Where is the Solidarity?

Women, we are indeed our own worst enemies. We wear heels because our legs are short, we shave our legs and armpits because the hair is 'gross', we wear mascara because our eyes are too small, we starve ourselves because fat is not sexy, we wear fake tan because our complexion is blotchy, and worst of all we are the ones who set this standard for ourselves, and others.

I'm not saying men have nothing to do with this- but how often do you hear a man say 'what a pale, small- eyed, short, bitch' compared to a woman? A man's assessment goes as far as 'she's fit' or 'she's a minger', but a woman's assessment of another woman's appearance goes much further into vicious detail.

We are certainly not making Rosie proud

I don't know where the idea that women have to shave their armpit and leg hair comes from- but I do know that we are all guilty of thinking it unsightly to see hair in these places on a woman. I can envision some great decider in the sky picking which natural female attributes 'need to change', the dialogue baring similarity to a 'New Year: New You' guide in Heat:

Great Decider: 'Cover up your chapped (disgusting) winter skin with our new £19.00 pore perfector- nobody likes big pores. Oh and btw, you've got to wear this season's clothes- which only fit my size 6 models who suffer from eating disorders and are deeply unhappy... so you better get chopping your tits off to fit in this season.'

As a woman, you could have; a successful career, children, meaningful relationships, good health- yet according to popular magazines and the majority of the female population- you're still a pale, fat, frigid plain Jane (no offence to any Janes out there). Look, even I am doing it- poor Janes of the world, what a horrible turn of phrase!

She's obviously purchase the £19.00 pore perfector

We buy magazines filled with unrealistic images of women who are, in turn, forced to pretend that their shit doesn't stink. Tulisa's video response to the broadcasting of a sex tape she made with her ex boyfriend was fantastic- instead of shying away, she faced the drama head- on and refused to apologise- rightly so! As long as we continue to criticise ourselves and others for being and doing things that are completely natural- like having sex and child-bearing curves, we will never be happy! There are women dying all over the world, yet we can't face living before we lose 'those extra few pounds' or become 'that bit more fabulous'.

I am going to reference Carlton Banks once again for his sheer genius. Just as he tells us that black is what he is, not something he is- trying to be, a woman is something you are, not something you need to try to be by changing everything that is natural to you. So, next time you see; your sister, your friend, your mother, your reflection in the mirror- tell them that they are a beautiful person, because they are. 

His philosophy is just applicable to so many things

 

Brooker says it best...

Recent news and information about Invisible Children and their KONY 2012 campaign have shone a very different light on the entire matter. I would love to write about it, but after the video I have just watched by Charlie Brooker, I unfortunately couldn't put it any better myself. So... here is a link- enjoy!

Charlie Brooker Ten O'Clock Live 14.03.2012

People's History Museum

The outside of the Museum

The People's History Museum (located on Spinningfield's Left Bank in Manchester) is a definite must go! The entire museum documents the plight of the population in their struggle for; suffrage, employment and public services. The exhibitions are very interactive and great for children (I was in my element, pressing Blair buttons and turning NHS cogs). The main gallery on the first floor is full of both Conservative and Labour election campaign posters, the most famous being Conservative's 1979 'Labour isn't working' election poster. It's fascinating seeing all the posters in the gallery- with some being individually dissected. It is also highlighted that posters without the words are just meaningless images open for interpretation. The most successful propaganda seems to either play on society's fears (i.e. unemployment, hunger) or feature top hats and pipes (symbols which connote trustworthiness). The second floor is hugely interactive and investigates the Peterloo massacre whilst speakers spill out historical speeches from famous policy makers. There is a huge selection of banners displayed- and the significance of banners and symbolism in protests is analysed.

You might be expecting the entire museum to be a huge shrine to socialism, where the water in the toilets comes out red. However, this couldn't be further from the truth! Obviously, the museum is focused on 'the people's' campaigns for equal rights and public services- this just happens to be a left wing notion. I'd say there is a fairly equal balance between both Conservative and Labour literature available for viewing in the museum. The running theme is what 'the people' have done to improve the lives of many, politics aside.

Famous Conservative 1979 poster.

I might return and buy the cup

Feminist Webs are currently exhibiting a collection of empowering material for women below the conference rooms on the first floor. Furthermore, the museum gift shop has a wide range of posters available for purchase- and plastic cups with straws spiralling around them (so tempting). If you are ever in Manchester, I really recommend this museum. The exhibitions are vibrant and engaging, and the whole museum is refreshing.

'You Should Learn a Trade'

'What do you do at Uni?'

'English Literature'

'Oh, and what are you going to do with that?'

'SHOVE IT UP YOUR ARSE!'

A conversation that many undergraduates and postgraduates will suffer throughout their education. Many a time have people questioned me on what I will specifically do with my history degree... erm... frame it? File it? What they mean is, what do you intend to make a living with after you've finished studying, but is that really all people study for? If studying is only ever a means to an end (the end being related employment), would there even be subjects such as Philosophy, Creative writing or History? Yet, if there weren't subjects like these, who would be the great thinkers, write the books you can't put down or challenge preconceptions? Education is about more than just getting a job at the end of it, you can get a job whilst you study, education is simply about learning.

I was just gunna pat my armpits dry with mine...

However, there are practicalities to consider- such as 'I got a bar job to tide me over during my degree... that was 7 years ago now. I am still here.'. According to the Guardian, Computer Sciences has the lowest rate of employment of all academic schools, with Medicine, Dentistry and Veterinary Science having the highest. So, if you want to study a degree that will earn you some dosh later on than go for one of these three. But let's be honest- is anyone capable of studying an entire degree on a subject they don't give two shites about, just to get a relevant job afterwards? Could Bill Gates study Performing Arts? Could Thomas Hobbes study Physics?

In all the bars and restaurants I have worked, people have always questioned my degree: 'what are you going to do with that?' to which I respond 'Oh, not sure- Politics? Teaching? Journalism? Hell, I might don some fluff and become a Playboy bunny'. How am I ever supposed to know, they don't hand out time machines in freshers' week. One of the best comments is 'you should learn a trade' (this was my driving instructor). To be skilled in a trade is grand, but someone needs to write the books that the carpenter enjoys when s/he gets home, just as someone needs to craft the desk where that book was written. Everybody has a role to play- but I'll bet my driving instructor has never said to a plumber 'you should do a Games Design course', as it would rubbish their trade- so why is it consistently acceptable for undergrads and postgrads to be criticised for studying? I would never dream of asking a colleague what they are planning to do 'next' in some condescending manner.

I just feel so sorry for 2012 enrollers...

With unemployment rates rising, and University fees increasing (A LOT) it is, of course, important to think of the future and build your CV up. However if you want to, you should mostly study for the love of it- no other justification is needed. Who knows what the future will hold, hopefully money, hopefully cheesecake, but mostly hopefully happiness- which can be achieved whether or not you have a degree.

Hotless Homespots

American advertising giant Bartle Bogle Hegarty have launched a 'charitable experiment' equipping 13 homeless people with 4G wi-fi, for which people will pay around £1.30 for 15 minutes access. Initially this doesn't sound that terrible, it's enabling homeless people to tap into modern methods of making money, right? Well, no, they are being made comparable to wireless routers, a lump of plastic used only for our convenience. I seriously doubt any self defined 'charitable experiment' by any advertising giant, particularly this one which is dehumanising homeless people as a piece of furniture. As if it isn't bad enough having no home and seeing twelve year olds enter Hollister shops with their casual i-Pads and Nike high tops, now you are no doubt destined to shuffle behind some pretentious 'intellect' whilst they laze in a park with their Mac drinking martinis.

Oh, Clarence.

John Bird, co-founder of the Big Issue has compared it to what the Victorians used to do, make homeless hold billboards, advertising- no less. The main priority regarding homeless people should be getting them a home and helping them get a stable life- surely the money used by BBH in this 'charitable experiment' would be better placed donated to a charity such as Shelter. 

Strangely, in his Guardian article, John Bird wrote:

'Coincidently we are working on a project that utilises the skills learned on the street. That is the skills the homeless have to develop in order to survive. They keep their eyes and ears open, and at times have local information that we could all use. Whether that is shops, cafes, libraries or hospitals that the stranger might need in an unknown high street.

We should not see the homeless as simply immovable pieces of the background, open to exploitation. Rather we should see them as guardians, guides and informers who understand the local area in a completely different way.'

  

We shouldn't 'use' homeless people until they are settled with a home and a legitimate job, and then they can be exploited like the rest of us- but we shouldn't take advantage of the knowledge they know of the streets, knowledge built by trailing dodgy corners looking for somewhere dry to sleep, or a busy ATM from which to ask for money. Our main priority should be rehabilitation, not 'making use' of homeless people by titling them 'hotspots' or viewing their knowledge of the streets as some sort of tourism attribute. 

I'm Clarence. A Person!

Also, what about their safety? If a homeless person is easily located through their wi-fi location, they could be a target of crime. Although I have criticised John Bird, he's not really bad and his final passage in his Guardian article is quite suited to finishing this blog:

'The homeless have more to contribute than simply being a part of the gadgetry. Many have been to the edge of the abyss, and looked over. They may need our encouragement and support, but more than anything they need our respect.'

Propaganda

The Richard Goodall art gallery in Manchester's Northern Quarter is currently exhibiting various examples of Maoist propaganda from China's communist. This got me to thinking about Propaganda and how it is used- can it be considered art? Yes, it certainly can! The 20th century saw politics realise the power of propaganda and how it could tip the scales of victory- particularly during WW1 and WW2. After witnessing how simple posters boosted the morale of a nation, leaders and activists the world over began using it to convince the people of their ideology.
 

Stalin's famous 'Stakhanov'

IRA Campaign

Vietcong activism

Get 'em whilst they're young

Typical Cold War propaganda

A really large Mao

Mussolini being one of the lads

There is a definite correlation between political turmoil and propaganda- where do you see propaganda nowadays? It is only very recently, with present political unrest that propaganda-style art has come back, with the likes of Shephard Fairey promoting freedom fighting and change. However, recent propaganda has tended to be more by the people than by those in charge- who just can't seem to manage it these days. It requires imagination... which is just not evident in the BNP's last election campaign literature! It's not only the amateurs, though- all the major parties do is focus on how rubbish their competition is, rather than how good they are or what they can bring to the country.

The most successful propaganda seems to be done by the fans these days- like the Sun's famous 'Our Only Hope' campaign about David Cameron (not understanding that the majority of the Sun's readers will be the hardest hit by Conservative changes). Shephard Fairey's Obama 'Hope' poster made worldwide ripples, testing the walls of art and propaganda I'm not sure if the use of propaganda in democratic elections is such a good thing, but it would certainly make election campaigns more interesting...
 

Well no he didn't

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Honestly, what is this?

So Marty McFly

KONY 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc
I doubt it needs an introduction, but this is the video that, yesterday and today, went viral on the internet. There is a thick blanket titled 'KONY 2012' laid over facebook and 'Cover the Night- KONY 2012' events sprouting absolutely everywhere- (really everywhere- even Garstang...). The charity Invisible Children has launched this video as part of a huge campaign to get Ugandan guerilla warlord Joseph Kony arrested by the end of the year. Kony has been the leader of the Lord's Resistance Army since around 1988, with the bulk of the army's footsoldiers being children. As the LRA attack villages, they give the young boys guns and make the young girls sex slaves- sometimes stealing them from schools. As the army do this, they often kill the family of the children- or make the children do it themselves. Invisible Children have pushed the campaign under fresh fears that US military assistance (which embarked in Oct 2011 to arrest Kony) will be withdrawn by the end of 2012 if public support for Kony's arrest continues to wane.
I watched the video on facebook this morning and was really touched by it; signed the petition, shared the video, joined group, joined the 'Cover the Night' event in Manchester and was all about ready to get campaigning and pasting the walls with posters. The video is THAT well done. I'm going to use the word propaganda- and I'm not using it in a derogatory sense, but the video is fantastic propaganda. As the day has progressed, however, there have been echoes of criticism of the movement, about Invisible Children and about the methods of campaign which made me hesitate to throw all my support at the campaign.

Joseph Kony, wanted by the International Criminal Court for commiting crimes against humanity

As far as a lot of the criticism is concerned, it's really not justified. It seems a lot of people are more irritated that it is cluttering up their facebook newsfeeds than actually contributing any legitimate criticism. It's not right to be irritated at lots of people on facebook, some of whom wouldn't usually bother promoting a good cause, for sharing the video and promoting the cause. Regardless of whether you see it as irritating, if it results in the end of Kony's crimes then surely it was worth it.
It's not right to disbelieve that spreading the word can change things. It certainly can, facebook and other social media platforms connect people from all over the word- and promoting a cause has never been easier. The more people that back the cause, the more it is in a government's interest to meet the people's demands.
It is not right to compare Joseph Kony to other warlords and say that another cause is more worthy of support. As before, anything is better than nothing- and Kony 2012 hasn't replaced any other major campaign, it has just raised awareness where there was none.

One of KONY 2012's campaign posters- made since both the Republican and Democrat parties condemned Kony's actions

However, the video is so powerful and evocative that it is very difficult to watch is objectively and see through the fog. Yes, KONY 2012 is a brilliant cause, yes we shouldn't become to wrapped up in politics and ignore what we feel emotionally drawn to do- but we don't seem to realise that we are consenting and actively encouraging America to reinforce Uganda's military when we really don't know much about it. There are plenty of reasons to argue that giving the Ugandan military improved technology and arms is not necessarily a good thing. Some of the people who have promoted this cause will say that the USA and UK were wrong to get involved in the affairs of Iraq (trying not to go too deeply into that), yet actively support US and UK involvement in Uganda because of this one video. Will there not be future criticism if US and UK soldiers start dying in Uganda?
I'm not making a judgement on whether the cause is right or wrong. However, we shouldn't forget to scrutinise what we are watching, hearing and consequently promoting. One huge criticism of this is, 'what is the alternative'? Unfortunately, the answer is that there is no alternative as huge as this movement. Amnesty has been campaigning Kony's arrest for years, alongside Invisible Children and other organizations, offering alternatives to KONY 2012. However, none of these movements have come even close to raising the same level of awareness and support as KONY 2012, so maybe it is the way forward. Undecided.

Meninism? Masculism?

masculinist [ˈmæskjʊlɪnɪst], masculist [ˈmæskjʊlɪst]

n

an advocate of the rights of men

adj

of, characterized by, or relating to men's rights

 

Masculinism is not a common concept. In fact, I only really thought about it after seeing SurvivorsUK's London tube advert, trying to raise awareness about sexual crimes against men. Maybe the reason why masculinism has such a quite voice is that men aren't technically a minority. However, this doesn't mean that men are fairly represented, or that they are somehow immune from feeling the pressure to adhere to social conventions. 

 

Government estimates say only up to 11% of male victims report attacks.

 

Once I saw the tube awareness advert, evidence of pressure for men to behave a certain way was everywhere. ITV4's Tetley's sponsorship adverts are a classic example of what 'real men' are 'supposed' to be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEW9UjC687E&feature=endscreen&NR=1

Does this advert imply that, if you are loving and affectionate with your wife and children, you aren't a 'real man'? If you prefer to drink gin and tonic are you not a 'real man'? If you are a man married to a man are you not a 'real man'? And what is fake men's television? I watch programmes on ITV4 and I am not a man... are they not meant for my cocktail drinking eyes? 

The frequency at which I hear the phrase 'man up' just makes me wonder how one 'mans down', or is at any point less of a man than usual. A man is not something you have to try to be, a man is what you are*. 

 

At a recent gig I was stood next to a young lad of about 14. Now, at this gig one of the support bands didn't go down very well and many a bottle was thrown their way. This lad was wearing one of said bands T-shirts and seemed to shrink as their reception grew worse and worse. Suddenly this huge hulking man was asking him what band was on his T-shirt and calling them 'faggy'. Maybe by doing so, this guy's ego inflated just a fraction, or perhaps his genitalia grew an inch, but all I saw was some great big bloke undermiming a young lad's masculinity because of his music tastes. Personally I didn't like the band either, but would never dream of insulting someone, or putting someone down because of their taste in music. Maybe this lad wasn't a 'real man', maybe he had a prosthetic willy.  

The definition of a man includes every single man out there whether he be thin, or fat, muscular or not, a rugby player or a ballerina, a 'hipster' or a 'chav', gay or straight. All we can conclude is that there is only one type of man- a man. 

 

Ten responses to the phrase 'Man Up'

http://feministing.com/2012/02/09/ten-responses-to-the-phrase-man-up/

 

*Taken from the wise words of Carlton Banks 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOY9CbIK9zk

You've Got Red On You

Entering Waterstones and seeing Simon Pegg's autobiography adorned with a 'Half Price' sticker, I knew I wanted to read it. I have always liked Simon Pegg's comedy, particularly Spaced which offers endless hours of cackling laughter. I never thought my funny fuse would be the same again after watching Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz (luckily it was, and this was confirmed by Russell Brand's Ponderland). The thing that was so likeable about Simon Pegg was that he, and his productions, appeared so unassuming and real, a refreshing feature amongst your usual manicured and pedicured Hollywood blockbusters. Unfortunately, I still couldn't afford the book, but eventually bought it from an extremely discounted (and awesome) book shop in Waterloo. If you, like me, like Simon Pegg but haven't yet read his book, learn from my mistakes and banish all thoughts of his autobiography from your mind. As I read the book, he revealed himself to be; pretentious, self-indulgent, patronising and the most regal of drama queens. Upon reflection, these characteristics seem to be evident in a whole load of comedians, but Simon Pegg was always one of us, a normal, geeky, awkward guy!
In regards to Nick Frost, Simon Pegg describes himself as a father-type figure to Frost and continues to patronise him, taking most of the glory and responsibility for Nick Frost's achievements. His book is interjected with a fantastical story about Pegg and his robotic butler Canterbury. The story is actually entertaining and written very well, however the character Murielle and his autobiographical references to his childhood sweetheart Murielle is quite uncomfortable. Understandably, he doesn't discuss in detail his relationship with his wife, Maureen, and their child, but to delve so deeply into the history of his childhood love, and then document a fantasy about said Murielle, where they repeatedly have sex seems totally inappropriate. I suppose it's all for entertainment, but if I was his wife I might ask Pegg 'What the fuck?!!!'.

'Did I really write that?' Yes, you did *sobs*

Perhaps the worst thing of all is that his opening chapter is all about how he didn't want to write an autobiography at all, almost apologising for doing so. He writes:

'It was never my intention to write an autobiography. The very notion made me uneasy. You see them congesting the book-shop shelves at Christmas. Rows of needy smiles, sad clowns and serious eyes, proclaiming faux-modest life stories, with titles such as This is Me, or Why Me?, or Me, Me, Me. I didn't want to do that, it's not really me.'

But it IS you! That is why you have written an autobiography! You can't punch someone in the knee and then say 'I hate it when people punch other people in the knee, it's just not really like me to do it... I suppose I was encouraged to do it'. Fair enough, write an autobiography, you're a funny guy- it will sell, but please DON'T try and make excuses for it. If you disaprove of celebrity autobiographies so much, just don't write one- it will probably make you happier.

I then watched Paul and his comedic coffin was sealed for me. The thing that made Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz so refreshingly funny were their constant references to British popular culture, and their unpretentious, unassuming simple humour. Going to America and making Paul was, undoubtedly, a smart career move, but all my faith in his comedy has been demolished. I really regret reading his autobiography as I really, really liked him before! I am henceforth personally boycotting all autobiographies of celebrities/comedians/actors I like. I would recommend Simon Pegg's autobiography alongside One Direction's.