On women only train carriages

I often utilise women only spaces (officially ones or unofficial ones) to avoid harassment in public & at social events (toilets, gyms, kitchens at parties, clothes shops) and, you know what? It works. The issue of public transport is the issue of choice. Now, it would be real simple if you and your buddies could make the honourable choice to stop flexing your metaphorical members in a cat call-off on a Friday night, but my experience has concluded that you can’t. So the idea of women only coaches on trains and tubes (proposed for consultation with women by Jeremy Corbyn) is one simple (by no means 100% solve-all option to give women a choice to be in a carriage with no men in it. Now, whilst there may be problems with this idea (that would be useful  for women to discuss together) men have taken to twitter to air their disgust at this policy idea. 

I have been harassed on public transport since the age of 14. Telling me that this ‘could easily happen to men’ even though it doesn’t is telling me that I, at age 14 on the train from Southport to Appley Bridge deserved to be cornered and & have middle aged men interrogate me about body.

Because the truth of the matter is in the last eleven years I have grown to expect to be sexually harassed and assaulted on public transport with very little support from other passengers. And when that support comes it is usually from other women.

Every time I have been harassed on public transport it has been (to my knowledge) by a man 99.9% of these instances the man has been white 99.9% of instance he has been unchallenged.

-It was a man who repeatedly tried to touch me on an empty platform in Liverpool when I was 21.

-It was a man who harassed me on a weekly basis on the 395 bus from Ormskirk to Skelmersdale, who got annoyed when I refused to speak to him and followed me part of the way home when I was 19.

-It was a man who rubbed his genitals on my hip on the London Underground when I was 18.

-It was a man who intercepted another man who was drunkenly propositioning me at Ormskirk bus station only to then sexually harass me for the entire journey home when I was 22. Imagine that- getting sexually harassed whilst you’re being sexually harassed.

-It was a group of boys (age 12-16) who spat at me, threw food and drinks at me & chanted names at me every morning on the school bus in Shevington when I was 14.

-It was a man who touched my body without my consent on the 143 bus in Manchester when I was 23. And who got the funny looks when I shouted over to my friend  ‘Ew this man is trying to grope me’? Oh yeah, me.

-It was a man who rubbed his thigh against my leg and read over my shoulder on the bus last night.

-It was a group of four men who made comments about my fat body this morning at the coach station.

I am 25.

I have been spat at, cornered, followed, groped, shouted at, whispered to, blocked from moving, stared at, spoken about, had pictures taken of me, been called names, been coerced into conversation, been sexually shamed & had my belongings confiscated.

I have tried ignoring it, challenging, discussing it, reporting it, shouting back, glaring, asking other passengers for help & physical confrontation.

Any whilst it might hurt a few feelings for men who have decided that this is ‘segregation’ (which is not only pretty flagrant use of a racially charged word but just horrifically incorrect) or that ‘all carriages should be harassment free’ (yeah, they should, but erm, they aren’t & I don’t see you looking up from your copy of the Telegraph to challenge other men on their behaviour) I can’t help but feel cheated.

Yet again men’s views are privileged above women’s safety and autonomy. That same privilege that comes into play when a man decides his desire to touch a woman comes before her permission. Your feelings are hurt?  Your FEELINGS are hurt. Fine. That doesn’t make your beliefs correct. This isn’t Dawson’s Creek. This is the real world. And I have a life time of research called ‘Being a Woman on Public Transport’ to support my ideas.

So I’m sorry if the idea that women want to be safe from the daily barrage of crap you throw at us is hurtful. It seems so many of you are moved to tweet, maybe whilst on public transport, maybe whilst ignoring the awkwardness of a woman being harassed three seats down.

I am tired of pretending to be on the phone, pretending to know other women on public transport to defuse harassment situations and most of all I am tired of pretending to care about your feelings. Close your legs,  get your hand off my thigh, log off twitter and shut up.

On Jump Stories of Life, Love and Fear by Paula Kelly-Ince, justice & quiche.

In university, where Paula & I met (studying creative writing), each semester we had an assignment entitled 'Reading as a Writer'. And sometimes, when I wasn't too busy protesting or talking about representation, I did the assignment. We analysed the work of playwrights, poets, screen writers, novelists and memoirists. We discussed their form their structure, what themes we would apply to our own work and how, if the work was effective and (audible gasp) what we would improve. 

Now, it's one thing telling your classmates their time travelling-rapping-werewolf-romance novel would be a more consistent read if the dialogue was tighter, but comrades, it is an entirely different bag of fish to critique a "real" writer.  A "real" writer with that elusive published masterpiece (following film adaptation, cult classic t shirt references). Yes, obviously I chose George Orwell.

Believe me. I am picky. I may not be Judy Blume myself but I can sniff out holes in stories at the speed a quiche disappears at a family buffet (dead quick). I guess the reason I'm saying this is that when I read Jump I felt that I was reading as a writer, reading the work of an established and effective writer. Paula writes beautiful and delicate stories of people (mainly women, woop woop feminism) at their extremes. These circumstances that life pushes up to live through, documented in such a grounded style. 

And that's the point. Paula's work is effective because it's written about women I could know. Working class situations we recognise, grief, crushes and money problems, community. Struggle, really. How often is it that we see our own experiences played out on the page interspersed with magic realism and hilarious dialogue? Never. 

On reading Mr Phillips I  was transported to my own teenage years. And with Paula's gentle, yet uncompromising humour I began to recognise the hilarity of youth. The story plays out before you and after all you can do is think God, do you remember -. Even now I spend time too wrapped up in social justice causes (arguing with Tories on the internet) to consider the relationship between activism and fiction. But I believe healing is part of justice and Paula's work was, for me, healing. 

Jump is a story that rings with heartbreak and shines light on an area so often wrought with shame and secrecy.  Tara is a story that twinkles with promise and the unsaid. The fact that these three stories can sit side by side in unison is a testament to Paula’s skill, precision and bravery. It is brave to speak out, to construct these voices that whisper truths to us, in a world that seeks to scare us into silence. 

Seeing the stories of working class people, especially women written down, it's transformative. Sometimes, just existing in a world where you are abhorred and tested is radical in itself. Depicting the stories we are too scared or embarrassed to tell is one step further. If doing so with elegance & care is not justice I don't know what is. 

• To buy Jump (for less than £1!) click here Content note for still birth and child death in Jump, slut shaming in Mr Phillips. 
• For weekly updates on Paula's hilarious life and musings on feminism and parening you can follow Paula's blog.
• To keep up to date with Paula's writing you can like her on facebook or follow her on twitter @paulakellyince.

 

Being a care leaver, being a survivor.

What does it mean to be a care leaver? 

In policy terms it means a relevant child or former relevant child who has been under the care of their local authority as a young person. For the purposes of our everyday lives I will discuss what being a care leaver means on a practical, emotional level and what it means within society. These discussions may not be confined or limited to purely legal definitions depicted in government policy.

The experience(s) of young people in care is one of the most important  measurements of society’s values.We need to talk about our experiences in care, because they shape who we are after care. We are taught how and where we fit into society whilst in care. But we also learn about how society functions in relation to us because being in care means you are very aware of how the state treats some of its most vulnerable citizens. The entire country’s ideas and values are built around the government and politics of the time (whether people agree or disagree with them is less important than the fact they exist.) And because so much of our interactions with the local government are taken up by initiatives and new schemes (does anyone remember free laptops?), we understand which parts of our lives society sees as important and which parts it chooses to forget or ignore.

 Abuse, representation and reality

For example of young people in care being yardsticks of values I will discuss a time paedophilia and child abuse were less discussed, engaged with and investigated. An instance of this is the widely discussed case of Jimmy Savile, whose celebrity status and power gained him entry to the homes and lives of vulnerable young people in care.  In the 2012 documentary produced by the BBC entitled ‘Jimmy Savile What the BBC knew’ the  investigators spoke with people who were in care and abused by (or witnessed abuse by) Savile.  Young women were often taken out in Savile’s car and didn’t realise that his actions were abuse, some even believed them to be romantic. In a lot of cases it seems safe to say that the lack education on relationships that these young women received contributed to them believing the interactions they had were healthy, and the abuse they endured was a ‘trade off’ for escape from their homes and for getting some attention that made them feel important. This, along with the workers in the homes being in awe of Savile, and the Police dismissing the young people's reports meant that many of these young people, now middle aged and older have never spoken about their experiences.

So celebrity culture, the police and the care system created a free pass for Savile to abuse young women. 

Obviously some things have changed now. There is policy in place by for both the police and local authorities that should prevent this situation from happening. It is worth noting that this policy is often overlooked, or ignored by the police in situations relating to rape. Sometimes those who work with care leavers and young people in care don't get given the practical skills to put the policy into practice. This isn't the fault of those people, but rather a result of policy being written with lots of jargon and little understanding of how we live our lives.  Thus we see that the power dynamics of young people in care (with little or no power and understanding of the love and care they're entitled to) and adults with power over young people means that abuse occurs often. And just as often is goes unrecognised. 

Most recently there was the representation of (again sexual) abuse in the  Channel 4 drama The Unloved, this time they showed a young women being abused by a member of staff. The media often uses young people in care as a story, they sensationalise our experiences and turn us into statistics to scare their readers, but the media is often silent on other forms of abuse and the rest of the difficulties that face young people in care and care leavers.

Why abuse. why now?

I’ve had many interactions with other care leavers, at special events, and just personal chats and what seems most common is the widespread experience of abuse, before, during and after they have been taken into and left care. Obviously sexual abuse is important, but I’d like to define a few other kinds and open discussion about one. Physical abuse is  violence and physical harm, neglect is failing to meet a persons care needs, emotional abuse is bullying a person verbally, psychological abuse is more commonly understood as ‘mind games’. Abusers can be people in authority or our peers, it can happen at any point and all abuse is wrong.

 Most of the people in care I have spoken to and all of the care leavers I have gotten to know (and myself) have experienced at least one of these forms of abuse, usually more. I’ve never attended an event for care leavers that didn't turn into those present talking about their horrible experiences. Drunken foster parents, possessions stolen, or kept, physical harm, blame, lies told to social workers. I think one of the most important things I can say is- I believe them all. Care leavers and young people in care are so often not believed, so often people tell us that we ‘must’ have done something to provoke abuse towards us, but abuse is always the choice of the person committing it. We are not responsible for their actions. Because of the poor resources and structures that aren't effective we often have to work very hard to keep ourselves safe. That may be one of the reasons why so often care leavers live with a fight or flight response. We have strange habits, we may appear unusually protective of our possessions or unusually relaxed about them.We may get very upset when certain topics are mentioned, or seem very detached when we talk about topics that other people think are sensitive. We might feel scared that our homes and our things are going to be taken from us, this isn't because we're unnecessarily paranoid, but because we have been taught that this is what we deserve and should expect.

 Our experiences of abuse are real, they are difficult to process and we carry them with us as care leavers absolutely every single day. This is not to say we are weak, or we can’t let go of the past, or we can’t form healthy relationships, but that we have a very different experience to our peers who have not been in care. Of course other people can encounter all the forms of abuse I have listed above, so what’s the difference? 

 What's new?

Being 'looked after' by the state/government means we are automatically at the mercy of whoever is in power. And the people in power may change and have different ideas about how to run the country, and how much funding the local authority(/ies) should have. In fact, from what I have seen, funding problems are more consistent than any scheme or project. Funding is reallocated or the terms of receiving it are changed, it's suspended, lessened or replaced with alternatives but this usually means the same thing- less money for those who need it. This is the same for all who need the help of the government, from people's benefits to hospitals to libraries. Very often care leavers are seen as an unnecessary expense.

I don’t want care leavers to feel oppressed or like they have to put up with endless suffering, but I feel it’s really important that we name the harm and sadness caused to our lives by the ever disappearing funding and the bureaucracy we encounter in just trying to live our lives. I think we should call it 'administrative neglect'. Our needs as care leavers are being ignored by the administration the people high up who run the government.

 This is not about the people who have cared for us, or social workers, it’s not a personal problem, it’s a problem with the system. It's a problem with the people who decide that our local communities can cope with millions of pounds less. The problem becomes real when the local government decide us, care leavers, are the best place to start cutting that money from.  This is offensive and unfair because the person deciding to cut funding has never lived in a kids home, has never run away from foster parents, doesn’t understand that university funding is sometimes the only reason some of us consider university. They are not qualified to make decisions about our lives, (but, just like the examples from before) because they hold power over us they are able to make choices about our lives that negatively effect us.

Why does it matter?

There’s a very important reason for us to recognise the failures and abuses that have happened; they impact our quality of life and our mental health, our aspirations, our physical health, our living conditions, our opportunities and self-esteem. Without understanding how these problems have changed our lives we can't begin to think about recovery. Much of the time care leavers attempt to go on with their lives like other people do, we get jobs, have families, or form relationships, but there’s always something that seems different. Often these walls of a life that we’ve built for ourselves fall down, and we feel unable to perform the average tasks to keep our lives flowing normally. It can be as simple as being scared to open letter, or as complicated as being scared to interact with the state via the NHS and not seeking adequate medical help. When this happens, we blame ourselves. Self-blame can tear lives apart, can make us believe that we didn’t try hard enough, or that our interactions with drugs, or with the judicial system are just incidents we’ve brought on ourselves. The reason we need to recognise administrative neglect is that these cuts often mean that there's not enough resources to teach us how keep our lives going, and how to mend them when they break. If that is the case, then the system of one person holding power over another is harming people. If, like I said earlier, young people in care and care leavers are the yardstick by which we can measure the values of society then what does that say about those values? It often seems like the media who were so interested in reporting about how many of us are 'victims' of sexual abuse don't want to report when powerful people in our country make cuts that make our lives worse.

So where does this leave us? 

Well often care leavers will find solace in another community, it might be friends we’ve met through college or university, it might be a community based around drugs, or other young parents, or a political community. I’m not here to say that any of those are wrong, we do what we need to do to build ourselves a family, to make decisions for ourselves, to get support.

One of my communities is feminism, (women’s rights) which is tied up a lot in children’s rights too. In  feminist discussions people who have experienced abuse aren’t called ‘victims’, they’re called survivors. If there’s one thing I would encourage all care leavers to do it is this- the next time you think about how you have been treated, or any abuse received and begin to feel weak remind yourself that being stood where you are now means that you survived it. You have overcome it. And though there might be nights when you feel anxious or scared, though you’re not always managing to juggle adult life just you, getting out of bed this morning (or staying in bed for a rest) means that you are surviving.

I don’t believe that there will be big changes to the government structure that will allow young people and care leavers to exist free from administrative neglect. But I do believe that the idea of a society where people in care are treasured and not condemned to suffering through administrative neglect is an idea worth hanging on to. After all, we’re all allowed to hope, right? Until the point when this is a reality I’ll stand tall with all of the other people who have suffered abuse in care and as care leavers and say- I’m not a care leaver, I’m a care survivor. Because you can take the kid out of care, you can't take the care system out of the kid, and if I'm going to carry so many experiences with me, I want to do it as someone who is still standing, I want to do it as a survivor.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01nspvr

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-unloved/episode-guide

SPAnswers- gender(queer), fatphobia, abstinence & polyamory.

Q.How do I explain to feminists that I respect that it's oppressive to deny that fatphobia/thin privilege is a thing?

A.The problem here is that feminists come in all different shapes and sizes, and by that I don’t mean they are varying in weight (although they are), but rather that they hold very different values.

The one thing I think most self-defined feminists have in common is their belief in equality and that all people should be treated equally. In detail that means that regardless of gender, sexual orientation, religion and ethnicity all people should be treated equally economically, socially and legally. And if it extends to all that, then it should extend to weight & size.

With that in mind a feminist should, in theory, want someone who is ‘fat’ to be equal to someone who is ‘thin’. In our society that unfortunately isn’t true. If I, as a self-defined fat person, could walk into a high street shop and know they had my size, or if I could not worry about fitting into the rides at Alton Towers, or if I could go to the doctors for a flu jab and not come out with a leaflet about weight loss then yeah, sure, I’d agree that people are equal regardless of weight. Anyone who can do all that has thin privilege: the luxury of going a day without thinking about their weight and size.

Fatphobia is the reason I can’t do that stuff – it is the constantly reinforced idea that fat people are lazy, unhealthy slobs and as such clothes manufacturers don’t need to produce clothes in their size and doctors don’t need to understand underlying issues because after all, they’ve brought it on themselves haven’t they? It’s the treatment of overweight people as too stupid to understand ‘move more, eat less’ (even though it’s not always that simple). It’s the treatment of overweight people as sub-human.

No one likes to admit they have privilege, or that privilege even exists. It makes most of us feel a bit dirty. So I would reassure whomever you’re trying to talk to about this issue that it’s okay to feel like that, and that we all have some privilege. I would then try to open a dialogue about why they deny fatphobia and thin privilege, or why they think it’s not oppressive to do that. Perhaps ask them what they think the reason they don’t stock a size 18 in every shop is. Because there’s not enough shelf space to have all those sizes? Because there’s not enough demand for size 18s? Because size 18 people *want* their own shop where they can pay twice the price for specialist clothes? If they can see there is no reason for this except to make certain people feel unequal then the next step is to accept the inequality exists and accept that denying it, as denying any inequality, is oppressive.

Q. I've never felt especially attached to my gender identity (outside of the ascriptive shit that I get from most of society); I'm wondering what does it feel like to be gender queer (or how did you know you were GQ)?

A. I’d like to preface this by saying there is no one, common genderqueer experience, nor is there a “right” way to be genderqueer. That being said, this is my experience of it:

I'm AFAB (assigned female at birth) and still identify fairly closely with that; I use female pronouns, I identify as a woman - though a genderqueer one - and my presentation is decidedly femme (gender identity and gender presentation are different things, of course, but for me they are linked).

I started exploring my gender identity when I was around 17, after I discovered feminism and queer theory and began to question the gender binary. I went through a range of identities, trying to find where I fit – bigender, agender, genderfluid… but none of them felt right. I eventually found that what I feel most comfortable with is the broadness and freedom that I feel ‘genderqueer’ gives me. For me, being genderqueer is part of my radical and political queerness, and it affords me absolute freedom in my self-expression and identity.

Q. pip- how can you do abstinence and polyamoury, surely those are two conflicting lifestyles

A. Although I practised abstinence at a time in my life i didn't self define as polyamorous, I don't feel like they're conflicting. Abstinence was a decision (seperate from my experience of asexuality) to take some time away from erotic behaviour so that I could rebuild and reaccess my relationship to my sex. This allowed me to develop a healthier relationship with sex.
Polyamory as a relationship orientation doesn't mean sex with many people (although it doesn't rule that out) it means multiple relationships (relationships can be formed on sex, kink, romantic attraction or a mixture).
My ability to be a 'good' sexual partner (e.g. understanding, patient, relaxed, unexpectant) comes from my ability to maintain a healthy personal relationship with sex which I personally used abstinence as a tool to allow myself room to develop.
I'm certain that should I decide to become abstinent for a period of time (to allow myself space to learn to be understanding, patient, relaxed and unexpectant with myself) now, anyone I'm sexually involved in would support my decision to do so.

Got a question about this post or about gender, sexuality or relationships? Ask it anonymously at- http://ask.fm/SPAnswersquestions and have it reviewed and answered by a team of fabulous people.

5 problems with sex positivity

Although I am a sex positive activist, I don't believe subscribing to any tradition, political perspective or community, uncritically, is a good idea. The problems outlined below are things I've encountered in spaces that aren't explicitly feminist. But they are important, and they do matter.

1. Men dominating conversations on women's sexuality and bodies
I've found that in a spaces that aren't feminist the oppressive power dynamics found in any other place are reitterated and validated in discussions. The discussion is usually male centered, binarist, cissexist, heteronormative, etc. Some men use sex positivity and the discourse of 'preference' as a cloak to excuse their patriarchal generalisations. E.g. 'body hair (on women) is revolting'. Sex positivity should be about challenging patriarchal notions and normative, oppressive ideas about sexuality, and it saddens me that some men are accessing sex positive spaces to do the opposite.

Benjamin Rush, Carl Von Linné, Julien Offray de la Mettrie, Sylvester Graham, Richard Von Kraft-Ebing, John H Kellog, Sigmund Freud, Alfred Kinsey, Claudius Galerius, Samuel Tissoflt- the discourse on human sexuality has been dictated by white men, some making progressive arguments, some scientific and some oppressive, but all men. Most people in the world are not white men. And our sex positive spaces should endevour to not silence those who aren't, otherwise it's just the same old shit, under a different name.

2. Shallow analysis of the roots of sex negativity
Sex is political, just like anything else. Sexual behaviour has been policed, villianised, or encouraged thoughout history depending on the political climate. There's definitely positives in addressing the symptom (the experience of sexual shame and repression) but the discussuon of the cause is important for true progression. Sex positivity in relation to capitalism, sex positivity in relation to disability, to patriarchy, to the nuclear family? These  dialogues are missing. Sex positivity cannot simply be a tool for self validation alone, but for ensuring we can break the the cycle of sexual repression.

3. Pressumptions
I believe a sex positive space should be one in which people aren't subjected to others making tired presumptions about gender, sexuality, or experience of sexual desire. When writing about sex positivity leads to relative strangers (all men) contacting me pressuming that I want to have sex with them, this reinforces the idea that a woman discussing the politics of sex is a 'cert'. No, I don't want a photograph of your sex organs. Thank you. No, talking about sex doesn't automatically mean I experience a high sex drive, or that I want to answer questions about my sexual behaviour. Thank you. No, talking about sex doesn't mean that I'm heterosexual. This dialogue is not another tool to service male pleasure, it's a tool to challenge the assumptions, not reinforce them.

4. Slighlty missing the point
Sex positivity is not about uncritically claiming that all sex is great.
a)Sex is not always positive
b)and it's not essential for everyone.
Many people have a strained relationship with sex, and their own body, they may have sexual triggers or have survived sexual abuse or rape. The sex positive movement cannot make progression if we simply plaster over the fact that sex can be a negative experience and a tool of oppression. We are failing at communicating the true purpose of sex positivity if we exclude people with sexual triggers. It's not about saying 'woohoo, sex is always fabulous' it's about recognising that human sexuality is diverse, complicated and often an emotive topic. It's about saying that there is no 'wrong' way for a person to express their sexuality, or asexuality. We shouldn't be silencing survivors of sexual abuse, we should be shaming institutions that normalise it, we should be discussing consent.

People may choose not to engage in erotic behaviour and still lead rich, fulfilling lives. Sex positivity should not be about interveining to educate people who choose not to have sex, to tell them what they're missing. Sex positivity should not be about forcing people to discuss their own sexual behaviour if they don't want to, or pressuming that those who don't are victims of sexual shame.

5. Body negativity
I cannot count the number of times I've seen or partaken in discussions that transcend into body negativity. Why? Because although it's essential that sex positivity and body positivity are linked, someone forgot to put that on the group email, or the general memo. Fatshaming, thinshaming, disability shaming, normative beauty standards, body policing= not sex positive. Body positivity absolutely has to be a part of this movement because if not, then we're saying 'you only deserve sex positivity if you fit these narrow critera'. Expressions of sexuality are not hierarchical, hopefully most people realise that penetrative sex is not the Golden Chalice of erotic acts? Body types and appearences should also be discussed in a non-judgemental, non-heirarchical manner, too. Otherwise we are  shaming the tool used for the expression of human sexuality, and therefore we are encouraging sexual shame.

Conclusion? My sex positivity will be feminist, intersectional, self-critical, LGBTQ inclusive, disability positive, and radical, or it will be bullshit.

Got a question about this post or about gender, sexuality or relationships? Ask it anonymously at- http://ask.fm/SPAnswersquestions and have it reviewed and answered by a team of fabulous people.

Sexy Politics answers your questions

What is SPAnswers?
Sexy Politics Answers is a new project I'm launching to offer people the opportunity to ask questions of people with a range of experiences, opinions, ideas and solutions. From 'how do I tell my partner about my sexual health status?' to 'how does class interact with sexual dynamic?' and everything inbetween and beyond.
Did you ever have a question that you felt you couldn't ask friends, family or partners? Ever wonder if everybody does that thing or how you can find people who enjoy it? The time for those questions, dear friends, is now.

How can I ask a question?
You can ask a question here- http://ask.fm/SPAnswersquestions
We'll answer questions on a regular basis by publishing them in posts on this blog and then linking the post to you on ask.fm. By doing this we are able to educate and support others who may be experiencing similar concerns or interests as you, whilst ensuring your anonymity.

What can I ask about?
The focus of this project is to answer questions on sexuality, sex, gender & relationships. Some topics are suggested in the profiles of the advisors below. We will endevour to answer any questions you ask us, but where we aren't qualified to answer (e.g. medical/legal advice) we may signpost you to a resource or person who is better equipped to answer.
We're happy to take questions on identy in relation to sex(uality), gender and relationships e.g. 'How can I navigate impaired mobility within a ablenormative BDSM setting?' But for accounts of experiencing structural oppression on a day to day basis http://www.liberateyourself.co.uk is an excellent resource.

Who will answer my questions?
I'm glad you asked! A spectacular range of amazing individuals will answer your questions! This group will grow as/when your interests and the rate at which you ask questions changes.
If you would prefer a certain advisor answers your question, feel free to stipulate this on ask.fm.*

Hi, I’m K. I’m a polysexual genderqueer girl in a 24/7 power exchange relationship, in which I’m submissive. I’m strongly committed to intersectional feminism and love comics. Topics I’m especially happy to answer questions on include BDSM/kink, trans*- and/or queer-ness, feminism, and allyship - but I’ll also answer things that fall outside of those categories if I feel capable!

Hello, I'm Susuana, I am a heterosexual, demi-ace, cis-woman. I'll answer all reasonable questions the way best I can, no really personal stuff though.

I describe myself as a pseudopansexual genderqueer. My mother has Multiple Sclerosis, and my father has been absent since I was aged 9. I have Asperger's Syndrome and have always, in some way, expressed myself as queer. I am about to begin studying an MSc in Cognitive Neuroscience at Birkbeck College, University of London. I am a kinky (switch), slutty, poly, Christian queer, and an unpaid, indefatigable 24/7 feminist biatch.

Hi, I'm Alex. I'm 20, and I identify primarily as a Queer Guy, with a splash of grey asexuality. I'm a student, and I love to be busy. When considering a question I will always adopt an open minded, sex positive approach. I'm a fan of solution-based thinking, considering what is going right and projecting about how it can get better, that way specific answers will play to the individuals strengths and what they excel at, rather than what I am good at!

Hello, I’m Lucy. I’m a pansexual cis-woman currently in a long-term monogamous heterosexual relationship. I work in the travel industry and in my spare time I like to bake, play board games, and practise hairstyles that minimise my double-chin. I have two pet rats, a growing collection of dictionaries and I am a connoisseur of tea and biscuits. I’m happy to answer questions on relationships, including monogamy and cheating; sexuality; sex, including different methods and styles but also about communicating about sex with partners and others; sexual health, body image and body confidence, including fatphobia; feminism; drugs and alcohol; and most other reasonable questions. My approach to answering questions will come from a non-judgmental, honest and confidential position based on my own personal experiences and knowledge, and I’ll provide references to further information where I can. Looking forward to responding to questions!

Hello! I'm Anna. I'm a submissive queer poly trans woman with somewhat limited experience in "the kink scene", but will answer any questions I feel confident to answer to the best of my ability :)

Hi, I'm Pip. I'm a cis woman (and femme with tendancies to wear fake moustaches). I have experience with- lesbianism, bi*sexuality, heterosexuality, asexuality, polyamory, BDSM/kink, abstinence, sluthood and stone...ness. I'm happy to take questions on the above as well as liberation politics, feminism, fatphobia, masturbation, method, consent, sex positivity, body positivity, gender, (dis)ability and class. I like fruit tea, feminist porn, writing, collecting sex toys and my cuddling method can be defined as- cat.

Hi, I'm Ellie, I'm a genderqueer, pansexual, polyamorous, psychology student from Wales. I work at a swingers club, run sexual health campaigns and enjoy some BDSM/kink. I'm happy to take questions on these as best I can.

* Purposely offensive/oppressive questions or questions used to bully or intimidate individuals will not be published. They will not pass the moderation process and as such the advisors will not see them.

Mary Lambert- marry me?!

So Mary Lambert is a singer and spoken word artist who has worked with some guy you might have heard of called Macklemore? She's not single. We've never met. And she's not going to marry me.

But today I read something written by her that made me want to ask her to. In fact, it made me want to stand on top of a big hill and throw glitter around. Mary Lambert is...well...pretty fucking amazing!

I think a lot about how the media and music industry never produce people 'like me' or never show people like the people I know. And I know I'm in a comfortable little bubble. Most of my friends define into multiple liberation groups and are intersectional feminists, socialists, anarchist or just have genuinely shit hot politics.

So when I see celebrities and musicians who think rape jokes are hilarious and being fat is a crime- it shocks me. But not as much as it should. Because we get used to the idea that things like body positivity, self care, and working against the stigma of mental health are things we have to do. Things we have to talk about and things musicians & celebrities are so detached from that we stopped reading magazines and watch MTV years ago.

That's what I did think. Now I saw Lambert's performance of I Know Girls a while ago and posted it on facebook. Basically, I forgot about it because I thought it was a fluke. But tonight I saw what Mary Lambert had written and I was blown away. I read about her life. All I could think was 'this sounds like someone I could have an excellent feminist rant with' (basically the yard stick by which I measure friendships).

So, old me, you were wrong. There are successful people out there that have brilliant politics. They didn't have to dillute themselves or disregard their values to get there.

I'm not saying it's a war won. I'm saying it's a battle I had chalked up as a loss...reopened?

Anyway, I'll leave you with the a quote from the woman I'm not going to marry. But who I'd quite like to rant with. And who happens to be spreading this message to millions of people.

When you shame another’s weight (be it thin or fat), when you claim to call out someone’s body size because you “care” about their health, it is not a beneficial statement in any sense of the word, and in actuality is far more harmful to any progress a person might have with relation to their health. What right do you have to talk about someone else’s body or health? You are hammering a distorted ideology that they are not normal, that they are not worthy, and convincing them that they are going to die early. The reason that there is a body positive movement is because we’re celebrating our bodies for the magic that they are and the beautiful things they are capable of.

Sexy Sunday- Communication and Negotiation Resources for Sex & BDSM.

So lately I've been thinking about sex and BDSM and why the two are so massively misrepresented in the mainstream media. Sex is either not spoken about or taken as something to be 'performed well'. Kink and BDSM get a worse deal, either being represented as something only engaged in by people who are in some way emotionally unhealthy (show me a person who is wholly emotionally healthy? Like, come on!) or worse yet, it's depicted as a '50 Shades of Grey' nightmare. Don't get me wrong, I understand that dubious consent is A Thing in kink erotic literature, where we have the narrative view of each characters' secret desires (still problematic in cases), but that's not BDSM.

Anyhoo, what seems to be missing in the dialogue on sex is the idea of negotiation. (Sex isn't just going to be perfect and awesome the first time without any verbal communication.) And what the kink and sex positive community do really well is; communicate and negotiate.

When I talk about negotiation I don't mean 'How can I get my partner(s) to do a thing they hate?'. I mean outlining and navigating a space where all those participating feel comfortable enough to engage and recognising that this space isn't a permenant fixture. One of the greatest things a person can do for themselves is recognise that sexuality, and sexual tastes can change. Right now you might be a lesbian sadist. If these factors shift or your boundaries move in the next however-many-years-you-live don't be too hard on yourself.

So, today, from the comfort of my bed, whilst wearing possibley the least sexy item ever (a onsie) I'm bringing you some resources. All I ask is that you give them a chance. You may not feel BDSM is relevant to you, and it might not be, but the skills of negotiation and communication are necessary for everyone.
Happy Sunday.

1. The Sex Positive Movement
(A series of videos from Seattle Psychology with the director of Seattle's Center for Sex Positive Culture. There are about seven at 10 minutes(ish) each.) These videos are important, they detail that sex positivity isn't about always being all 'Yay for sex!!' but that it's about understanding. And that sexual shame is not conducive to building healthy relationships with people or sex/kink.

2. Five Golden Rules for BDSM *TW* abuse
(Video less that 10 minutes) Laci Green discusses the difference between BDSM and abuse and outlines five rules that are pretty useful for any activity that requires intimacy or sex.

3. A System for Negotiating Sexual Boundaries
(A video less than 5 minutes) from Sexplanations that details how to negotiate and outines a system for communicating boundaries and interests.

4. Rules and Boundaries
(A short article) on things to be learnt from the sex positive community. This article isn't just about sex but also physical contact and affection with friends. It's only downfall is the continued use of the word 'girls'.

5. Negotiating Sex- Why not to keep quiet
(Video, about 5 minutes) I only found these two recently, but they're brilliant. They answer questions and dispell myths and talk about sex really openly. In this video they talk about the sensitive nature of negotiating sex and how one of them once suffered in silence because of fear of doing so.

Guest Blog- Alex Prestage's Statement on Sexism at the Womens Ambassador's Solidarity Address

Conference,

I hate that I have to address this, however I feel I cannot leave it unsaid:

This afternoon [20th April] I witnessed the derailing of the Women’s Ambassador’s Solidarity address. This derailing came in the way of foregrounding “men’s issues” in a space specifically designated for those who do not define as women to hear about issues pertaining to the Women’s Campaign. The address by was an opportunity for allies to present themselves and to show our solidarity with women’s liberation. In the ensuing aftermath of the address there was little solidarity to be seen.

Jo Johnson gave us, those that do not define as women, a chance to co-operate and reach a greater level of understanding of the oppression that Women face; in day to day life, and apparently at conference. Instead patriarchy struck again.

After presumably listening to the address, covering the basics of feminist principles, and the floor was opened to questions the men in the room continued to side-line women’s liberation. Rather than discuss key issues of Rape Culture and slut shaming we heard about men’s struggle with HIV and the Blood Ban – each already discussed on conference floor that very day, and each not specific to men. It was the silencing of women’s issues that, as a feminist – ally or not – infuriated me, the persistent whining about “Men’s Caucus” despite being given a position on the matter, the aggressive nature and tone of some of the questions, the gang-like mentality a few of the audience adopted truly fucking sickened me.

The knowing, or unknowing sabotage of the address demeaned and undermined Women’s continuing struggle to fight sexism and oppression by the hands of a Patriarchal society. The attendance of the address was disappointing in itself – it should not be left to a few Feminist Allies to aide and support Women in their liberation, and conference I assure you there were Allies present. However, their efforts were drowned in a sea of misbegotten “oppression”. I would like to thank the allies present; as I am sure the women’s campaign would also, it would be wrong to not recognise their efforts.

I will leave you with one final message:

Gentlemen, check your fucking privilege.

My experience of Steve Hedley and a message to the British Left.

*Disclaimer/TW*
Triggering issues including mental illness, domestic violence, victim blaming and body elitism are discussed in the following post.

As most trade union/left activists in the country know, there has recently been an incident regarding domestic abuse. On International Women's Day 2013 Caroline Leneghan (RMT- Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers union) made public an account of how her ex-partner Steve Hedley (Assistant General Secretary of RMT) abused her physically and mentally during their relationship. Leneghan's blog can be found here and contains pictures of her injuries that some readers might find upsetting. In her blog she detailed how when she took her complaint to RMT & she detailed several ways in which RMT tried to disregard her allegation

1. The investigator attempted to make a link between her mental illness and the abuse she suffered.
2. She was asked about her personal history.
3. She was asked how someone of Hedley's build with a history of boxing didn't hurt her more.

RMT then cleared Hedley and on the back of the investigator's attempt to blame Leneghan's mental illness he wrote a statement which you can read here.

A few weeks before this Leneghan published her account of the abuse she suffered at the hands of Hedley, I got into an online argument with him. Firstly during the argument he stated that I 'couldn't handle the topic' attempting to convince me and others that my point was non other than a product of me being to delicate for the discussion.


His tone with anyone who contributed to that discussion was vile, but to me in particular. He told me that 'in the real world' people argued and alleged that I was a 'middle class student' who would soon be 'sacking the workers' (presumably with my English degree from Edge Hill). When I affirmed that I was indeed working class, a council tenant, a care leaver and had extensive experience in the 'real world' he then shifted his attack to my looks. 

Hedley's attempt to silence me by telling me I was middle class, then telling me I was ugly then telling me I needed to 'find myself a partner of some kind'  made me feel like my part in the debate was completely dictated by my gender and by my age. A well paid middle aged man in the high ranks of the RMT being misogynistic, ableist, and attempting to intimidate a young woman isn't as serious his violence to Leneghan, and I wouldn't want anyone to think that for a second. What is similar, however was the way in which Hedley reacted. 

First he attacked me and then when I fought back he told me that my mental health was the problem and that I needed to 'seek some help', he also went to look on my profile. Finally when I refused to allow him to bully me publicly he told me that I was playing the victim and that I had been attacking him by swearing in my comments.
 First he physically attacked Leneghan and then when she sought help in his statement he told the world that her mental health was to blame and he hoped she would get the help she needed and he implied he had been the victim. 

There's a pattern emerging, isn't there? I spoke to someone who worked with domestic violence victims and they told me that abusers tend to use one set of behaviours repeatedly to disempower the people they wish to hurt. Hedley's attack on my mental health and his pointing to Caroline Leneghan's as the problem isn't a coincidence, it's a tactic used to make onlookers (and the victim) question the validity of their opinion. 

Unfortunately I've encountered many men that attempt to silence me with bullying tactics and many of them in the Left, I've seen first hand in the SWP what not listening to women and survivors can do. It's poisonous. So I have a message to the British Left;

 women will not be silenced any more and your attempt to disregard the abuse we suffer will result in your cause being weaker. No longer can you hide misogyny or rape apologism behind a veil of doing the best for the party or the cause. No longer can you appropriate the women's struggle with tokenism to strengthen your appearance whilst simultaneously pushing silence upon us. 
There will be no radical left without women's liberation and no women's liberation with victim blaming and rape apologism. 

Phat resources on Fat Shaming, Body Positivity and Self Acceptance.

 

A lot of people have messaged me to ask questions about my post on fat shaming and body image to ask questions. There are loads of resources out there. I'm going to list a few here. :) 

What it's all about- wikipedia

If you have tumblr the body positive tag is always fun- http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/bodypositive

And here are some other tumblrs you might like-
Fat Art
Body Positivity
Fat Grrrl Activism
Body Posi
Redefining Body Image Post
Big Fat Feminist
It Gets Fatter (For fat queer people of colour)  

If you want things on facebook-  
Body Positive Image Campaign

For twitter- 
Fat Positive Tag
Body Positive Tag
Fat Positive Hulk

Google image that shit. 

Asortment of websites and blogs-
Body Shaming Article 
http://fiercefatties.com/
Fat Liberation Manifesto 
Recognising body shaming 
Top 50 Self Acceptance blogs
Fat Feminism
The most highly rated fat acceptance books
Fat positive youtube videos
Ways to deal with body shaming 
On raunch culture and body image 

I'm happy to answer questions etc, but a lot of answers will be found in these resources! :)

Whose fat is it anyway?

*Disclaimer: this blog applies to me and is applicable to my experience. I certainly don't speak for all women, let alone all overweight women.*

I have something I need to say, and it's not pretty. It's not sexy either. It's about fat. And not just any fat. my fat. I'm not sure how much and how emphatically I can stress this to you, dear reader; I don't consider my fat to make me an inferior person. And I never will. Rather than recount the long and complex journey I've taken with my body image over the years, or discuss the feminist issues surrounding fat, I'm just going to lay down some rules. If you struggle to shrug off the prescribed norms surrounding bodies and fat that fine. But here are some simple rules you can follow for interacting with this fat person:

1. If you get the urge to inform me I'm fat: suppress it. (This one goes out to the men in clubs, the girls from high school and all the other people who feel it's hilarious to tell me I'm fat). It might come as a surprise to you but I actually know I'm fat. Weirdly enough, I can see myself. I don't need you to inform me. Unless you have some deep seated issues relating to your self esteem & you think will benefit from putting me down: I don't understand why you'd want to take time out of your life to tell me.

2. Please don't presume you know why I'm fat. As it happens I have an illness relating to my metabolism which causes me to gain weight. But, even if this wasn't the case, I don't want your diet advice. I don't want your exercise advice. I don't want to join in with your weight loss challenge and no, dear lord, no, I don't want to hear about how your Nan/ Mum/Aunty's Dog lost weight. Strangely enough I'm not overweight because I'm not intelligent enough to google diets.

3. Please don't body shame me. Body shaming for me is really complex, but basically: I'd prefer it if all your comments about my body were kept to a minimum. A good minimum is silence. if I want your opinion, I'll ask for it. I don't need you to tell me I've put on or lost weight. I certainly don't need you to say 'Minute of the lips lifetime on the hips' whilst I'm eating. I don't need your humiliation. Thanks. If you choose to believe the hype society makes about all fat people being lazy and generally awful human beings and feel compelled so strongly to save me from yourself: why not do it privately? And then I can privately tell you to go fuck yourself. :)

4. Don't presume that *any* weight loss is good. See, society has constructed a reality where fat=bad. So when you see that I've lost a little bit of weight, you want to tell me 'Hey, well done, you're not as physically repulsive as you used to be'. The problem here though, is that my weight is a symptom of a disability. Sometimes I lose weight because I'm ill, or cant afford to feed myself properly or can't afford a lot of heating or because the illness that my weight relates to is easing up slightly. But all those variables are temporary and so inevitably I'll re-gain that weight. If you notice this, it is most certainly not your place to be disappointed. I'm not asking you to keep quiet because I'm arsey, but because it's not good for my mental health for you to congratulate me on poverty weight loss and the pressure to maintain a completely unsustainable weight loss isn't helpful either. 

5. Please don't presume that I require or will welcome your approval. I once received a phone call off a family member who thought they would ring me up to remind me that fat girls can be attractive too! Listen, purrr-lease; if you have a problem with confusing weight and attractiveness, that's your business, baby. Don't make it mine. I don't hold the same values as you or see the world through the same lens, I don't need you to find me attractive *despite* my clearly disgusting and horrific disability. Really. Also in relation to this: don't presume that people you deem unattractive don't ever have sex or that people don't ever find them attractive. You're sorely mistaken.  


What I think happened is that somewhere down the line fat got communal. And now people who have no qualification other than being slimmer than me, and not suffering from the same condition I do, now feel like it is there place to save me from my gluttonous ways. For a long time I allowed myself to be taken in by this culture that thrives on insecurity on punishment and not help, on laughing and not caring. But my fat doesn't belong to this culture, it doesn't belong to well meaning friends, it doesn't belong to drunk men in pubs or anyone else:

it belongs to me. And you should probably respect that.

Just the view of some ‘big fat bitch’? Body Elitism and Me

  So I’m thirteen, on the bus to a school I joined three months ago and I’m trying not to cry. Yes, three months, that’s enough time for the boys in my school to work out I didn't have any ‘hard’ siblings and notice I was a ‘big fat bitch’. This I was used to, and scary as the thought is, this is what I expected. On this particular day what I didn't expect was for all the boys on the bus to have gone to the bakery. What I didn't expect was for one of them to hit me in the face with cream cakes to the joyous chorus of ‘FATTY! FATTY! FATTY!’ What I didn't expect was for one of them to spit in my face. I didn't expect that. I didn't expect them to throw half-full coke cans at the back of my head.

By the age of thirteen, I had internalised how undesirable, unattractive and unacceptable society found (and still finds) ‘fat’ people to such a degree, I expected verbal abuse. In fact, I remember scolding myself, for crying. I told myself ‘You should be used to this by now.’ I did this right through my teens, continually repeated the messages society taught me. I told myself I was disgusting because I had stretch marks, unlovable because I couldn’t control my own body. At seventeen I was diagnosed with a thyroid condition, the main symptom being ‘weight gain’. I remember wishing I could go back though my life and tell every person who had sneered, laughed or shouted at me for my weight, about my condition. Five years on, I know that the problem isn’t fat or slim; the problem is in my head. The problem is in your head. The problem is on the television, in-between the pages of magazines.

This culture of ideals, this construction of ‘perfect’ is even more prevalent in today’s youth, and with the rise of plastic surgery, body shaming and positively poisonous gender-norms, it continues to rise. My story isn’t unusual. There are thousands of others from women and men who are labelled as unattractive because they’re overweight. There are stories from people who have suffered because, they’re told they are too thin, too fat, have the wrong hair colour, or posture, or facial features, or are too pale, or too dark.

This is body elitism, the fact that we are taught ‘what’ and ‘who’ is attractive. Body elitism is the idea that one kind of body is superior, it’s the resulting label of bodies that don’t completely fit in between those narrow lines inferior as ‘ugly’ or ‘wrong’.  Today, rather than saying, ‘my body is wrong for a reason’ I’m saying ‘a body cannot be ‘wrong’’. A body is made up of flesh, veins, skin, and muscle. Bodies are diverse; bodies can be healthy or unhealthy. Bodies have different abilities, different uses. If a body exists, it is not ‘wrong’. What is the point in deciding one is ‘better’ than another?

The truth is that even capitalism, the economic system that thrives on our  prescribed inferiority complexes and sells us the products that can cure ‘imperfections’, (boost skin, decrease wrinkles, re-energise tired looking bags,) even this machine of consumption, that sells us this ‘superior’ body, doesn’t 100% know what exactly this body looks like. It comes as no surprise that the major companies that sell tanning products to women in the west, sell skin-bleaching products to women in the east. It does come as a surprise that big toiletry companies try to sell products with campaigns about ‘real’ women, as if we should be thankful that they aren't using the kind of bodies this culture deemed ‘superior’ in the first place.

When I think about this, I get angry. But I’m angry at the culture itself, I’m angry at the way people are forced to hate themselves, not at women who fit into the ‘superior’ category. This is where I draw an important line, because most of us can recognise how we shouldn’t feel inferior for being fat/thin/having different facial features. (Although that doesn’t necessarily mean that we don’t). What I’ve found increasingly troubling is this rhetoric of ‘real’ women (as if there is such a thing). Now, it seems, those who sell us are insecurities are trying to sell our differences, too. Now we’re told that ‘‘real’ women have curves’. ‘Real women have meat on their bones’.  

Now we’re taught that rather than challenge the idea that one body is inferior on the basis of specific characteristics, we should challenge other women. ‘Bigger women’ have been told (and some embraced the idea) that other women, judged in the same society, oppressed by the same narrow guidelines of ‘attractiveness’ are the direct enemy to their body autonomy. I’ve seen this warped idea play out in several social situations, from other ‘bigger’ friends saying things like ‘(Slim girl) might be thin, but she’s really ugly’ or ‘(Slim girl) has a body like a child, she’s not even like a woman’. Most horrifyingly, I’ve seen it play out when a relative said of ‘anorexics’; ‘It’s the way they think, they hate us’ and continued to insult them on the basis of their condition.

No!

Just stop.

Like everyone else in this distorted reality, people who suffer from anorexia are taught to hate themselves.

What can stop this slaughter, this construct that is literally killing people? Well I don’t have all the answers, but it’s my belief that thorough and far reaching social change would ignite a process of women collectively shunning these prescriptive standards. I believe the media and corporations being owned by the people would result in media and businesses that work for people not profits at any cost. These things I believe, but some things I know.

 I know that my struggle against body elitism is more than giving the finger to people who walk past me and sneer or laugh. I know that I never want anyone to have to be bullied like I was for their appearance. But more than this, I know that other women, other people are not my enemy, because no matter how ‘pretty’, ‘skinny’ or healthy another person is, they are still judged, every day. I wouldn’t wish my experiences on them, and I certainly don’t blame them for my suffering. If I want liberation from constrictive body ideals, I want it for everyone, regardless of shape, race, ability, facial features and regardless of whether society sees them as ‘prettier’ than me.