Any excuse to beat her

May 31st, 2016 10:10 am | By

Life for women under theocracy:

The Council of Islamic Ideology has proposed a new Women Protection Bill for Punjab that allows husbands to “lightly” beat their wives for disobedience.

The proposed bill was on Wednesday discussed by the religious body, formed in 1962 under the “modern” Ayub Khan dictatorship to ensure all laws in the country conform with Islam, after a previous version drafted by the Punjab government in collaboration with women rights organizations and civil society was rejected by clerics and religious parties for being “un-Islamic” only a day after its passage into law.

That right there is theocracy – having a government body set up by a dictator to ensure all laws in the country conform with a particular religion. Religions are crap at respecting human rights, because they are more concerned with a deity’s rights. They are even worse at respecting women’s rights, because religions are artifacts of history and thus are male-centric: they write laws to control women and give men absolute power over them.

In the version of the bill discussed on Wednesday, the council recommends that husbands should ‘lightly’ beat their wives for disobedience and for refusing to wear the Hijab or take a bath after intercourse and menstruation.

And for eating sweets, and going out without permission, and talking back – just as if women were all six years old.

‘Light’ beatings are also recommended for wives who refuse sex with their husbands without a valid religious excuse, speak loud enough to be heard by strangers and donate money without the consent of their spouses.

Because god said so, that’s why. He told Muhammed and Muhammed told everyone else, so now you know.

A number of professional sanctions on women are also proposed in the bill, including a bar on participating in military combat, a ban on female nurses treating male patients and a recommendation to prevent female models from appearing in advertisements.

The bill also bans co-education for women after primary schooling and bars them from welcoming ‘foreign’ delegations or interacting with males to whom they are not married or related by blood for recreational purposes.

Shut up and pray.



What would be seen as sexual violence in other contexts

May 30th, 2016 5:29 pm | By

Via Soraya Chemaly, I read this Washington Post piece about pornography and violence against women and girls. It’s not one that will please the choosy-choice, I’m a pornographer so don’t you dare connect porn with violence types.

A current government inquiry into sexual harassment in schools and a new cross-party campaign to tackle misogynist abuse online have all highlighted the ways in which pornography contributes to and legitimizes negative attitudes with very real impacts on the lives of women and girls.

It is crucial to understand pornography as a form of violence against women. Overwhelmingly, content is produced and consumed by men, with strikingly consistent themes. The content categories of two of the most popular tube sites — XHamster and Pornhub — reveal a dismal pattern of endless scenarios of male dominance and female subordination, categorized by specific acts, female body parts, race and age.

It doesn’t take a great awareness of cultural theory to grasp the social meaning of images of women being repeatedly penetrated in every orifice to a chorus of “slut,” “bitch” and “whore.” It does, however, require a willingness to think beyond the rhetoric of “choice,” “empowerment” and “free speech” that is invariably used by industry representatives to justify such content.

Sometimes those industry representatives are disguised as hip, knowing, awesome people, even feminists, even women.

First and foremost, mainstream pornography consists of socially sanctioned acts of direct violence against women. What would be seen as sexual violence and brutality in other contexts is par for the course in pornography, as female survivors will confirm. However, pornography does not simply function as an arena in which direct violence is sanctioned and routinized. It also functions as a form of what sociologist Johan Galtung terms ”cultural violence.”Exercised in the stories a culture tells itself — its texts, its images — it is “an aspect of the symbolic sphere that can be used to justify or legitimize direct or structural violence.” One of the things that pornography does extremely efficiently is provide an endless flow of narratives of women being treated as objects, violated or “done to.”

It’s still baffling to me that people – men – like that, like a steady diet of it, think it’s the best kind of sex fantasy.

[T]he cultural violence of pornography is usually far more mundane. Porn narratives are not simply those accessed by users; they also find their way into mainstream cultural images: the jeans advertisement that replicates a gang bang scenario; the perfume advertisement mimicking the penetration of a woman’s shaved vulva; the underwear advertisement that utilizes an “up-skirting” image. What these kinds of images do — and there is certainly no shortage of them, on billboards, in magazines, online — is cumulatively to tell us what women are about: that the defining feature of women’s bodies is that they are available and violable. Not only does pornography entail very direct forms of violence in its production; it also, in a world where violence against women is endemic, serves to naturalize and normalize such violence. As Galtung says, “Cultural violence makes direct and structural violence look, even feel, right — or at least not wrong.”

But, fortunately, there is no real violence or abuse of women in the world.

Oh wait.



Bros before

May 30th, 2016 5:07 pm | By

Paul Bettany ‏@Paul_Bettany May 28
known Johnny Depp for years and through several relationships. He’s the sweetest, kindest, gentlest man that I’ve ever known. Just saying.

Lawrence M. Krauss ‏@LKrauss1
@Paul_Bettany as another friend of Johnny’s I wanted to thank you for your brave and true statement. I couldn’t agree more. Thank you.

Just saying.



The awesome God that he is

May 30th, 2016 4:20 pm | By

Hmm. She forgot to mention something.



Erdoğan tells women what they’re there for

May 30th, 2016 11:52 am | By

Erdoğan spoke up today for the benefits of overpopulation.

He is quoted here as saying:

We will multiply our descendants. They talk about population planning, birth control. No Muslim family can have such an approach.

On International Women’s Day, March 8, the President said he believed that:

A woman is above all else a mother.

In a speech peppered with quotes from from the Koran on the virtues of motherhood, he stressed that women cannot be freed:

By destroying the notion of family.

It’s a win-win, you see. More submitters for the religion, and fewer rights for women.

While urging his compatriots to protect the family, the President also insisted that:

Women are not equal to men. Our religion [Islam] has defined a position for women: motherhood. You cannot explain this to feminists because they don’t accept the concept of motherhood.

He said he believes women and men are not equal “because it goes against the laws of nature” and because of differences in their “characters, habits and physiques.”

“You cannot place a mother breastfeeding her baby on an equal footing with men,” Erdogan said, because women cannot do the same work as men “as in communist regimes,” where women are given a shovel and told what to do.

This is against their delicate nature.

Sure. They’re delicate flowers, plus they’re stupid, so nursing a baby is really all they can do, frankly.



What makes her worth that price?

May 30th, 2016 11:03 am | By

IS “fighters” are now apparently selling sex slaves on Facebook. As one does.

The woman is young, perhaps 18, with olive skin and dark bangs that droop onto her face. In the Facebook photo, she attempts to smile but doesn’t look at her photographer.

The caption mentions a single biographical fact: She is for sale.

“To all the bros thinking about buying a slave, this one is $8,000,” begins the May 20 Facebook posting, which was attributed to an Islamic State fighter who calls himself Abu Assad Almani. The same man posted a second image a few hours later, this one a pale young face with weepy red eyes.

“Another sabiyah [slave], also about $8,000,” the posting reads. “Yay, or nay?”

Facebook took the photos down within hours (within minutes would have been better) and it’s not clear whether the posts were marketing or commentary.

As the terrorist group comes under heightened pressure in Iraq and Syria, these female captives appear to be suffering, too — sold and traded by cash-strapped fighters, subjected to shortages of food and medicine, and put at risk daily by military strikes, according to terrorism experts and human rights groups.

You don’t say. There we were thinking they were living a life of luxury, doing voluntary “sex work” among the theocrats.

Social-media sites used by ­Islamic State fighters in recent months have included numerous accounts of the buying and selling of sex slaves, as well the promulgation of formal rules for dealing with them. The guidelines cover such topics as whether it’s possible to have sex with prepubescent prisoners — yes, the Islamic State’s legal experts say — and how severely a slave can be beaten.

Allah is merciful.

In displaying the images of the women, Almani advised his Facebook friends to “get married” and “come to dawlah,” or the Islamic State’s territory in Iraq and Syria. Then he engaged with different commenters in an extensive discussion about whether the $8,000 asking price was a good value. Some who replied to the postings mocked the women’s looks, while others scolded Almani for posting photos of women who weren’t wearing the veil.

“What makes her worth that price? Does she have an exceptional skill?” one of his correspondents asks about woman in the second photo.

Right? How much is a hole really worth, when you think about it? The hole should at least be able to make a great dinner out of minimal ingredients.

The Facebook incident comes amid complaints from human rights groups about waning public interest in the plight of women held as prisoners by the Islamic State. The organization Human Rights Watch, citing estimates by Kurdish officials in Iraq and Syria, says the terrorist group holds about 1,800 women and girls, just from the capture of Yazidi towns in the region. After initial denials, the Islamic State last year issued statements acknowledging the use of sex slaves and defending the practice as consistent with ancient Islamic traditions, provided that the women are non-Muslims captured in battle or members of Muslim sects that the terrorist group regards as apostates.

Of course. One is decent only to one’s own tribe; everyone else one is free to persecute. That’s the height of religious virtue.



Treated like an untouchable

May 30th, 2016 10:10 am | By

Speaking of menstruation…the Independent reports:

Teenage Nepalese girls from Sindhuli, 130 kilometres southeast from Kathmandu, took pictures to document the restrictions imposed upon them during their periods as part of a campaign by charity WaterAid, challenging taboos and improving female sanitation.

Every month in Nepal, the girls are separated from their families, forbidden [to look] at the sun, touch fruit and flowers and even stay in their own homes.  In Nepal girls during their periods are considered to be ‘impure’ or ‘contaminated’.

The tradition is called Chhaupadi, popular in  western-nepalese hindu communities; it is common for girls to remain excluded from interaction with the family for up to 6-10 days, childbirth can also result in a 10 day exclusion.

The Supreme Court outlawed Chhaupadi in 2005, but of course it continues anyway.

Manisha, 14, who took part in the project explained the limitations put on her during her when she began her first period: “I stayed at someone else’s house during my first period. I wasn’t allowed to go to school and, on top of that, I wasn’t allowed to even read a book. It was a wrong belief that we shouldn’t study during menstruation.”

I hope someone at The Establishment reads this story.

Barbara Frost, WaterAid’s chief executive shared the charities motivations to conduct the project:  “The silence and stigma that surround menstruation impinges on girls’ everyday lives. Furthermore, when there are no safe, private toilets in schools, girls often skip school during their period, or drop out of school altogether once they reach adolescence. With nowhere hygienic to clean sanitary pads or wash, women and girls also risk infection”

“Being able to deal with periods in a hygienic and dignified way is crucial to women’s wellbeing. It helps women feel that they are able to play a full role in society, no matter what time of the month.”

Being able to deal with periods in a hygienic and dignified way means being able to do so in private but not in seclusion. There’s a difference. The difference of course is in who gets to decide: it has to be the girl / woman who decides.

nepal2.jpg

Sushma Diyali,15: “This is the girl’s toilet of our school. We are in urgent need of MHM friendly toilet. The one we use doesn’t lock properly. If someone is inside, other person has to wait outside pushing the door for her. Because of lack of latrines in our school, we have to wait in the long line. This is very problematic for us and we are need of more girls’ friendly latrines.” (WaterAid)

nepal6.jpg

Bandana Khadka, 15:  “This is my mother and sister in the picture. Here, my mother is feeding my sister with so much of love. Mother loves me very much as well. However, during my menstruation cycle I am kept separately and have to eat at distance. When nobody touches me, I feel unloved. We need lots of love and support during our menstruation but, when I am separated and treated like an untouchable I feel no love from my mother and father and I feel only hatred. I feel sad being treated that way.” (WaterAid)

This project was part of a Uk aid programme WaterAid are running across Nepal, to improve girls’ ability to manage their periods. For more information visit:www.wateraid.org



A kind of routine violence was normalized by johns

May 29th, 2016 5:10 pm | By

A couple of weeks ago Meghan Murphy did a detailed examination of Emily Bazelon’s NY Times article on prostitution.

Over the weekend, Emily Bazelon, a staff writer at the New York Times, published an article called“Should Prostitution Be a Crime?” What she didn’t say was that she had already answered her own question, and that she chose to distort (or outright ignore) facts and interviews in order to push a narrative in support of full decriminalization, under the guise of neutral reporting.

Her bias becomes clear early on to anyone who is familiar with the politically loaded term, “sex work,” which she adopts uncritically, claiming this is “the term activists prefer.” While Bazelon admits that most of those who speak publicly as “sex workers” are white and very privileged in comparison to most women in the industry, she doesn’t challenge the language.

So that’s weird, isn’t it. It’s a bit like taking upper management’s view of working conditions as definitive and ignoring what the people on the factory floor have to say about it.

While Bazelon centered her piece around the perspectives of those who support a legalized sex industry, she intentionally left out stories of survivors who would have disrupted the chosen narrative for her story. A woman named Sabrinna Valisce who was involved in the sex trade in New Zealand on and off for many years, both before and after decriminalization, told me she spoke with Bazelon for the piece, but that her interview was cut. Valisce was a volunteer with the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective (NZPC) until about two years ago and had advocated for full decriminalization until she experienced its results firsthand.

While the Prostitution Reform Act was meant to make the industry safer for women in it and enforce safe sex practices, it’s done the opposite, Valisce says. Women were suddenly expected to engage in “passionate” kissing and oral sex without protection (called “NBJ” or “Natural Blow Job”) — things that had previously been viewed as “a betrayal of the sisterhood” and internally policed by the prostituted women themselves. “All that has gone by the wayside [due to] high competition and lowered rates,” Valisce says. “Girls are also now expected to let men cum as many times as they can within the booked time. It was never that way before. They paid once and received one service.” Under decriminalization, Valisce’s efforts to institute exiting programs were rejected full out.

Not only that, but a kind of routine violence was normalized by johns. “I’m not talking about punching and beating… [though this still does happen] I’m talking more about the everyday violence of gagging, throttling, spanking, hair pulling, rough handling, and hard pounding.” Valisce says there has been a notable rise in men’s sense of entitlement and a normalization of abuse since the new law came into effect.

Well after all…it’s legal…

When I spoke to her over Skype, Valisce said she had told Bazelon that she had worked alongside trafficked women post-decriminalization. Trafficking was hard to track, as it had been rebranded as“sex worker recruitment,” but it still went on. Nonetheless, Bazelon reported that “the New Zealand government has found no evidence that sex workers are being trafficked,” and left it at that. Bazelon’s desire to paint a rosy picture of decriminalization in New Zealand seems to have led her to expunge Valisce’s testimony from the record, despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that she was the only person Bazelon interviewed who had worked under decriminalization in New Zealand.

“The things she’s said about decriminalization in New Zealand are absolute falsehood,” Valisce said.

Everything Valisce told me, she also told Bazelon. Which makes her statements about New Zealand and the benefits of decriminalization all the more shocking, and Bazelon’s choice to leave Valisce’s testimony out of the story all the more telling.

That’s just a small sample; it’s an excellent critique.



He’ll give us something to cry about

May 29th, 2016 12:06 pm | By

Ricky Gervais is so thoughtful and wise and empathetic.

People offended by the “C word” would hear it a lot less if they didn’t go around acting like such cunts.

Isn’t that just the truth?

Similarly people offended by the “N word” would hear it a lot less if they didn’t go around acting like such niggers, right? People offended by the “F word” would hear it a lot less if they didn’t go around acting like such faggots? People offended by the “K word” would hear it a lot less if they didn’t go around acting like such kikes? And so on?

That tweet of his has 8.4 thousand likes.

Hey I have an idea! Trump should totally get Ricky Gervais to be his running mate. You have to be a US citizen to run for office, but what the hell, billionaires can do what they like, and Gervais would be perfect – if one bully is good two bullies must be even better.

That tweet is such classic bully-thinking – if you don’t want me to bully you, you shouldn’t be the kind of person I like to bully. I would bully you a lot less if you didn’t go around acting like someone I don’t like. It’s your fault that I bully you, because you’re such a loser and I’m so fabulous.

Why are people like that so popular?



Harambe

May 29th, 2016 11:23 am | By

I’m upset this morning because of something that happened at the Cincinnati Zoo yesterday.

After a 4-year-old boy slipped into the gorilla enclosure on a crowded day at the Cincinnati Zoo, a security team killed the gorilla to save the child.

The zoo said in a statement that the boy “fell into the exhibit’s moat.” A male Western Lowland gorilla was in the yard with the child – and “the Zoo’s Dangerous Animal Response Team responded to the life-threatening situation and made the difficult decision to dispatch the gorilla (Harambe).”

Harambe was agitated and aggressive and injuring the child, so the zoo had no real choice. But it makes me livid and sad. The adults who let the child fall into the moat got that gorilla killed.

His family will miss him.

In 1986 a five-year-old boy fell into the gorilla exhibit at Jersey Zoo. That outcome was better.



“Machismo kills” and “No means no”

May 29th, 2016 10:16 am | By

A gang-rape in Brazil has caused outrage.

Brazilians reacted with shock after the May 21 assault came to light last week. Graphic photos and videos of the unconscious, naked teenager were posted on Twitter, and several men joked online about the attack.

Of course they did. Women are a joke, girls are a joke, rape is a joke, the degradation of women and girls via rape and social media is the most hilarious joke ever.

The authorities said the teenager had been raped in the São João shantytown on the west side of Rio de Janeiro as she was visiting her boyfriend, The Associated Press reported. The girl told the police that she was briefly alone with him but remembered nothing until she woke up naked the next day in another building among dozens of men who had guns.

The case has rocked Brazil, Latin America’s largest nation, and highlighted its deep-rooted problem of violence against women.

Unlike other countries that have no such problem, for example…

…no, I don’t know of any.

Demonstrators gathered in downtown Rio on Friday night with signs that said “Machismo kills” and “No means no,” Agence France-Presse reported. In São Paulo, protesters made a mural with messages that included “I like to wear necklines, that’s not an invitation to rape me.”

The girl, in brief comments to the O Globo newspaper, said: “It’s the stigma that hurts me the most. It is as if people are saying: ‘It’s her fault. She was using scanty clothes.’ I want people to know that it is not the woman’s fault. You can’t blame a robbery victim for being robbed.”

And yet people keep doing exactly that.

 



Public platforms aren’t places for chats between pals

May 29th, 2016 10:04 am | By

Beatrix Campbell on Facebook a couple of days ago – it’s a public post and some people don’t want to mess with Facebook so I’m just going to share the whole thing here.

Morning people, here’s my reply to my old friend Jacqueline Rose on transgender and no platforming in the London Review of Books:

‘I am pretty sure that, were I transsexual, I wouldn’t want [Germaine] Greer on any platform of mine,’ Jacqueline Rose writes (LRB, 5 May). But she isn’t transsexual and public platforms don’t belong to her, or to transsexuals or to anyone else: they belong to the collective we – the public. Public platforms aren’t places for chats between pals. They exist in a forum where we, the public, get to hear people, be in their presence, listen, learn, call them to account; a forum where we get to join in public conversation, where we do politics.

Rose understands that of course, and she states her position: ‘I tend to be opposed to no-platforming.’ But she sets Greer up as the demonic person who goes too far, who breaches Rose’s own tendency and warrants banishment. Greer is an easy target. Her opinions on transgender issues are described as ‘hateful’. ‘Hate’ and ‘phobia’ are part of the hyperbolic lexicon of trans debates. Another pioneering feminist activist, Julie Bindel, has been declared ‘vile’ and no-platformed in resolutions affirming trans rights passed by conferences of the National Union of Students. Bindel is cheeky, irreverent and occasionally offensive. She is also an adroit campaigner for justice for the most marginalised and maligned women. But the NUS does not allow students to hear her in person, or to be heard by her.

That is why the no-platforming of feminists in the name of trans sensibilities is so toxic: it not only silences some feminist voices and purges legitimate feminist discourse from some public platforms, it excludes students themselves from active participation, from challenging and changing their own and other people’s minds. I once invited an NUS women’s officer to debate that ban in public. No, she said. So, a feminist is consigned to the NUS proscribed list, along with neo-fascists.

More recently I suggested that one of Britain’s leading gay journals – I won’t name and shame – host a round-table. No, they said. ‘Why?’ I asked. ‘Are you frightened?’ Yes, they said. I suggested the same thing to an Oxbridge political journal. No, they didn’t think they would or could, they said, because university must be a safe space, like home. As if every home is safe! As if debate is dangerous.

I should declare an interest: Jacqueline and I are old friends, we have enjoyed agreeing and disagreeing with each other for years. But I find myself foxed: why in 15,000 words is Greer’s purported hatefulness flagged, but not the bullying that flays feminism? The sexual revolution wrought by feminist and gay activism has, of course, changed the political landscape in which trans lives can be lived. It co-exists with the commodification of gender archetypes and the reinstatement of seemingly polarised and parodic masculinities and femininities. All of this can be aired in feminist forums and, say, Mumsnet, but not in trans/feminist discourse in the NUS.

As I write, up pops the following notification from ‘youngradfems’:

Unfortunately we’ve had to take down the post ‘how I became a cis-privileged shitlord’ because the author was scared of being outed as a DISGUSTING TERF [trans-exclusionary radical feminist] BITCH if her fellow students found out about her radical feminist views. Yet another example of radical feminist young women being bullied into silence.

The NUS impulse to no-platform feminists who problematise transsexualism or prostitution, who attract the abusive designation ‘transphobic’ and ‘whorephobic’ (they often go together), has migrated to other venues and organisations.

In February 2015 Deborah Cameron and I gathered more than 130 signatures to a letter published in the Observer opposing no-platforming and the stifling of debate. Rose was not one of them. It was provoked by the Bindel ban, new purges, and threats to feminist students and to the comedian Kate Smurthwaite at Goldsmiths (she has expressed support for the ‘Nordic model’ – criminalising the purchase of sex); it also referred to the Germaine Greer kerfuffle, and the ugly harassment of the philosophy lecturer Rupert Read. He’d written a philosophical essay on transgender and feminist issues in 2013 but two years later he was subjected to a public thrashing. People threatened to picket his election appearances as a Green Party candidate. ‘There are few things more conservative,’ Sarah Brown, a transgender former LibDem councillor in Cambridge, wrote about Read, ‘than the view that trans people are dirty perverts who shouldn’t be indulged in our supposed delusion, that sex workers are wanton harlots who are certainly to be discouraged, and that masturbation is some kind of social ill that needs eradicating.’

Read, of course, held no such opinions. But that didn’t matter. Following relentless attacks on social media, including death threats, and with the Green Party itself thoroughly spooked, Read had to ‘retract’ things that he had never said in the first place. Brown, a leading trans activist, had form, a talent for spite. In a public riposte to a fellow Cambridge councillor, she wrote: ‘I invite you to suck my formaldehyde pickled balls.’ This field is bloodied with ‘hatefulness’.

Our ‘no to no-platforming’ Observer letter said: ‘You do not have to agree with the views that are being silenced to find these tactics illiberal and undemocratic. Universities have a particular responsibility to resist this kind of bullying. We call on universities and other organisations to stand up to attempts at intimidation and affirm their support for the basic principles of democratic political exchange.’ The signatories included scholars and activists, transsexuals, people for and against prostitution united by commitment to democratic debate and opposition to no-platforming.

One of the signatories was Mary Beard. She – like Deborah and I – didn’t know what all the signatories thought about the contested issues, but the day after the letter appeared she wrote on her blog that they included ‘many I am proud to be next to: Nimko Ali, Peter Tatchell, Lisa Appignanesi, Melissa Benn, Caroline Criado-Perez, Catherine Hall, Gia Milinovich, Sophie Scott, Francesca Stavrakopoulou, and loads more. Hardly the forces of gender darkness, unless you are a real reactionary.’ Yet, she continued,

since the letter was posted on the Guardian website … I have been bombard[ed] by tweets … I got sixty tweets in the space of about an hour from one person alone … Last night I went to bed wanting to weep … It wasn’t the force of any remark, it was the relentless pummelling of attack on the basis of extraordinary loaded, sometimes quite wrong, readings of the letter … You can see why a lot of women (and there is a gender issue here) might choose not to put their heads above the parapet.

Peter Tatchell was also bombarded – all the more galling for him because he is a strong advocate of trans people and sex workers. Many responses, he wrote, ‘were hateful and abusive: homo, foreigner, misogynist, paedophile, nutter and so on. Others were threatening: “I would like to tweet about your murder you f*cking parasite.”’ The pioneering trans campaigner Stephen Whittle blogged: ‘I was astonished to discover that those social justice campaigners, Peter Tatchell and Mary Beard, among others, had become the latest attack of the twittering trans-sirens.’ Was this ‘vicious streak’, he wondered, the ‘death of the inclusive, tolerant trans community’? The answer seems to be yes.

Sara Ahmed, professor in race and cultural studies at Goldsmiths, is adamant: ‘There cannot be a dialogue when some at the table are in effect or intent arguing for the elimination of others at the table.’ But speaking is not the same as pointing a gun, as Whittle reminds us. Ahmed organised a group response to our Observer letter, published in the paper a week later: ‘We do not agree that freedom of speech is freedom to speak unaccountably.’ But NUS no-platforming does, precisely, prevent speaking accountably: it not only proscribes speech but students’ active participation – in hearing and, crucially, being heard.

Feminism is nothing if not a politics that problematises gender and the construction of masculinities and femininities; it is bound to get into ‘gender trouble’. Who knows whether ‘What is a woman?’ is a feminist question or a patriarchal conundrum? Transsexuals, including Kate Bornstein and Miranda Yardley, for example, have put these questions on the trans agenda.

If feminism can’t make gender trouble then it can’t talk about anything, indeed it is silenced by Ahmed’s authoritarian notion of ‘dialogue’: language loses meaning and politics is shot.

Beatrix Campbell
Beverley, East Riding



It’s kind of like an “out of sight, out of mind,” deal

May 28th, 2016 5:55 pm | By

Oh god oh god oh god sometimes it’s time to just tell people to sit down and be quiet and stop writing anything for awhile, until they know something. It’s for their own good as much as anything. Nobody wants to be haunted forever by whatever idiotic thing she thought she believed at age 17 or 12 or whatever the age is of this tragically lost young person. It’s someone called V. Tanner at The Establishment, explaining Why We Must Stop Calling Menstruation A ‘Women’s Issue.’

That’s easy: we mustn’t. There is no “must” there. We don’t have to stop that.

For one thing who calls it that anyway? It’s not an “issue” (except in a rather antiquated sense of the word, as in “an issue of blood” – which is not the meaning here). It’s a reality and a nuisance, not an issue. There are some issues around it, like taxes on tampons and pads, but it is not itself an issue.

But whatever it is, an issue or a nuisance, it certainly is a woman’s whatever it is. Of course it is. It’s been one pretext for the persecution and subordination of women since forever. The fact that trans women don’t menstruate does not make menstruation not a women’s issue.

Also? I am very very very tired of people telling us yet more ways in which we need to erase women. So tired of it. So tired of it I could happily set fire to it, and then bury the ashes under a toxic waste dump.

But that’s just the title. It’s when you start to read the article that you realize how desperately V. Tanner needs to stop writing anything and learn things instead.

When we talk, write, and yes, even sing about menstruation, it is typically discussed from the perspective of cis women. And on the surface? That makes a lot of sense. Cis women are the majority when it comes to the demographic affected by this much-maligned shedding of uterine lining.

“This much-maligned shedding of uterine lining”??? Stop writing. Stop now, before it’s too late.

Also there’s the obligatory contempt for “cis women” and the grudging admission that there are several of us and the insistence on saying we’re “cis” at every mention. This isn’t how to social justice. Clunkyness is not a winning strategy.

However, the fact is that many cis women’s consistent framing of this biological phenomenon as a “women’s issue” does a lot more harm than many know.

What “consistent framing”? There is no such thing. Nobody bothers to “frame” menstruation as having to do with women, because of course it fucking is. How dare cis men consistently frame beards as a “men’s issue” amirite?

There’s some brilliance (we’re told) from trans people talking about how menstruation is all about them and not those horrible cis people.

Ame: Menstruating does cause me dysphoria. I feel extremely uneasy in the days leading up to my period, and it gets even worse during my period. I counteract this dysphoria by taking a contraceptive pill. I take it in a way that allows me to skip all my periods so I don’t have to deal with them, however sometimes I accidentally forget to take a pill, and end up having my period for the month. When this occurs, I opt for using tampons as I find that I’m less dysphoric with them as opposed to pads. It’s kind of like an “out of sight, out of mind,” deal.

Um…yeah? That’s not dysphoria, it’s menstruation. That’s because menstruation is unpleasant at best and disabling at worst. What do you think, it’s a picnic with Mozart playing for “cis” women? It’s not. And well done figuring out the advantage of tampons, which – don’t tell anyone! – is not exclusive to trans people.

I’m not going to read any more. But I do hope these people take a break from writing until they get better at it. These things take time.



He would shut her up if he could

May 28th, 2016 4:47 pm | By

RT talked to Maryam Namazie and Mohammed Shafiq yesterday. It was quite a disgusting display by Shafiq, and at the beginning even by the presenter – Shafiq would not stop interrupting Maryam.

Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, and Maryam Namazie, human rights activist, discussed the issue of Sharia law practices in Britain.

Mohammed Shafiq said that there are no Sharia courts: “They are Sharia councils, where people on a voluntary basis can go to get advice and get recourse according to Islamic principles.”

He added that every person of any religion is free to do that.

However, Maryam Namazie, human rights activist, said the UK government should reach a position where any type of religious arbitration, when it comes to family matters shouldn’t be allowed. She believes that it is “fundamentally discriminatory against women.”

According to Namazie, there is legal cover for Sharia courts.

“The Sharia councils call themselves courts; those who are presiding over them call themselves judges; the Muslim arbitration tribunals are using the Arbitration act,”she told RT.

Shafiq argues that politicians such as Theresa May and Prime Minister David Cameron have been employing a policy of targeting Muslims. “This is a part of neo-conservative agenda,” he says.

He believes this rhetoric comes in a climate of Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred, which is perpetuated by the politicians, people in media, and other commentators. Shafiq says they demonize Muslims and their way of life.

At about 3:30 the presenter interrupts Maryam which he did not do to Shafiq.

At 4:30 Shafiq starts ranting at Maryam, accusing her of attacking Islam, constantly obsessing about it. At 5:50 he interrupts her. Then he interrupts her a second time to tell her to get a life, throwing her off stride for a second. Again @ 6:34.

The presenter interrupts saying can we give Mohammed a chance to respond! When Mohammed has repeatedly interrupted Maryam, which she did not do when he was talking. It’s incredible.

Then Mo responds and this time Maryam pays him back in kind. She had to, because he wasn’t going to let her talk without interruption, so she had to interrupt him right back, or he would have had an unimpeded chance to talk while she never did.

At 8:55 the presenter interrupts Shafiq (finally!!) to let Maryam respond. At 9:34 he interrupts her when she’s been responding to the presenter’s question for about 20 seconds. He simply will not let her talk.

At 10:18 Mo says “can I get a word in edgewise?”!



“That guy just put something in her drink.”

May 28th, 2016 1:03 pm | By

Don’t roofie your “friend” in front of these women. Or any other women, or anyone, or at all.

GUESS WHO STOPPED A RAPE LAST NIGHT?! THESE GALS!

Ok, so we’re still recovering from the events, but we wanted to tell the story. And if it seems like the photo is making light of a heavy situation, it’s because we know FB prioritizes pics AND we needed to get your attention. This is no joking matter.

Monica, Marla, and I were at Fig at the Fairmont for their delicious happy hour (“Fig at 5.” Treat yourself). I was going on about something and saw Monica staring behind and making a funny face. I stopped. “What’s going on?” After a few second she said “That guy just put something in her drink.”

Now, Fig is a nice restaurant. We were enjoying our charcuterie platter and some fancy cheeses. That type of place. They had a bottle of wine they were splitting. It seemed like a first or second or third date. After a few “Oh god. What do we do”s, I got up to find her in the bathroom to tell her. Warn her. Tell her to get up and leave this creep. Make him drink it. Something.

So, after feeling awkward hanging out by the sinks in the bathroom til she was done, I approached. “Hey! Um, this is kind of weird, but, uh, we saw the guy you were with put something in your drink.”

“Oh My God.” She said. Shocked, kind of numb, so I babbled “Yeah, my girlfriend said she saw him put something in your drink and we had to say something. Woman to woman…you know. We had to say something. How well do you know that guy?” I was expecting to hear “We just met,” but I got:

“He’s one of my best friends.”

Shit. Yeah. One of her best friends. They had known each other for a year and a half. They worked together.

I continued to talk for a bit and said she could ask “the one with the short blond hair” any questions since she was the one who saw it and then left her to return to the table.

When I got back, Marla was talking to the server about what happened. Seeing if he or the manager could do anything. Monica filled us in on more of what she saw.

“He pulled her glass toward him, kind of awkwardly, then he took out a little black vial. He opened it up and dropped something in. Then he tried to play it cool, like checking his phone and hiding the vial in his hand and then trying to bring it back down slyly.” He apparently saw Monica looking. Marla said she was just going to lean over to Monica and say “that guy is acting really creepy” when she saw Monica already looking. Witnessing.

It only took a minute for the manager to walk to their table, see if everything was ok, allowed the girl to order a sparkling water. All super cool. He stopped by our table and said he couldn’t do much because he didn’t see it. But he did let security know.

The poor woman had to sit through 40 more minutes, sitting across from “one of her best friends” knowing that he was trying to drug her. Marla noticed him several times chinking his glass to hers to get her to drink. She played it cool. Mostly, I believed, just stunned. The staff wanted to jump in and dump the glass, dump him, do something! I was going through fantasies of walking up and demanding he drink the tainted glass of wine. Eventually, they finished up dinner. There was a delay getting their bill “The computer is down” is what the waiter kept saying to him. Then, in walks Santa Monica PD. They say “Come with us” and he doesn’t protest. Doesn’t ask why. Doesn’t seem surprised.

The head of security came by and said that because we notified them immediately, they were able to go back and review the footage from the security camera.

They got him on tape. They had proof of him drugging this girl. They took the glass away as evidence. They kept us for statements. We asked the girl if she had a ride home. “My car is at his place. In his building. We came together.” Part of a plan. We were blown away. She was still in shock.

But it wasn’t over.

From every table In our section, from through out the restaurant, people came by to thank us for taking action.

“It happened to my sister…I’m glad I was there to take her home.”

“It happened to my roommate at a producer’s party. He’s still messed up from it.”

“It happened to me. At a backyard barbecue.”

“It happened to me. At a bar I worked at.”

“Some Heroes don’t wear capes. Thank you. It happened to me. Thank you.”

“Fuck yeah you guys! You fuckin rock!”

At least 10 stories of being personally affected buy someone like this. Something like this. Those were only the ones who knew what went down. I am sure there were tons more stories through out the restaurant and the hotel.

We kept thanking the manager for taking action. We are well aware how many people would not have taken what we said seriously. Not taken action. Said their hands were tied.

So thank you, everyone at Fig and Fairmont in Santa Monica for keeping this guy from harming someone.

And thank you in advance to everyone who sees this and shares this and reminds each other that yes, you SHOULD say something. Even if it’s awkward or weird or just uncertain if anything can be done.

Know that YOU did something. And that it helped.

Don’t roofie anyone. That’s not too much to ask.



That sense of shame

May 28th, 2016 12:41 pm | By

A piece in the Guardian on menstruation by Bibi van der Zee and Katherine Purvis starts with this uncomfortable fact:

“Girls are literally selling their bodies to get sanitary pads,” says Dr Penelope Phillips-Howard. “When we did our study in Kenya, one in ten of the 15 year old girls told us that they had engaged in sex in order to get money to buy pads. These girls have no money, no power. This is just their only option.”

The joys of being a girl – you have this mess to deal with, and you have to engage in unwanted sex to get the money to deal with the mess.

“The persistent taboo around menstruation means that limited information is available to young women,” says Sabrina Rubli of Femme International. A study by the Canadian organisation in Nairobi revealed that 80% of girls had no idea what their period was before they started.

Oh, no – that’s horrifying. So 4 out of 5 girls in Kenya get scared out of their wits around age 12. That’s so cruel, however unintentionally.

That sense of shame, the sense of being guilty of an activity so secret that that no one will even talk about it, is then compounded by cultural prejudices and beliefs around menstruation which vary from country to country and region to region. In some cultures, it emerges, women are told that eating certain foods during their period will make them smell bad, in others women are sent away from the home or not allowed to bathe, while yet in others an association is made between menstruation and sexual activity.

An Ethiopian girl tells of how her father found her washing her underpants and demanded an explanation, she said it was nothing and he picked up a stick to hit her with. Her mother intervened, but her father said “menstruation happens only after a girl has had sex with a man” and he beat her.

Schools in particular can be full of pitfalls. There may not be adequate bathroom facilities; many have shared latrines, no locks on the doors, and no running water. According to the research, some teachers are unsympathetic and teaching methods may compound the problem. In sub-Saharan Africa, for example, teachers prefer students to stand up when they answer a question, and girls often talked about their anxiety that they would have to stand up and reveal stains on their clothing.

Puberty is such hell for girls.

“Sometimes when I am in class and the teacher is teaching, I don’t concentrate on what is being taught because your mind is always on the thought that when you stand and your clothes will be blood stained and the teacher will see, hence you don’t concentrate.” Partly as a result, and partly for all the other reasons, girls often miss school when they are menstruating. The World Bank has estimated that a girl may thus miss between 10-20% of her education.

“‘Some people exchange sex for money,” one young girl told her interviewer. “The money is used to buy pads. Maybe she is being given money then they have sexual intercourse.’

“It’s referred to as transactional sex,” says Phillips-Howard. “But of course in some cases it is really coercive.” She worked on the 2013 and 2015 teams and also worked on further research, published last year, which drew on responses from more than three thousand women to find that one in ten 15 year olds said that they had had sex in order to get hold of money for pads. “‘She will go look for this money (to buy pads) from the men, and that’s how they can end up with the unwanted pregnancies,” one parent told the team.

Well at least it stops the bleeding for awhile.

And the long-term implications? As the researchers point out in the 2013 report: “Should others become aware a girl was menstruating, the girl would become (or was fearful of becoming) a figure of fun, being laughed at or teased. That this was so dreaded by the girls is perhaps indicative of it being seen as a form of emotional bullying. We wonder,” they ask, “if such bullying is the first step on the path towards gender abuse which females in this region become accustomed to. The context in which our study was set shows particularly high rates of gender-related physical, sexual and emotional violence, which appears to be an accepted part of life for women.”

I can’t read any more of it right now. It’s too tragic.



The judge, who happens to be, we believe, Mexican

May 28th, 2016 11:26 am | By

Like a lot of people, I don’t even know how to express my disgust and fear and shame-as-an-American that Donald Trump could be elected president of the US. How is this possible. How can so many people embrace such a loathsome sexist racist self-aggrandizing know-nothing fascist-leaning bully?

I don’t know the answer to that. I have no illusions about influencing anything, but I’ll probably point out some of his egregious awfulness now while I can. If he is elected we might not be able to.

From the Washington Post:

The Republican Party’s presumptive presidential nominee gave a fiery speech in San Diego and sought to leverage the power of his pulpit to shame one of this city’s federal judges, Gonzalo Curiel, who is hearing a class-action lawsuit against Trump University.

Trump delivered a lengthy monologue about the years-old case involving students who claim they were defrauded by Trump’s real estate “university.” He delved so deeply into details of the case — at one point, he talked about the origin of the name of the law firm representing him — that he seemed to lose the attention of his crowd.

Trump leveled a series of blows against Curiel. He called him “a hater of Donald Trump” and “very hostile” person who had “railroaded” him. He then taunted the judge, who has scheduled a trial for late November, after the election.

“I’ll be seeing you in November, either as president…” Trump said, trailing off. “I think Judge Curiel should be ashamed of himself. I think it’s a disgrace that he’s doing this.” Trump brought up Curiel’s ethnicity: “The judge, who happens to be, we believe, Mexican…I think the Mexicans are going to end up loving Donald Trump.”

It used to be so easy to ignore Donald Trump. I never saw The Apprentice. Trump was just the name of a joke-person. Good times.

 



Guest post: What to do if you get lost in the backcountry

May 28th, 2016 10:55 am | By

Originally a comment by James Garnett on Help that never came.

I’m not going to pass any judgement on this poor woman. She was clearly doing something that she loved and made a mistake. That could describe any one of us, but most of us don’t pay this kind of price.

Instead, I’ll offer some information. I have been a hiker, backpacker, climber, and outdoorsman since I was a child. As an adult, I’ve taught classes on backcountry survival, especially in situations where you get lost (which is REALLY easy to do). I’ve also been a Mountain Rescue volunteer in the past, for many years (albeit not anymore).

To correct one thing in the article right away: SAR (search and rescue) people do NOT recommend that you move once you realize that you’re lost. Instead, the recommendation is to stay put. You don’t know where the high ground is if you’re in a thick forest, so don’t wander around looking for it. Stay close to where you last had contact or a fix on the trail. Dead reckoning almost always leads you astray; if you wander off, you’ll be leaving the search zone of the SAR teams that come looking for you. I can state, definitively, that SAR teams do not go looking in low-probability areas until we’ve exhausted the high-probability ones. If we think that you were hiking down Trail X, then we’re going to look closeby to that trail. We’re not going to extend the search two miles in each direction from that trail, at least not right away. Each meter away frrom the trail does far more than simply double the search area. As SAR people, we know that if we find you within 24 hours, then your chances of survival are the best. We’ll do everything we can to maximize that probability.

Some more useful ideas:

  •  ALWAYS bring the Ten Essentials with you on any hiking trip, and know how to use them. They can get you out of exactly this kind of situation.
  •  Take a course in compass use. Mountaineering clubs offer these all the time. They are everywhere. The Colorado Mountain Club is the one that I know well, but there are similar things all around the country. Just google for them. The courses are cheap, and valuable. Once you know how to use a compass and a map, you can get within a few feet of a target objective on the map, from miles away. I’ve done this so many times, and it still astonishes me how easy it is.
  •  Remember simple facts. The sun rises in the east, sets in the west. If you know basically which direction from which you left a known waypoint, you can use these facts to get you back.
  • Do not rely upon GPS. It needs batteries, and those can run out, and it needs signals from the satellites, and those can be blocked. If you are going to hike in the back country, learn to use a compass and map.
  •  Learn about local flora and fauna, if possible. Lots of things are good to eat, out in the wild. Perhaps disgusting, but better than dying.
  •  Last but not least: if you’re not experienced, or don’t have the skills above, do not ever go out in the backcountry alone.


Once he’s paid for you, you are his to use and abuse

May 27th, 2016 6:33 pm | By

Sisters Uncut on why not the Nordic model :

Some may be be wondering why we are not supporting the Nordic model or ‘sex buyer law’, which is sometimes presented as the ‘feminist’ legal model regarding prostitution. Countries such as Sweden, Norway, and most recently France have implemented ‘Nordic model’-style laws.

Sisters Uncut cannot support the Nordic model, in part because it retains the criminalisation of people who sell sex – in particular, sex workers who are working together indoors for safety. This criminalisation has been extensively documented by sex worker-led organisations, and has also been noted by Amnesty International. The arrest and prosecution of sex workers is a form of state violence against (mostly) women and LGBTQ people, and advocates of the Nordic model are overwhelmingly silent on the fact that the law they are attempting to import retains criminalisation for those who sell sex – silence which does not persuade us that these campaigners meaningfully oppose this criminalisation of sex workers.

Except that the Nordic model is about decriminalizing prostitution, not criminalizing it.

Rosalie Haynes on Sisters Uncut:

I heard the anger in this John’s voice. The look in his eyes. It was hungry, it was murderous. I fought against him when he lunged at me, I tried to be strong. But it wasn’t enough. It never is enough. I was an ant in comparison to him. He was a man that would always tease me about being weak, you know,right before he’d rape me and carry out his sexual fantasies. (I think he liked that. He liked me to be reminded of how small and powerless I was, so then he could feel big and powerful). I was pinned, hurting, I wanted to close my eyes and forget everything. Who I was, who he was, what was happening, my whole life. I guess you could say I wanted to tap my shoes together and go home. That only happens in fairytales. This was far from one. The lives of prostituted girls/women are hardly rosey, are they?

For the next few weeks every time he called me I had to go over to his house. He threatened to hurt my family and friends. Especially my mum. Always. I legit think he was mentally disturbed. He always told me how when he was younger no girls wanted to go out with him & he felt like he missed out on a lot of fun & fooling around.

I think this is why he was obsessed with always buying me, because I was just a child.

She was fourteen. She was pregnant, and hid it from him. One night she had a miscarriage in his bathroom.

He was angry as ever when he came right back and attacked me again because of the “period” mess I made in bath. I tried so hard to clean it all up and to make sure there were no stains but I didnt have enough time. (I also think he had OCD) I tried to fight him all night, crying, hurting and screaming. But I felt too weak and I stopped resisting. He didn’t stop, they never do. He carried on and carried on and carried on.

He smeared the blood from my vagina on my face.

I WAS 14 FUCKING YEARS OLD AND HE PUNISHED ME BY SMEARING THE BLOOD ON MY FUCKING FACE

DO YOU THINK THAT’S OKAY? DO YOU THINK IT WAS OKAY FOR THAT TO HAPPEN?

Amnesty International wants to decriminalize Johns like that. AI wants to make pimps and johns just good participants in capitalist consumerism, and prostitutes workers in an industry like any other industry.

SistersUncut I hope you do realise that you’re supporting the death of women too? Couldn’t really give a toss if people think I’m being extreme by saying that, because personally I’m not & realistically I’m not.

So, “they cut, we blood” yes, for sure we do. But what about the men who make me bleed?

Your support against the Nordic Model  means women like me will carry on bleeding.

Their words are still threats to me. But also their words are not heard by me anymore. I have grown deaf to them, see that’s where the lovely thing we like to call dissociation comes in and helps us lasses out.

Every man who’s ever raped me should be in prison.

Every man who’s ever beaten me to a pulp should be in prison.

Every man who’s EVER paid to have sexual access to a womans body and has tortured her sexually, physically and mentally, should be in fucking prison.

We’re always told to listen to the sex workers.

As a feminist group, AS WOMEN, you fucking disgust me just as much as the men who buy and rape me. I hope you are aware that’s a huge level of disgust.

You stand there and preach about refuges and DV services which I fully support. Carry on doing so.

But for some reason exploited women are left out of your activism? But that’s because you don’t class being prostituted as abuse, right? I’m assuming that this is the only answer?

Your support against it means women like me will carry on bleeding. And you’ll make it harder for men to be held accountable. Because like I’ve said many times before, anyone who doesn’t support the Nordic model and is against it, support rapists. End of. That’s how I see it and essentially, that IS how it is. You’ll probably disagree with that statement but I couldn’t really give a flying fuck. Though, I’m also aware you have a habit of ignoring women when they question you. So I won’t hold out for a response.

No sexual predator on this earth deserves the support of any woman OR any organisation to okay them buying their way into a womans body.

Surely, as “feminists” you should know this?

Once we are bought, once that transaction has been made we aren’t safe. We aren’t ever safe when we’re in the company of a John. But once he’s paid for you, you are his to use and abuse for as long as he likes.. He owns your body. He own everything. You know, there are no safe words. Safe words don’t exist in our world. No doesn’t mean no. Stop doesn’t mean stop. All we can do is stay silent and suffer in silence.

You are supposed to be a feminist organisation, right? Fighting for women’s rights? Fighting for women’s freedom? Fighting for women to live a life free from violence? Is supporting the commercialisation of my body a feminist action?

There’s more.



Amnesty has lost its vision

May 27th, 2016 2:44 pm | By

Here’s one way we can talk back to Amnesty International:

It’s Official — Amnesty International Creates the Human Right to Pimp and Purchase Sexual Acts

MAY 27, 2016 — Nearly a year after Amnesty International’s International Council released a proposal on prostitution, which it calls “sex work,” the organization’s International Board issued its global policy calling on governments to decriminalize pimping, brothel owning and sex buying. As of May 26, 2016, Amnesty has officially adopted a framework that will shape its advocacy to stand with exploiters, not the exploited.

CATW, along with survivors of the sex trade and other women’s rights and human rights activists, will continue to urge Amnesty to reevaluate its policy. Instead of the wholesale decriminalization of the sex trade, the organization must call on governments to decriminalize only prostituted individuals — not their exploiters. It should not allow pimps, traffickers and brothel owners, who profit from this multi-billion dollar global trade, and the sex buyers, who fuel it, to brutally abuse women with impunity.

Amnesty’s decision to legitimize the sex trade is a gross violation of human rights principles and international conventions, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 1949 Convention, the Palermo Protocol and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). As we continue to oppose this devastating move, our Change.org petition will remain active until we succeed in reversing Amnesty’s policy to decriminalize the sex trade.

In October 2015, as part of the Global Day of Action against Amnesty’s proposal, we circulated a Global Declaration urging the organization to uphold human rights, especially those of women. If you fit into the categories of “We, the undersigned…” as described in the text, please join the signatories who have already rejected Amnesty’s decision to endanger the lives of countless women and girls by condemning them to commercial sexual exploitation.

A human rights organization has a duty to protect the most marginalized among us, especially those who lack real choices. Amnesty is the first and the most prominent grassroots human rights organization in the world. With this policy green-lighting prostitution as a source of employment and empowerment for women, Amnesty has lost its vision of a world where every human being has a right to live with dignity, free from violence. However, we hope that Amnesty will one day reclaim its mission and credibility, and that it will once again abide by international law and fight for the human rights of all.

Until then, it’s official: Amnesty is advocating the right to pimp, buy sex, and profit from the sale of sexual acts off the backs of women and girls everywhere.

You can sign the global declaration here.