So, it turns out that York University’s Women’s Committee is no longer Women-only. I was quite astounded (and then not) at the result, but I think the positive thing to come out of it was that it seems there are more feminists or feminist supporters on campus than previously thought – 361 of them in fact. This includes all those from the Centre for Women’s Studies (which is quite a small department) that voted and then some…whoever they are. It’s quite encouraging really – we are in the minority but we making a difference.

I’m quite concerned that this motion may set a precedent for Women’s Committees around the UK. I know that the Women’s Officer means well, but I think the motion was partly because of her political motivations (she is stepping down at the next elections, I think) and wanting to be remembered, and because she personally seems to feel more comfortable in the company of men. However, if her motion stops any woman from coming to women’s committee because they don’t want to talk about campaigns around rape, sexual violence, fgm, menstruation and other sensitive subjects – perhaps because of their experiences with these – because there will be men present, then I think her motion will be extremely detrimental to the YUSU women’s campaign. Sheffield’s Women’s Officer post and Women’s Committee are also under attack (as they want to discard equality officers and make it into one banner post).

I feel a loss of respect for Women’s Committee at York for not standing firm in the conviction that women only space is a positive thing. For me, Women Only space fosters mutual understanding between women, creativity between women, and a chance for women to find their voices politically about issues that they may previously not have had the chance to speak about with other women, or about things they know about but have felt unable to voice. Yes, this can be done with men present, but many women do not feel comfortable in the presence of men (unlike the YUSU Women’s Officer). It can also be for religious reasons (as some religions and cultures may not allow frank discussion of sensitive issues between men and women?), as emerged in the debates surrounding the issue. I also think that fostering understanding and discussion between women puts an end to the idea that women are supposedly naturally ‘bitchy’ and ‘judgemental’ and that they can work together to create campaigns.

The Women’s Officer’s campaign ‘Because it doesn’t matter what’s in your pants: Vote for openess’ seems to me to miss the point – no, it doesn’t matter what’s in your pants, but unfortunately, society doesn’t see it that way at the moment. Traditional masculine and feminine characteristics are still put upon men and women, girls and boys; categorisation as male and female still has negative cultural and social (and medical) effects on men and women (or whatever else you choose to call yourself – intersex individuals, transsexual etc).

I have repeatedly been called sexist this week because I have tried to debate with someone about the issue of women only space. They eventually conceded that women only space can be positive but still thought it exclusionary to “ban” men from Women’s Committee. Perhaps my comments were heated as I got quite angry in the process of trying to explain some of the issues surrounding women only space, but I felt under attack and defensive.

It’s not really the first time I’ve felt as though I’ve had to defend my viewpoints and felt as though I was pointing out the OBVIOUS – that male violence is prevalent, that rapists are not actually blamed for rape but the victim is (eg. she provoked me, she was wearing a short skirt, she was drunk, etc), that culture doesn’t see feminism as a postive thing (the backlash), and so on. I know that lots of people feel like they are slamming against a brick wall, but it felt so PERSONAL to be called sexist, so demoralising, even though it’s not the worst thing I’ve been called (MRA’s are notoriously foul mouthed, yuk). It seems that because they felt I was generalising and saying ‘all’ men do this blah blah – which I wasn’t – I was being sexist. It seems laughable to call a feminist sexist.

This year has been a case of hiding from Valentine’s Day in my room at Uni as both my partner and I have a distinct lack of money. I’m kind of fed up with Valentine’s Day and have decided to rename it national-make-people-feel-guilty-because-they-have-no-money-day. It’s also extra depressing when you’re not with your partner and can’t just have a night in or go for a nice walk or something. It’s just a commercial holiday in order to make people who are single feel bad, and people who have no money for “presents” feel really bad. If you have a good relationship, it shouldn’t have to involve buying chocolates (cliched and not everyone likes chocolate anyway) or roses (extra cliched, as not everyone likes roses and they’re not very personal anyway) and most of the stuff sold as valentines day presents are very gendered indeed. I would find it much more impressive to just go out and celebrate the impending death of capitalism…if it ever happens Great post re. Valentines Day here.

Also, I would like to reassure people that I do indeed read your blogs when I get the time, but things are so busy at the moment. I have been thinking about a great many things that people have been blogging about and they are real food for thought. I read Laura’s post on the F-Word with interest about that contentious topic within feminist discourse regarding whether all heterosexual sex is rape (for a good discussion on heterosexual relations and power, I would direct you to Andrea Dworkin’s ‘Intercourse’) here. Debs at the Burning Times wrote a post on which there has been interesting comments and further clarification of the debate here.

As for myself, I don’t necessarily think that ALL heterosexual sex is rape. However, I am still thinking on this particular strand of feminist thought, and the debates above are far more interesting than anything I could say on the matter. It is quite alarming to hear someone say that “all heterosexual sex is rape” as it could be construed as a denial of women’s agency in heterosexual relations: when I first heard of the idea, I personally felt that it did exactly this, as I have not experienced sexual relations without consent or without my own desire involved; however I think I am privileged in this respect (as I have a very egalitarian relationship with a very lovely man). We tend to think of rape as force, as lack of consent, as exercise of unwanted sexual activity on someone’s body. But there are more subtle intonations as the above debate implies, that I have not thought of previously.

I have also decided on a dissertation topic for my MA: I am going to focus on deaf women and their experiences of achievement. I am not quite sure about the specificities of this topic yet but it should prove interesting and personally rewarding (and inspiring for me). I have found some very interesting literature by reading an article called ‘Feminist Disability Studies’ by Rosemarie Garland Thomson (in Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 2005 vol 30, no. 2) which presents an overview of feminist disability studies and has also provided me with further literature about deaf people and how gender and disability intersect within feminism. I was unsure about how feminism and disability intersect together, but it has become clearer to me that both disability studies and feminism have a rewarding partnership:

“Feminist disability studies wants to unsettle tired stereotypes about people with disabilities. It seeks to challenge our dominant assumptions about living with a disability. It situates the disability experience in the context of rights and exclusions. It aspires to retrieve dismissed voices and misrepresented experiences. It helps us understand the intricate relation between bodies and selves. It illuminates the social processes of identity formation. It aims to denaturalise disability. In short, feminist disability studies reimagines disability.” (Garland Thomson, 2005: 1557)

p.s. That picture is me and my sis off to our first reclaim the night (pretending to be ninjas) in 2006. I’m the one on the left.