Thank You, Emma Watson

I've been writing a few blog posts lately, and after Emma Watson's beautiful speech, I had to take my rant about how some people are changing the term "Feminism" and fashion it into, what I can only hope, will be a response to her speech that hopefully does it at least some justice.

Dear Emma Watson,

Thank you for speaking to the UN about the importance of women's rights. Thank you for understanding that gender inequality is not just an issue faced by women, and that it is a problem that negatively impacts both genders: men, because they are expected to be strong and stoic by withholding their emotions; and women, because we do not receive equality in society's expectations or treatment. Thank you for presenting so beautifully on such an important topic. Emma Watson, thank you so much for understanding that being a feminist does not mean forgoing everything feminine.

And above all, thank you for putting the importance of feminism back on the agenda, and presenting it in a beautifully unaggressive manner.

Many women do not identify themselves as feminists due to the negative connotations that now surround the word. Feminism is not about men and women competing. It is not about women wanting to be better than men. Feminism is about bringing women up to be equal with men: politically, socially, and economically. 

If you are a man, who thinks that women should get equal pay, you are a feminist. If you believe that gender shouldn't matter when it comes to getting jobs, you are also a feminist. If you think that women should be lorded above men, and should receive higher pay rates because we're the better gender, you are not a feminist. You are a neo-Feminist.

I think it's important to make this distinction because a lot of people declare that they aren't feminists or find feminism aggressive; they think feminism is synonymous with female superiority and exactly the same as man-hating.

Some women label themselves as "Feminists" when they are definitely neo-Feminists: in favour of women being superior to men. This, in turn, ensures that the term "Feminism" is thought to be standing for an aggressive movement, when it is, in fact, the opposite. The use of this term in this way makes people pidgenhole the majority of feminists as man-hating extremists, and therefore discourages other women to speak out for their rights or identity as a feminist, for fear of judgement. 

It has been suggested that the term "Feminism" is too aggressive, and therefore, that it should be changed into something more fitting with what Feminism actually is: wanting equality between men and women, politically, socially and economically. I don't see why the term should be changed just because a few extremists got their hands on a word that means so much to so many people (not just women) all over the world. A lot of the men who have a problem with the over aggression of some feminists have the same problem with them that us feminists have in the first place - inequality due to gender.

While the HeForShe campaign is primarily aimed at benefiting women - because, realistically, inequality affects women, at least in a statistical sense, far more than men - Emma acknowledged that by removing gender stereotypes, men can be free to be sensitive, while women can be free to be strong, and this is why Emma's speech is so important. Suicide is the leading causing of men in the UK between the ages of 20 and 49, and so we need to start thinking about societal expectations negatively affecting men too. 

I think it is so important that men are part of this move for gender inequality, not just because of the benefits it has for them, but also because we can't expect change if we are attempting to mobilise only half of those who may be able to help us. We need everyone to fight for gender inequality, not just one half of the world. 

However, I think it is important to acknowledge as well that some people: male, female, whatever, will be against Feminism, not due to a lack of understanding about the term, but a lack of appreciation or wanting for change to come around. 

If wanting equal pay for equal work isolates some people from me, so be it. If wanting to be able to walk home safely is seen as aggressive, so be it. If wanting to be treated as more than the "F" gender box that I tick is seen as unattractive, then so be it, because I do not exist to be attractive: I exist to be the best possible me, regardless of my sex. 

Emma, thank you so much for reclaiming the term "Feminism", and ensuring that people understand that it is about equality, and how this equality will be beneficial for both men and women. 

Be the voice that you want to hear, be the change that you want to see in the world, and, above all, be the person who you want to be, regardless of your gender.

Lots of love, Laura

P.S. You'll always be more than "that Harry Potter girl" to me.

Victim blaming isn't new, but it's getting old

The recent photograph "scandal" affecting over one hundred celebrity women has shocked and horrified me, however, what (sadly) haven't surprised me have been the reactions that are blaming the women who have had their private photographs shared with the world. Victim shaming and blaming isn't new, but it's getting old and it's getting old fast.

"She shouldn't have taken the photographs" sounds awfully similar to "she shouldn't have been wearing a short skirt", don't you think? Different scenarios, but ultimately blaming victims for an act that only the hackers/ assaulters should be receiving punishment and judgement for. A lack of empathy for the women in this situation is disgusting and really quite heartbreaking - I can imagine they would be feeling unsafe, scared, and possibly embarrassed that something that was meant to be so private can now be accessed all over the world.

People are speaking out about how these women made a mistake. No, I don't think they did. They're saying how they should have known better. NO! That's just like saying someone should know better than to get drunk and walk home alone. That someone should know better than to wear a short skirt. That someone should know better than to take a taxi home by themselves.

Do you know what some people need to know better?

Some people should know better than to prey against a women who has had too much to drink and is just trying to get home safely. Some people should know better than to assault a woman, just because of what she is wearing. Some people should know better than to hack into systems to share photographs that were obviously taken for personal reasons and put somewhere seemingly private.

This person did not just stumble across these photographs - this person went looking for them, hacked into systems, and broke the law. The fact is, this is crime against women. If it was a crime against celebrities, there would be photographs of males amongst the hundreds of women - I'm sure there are at least a few of them floating around on various unprotected iClouds. It was women who were affected, women who are receiving the blame for taking the photographs in the first place, and women who are sick of being blamed and shamed for something that just isn't our fault.

But regardless of the gender who was affected by this crime, celebrities should not have to deal with a complete invasion of their privacy just because their work is seen by millions. By signing a movie deal or a record contract, they are signing to record a movie or an album. They are not signing away their private lives. No one has the right to see anyone else's body without that person's consent. That may be in the case of sexual assault, that may be in the case of photographs, whether they be of a celebrity or someone else. If Jennifer Lawrence (or any of the other celebrities) did not send those photographs to you, what the hell are you doing looking at them? They're none of your business, you're creepy, just stop. If a celebrity appears in a movie or in a photo shoot in various states of undress, that's a completely different situation than what has happened here. A movie intended for mass production and consumption is different to private photographs - the fact that someone had to hack into systems to see them suggests that they were not meant to be viewed by others. Consent is the difference here.

You know what? We learn when we're younger that any photograph we take may end up being seen across the world - I am sure that that risk increases a thousand fold if you live in the public eye. However, that doesn't mean that it's something you should expect, or that it makes it any more okay or understandable for someone to hack into someone's iCloud and share their private photographs. It's just like how, as a young female, I have been taught not to walk home by myself late at night, to reduce my risk of something happening to me. If, however, I did decided to walk home alone, and something did happen, that wouldn't put me in a position of blame (or, at least, it shouldn't - there are plenty of people around the world who would believe it was my error that caused whatever happened to me to occur).

It doesn't make it any more acceptable for what happened to occur. Like many other things, it's a safeguard that we have been taught to protect ourselves and our loved ones against some of the creepers that share our world.

We live in a sad world where things like hacking photographs of celebrity women happens, however it’s sadder still when these women cop the blame for someone else’s reprehensible actions. There are actions that we can take to safe guard ourselves something like this occurring, however not taking these actions does not make it okay for someone to be a victim. It doesn't mean they deserve what happened to them. 

Stop victim blaming, and start perpetrator blaming.