That Girl from Derwent dwells on the value of religion this Christmas.
That Girl from Derwent has learned a few more things about prejudice since moving up North.
That Girl From Derwent reckons if you're going to be offensive, you should find a better reason.
That Girl from Derwent considers why it is that some words have wider implications than others.
Since the 1970s feminists (both male and female) have been standing up (quite literally) to violence against women through the Reclaim The Night marches that have taken place in many parts of the world. A few weekends ago I had the opportunity to join hundreds of others in such an obvious protest against female subjugation.
One of my favourite campaign slogans floating around during the last YUSU elections was "Whatever we wear, Wherever we go, Yes means yes, No means no." Sadly, this is a point which still needs to be made. The battle against rape apologists who try to argue that a flirty smile or short skirt mean a victim "deserved" what they got is far from being won.
Until the myths surrounding sexual assault are wiped out women are unlikely to feel safe, a right they are entitled to. The horrific reality that an overwhelming 95% of women and a large proportion of men feel unsafe to be out on the streets at night is something I feel is worth making some noise about.
To me it can sometimes seem that society would sooner hide women away than alter perspectives or try to solve the real problems at hand. Reclaim The Night tries to shout this view down.
Women are seen on the streets. Heard on the streets. We don't wrap coats tightly around ourselves and, hands in pockets, eyes downwards, scurry back home.
We all make noise together. We all shout together. We all chant together.
We do the things we should be able to do every night, without the support of hundreds of others. We live our lives in spite of the sun no longer shining. By taking to the streets and being seen and not scared the march aims to show that women are never to blame for the violence perpetrated against them.
Reclaim The Night York aims to do exactly what it says on the tin: it's a protest against the mentality that people should be forced to decide between safety and halving their lives. Nobody should be afraid of stepping outside of their front doors, they shouldn't be afraid of wearing whatever they want or acting in a certain way.
The protest against the epidemic levels of violence against women in our society is still as important today as it was in the 1970s when the marches first began. In fact, statistically speaking, it may be even more of a pressing issue than back then. Today the conviction rate for sexually related crimes is around 8%; in fact Britain has the lowest rape conviction rate in the EU.
The solution is not to keep avoiding the problem. The only way forward is to speak out against violence and reclaiming the spaces from which we are told we are not safe, not allowed to be in, that we must be protected from.
Safety is an issue for everyone and that's why I feel it's important for men and women alike to attend Week 10's Reclaim the Night York event. The signs asking us not to walk down a certain path at night are not good enough. Those who are responsible need to be held accountable. We need to stand up and be heard.
We don't need protection, we need a change.
Reclaim the Night York will be on Monday Week 10 and is open to everyone. Meeting at 5.30 in Market Square, for a 6pm march around campus. See the Facebook event Reclaim The Night March- York for more details.
#20: The use of biased estimates in politicised discussions has some quite obvious benefits. In this case, they are meant to act as moral justification for some questionable ideas held by radical parts of the feminist movement, typically of the 'women-are-living-in-constant-terror' and 'men-are-bastards' variety. Also, if you kindly point out that such estimates are actually arbitrary and probably exaggerated then you'll automatically find yourself being accused for trying to stand up to chauvinism and female subjugation.
In a few words, this is a form of intellectual bullying intended to reinforce the idea that women will have to live a life of terror unless they radicalise themselves, which is why it qualifies as a scare tactic.
(Needless to say that all of this has nothing to do with the article.)
At the 'Tell' launch party, Amal (one of the women's officers) made it expressly clear that the march was to instate better lighting around the alleys onto campus as safety measures to benefit both men and women. There were many cases last year of male students being attacked and mugged on campus and the surrounding areas. the women's officers have taken this into account and the march is not designed to present men as 'bastards' I hope that any men who felt that raising issues of violence to women is to present men as 'bastards' feel reassured.
If you actually read the comments you will realise that hardly anyone here is opposing the protest or the measures being proposed. The discussion is completely irrelevant to that.
comment deleted by the author The stats used have no reliable source, therefore it's very likely they're not factually correct. Violence against women the most common crime? I don't think the police class common assault against men and women as seperate crimes.
Hyperbole, inaccurate figures and reactionary comments aside, the issue raised is an important one.
Certain areas of campus and the surrounding area are unacceptably dark at night. 'Do not use this path' signs aren't going to stop anyone cutting 15 mins off their journey home on a freezing cold night at 3am. Retreat lane is well used, and isn't a private road so should be adequately lit. CCTV would be reassuring too, but given that it's not uni property and people live there it's probably not possible. If anyone can make this road safer it's the council.
Walmgate stray is dangerously unlit, particularly with livestock around. In cold weather hidden ice is a serious hazard. Once again, not the uni's land, not the uni's business.
Seems people might be barking up the wrong tree with this idea. The cause is a noble one but there's nowt that the uni / union can do unless its uni property. The only people who can put up lighting or cctv are the council. Sadly I doubt they were listening at the protest.
Finally if the campaign lost some of the feminist rhetoric it might double it's support on campus. Lots of men and non-radical-feminist women would like a safer walk home and a safer campus too. Nobody tells you you're 'not allowed in' spaces. Why must you turn a well meaning anti-crime campaign into a feminist rant which assumes that men tell women not to use certain places, not to go out at night etc... They don't. Reading this article you'd think we're living in gender apartheid where women are under house arrest after 10pm.
If it lost some of the feminist vitriol and replaced it with a grown-up anti-crime campaign targeted at the right people and backed up with evidence, this campaign could actually do a lot of good.
vitriol is a very strong word, and unnecessarily used. This article is not the campaign. The campaign consisted of posters, a march and petitions. When we collected signatures, many men were willing to sign up, and we all stressed that it's for the safety of both men and women. Men are more likely to be attacked at night, mainly. So thank you for your advice, but hundreds of people signed the petitions and support the cause anyway.
Someone earlier said it was legal to rape your wife in 1960; marital rape was actually legal until 1991 in the UK.
#25 I'd like to show you some genuine radical feminist ideas, if a lighting campaign is too hot for you.
There's a very good chance that #25 has graduated, left York, and hasn't looked at the Yorker for an extremely long time. Just saying...
Why is she commenting on year old articles trying to start arguments???
Someone's bored of their Easter break...
Well, I find a few marital rape facts certainly brighten up my lonely days!
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report