oils, etc. to provide them with basic nutrients necessary to survive and fight malnutrition. The food is given to the family to distribute among themselves. It wasn’t much, but it was enough. Some of the families got better, they still were poorly nourished, but they were all getting better. However, there were instances where the children and women were still malnourished and only men weren’t affected. After careful investigation, it was obvious that some families do not distribute food according to needs, but according to the status.

What that meant, was that a man as a head of a family was allowed to get full with the food, while women and children were eating what was left for that day. And it happened regardless of whether mother was pregnant or breastfeeding and whether child was very young or not.

I can already hear some of you yelling that if we want equality than the woman shouldn’t get the special treatment just because she’s pregnant. Well, my question is: why not? There are situations where women should get preferential treatment than men. And it’s not to instil inequality and shift the balance of power. It’s just a human thing to do, to sometimes think about other’s needs. So in this situation, the person, who should have her needs taken care of is woman as she is with baby and she needs to be healthy in order for her child to be healthy. There is no man-hatred here, it’s pure biology. Pregnant women needs healthy diet for their foetus to develop into a healthy baby. And children needs nutrients for their brain development and general health. Adult men, as fully developed and with stronger organisms, they could go without being full for some time and survive only on the amount of food that was necessary to keep them out of hunger.

If the situation was different, that man was working long hours in a field and women had non-exhaustive tasks, I would agree that man needs more nutrients to work more efficiently. It depend on a context and on the needs.

So you see, sometimes putting the needs of one person in front of the other is necessary for the most vulnerable to get a fighting chance for survival. And it never means that this other person is less important or their rights will be violated. It just means that in this particular situation someone else’s needs have to be put in front for the general situation to improve.

My particular area of interest is violence against women and I would love to see more fierce action to stop this type of violence. As a women, I am very passionate about this subject. The sole idea that a man might find it justifiable to beat his wife or rape another women, just because he perceives it as his male right, just boils my blood. And I don’t see any justification for it, nobody deserves such treatment. I want to see it stopped. But advocating for ending domestic and sexual violence or at least for better justice response, feminists are not trying to divert the attention from another crimes. It’s just something we feel passionate about, we don’t imagine that such situation can happen in a civilized world and we will always oppose it. But we are not standing in a way for seeing other crimes receive justice.

I hear frequently the voices saying “what about violence against men”? What about the situation when it is a women who hate men and attacks them?

My answer would be: please, tell me more. I am not a man. I have no idea what kind of threats awaits them. But if I knew, if men were to speak more loudly about their pains and their abuse, I would be again in front campaigning for it to stop. Both situations are unacceptable and both causes can be defended in parallel.

I know that many women abuse their husbands. That sexual violence is not only delivered by men to women, it’s also the other way around. Can’t you see? It’s exactly the same misconceptions and social norms that prevent the victims of these crimes to seek justice and see it delivered. Why? By highlighting and enforcing the stereotypical masculine and feminine values, we are allowing those crimes to occur and we automatically silence all victims. How we construct and reinforce femininity and masculinity does not keep society whole. It keeps us apart, divided, hurt and broken.

I cannot even start to imagine how many boys and man have been raped by their mothers, aunts, cousins, sisters, girlfriends! They have no one to turn to, because the entire society tells them that they should be proud and happy, because experienced women introduced them to the world of sex. That they need to want sex, all the time, anytime, always. But nobody even stops to think whether they were ready when it happened, whether they wanted it at that time, whether they wanted it with HER. And they are forced to live with the memory of experience which feels so wrong and yet everybody tells them that it should (heck, must!) feel right.

Instead of forcing on people what stereotypically they should perceive as natural and normal, we should stop and listen and allow them to admit that what they experienced wasn’t alright. In this particular situation, we are putting victim’s needs in front of the non-affected and non-abused person. And by wanting some attitudes to change, we are not accusing innocent people of being hurtful to others. We just want to see the victims protected and cared for, and guilty people punished. That’s it. There is nothing more to it.

If you want to know what is the vision of equal world that feminists are fighting for, don’t listen to those who scream the loudest, verbally abusing others, their beliefs and opinions. Look and listen to those, who fiercely, but with respect lecture about their views and are open to dialogue. Whose views might be opposing to yours, but who want to see a better world for everybody.

Listen to Jackson Katz, laugh at Ellen show, look at the campaigns of UN Women, Bollocks to Poverty, UNFPA or Girls not Brides. Just think about it for a second, how our world is constructed and what some of us really try to change about it.

And if you still don’t agree with all of that, then that’s your right. 

Written by Vespertilio

Global Sisterhood

I am pretty sure, that anyone who have ever had a debate about feminism also had a conversation or two (or three…) about situation of women in developing countries. This type of conversations can play out in few different ways.

1. You might hear argument: “Why are you complaining, women in other countries have it way harder than you.”
2. If you take a stand and condemn the fact that “others have it way harder than me” you might hear: “Feminists are imposing their western values on third world countries, destroying their culture.” You might also earn a badge of imperialist, racist, immoral destroyer of traditions around the globe.
3. However, if you do not take the stand you might also be called “privileged, ignorant coward”.

The choice of where you want to stand is yours and if you are white, your choice is even harder. My intention is to help people understand why all of the above arguments are wrong and no matter what people say, feminist should support their sisters abroad, in places where it is really hard to live as a woman.

Being a woman in Europe or America is not easy, we don’t have it perfect here yet, but we did come a long way. Compared to our grandmothers we live great lives. We have opportunities that women never had before: we have access to education; we can read or write whatever we want; we can own property; we can open bank accounts or leave the house without our husband’s permission. In fact, we don’t have to have husbands in the first place. We have a choice. That thing we take for granted, choice is a dream of women in many countries. Freedom in my country and lack of freedom in different countries can and does exist in the same time, both situations don’t exclude one another. Lack of freedom in Saudi Arabia is not a reason for me to sit quiet and be content; it is a reason to act, or at least to be enraged.

I would like to argue that we have moral responsibility to take clear stand on what’s happening in other places. Oppression of women in developing countries is not a fictive problem of hysterical ladies in The West.  Secondly, we do not destroy cultures and traditions with our feminist ideas. If someone feels that feminism poses a threat to their culture it means the culture is misogynistic and its oppressive parts have to go! We shouldn’t be scared of criticizing cultures others than ours. If we cannot accept oppression of women at home, why can we tolerate it abroad? Isn’t it hypocritical? White men are not the only one who can oppress women. If we don’t realize it, our sisters in many places will be left alone in their struggle and it’s a pity, because we, women in The West, have enough power to support them.

To prove that discrimination of females in developing countries is not an idea of white, western feminist I would like to give few examples of women from around the planet speaking out about injustice they face.

Great example comes from Iran. Just recently Iranian women have rocked facebook upside down by posting pictures without hijab in public places. It is a crime in Iran to uncover your hair and women are often punished for it. The page “My stealthyfreedom” has given a voice to voiceless women of the country, who are forced to sweat in hijab on every sunny day in Iran, whether they like it or no. Obviously there are women in Iran who chose to wear hijab, but it doesn’t mean the government should push all women to veil themselves, some might simply choose to remain “immoral” and it is not government’s job to send them to Allah.

Recently we heard about four Saudi princesses who claim to be under house arrest since 13 years. They are imprisoned by their father, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. They are denied basic human rights, yet, we remain quiet. It is enough for King Abdullah to ask for respect of his religion and tradition and we all quit fighting for freedom of women in Saudi Arabia or other Muslim countries. How much longer will we sacrifice women in developing countries for sake of political correctness?

It gets even worse when abuses of women in different cultures are knocking on our door and because of tolerance we disarm our social workers, police officers and other officials who should protect potential victims of abuse. If we are not going to openly talk about flaws in traditions that cause men to abuse women we are not going to help anyone.

This article is one of the examples of how mainstream media beats around the bush and avoid the truth about one of the worst form of child and women abuse, FGM. In the article you will find no proper explanation of why girls are subjected to such cruelty. Honor, virginity, religion – all these terms are pushed somewhere in the shadows. Readers are informed about existence of this problem in UK, but receive no direct information of why people do it and not even who are the people who do it. FGM occurs in Muslim countries, but author preferred to write: “FGM is most common among some African, Asian and Middle Eastern communities.” We are so terrified of offending people, that we willingly ignore suffering of women, our sisters.

People who support struggles of women in third world countries are often called “imperialist” who spread immoral western ideas. However, it is worth noting, that individuals who make such comments are usually those who benefit from living in conservative, patriarchal societies, or are religiously influenced to believe that women are inferior to men and need male guidance to distinguish between right and wrong.

Women deserve equal rights, choices, and opportunities, irrespective of where they live. Let’s stop ignoring each other and let’s support our common fight for world where all people are free to be who they truly are. To hit the last nail I would like to quote Taslima Nasreen, poetess from Bangladesh.

Written by Inanna

Orange is the New Black

Double Standards and Inequality in Criminal Justice System

Frequently feminists and other social activist mention that they are fighting for “equality”, but unless you listen to them carefully, no one can really gather what do all of they mean by it. Even though all of us understand the term, when you start to think about it, it’s not self-explanatory, when a feminist mentions “equality”.

What kind of measurement do we use? Do we want to work in quarries (it’s one of the first arguments I always hear when I mention that I am feminist and I fight for equality)? Do we want to be treated like one of the guys? Do we want to have masculine jobs?

The answer is yes and no.

It’s not about what I want or what any other feminist wants, for that matter. It’s all about a choice. And to be fully capable to make that choice.

However, today’s post is not about choice for equality. Is about double standards and inequality.

Double standards, you ask? Where, when? What’s a big deal? Well, in some cases it’s serious. In others it’s just annoying.

I have a background in criminology and so I will give examples from this area of study. As I know more reliable sources for UK criminal statistics, it will be easier for me to base my argument on UK case.

Generally, not many women commit crime. Most of them are non-violent. Majority of crimes are property crimes, with shoplifting being the most popular. So nothing dangerous here. Many reasons for committing a crime is self-medication or drug use. Even the violent crimes are not as violent and as serious as those committed by men.

Furthermore, 80% of women’s criminal carrier stops within a year from an onset (compared to 50% of men). Apparently we are not a really good criminal material. But the female prison population has been rising over the past couple of years. And you know why? Women are being punished for acting against their assigned gender roles, i.e. they are not doing what women are supposed to be doing.

Bullshit, you say. They are being sent to prison, because they committed a crime. They are becoming more violent, they binge drink, they join gangs, they use drugs and are behaving more and more disorderly.

The truth is that violence is more accepted when it’s committed by men. We are socialised with the notion that men have to be violent in order to express their masculinity. Strength and power (sounds almost like signal from Gladiator…) is valued above anything else. Women are destined to be carers, with well-developed maternal instincts and their main focus should be on domestic sphere. When they are failing as mothers, as carers, their feminine responsibilities, the societal defensive response kicks in and calls for a punishment. Hence the more severe sentences.

Probably I won’t convince you without a solid proof, so let me quote you some statistics. Within 11 years (1997-2008) the seriousness of female offences rose only by marginal percentage or during some years remained static (the percentage of women convicted of indictable offences rose from 10% to 14% between 1996-2010), but the number of females in custody rose by as much as 68%. You know how much male prison population rose? 35%. Not to mention the fact that ¼ of women in prison had no previous convictions, while only 12% of men could say the same (data from 2012).

That’s not all. Also the number of women, who entered prison on remand awaiting trial rose by 22% (2004-2008). All of those women spent on average four to six weeks in prison, but only 40% of them received a custodial sentence after trial. And on average 1 in 5 of those women get acquitted. So let’s sum up those facts: 20% of women got punished when they were innocent, others were locked up for committing minor offences, but 4/5 of them, in addition to those weeks spend in prison, received additional punishment (either custodial or community service order).

Women, who got involved with criminal justice systems are doomed by their life. Like Emily Bronte doomed, like Shakespeare doomed, like red-shirted ensign in “Star Trek” doomed. 

• Over half the women in prison say they have suffered domestic violence and one in three has experienced sexual abuse.
• 78% exhibited some level of psychological disturbance during the assessment at the admission to prison (the number for general female population is 15%).
• 37% of female prisoners attempted to commit suicide sometime during their life. And despite representing only 5% of total prison population, women accounted for almost 50% of  all self-harm incidents in prison.
• 1/5 of women in prison who are mothers, are single parents (comparing to 9% of single mothers in total population).

I could go on forever about this. So I will stop now.

If the offending didn’t change and not so many more women committed crime than what changed? Well, attitude towards women committing crimes did. Nothing more.

Now UK and many other countries decided to reduce the female imprisonment, so there is some hope for improvement. But can you imagine what is happening in countries where women have inherently less rights than men? Without a lack of access to legal assistance? What kind of rights violations, exploitations, mistreatment do they suffer?

I could go on for ages about sexist attitudes, explain the underlying benevolent or hostile sexist mechanisms, but I don’t want to bore you to death with academic and/or feminist rambling. And it might not be relevant at all. But now it’s your turn: tell me, why are numbers in women in prison rising when the severity and frequency of their crimes isn’t? And knowing their backgrounds, why hasn’t been/aren’t they helped instead of being punished? It begs the question, what they are really being punished for?

They are being more severely punished first and foremost for not following the assigned female gender roles. As they are more frequently failing their femininity but acting in contradiction to those gender roles, they need to be contained and proven that they are a failure. There is nothing more to it.

Girl Green

Do you believe me now?

References:

Prison Reform Trust - Women in Prison

Carol Hedderman (2011) 'Policy Developments in England and Wales' in R. Sheehan, G. McIvor and C. Trotter, Working with Women Offenders in the Community, Willan Publishing: Oxon.

Written by Vespertilio

What You Should Understand About Uttar Pradesh Gang Rape

The story of how fields kill girls in India.

            Just few days ago story of two young dalit girls being gang raped and killed in Badaun sent shock waves around the globe. Rape in India… again. Last time it was loud in the media about rape on Indian soil in December 2012. Student in Delhi was raped, people went to the streets, candles were lit, protesters marched, banners were held up in the air, voices were screaming. This time however, it happened far away from Delhi, in some village we have never heard of. Journalists reported that some people were angry, political opposition in UP played their drama, procession of top politicians came and went, money has been proposed to soothe soaring hearts of parents. Nobody however, seemed to be surprised, maybe except for Ms. Mayawati.

            In reaction to the crime both local and international media writes mostly about toilets and fields. Seems like they identified number one enemy of Indian women and they won’t stop writing about it. I acknowledge that lack of toilets is a big problem across India, but it is not toilets and fields that raped 4 girls in Uttar Pradesh in only 48 hours. Yes, you heard me. There have been two more rapes brought to media’s attention, coming from the same state. Cannot imagine how many more went unnoticed.

            In all articles that I’ve read so far, I was informed how scary it is to defecate at night in the fields. How ladies have to wait till sunset in order to defecate. In the news all we hear is criticism of government inaction to provide latrines in rural areas and praise to Modi for promising to change this situation. I really admire the insight of journalists into the sanitary problems in India, but I can’t stop thinking that we are letting something bigger off the hook.

            First of all, I have to comment on political drama and complete ignorance. First reaction of current Chief Minister of UP shows us how annoying the problem is to those in power. When asked about his opinion on violence against women in his state, Akhilesh Yadav responded with simple logic – if you weren’t raped, you’re safe and well, there is nothing to whine about. He is not to be blamed, like any good Indian man, he is just continuing the family traditions. For those of you who don’t remember, his father (Mulayam Singh Yadav), current Lok Sabha member and ex – Chief Minister of UP is on record to accuse girls of provoking rape and excuse rapists “because boys will be boys, they are bound to make mistakes”. Wonder if he’s son ever made such mistake.

            Drama wouldn’t be complete without opposition leader, Mayawati. She enjoyed the seat of UP Chief Minister 4 times, she is a dalit women herself and demands Yadav's resignation, calling her own state a “jungle raj”. Why nobody is questioning her contribution to condition of low cast women in UP? I have been to Lucknow, I have seen rural UP, and conclusion is simple. Ms. Mayawati, during her cadency, was busy building monuments of her power in the state capital, forgetting latrines for poor girls who were raped and hanged on the tree on 28^th of May. The visit to their family and sympathetic handshakes won’t help much. Media's focus on political battles is only taking away spotlight from the problems that need to be addressed.

            In all articles that have been published so far I found no mentioning of how women’s life in UP really looks like (except for latrine issue). 2011 census revealed, that average sex ratio in UP is 908. It means that for every 1000 man in the state there is only 908 women. In Badaun region, where infamous rape has taken place, ratio is 859 - even lower than state average. It places Uttar Pradesh in the club of states with worst sex ratio in India, along with Haryana and Punjab. Sex ratio is one of the indicators of discrimination against women present in the society. The whole India is on a mission to prevent female infanticide, and UP must be one of the hardest battle grounds.

Literacy rate might scare you even more. In UP 79% males were found literate in 2011 census and only 59% females. That roughly accounts for 56 million uneducated females in Uttar Pradesh only. My whole country has 38 million inhabitants in total - mind blown!

            I hope that these stats have put things in perspective for you, but that is not the most important piece. The reason I wrote this is because we should stop focusing only on the problem of public defecation and finally start talking about the rapists. While reading about pooping in the fields at night, have you asked yourselves, who the heck gets horny by a girl pooping in the bush?! Have you, even for a second, considered why are these girls scared of being raped, instead of normal things, like spiders and snakes out there?

I would like to ask all the journalists working for Indian and foreign stations to step up their game and start writing about real problems of discrimination against women in India and violence that they face, instead of going on for pages about latrines or following Mayawati's narrative and politicizing the whole issue. If you want to make it political, question Mayawati first.   

Written by Inanna 

More information about Badaun rape:

BBC - 'Our Ambitious Girl'

Reuters - Home Minister Seeks Report on Grisly Rape, Hanging of Teens in Uttar Pradesh

Zee News - Uttar Pradesh Rape Cases Point To Girls' Vulnerability in Absence of Basic Amenities

The Times of India - Asked About UP Rapes, CM Akhilesh Yadav Says, 'But You're Safe'

The "F" Word

           Isn’t it strange that we didn’t call our blog “Feminism is new Sexy” or something similar? After all, our blog is going to be centered on feminism and experience of being a feminist. One would think it’s only fair to put the “f” word in the name of our blog.

            Replacing “feminism” with “equal” was a conscious choice. Somehow, it seems to us that equality is less alarming to many people, even though it is the very essence of what feminism is all about. Equality is the main thing feminists fight for. We wish to prove it here, hoping that in the process our readers will find a reason and courage to call themselves feminists too. Just so you know, we plan to quietly sneak in feminist ideas into the subconscious mind. Just when our readers get comfortable with the idea, that we are all equal, perhaps we can infect them with a feminist bug and spread the word.

            However, this simple evasion of the “f” word made us think of why this word is so alarming to many. How is it possible, that the word expressing a simple believe, that men and women are by definition equal, awakens hostility and many other radical emotions.

            I do not want to assume that all people who disagree with me are uneducated (although it’s exactly what Taslima Nasreen said in one of her interviews). I believe that each one of us, deep in our hearts feels the same way about injustice and strives for freedom. Gender studies prove it over and over again, that we become what society wants us to become (gender wise), even if it means sacrificing our uniqueness, unless we educate ourselves, read, listen to people with opposite, new, provoking ideas.

            No matter if we wear a hijab to be thought of as “modest”, “proper” women or wear sexy clothes to appear attractive. At the end of the day, we all strive for the same thing – acceptance and, even more important, approval.

            Since the beginning of “female cause” the best our opposition could do is to ridicule us or deem as inappropriate. Sadly, in minds of many the message that being a feminist is something absurd is still carried. Even today we meet young, educated, successful women being appalled be word “feminist”. They are absolutely ignorant of the fact that the right to higher education and career is given to them as fruit of feminist struggle.  The “f” word sounds like an insult to their femininity, beauty and intellect.

            We are proud to call ourselves a feminists, for all that it entails. It is not always easy to be so far away from what society believe to be normal, desirable, pleasing. Let us tell you something, feminism allowed us to be whoever we want to be, allowed us to be free on the journey to discover who we want to become, without having to please everyone around us.

            No matter how you, dear reader, want to call it, we wish you the same freedom. The only purpose of this blog is to help everyone on their mission to find the key to their freedom. All we need is an open mind to try to comprehend new ideas. We dream of a day when feminism will be the thing of a past, because it will be obvious that men and women are equal. We hope that one day there won’t be a need to discuss this any further. But that day is not here yet and that’s why we decided to start this blog. We hope to inform those who until now didn’t see injustice in our world and applaud others, who like us, fight for equality in their daily life. 

Yours,

Equal is a new Sexy Team

Written by Inanna