#equal opportunity motherhood for everyone <3 | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

fluentlanguage · 6 years

Text

De-Brief From An Organiser: Women in Language 2018

A few weeks ago, I was proud to co-organise and witness the first ever Women in Language conference, a unique online event designed to champion, celebrate, and amplify the voices of women in language learning. It was not my first online conference about language learning, but certainly the first I partly created and the first one ever to feature an all-female line-up of speakers.

In today’s article, I am going to lift the curtain and share my official de-brief as one of the three members of our organising team.

What I Felt at Women in Language

Let me start with the most important thing: I enjoyed every single presentation that I saw. And as I was often online making sure everything went smoothly, those were almost all of them. The quality of our many speakers at Women in Language was excellent, and the range of topics kept things interesting and inspiring.

Women in Language delivered on a few extra levels too. It felt as inspiring and intense as every offline conference could feel, with the added bonus of allowing me to sleep in my own bed. I adored seeing #womeninlanguage posts on social media, and to hear from our attendees in the live chat and Facebook group. And most importantly, I got SO inspired and motivated to learn languages in a brand new way!

If you want to learn more about languages, join the extraordinary four-day online conference #womeninlanguage with presentations by 50 incredible women! Day 2 has just started 😉 #language #onlineconference #cpd #neverstoplearning #alwayswanttoknowmore #passion

A post shared by Barbara TRANSLATIONS (@barbara.peckova) on Mar 9, 2018 at 4:09am PST

What I Learnt About Language Learning

A lot of the impact of four days of language love cannot be put into words. It’s a boost in motivation, a renewed commitment, a burst of energy. And at Women in Language, I got all of those out of it and more. I got to know more of our conference attendees and boosted my own desire to learn and teach languages in new ways.

Here are the most important lessons from Women in Language that will be essential for all language learners:

1) Dabbling Is Legit

At Women in Language, we celebrated the huge diversity of how people learn languages. You can choose whatever language you want to learn, and you can learn it for 2 weeks or 20 years, and you can dabble in a handful of languages at once if you want to. This is all “allowed”, and won’t make you any less of a language lover or polyglot.

Sometimes it’s easy to feel self-critical as a language learner, and to tell yourself that you’re doing this wrong if you don’t use Anki or speak from day 1 or spend many hours on your project. But dabbling is perfectly legit, and you are allowed to feel proud of it.

2) Compassion Matters

Leading on from the previous point, compassion was a regular theme of the conference. When you’re faced with so many blog articles and Instagram posts and YouTube videos and language books telling you what to do, it’s sometimes hard to remember that everyone has a bad day.

You can’t always be happy and you can’t always be 100% gold in Duolingo. Compassion means allowing understanding and empathy for yourself when times are tough, but also for other language learners. No one method is the right one. Allow other people to feel good about themselves, and extend that same kindness to yourself.

3) Everyone Loves Transcribed Audio

Finding something interesting to watch or listen to, at the right level, and then with a transcription…that’s difficult. But it’s also what a lot of our conference attendees wanted, and you certainly CAN find it online. If you want to get a few ideas, check out Speechling, Glossika, Rhinospike, and Movieclips on YouTube.

And by the way: Just listening is NOT enough. If it’s just a wall of sound, you’re not doing much good. You’ll need to know what you’re hearing. Find input that you can engage with, and check against your own skills. For more about this, listen to my podcast episode about listening skills.

4) There’s So Much to Talk About

It’s never enough to practice speaking by doing the “Hello how are you where do you live” dance over and over again. Speaking practice is best when you’ve prepared something interesting to talk about. And lucky for us, there are tutors and learners who already discovered this too, and they’ve even put together lists (like this one) of questions and conversation prompts.

5) When Your Brain Is Having Fun, You Learn

All too often we think of language learning as a STUDY activity, in all caps. But it’s just not necessary to do things this way. Language can be learnt through story, through fun activities, through play. The most important things are exposure and repetition, not how hard you study or how much your language experience feels like work.

Though some of these lessons may read as happy-clappy positivity notes, I found that they often helped to ease a learner’s mind and allow them to take a break and come back to language learning with new energy and enthusiasm. After all, we want to get fluent while having fun, right?

What Do You Think?

Whether you attended Women in Language 2018 or not, what do you think about those lessons above? Are you a dabbler, or a hardcore study nut? Leave me a comment below to join the conversation.

In part 2 of this blog article, I will put on my co-organiser hat (a very stylish hat, for sure) to tell you more about how Women in Language was organised, what we learnt in the process, and what you should consider if you want to run or contribute to an event like this in future.

Organising A Successful Online Conference

I’ll start with what we looked for in our speakers and talks.

For this first ever conference, we used our own network of interesting women to ask if they wanted to speak at Women in Language. Their social media accounts, blogs, youtube channels, relationships with us were what put them on the radar. So if you’re dreaming of speaking out yourselves, making yourself very visible is good advice.

Before contacting our speakers, we considered some guidelines about the types of talks we would be looking for. In addition to practical topics featuring tips and techniques for language learners at “Beginner” and “Advanced” levels, we also chose the tracks “Living with Language” and “Working with Language”. Each speaker we contacted let us know which of the four themes they would like to address in their presentation, and was allocated one. This way, we ensured that no topics would be repeated and we could offer a varied programme on every single conference day.

Here are just three of the 25 talks we saw at Women in Language:

Some of our speakers came to us with a firm idea of the talk they wanted to present, while others found themselves unsure at the start. As our programme officer, I found myself receiving several messages saying “I don’t know, maybe I have nothing to say after all.” If you have ever hesitated to put yourself forward for an opportunity, here is the thought process that does stop them in their tracks: “Maybe I don’t have anything to say here.” Meaning “Maybe my experience, my voice, my passion are not valid. Others will have more to say.”

I extended offers of a little “talk surgery” to those who needed an idea boost, and without exception it was the speakers themselves who came to me with fantastic topic ideas, and who delivered on them 100%. In fact, I found that the most intriguing topics came from a place of passion and excitement in each speaker’s mind. Topics like “Learning With Crime Novels” and “Managing Motherhood and Language Learnings” are not a language learner’s most burning question, but that’s exactly why they make incredible conference topics: They are real, and invite us to think differently.

Some People Voiced Different Opinions

I won’t lie to you, at times it felt hard to be out there putting together this positive, kinda feminist event. Some commenters felt that it was a wrong move towards equality, unnecessarily excluding male voices. To those guys, I want to remind you that we welcomed and celebrated male voices throughout the event - it’s just that this time only women got to speak “on stage”, and every single one of them brought expertise, commitment, quality, enthusiasm, and outstanding topics. We set out to show the language learning world from a different angle, and I was so encouraged to hear from several male attendees who were enjoying the conference just as much as everyone else.

If You Want To Be a Conference Speaker

If you are considering applying to speak at a language conference, please don’t hesitate. Even if you were to hear a no, don’t worry and keep putting yourself forward - maybe the programme is full already or the conference can recommend a future event for you to try.

Don’t be shy about suggesting a topic outside the memory-boosting-fluency-fast-track-performance mainstream. Don’t wait until you’re fluent in 16 languages. You’re good enough right now, as long as you have a cool topic. And what’s a cool topic? Your own experience!

You are so cool when you are yourself.

I want to give kudos here to all those women who agreed to speak and trusted Shannon, Lindsay, and me with Women in Language. You absolutely killed it, and we appreciate all the hard work you put into giving a great online talk at an event you’d never heard of before.

Many of our speakers were new to presenting online. From my perspective as a blogger and podcaster, I’m used to speaking to an empty room and waiting until later to see if anyone connects with my words. But these guys were new to the whole environment, and they handled it brilliantly.

Tickets

When we put together our event, we knew that it was a risk to ask for payment from attendees of an online event. Many other online events are open to attendees for free, but we wanted to create an atmosphere where the sales pressure is off, and where our audience members were just as invested in having a great time as we were.

We found that the ticket sales achieved this goal, and allowed over 250 audience members to join us from all over the world. This reassurance also helped us relax and increase our commitment to Women in Language. So on the ticket selling front, we are happy to note that all went well and we are now able to give a donation of over $400 to our chosen charity, Kiva. The charity supports entrepreneurs who do cool things to alleviate poverty around the world.

Here I want to say thank you to our audience members, who went ahead and trusted us organisers with a brand new conference idea. Some purchased a ticket and even took time off work, others were unable to attend but joined the conference to support celebrating and amplifying women’s voices in language learning. We appreciated your trust and support.

About The Technology We Used

In terms of technology, we used a setup of Google Hangouts on Air for our live broadcasts and embedded them in individual Teachable lectures via YouTube. We also added individual Chatango chat boxes in each lecture.

At the end of any session, the viewers could click “Complete and Continue” at the top and move on to the next session in our packed programme. Credit here goes to Shannon for leading us on the setup of a gorgeous page and ensuring the information was up to date.

This format added to the feel of hosting a real conference, where you would often walk into the next room for another talk. But in addition, it made us into the Netflix of language learning, where any previous talk could be streamed from the beginning right after it was published.

All talks were offered on a single track (no two at the same time), which kept the conversation focused and helped create a live chatroom community. We also added an “after hours” experience through a dedicated Facebook group for Women in Language attendees.

Marketing Women in Language

Our marketing campaign, headed up by Lindsay, made it easy for Women in Language to get seen. We obviously talked about Women in Language in our own blog, podcasts, social media, newsletters, youtube, and wherever you see us.

Lindsay also prepared some beautiful pictures and tweets for the speakers and the attendees, so that everyone could easily spread the word about our event. We are so grateful that you guys supported us and shared your excitement before the event. It helped us so much.

Shout out to our friends How To Get Fluent, Language Learning Summit and Langfest for inviting us to present our new event, and to Mezzofanti Guild for hosting a guest post written by Shannon. Check those guys out - they are doing amazing work.

The Organising Team

Between three organisers, we found that we were able to play to our strengths and largely handle the large workload of running a conference like this one. We stayed in contact with each other through direct messages, but also weekly meetings, and the project management software Asana. When your organising team is living on three different continents, it’s helpful to ensure online communications are as good as they can be.

Our track record of collaborations was a key to our success. Lindsay, Shannon, and I were no strangers to each other’s work. We knew already that we appreciate each other’s work and that each of us knows how to use all parts of the technology and marketing setup. We had also met in person before and solidified our friendship. Throughout the organising process, we were able to stay supportive and open to suggestions from each other.

Sometimes, it can take courage and grace to reach out to a colleague and trust that they’re on board with your idea. From the minute Lindsay first mentioned the idea of Women in Language and Shannon hopped on the first Skype call to join us, that was something we committed to.

I am grateful that I had the opportunity to run such a cool project with two colleagues and friends that I respect so much.

What We’ll Do Even Better Next Time

So we were excited, we were buzzing, we enjoyed four days of a successful conference full of tips. But that doesn’t mean that there weren’t any mistakes to learn from.

On the technology front, a few hiccups taught us the following lessons. Maybe you’ll find them useful one day, so I’m sharing them here:

When you want to embed your YouTube events in another page, it pays to set up a dry run so that you’re double sure the embed will show up the way you want it to.

When you are planning to invite someone to a Google Hangout, you cannot send them a “join link” in advance because the software will discard that link the minute you close the video window in your browser. And then your speaker’s link will be useless and they’ll be confused.

Don’t click “eject” when you want to reset your Hangouts partner’s setup as they joined your Google Hangout. They won’t be able to join again, and you’ll have to create a new event.

Power Point going full screen in Google Hangouts is a bit of a gamble, so stay calm, have a dry run, and prepare trouble shooting notes to make sure all goes smoothly.

In terms of the programme, we tried a new format of round table discussions which was successful at large. The two-hour time slot did discourage some audience members from watching it though, and that’s something I had not expected and we will look into providing shorter round table discussions next time.

Finally: I feel fired up to expand our commitment to diversity and ensure we include more global voices. Our line-up was international but still looked largely like us: white women who speak English a lot. Even if each of them is different in nationality or language line-up, this still gives our attendees an unintentional impression of what the “norm” is. We can add to that during future events, and I’m excited that we now have 27 speakers who can help us grow our network and look for polyglots and language experts from more diverse backgrounds.

What About You?

Did you enjoy the online conference?

Have you ever thought about becoming a conference speaker?

I’d love to hear from you in the comments below.

#women #women in language #conference #online course

1 note · View note

khalilhumam · 4 years

Text

We Need All Hands On Deck to Close Gender Pay Gaps

New Post has been published on http://khalilhumam.com/we-need-all-hands-on-deck-to-close-gender-pay-gaps/

We Need All Hands On Deck to Close Gender Pay Gaps

September 18th marks the world’s first International Equal Pay Day, which calls attention to the importance of achieving equal pay for work of equal value for all people regardless of gender, age, disability status, and other characteristics. The United Nations’ recognition of this day is itself a reflection of the heightened attention the issue of equal pay has received across countries in recent years, but there is much more to be done to achieve its objective. To that end, in collaboration with the Open Data Charter and The B Team, we have prepared a joint policy memo that identifies roles for government and the private sector in closing gender pay gaps. Below, we summarize our recommendations.

No country has closed the gender pay gap.

Though the share of women’s participation in the labor force has increased over the past thirty years, women, on average, continue to be paid 20 percent less than men with gaps varying by region and country, and worsening along the lines of race, ethnicity, and other demographic characteristics. Now, the COVID-19 health crisis, coupled with the economic downturn, threatens to exacerbate these gaps. Figure 1. Wage inequality varies between and within the four income classes

Source: ILO: Global wage report 2018/19: What lies behind the gender pay gaps. Lower values (closer to zero) indicate lower levels of wage inequality and higher values (closer to 100) indicate higher levels of wage inequality.

Everyone stands to gain from closing the gender pay gap.

With higher earnings, women’s own welfare, agency, and opportunities have the potential to improve. This can, in turn, benefit their households and communities, because women invest more money than men into the education and health of their children—creating a virtuous cycle of development. Increased earnings for women also benefits governments (through increased tax revenue), businesses (through increasing purchasing power/consumer spending), and the wider economy.

What’s behind the gender pay gap?

Unfortunately, closing the gender pay gap is easier said than done. Several barriers and challenges exist, including:

1. The “motherhood penalty”: Unpaid care and domestic responsibilities impact the career progression of women.

After giving birth, women’s pay lags behind the pay of similarly educated and experienced men and women without children. Among married, full-time working parents of children under age 18, women still spend 50 percent more time than men engaging in care activities within the home. In lower-income contexts, unpaid care work burdens compound due to limited energy and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) infrastructure, adding to the time women must spend on domestic responsibilities. Indeed, women around the world spend 200 million hours daily collecting water for their households, further limiting the time they have for non-domestic tasks, including work and school.

2. Occupational sex segregation, coupled with the systemic undervaluation of “women’s work,” results in women-dominated industries and jobs attracting lower wages.

Women and men are concentrated in different sectors and positions. For example, women are more likely to be nurses, and men doctors. Women are more likely to be early childhood educators, and men professors. But women also make up a disproportionate percentage of workers in the informal sector (e.g., domestic workers), leaving them without any protection of labor laws, or social benefits such as pensions (creating the conditions for pensioner poverty), health insurance, or paid sick leave. Consequently, they are at a higher risk of having their wages withheld arbitrarily, receiving wages below the minimum wage, and experiencing sexual harassment, among other problems. Women are more likely to enter and remain in lower-paid occupations with fewer opportunities for advancement for many reasons including: (1) being tasked with unpaid care work responsibilities that limit their capacity to work in certain formal and high-paying occupations, and (2) being socialized into feminized roles (occupations that traditionally have a large percentage of women workers). Additionally, jobs women perform may be paid less precisely because women do them. When women enter an occupation dominated by men, wages tend to fall. Men appear to fear that if women move in, the work will be deemed to have become easier and less worthy of decent pay and status. This highlights the need to rethink how society values the work women typically perform.

3. Discrimination and bias in hiring and pay decisions.

Many companies’ recruitment processes are either gender-biased through their job advertisements and algorithms, or rely heavily on professional networks, given that people tend to recommend others similar to themselves for positions. For executive high-tech jobs, referred candidates are much more likely to be men than women, limiting women from integrating into the high-paying, men-dominated technology space. Beyond recruitment processes, employers may discriminate in pay when they rely on past salary history in hiring and compensation decisions, meaning pay decisions influenced by discrimination can follow women from job to job.

Calling all stakeholders to act

Addressing the barriers outlined above will require collaboration between governments, the private sector, and civil society organizations and labor unions, such as through multi-stakeholder forums like the Open Government Partnership (OGP) and the Equal Pay International Coalition (EPIC). Our proposed solutions for governments include:

1. Adopt and model best practice through the public sector workforce.

Public sector employment accounts for 45 percent of all formal employment in low-income countries, and between 20 and 40 percent in middle-income countries. Eliminating gender pay gaps in the public sector would go a long way toward narrowing overall gender pay gaps, both directly and through modeling to private sector companies on how to take effective actions.

2. Legislate a minimum living wage.

Governments that set a minimum living wage—one that allows workers to adequately cover living costs—have been shown to reduce earnings inequality across demographic groups. Also, minimum wage legislation offers a set of standards for labor unions to aim for when advocating for improved conditions for informal workers.

3. Legislate to mandate data publication on wages and overall compensation.

Evidence suggests that gaps shrink when companies are required to disclose them. The data published should incorporate intersecting demographic characteristics, including race, age, and disability status.

4. Legislate to prevent companies from requesting data on salary histories.

With historically lower wages comes a disadvantage in being able to negotiate for more compensation if salary history is disclosed. To ensure that job candidates have the information they need to assess whether a role fits their skills, experience, and financial compensation needs, firms should provide a transparent salary range for positions they seek to fill.

5. Invest in policies and programs that address occupational sex segregation.

Governments should consider setting targets or providing incentives for firms that hire more women in men-dominated sectors and vice versa. Governments can also prioritize job training and placement, providing necessary support for women to cross over into men-dominated fields.

6. Invest in social protection, parental leave, and public services.

Social protection schemes, low-cost or free services for childcare, the elderly, and people with disabilities should be prioritized, improved, and expanded. Such investments are vital to redistributing the unpaid care work that keeps many women out of the labor market, in part-time positions, or in precarious work. Our proposed solutions for business include:

1. Commit to and ensure equal pay for equal work.

Efforts to close pay gaps should include an annual audit of pay that is disaggregated by gender and other demographic characteristics. Businesses should also explore working with governments and platforms like OGP to advocate for binding legislation to ensure equal pay for equal work.

2. Address bias in the system to permanently close pay gaps.

When using advanced hiring platforms, companies should consider whether these tools actually result in more equitable, diverse, or gender balanced hiring outcomes. Without intention and oversight, hiring algorithms and technology platforms can introduce and reinforce gender and racial stereotypes.

3. Update and establish new policies that are gender-neutral and family friendly.

There is a positive relationship between paid parental leave and employee retention. Businesses should also confront the notion that care work is “women’s work” and actively encourage men to take advantage of parental leave.

4. Commit to gender balance in leadership and the broader workforce.

The lack of women in leadership roles contributes to the poor sense of belonging and isolation many women feel in male-dominated workplaces. While increasing the number of women in leadership is critical, it is equally important to establish a gender-responsive and inclusive culture throughout the company, including among low-wage and underrepresented workers who may face additional forms of discrimination.

5. Provide salary ranges for new positions.

Posting salary ranges will help ensure that women and other candidates who have traditionally faced discrimination are better equipped to negotiate. Showcasing salary ranges up front and providing the space to have conversations about pay will save time for both parties and foster trust through transparency.

6. Provide development and network-building opportunities.

On average, women and people of color do more “office housework” and have less access than white men to the opportunities they need to advance in their careers. Businesses should consider establishing rotational programs and sponsorship schemes to support the upskilling and development of all employees, with a special focus on women and people of color. We hope that these initial recommendations allow for more in-depth conversations about context-specific opportunities for progress, as well as concrete commitments by government officials, business leaders, and civil society organizations that result in meaningful change. For more detail, check out our memo here.

0 notes

cutsliceddiced · 4 years

Text

New top story from Time: I Let My Child Create Their Own Gender Identity. The Experience Has Been a Gift for Us Both

“What are you having?” I’d be standing in line at the post office or a movie theater, and I’d realize a stranger was staring at my belly. The kind person thought they were asking me a simple question with a simple answer: Is it a boy or a girl?

If you want to get technical, my partner Brent and I had found out our child’s sex chromosomes in the early stages of my pregnancy, and we had seen their genitals during the anatomy scan. But we didn’t think that information told us anything about our kid’s gender. The only things we really knew about our baby is that they were human, breech and going to be named Zoomer. We weren’t going to assign a gender or disclose their reproductive anatomy to people who didn’t need to know, and we were going to use the gender-neutral personal pronouns they, them and their. We imagined it could be years before our child would tell us, in their own way, if they were a boy, a girl, nonbinary or if another gender identity fit them best. Until then, we were committed to raising our child without the expectations or restrictions of the gender binary.

I have a gender-studies degree and a Ph.D. in sociology. In the decade before Zoomer was born, it was literally my job to study and educate others about gender. There was no shortage of gender-disparity statistics, but I felt confident that progress toward gender equity was gaining momentum. In my Sociology of Gender and Sexuality course, I would lecture on discrimination against queer people, the motherhood penalty, men’s higher suicide rate, violence against transgender women of color, and the way intersex people–those born with biological traits that aren’t typically male or female–are stigmatized or completely overlooked. But I also taught about the victory of same-sex marriage equality, more women running for office, fathers demanding family leave, the rising visibility of transgender actors in the media, and the movement to end intersex surgery.

With every new semester, the number of students asking me to call them by different names and use different pronouns than they were given at birth grew. Women confided that they were experiencing sexism from their chemistry professors. Men vented about the pressures of masculinity. These 18- to 20-something-year-olds were feeling crushed by gender stereotypes. I could relate. I was raised as a girl in the Mormon church, and it took a long time for me to untangle myself from the conditioning that the only things I should want (and could be good at) were marriage and motherhood.

I could see the trail of bread crumbs. How gender inequalities get their start in childhood. How girls do more chores than boys and are paid less allowance. How kids are dressed in shirts that say “sorry boys, Daddy says i can’t date until I’m 30,” yet when a child says they’re gay, they’re told they’re too young to know that. How girls are discouraged from running for student government. How boys are discouraged from playing with dolls. How queer and trans youth are kicked out of their homes. People have asked me to prove that gender-creative parenting will have positive outcomes. I double-dog dare someone to prove that hypergendered childhood is a roaring success.

Kids fare better in environments where they are accepted for who they are. The negative outcomes that are often experienced by queer and trans youth are mitigated by supportive families and friends. Parents take precautions to keep their children healthy and safe by enrolling them in swim lessons, teaching them to stay away from fire and cutting food into tiny pieces. Holding space for the possibility a child might be trans or nonbinary or queer is also preventative care.

The goal of gender-creative parenting is not to eliminate gender—the goal is to eliminate gender-based oppression, disparities and violence. The aim isn’t to create a genderless world; it’s to contribute to a genderfull one. We as a society have an opportunity to shake up childhood gender socialization in a way that creates more healthy and equitable adulthoods for everyone. What have we got to lose? The patriarchy? Good riddance.

The summer before I was pregnant, I noticed a young sprints track meet banner fastened to the chain-link fence of the local high school. I can’t wait till I have a little one who can run in that! I thought.

Three years later, I left that track meet in tears after I found out that despite assurances to the contrary, the 2- and 3-year-old girls would run in different heats than the boys. “I not running?” Zoomer asked as we drove away. I felt terrible for leaving. Zoomer just wanted to run. But I also would have felt terrible if I had stayed. It is these moments that plant the seeds that boys and girls are dramatically different, and in the case of track and field, that boys are better. I refused to have our family participate.

The experience was disappointing, if not unexpected. When I was pregnant, I would dream up hypothetical situations with cruel pediatricians refusing to use they/them pronouns and flight attendants treating Zoomer like a stereotype and anxiously think through how I would react to these circumstances. I was afraid that my family members might be so nervous about accidentally using a gendered pronoun for Zoomer, so nervous about offending me, that they would distance themselves from us.

But for the most part, the past four years have not been filled with tears and strife (at least no more tears than you’d find in any home of a young child and tired parents). Our life looks remarkably like a lot of other families’ lives, filled with joy and affirmation. And color. Lots of color.

Courtesy Kyl Myers (4)Top left: February 2016; Top right: June 2018; Bottom left: Father’s Day 2017; Bottom right: March 2016

When people think of gender-neutral, their minds often go to a grayish beige, potato-hued color palette. But we don’t dress Zoomer in burlap sacks, or only give them toys the color of Wheat Thins. We give them options, and they thoughtfully pick what they like the most. For a while, Zoomer’s favorite color was pink; then it was orange. They picked the pink, purple and aqua bedsheets; the fire-truck socks; the outer-space sleeping bag; and the violet climbing shoes. They wanted the Cars Pull-Ups one time and the Minnie Mouse ones the next. Zoomer has a stuffed dog named Dante that goes everywhere with them and a baby doll that they named DeeDee. Zoomer loves Play-Doh and molds neon-colored animals and pretend food. They say, “I’m not going to eat it.” Then I see that their teeth are bright blue, and they have, in fact, tried to eat it.

A common critique of gender-creative parenting is that “the kid will be confused,” but Zoomer doesn’t seem confused at all. In fact, they have a more nuanced understanding of sex and gender than a lot of adults. We teach them to use gender-neutral words until a person tells us about themself. We call kids friends. We have taught Zoomer about their own body without using boy-girl labels. Zoomer understands that some girls have penises and some boys have vulvas, and some intersex kids have vulvas and testes. Zoomer knows some daddies get pregnant and some nonbinary parents are called Zazas. At day care, I tell teachers, “Please snuggle them and wrestle with them. Please compliment their painted toenails and let them get muddy. Call them handsome and beautiful; sensitive and brave. Give them the opportunity to play with the Hot Wheels and the kitchen set.” Because Zoomer has been raised with a focus on inclusivity, they have an instinct to make everyone feel welcome. When a character on a kids’ show says, “Hello, boys and girls!” Zoomer adds, “And nonbinary pals!”

A friend of mine recently told me when she first found out how we were going to parent, she thought, That’s going to be endless work for Kyl. “But now I actually think that you are so lucky and had some great foresight,” she said. “I spend so much of my time tearing the walls down that people are trying to build around my daughters. People aren’t trying to build walls around Zoomer because they don’t know which walls to build.”

I wanted to give my child a gift. The gift of seeing people as more than just a gender. The gift of understanding gender as complex, beautiful and self-determined. I hadn’t considered how much of a gift I’d also be giving myself. While curating an experience for Zoomer to come to their own identity, I inadvertently started taking a closer look at mine too.

One day, Zoomer and I were playing hide-and-seek. They cupped their eyes as I hid in the pantry, then walked around the house mimicking the words we use when we are trying to find them. “Mommy, you in the plant? No … Mommy, you under the couch? No.” As they got closer, they called out, “Kyl! Where are you?”

Gender-creative parenting comes with a giant mirror and forces me to ask myself, “Kyl! Where are you?” I’ve examined my own gender identity and expression more in the past four years than I had in the three decades before becoming Zoomer’s parent. As I’ve tried to create an environment where Zoomer is free from the chains of binary gender, I am working to figure out what about my gender is authentic and what was prescribed to me, and is it even possible to differentiate at this point? I love my body, but I don’t love that I was assigned a specific gender role because of it. In my early 30s, I’m climbing out of the girl box I was placed in in 1986. I’m trying on new labels and pronouns, and giving myself the same encouragement to play with gender that I am giving my child.

Not everyone has the support that Brent and I have. We sprang gender-creative parenting on our families, and they decided to get on board. They shared in the emotional labor and took it upon themselves to educate our extended family and their co-workers, neighbors and friends. They are champions at using gender-neutral pronouns. Some of my friends have not been so lucky. They’ve lost touch with family members or have strained relationships because of their decision to do gender-creative parenting. I know of a grandparent who keeps a stash of clothing, so whenever their gender-creative grandchild comes over, they change them out of the outfit the child picked to put them in something more stereotypically associated with their sex. Some of my friends’ family members have called child protective services, reporting their grandchild is being abused, simply because they weren’t assigned a gender. This is also a reason I feel strongly about being a public advocate for parenting this way—many others don’t have the safety, support and resources to talk openly about it.

Around their fourth birthday, Zoomer started declaring a gender identity and claiming some gendered pronouns. Brent and I are honoring Zoomer’s identity and expression and answering all their questions in an age-appropriate and inclusive way. (I’m using they here because Zoomer is still exploring gender and I want them to have some autonomy over how they share their identity with the world.)

I’m witnessing my child create their own gender—and who Zoomer has become is greater than anything I could have imagined or assigned. Instead of us telling the children who they should be, maybe it’s the children who will teach us how to be. We just have to get out of their way.

Myers is the author of Raising Them: Our Adventure in Gender Creative Parenting, from which this essay is adapted

via https://cutslicedanddiced.wordpress.com/2018/01/24/how-to-prevent-food-from-going-to-waste

#Time #top stories #IFTTT #news

1 note · View note

newyorkprelawland-blog · 4 years

Text

Supreme Court’s Landmark Employment Decision Makes Waves

By Liam Farrell, Cornell University Class of 2022

June 27, 2020

The United States has been experiencing a long period of turmoil given the continuing Covid-19 pandemic and the civil unrest spurred by the tragic death of George Floyd. However, the Supreme Court made a case for equality with their landmark decision on June 15th. The long-awaited ruling, passing with a 6-3 vote, stated that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects gay and transgender workers under its language prohibiting workplace discrimination on the basis of sex. While the decision was shocking to many, especially those blind-sided by the justices supporting it, it undoubtedly serves as a key moment in the progress of United States labor law.

The language in Title VII of 1964’s Civil Rights Act was decidedly ambiguous, leading to a legal gray area that saw employers discharging workers on the basis of them being gay or transgender. The Act, prior to the Supreme Court’s recent decision, claimed that it was an unfair employment practice for an employer to “to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin”.[1] The defendants in the cases brought before the Court claimed sex to be a purely biological term in the context of the Act, barrign employers from discharging employees purely because of them being male or female, but allowing discrimination on the basis of personal choice or preference of sex. However, the Court did not validate this reasoning, instead choosing a more progressive stance, even with their decidedly conservative composition.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s first appointment to the Court, wrote the majority opinion on the matter and “was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan”.[2] In the decision, Gorsuch states that “we must decide whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender. The answer is clear. An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids”.[3] This monumental decision will bring change to employers across much of the nation, as more than 25 states previously had no law prohibiting employers from discharging gay or transgender workers based on their sexual orientation. Employees who feel that they were discriminated against at the workplace based on their gay or transgender status will now be able to file lawsuits against their employers that they may not have been able to previously. Such cases will have to include evidence of the alleged discrimination, and even then employers can attempt to claim that there were other factors that influenced their decision entirely independent of supposed discriminatory activity. Nonetheless, this decision gives gay and transgender employees a chance to advocate for the rights in a way that many of them have never been able to before.

In the majority opinion, Gorsuch goes on to demonstrate the broad nature of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, such that its language allows it to still be interpreted and applied to modern situations. He states that “those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have

anticipated their work would lead to this particular result. Likely, they weren’t thinking about many of the Act’s consequences that have become apparent over the years, including its prohibition against discrimination on the basis of motherhood or its ban on the sexual harassment of male employees. But the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands. When the express terms of a statute give us one answer and extratextual considerations suggest another, it’s no contest. Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit”.[4] With his words, Gorsuch demonstrates the power that statute holds. His reasoning that even though this decision’s interpretation of the text likely was not the intention of its authors, the law is not meant to exist in only a single period of time. In an independent interpretation of the decision, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden stated that “the Supreme Court has confirmed the simple but profoundly American idea that every human being should be treated with respect and dignity. That everyone should be able to live openly, proudly, as their true selves without fear”.[5] In a time of unrest, these sentiments serve as a beacon of equality and progress, proliferating the distinctly American value that the voices of its citizens will continue to be heard.

________________________________________________________________

[1] Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. n.d. https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964.

[2] Liptak, Adam. "Civil Rights Law Protects Gay and Transgender Workers, Supreme Court Rules." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. Last modified June 15, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/15/us/gay-transgender-workers-supreme-court.html.

[3] Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Nos. 17–1618, 17–1623, and No. 18-107 . SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, n.d. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/17-1618_hfci.pdf.

[4] Ibid.

[5] de Vogue, Ariane, and Devan Cole. "Supreme Court Says Federal Law Protects LGBTQ Workers from Discrimination." CNN. Last modified June 15, 2020. https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-lgbtq-employment-case/index.html.

0 notes

arplis · 4 years

Text

Arplis - News: Moms are multitasking more than ever before and it’s burning us out

Before the pandemic moms were already multitasking too much. Motherhood and multitasking are so linked in our culture that it can feel like a superpower, and years of news headlines about women's supposedly superior multitasking skills have reenforced this by suggesting that women are better at multitasking than men are.

But the science has shown that we are not. We are no more better suited to multitasking than men are, and the pandemic is forcing us to do more of it than ever before. New research suggests mothers in heterosexual marriages are now multitasking to the point of burning out—and this could create another crisis while we're already dealing with COVID-19.

We can't afford to let America's moms, the ones who are holding families and households together during the fight against coronavirus burn out. We need to address this now, because we can't afford to adhere to outdated gender norms in this economy. Moms are increasingly the breadwinners in American families, but still have to fight the perception that a father's job is the most important one in the household.

"In a lot of cases, gender trumps money," researcher Kristin Smith who wrote her Ph.D dissertation on the topic of gender roles tells CNN. "Our social roles are so much more powerful in decision-making than money."

It's hard to fight those social roles, and even dads who consider themselves feminists may leave certain things to a multitasking mom because of ingrained cultural norms.

We learn how to feed the baby while cooking dinner because the children are hungry.

We learn how to shower while simultaneously entertaining a toddler because even dry shampoo has its limits.

We learn how to answer emails with one hand while serving breakfast with the other while simultaneously tracking down lost shoes because there is no other choice.

And while dads do learn to multitask, the average mom does about 10 hours more multitasking per week than her male partner (and those are pre-pandemic numbers) and it's why fathers are, in general, happier than moms.

But we also know that they want to share that happiness and be more equal parents, but feel gender norms are holding them back. The pandemic is forcing so much unfortunate change on American families, but there is one kind of change that could be good by helping moms multitask less and giving dads the space to be full parents.

Work is still work even when it isn't paid

It is unfair to say that nothing has changed for stay at home parents, because they are doing more than ever before. When moms are not engaged in paid work they are often expected to do the majority of the childcare, but with many working partners now at home now is a chance for them to get more involved with the caregiving (and take some responsibilities off mom's plate).

Stay at home parents' workloads have increased at the same time as stress, anxiety and financial pressure have. Now is the time for partners to come together and have serious conversations about managing workloads. Everyone needs a break, even mom. Just because you're used to being an at-home parent does not mean you are used to this much pressure and the constant demands of raising children without childcare, school or social support.

How moms and dads can prevent a family breakdown by pivoting to "breadsharing"

Moms can't keep going at the pace they are. Many are working from home right now while attempting to homeschool and manage most of the childcare duties. There are only so many hours in the day and moms are burning out.

As Michelle P. King, author of The Fix: Overcome the Invisible Barriers That Are Holding Women Back at Work writes for Working Mother, "The Pandemic is the Perfect Time for Men to Embrace 'Breadsharing' Instead of Breadwinning."

In that piece King explains that this lockdown is giving us the opportunity for a cultural reset that frees dads from the confines of the breadwinner identity and frees moms from content multitasking."[M]anaging the integration of work and home life has never been more challenging. And it's falling disproportionately on women, who remain the default caretaker, teacher and chef, regardless of whether they also have a job," King writes.

Now is the time to change the dynamic by doing what Jules Barrueco suggests in her piece for InStyle: Admit that Mom's career is just as important as Dad's. This means that sometimes moms are going to have to draw a line on how much multitasking we can do and demand our partners do some, too.

"[S]ometimes advocating for the future of your career means standing before your partner with knots in your hair, with only five and a half painted toenails, wearing a pajama-outfit you've been wearing for one day too many, asking him to change the damn diaper because you're in the middle of a project. It means telling him you have an important call, so his fourth of the day will simply have to wait. It means handing him the plunger and letting him worry about what's happening on the other side of that door," Barrueco writes.

By painting moms as multitasking superheroes, we let everyone else off the hook

Moms have less time to themselves than ever before, and what we're doing right now (working remotely while also trying to teach fourth grade science) isn't flexible work, it's crisis mode. People working from home are working three hours longer per day than before the pandemic, Bloomberg reports, in part because we're always online and also thanks to constant interruptions from children.

Rachel Mushahwar, the vice president and general manager of U.S. sales and marketing at Intel, tweeted: "My 14 year old is taking French class in bed, my 12 year old is asking for food I don't have, my 10 year old is refusing to read, and my 8 year old is in my lap while on calls learning to multitask."

Mushahwar is obviously very good at multitasking, but that's also a recipe for burnout.

It's time for a conversation about moms and multitasking, because the truth is we're not any better at it, we're just forced to do it. And we can't keep this up forever.

Arplis - News source http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Arplis-News/~3/oLM58bXRS_Y/moms-are-multitasking-more-than-ever-before-and-it-s-burning-us-out

0 notes

jeremystrele · 5 years

Text

The Best Of Our Family Column in 2019!

Family

by Sally Tabart

Clare and her husband Marty at home with her twin sons Oscar and Elijah (12) and daughter Asha (16). Flowers by Babylon Flowers. Plants by Hello Botanical. Photo – Sarah Collins of Work + Co.

Clare Bowditch On Overcoming Self-Doubt + Being Your Own Kind Of Girl

What do you find works best for you in overcoming your self-doubt? I know you named your anxiety ‘Frank’, which is great.

‘Frank’ is an umbrella title for a feeling of foreboding. I came up with it during the very early recovery stage of my breakdown, when I didn’t really know how to separate my emotions. Now I know it was just anxiety that needed training. Reading Jack Kornfield helped a lot, as did a really practical little book by Dr Claire Weekes called Peace from Nervous Suffering. She was a stalwart of the Australian post-war veteran field. She helped people deal with anxiety before it really had a name. Slowly, slowly I was able to work past it, but it took until I was 27 to have the guts to put my own songs in the world. I’d been building that courage from age 21. I still have self-doubt, but these days it can motivate me. It tells me I’m onto something. My songs have always sat in me like pets. I can’t rush them. They come when they’re ready and my job is to make room for them. So I just keep showing up with my pen and paper.

Revisit our original interview with Clare Bowditch here!

Anthony and Catherine have ‘become tedious, active seniors’ hitting the gym at 6am! Photo – Sarah Collins of Work + Co.

Catherine hopes her boys to embrace the notion of logical, not biological, family. Photo – Sarah Collins of Work + Co.

Author + Comedian Catherine Deveny On Raising A Trio Of Boys

You’ve written on what you term ‘the narcissism of motherhood… the competition and judging each other from labour to Year 12 results to grandchildren.’ It’s so true, but why? I imagine you have an excellent approach for dealing with this or calling it out?

Sometimes I say, ‘That’s amazing about your high achieving, good looking, well-balanced kids – congrats! My kids play computer games, watch porn and make bongs.’ I won’t enable their competition parenting. When they ask, ‘What school do your kids go to?’ I respond, ‘What difference does it make?’ and flat out refuse to answer until they give me a rational answer. They never do.

Revisit our no-holds-barred interview with Catherine Deveny here!

With artwork for his latest exhibition The Space Into Bicheno opening on September 18th. Photo – Alisha Gore for The Design Files.

Artist Julian Meagher On Creating Through The Parenting Fog

Has fatherhood influenced the way you paint?

One of the biggest challenges in painting, or any creative outlet I would imagine, is to not overcook it. Fatherhood has forced me to let the work live and breathe on its own. I am painting with a lot more freedom. When I start a work I feel like I am actually now taking a run-up before I jump off the cliff. Fatherhood has forced me to accept that I’m not in control of anything at all, and nothing is really about me, so I feel more comfortable taking risks. I’m making a lot more failed paintings than I used to, but I’m making a lot more really successful ones too, I think.

Revisit the original story here.

Chloe Brookman and her family at home in Byron Bay. Photo – Lisa Sorgini.

The Co-Founder of Olli Ella Talks Business + Babies

What have you learned about yourself across your parenting journey? What do you need to be the most effective parent you can be?

To keep a sense of humour and to not try to be perfect, because it’s impossible. You will make yourself miserable in the process. I’ve learned to really sit with the chaos and the mayhem, to not wish away a second of it because it goes by too quickly.

Revisit the original story here.

Meika, 3, also started kinder – it has been a big year for the family! Photo – Sarah Collins of Work + Co. for The Design Files.

Hendrix, 5, started school as Sophie began her debut AFLW season this year. Photo – Sarah Collins of Work + Co. for The Design Files.

Meet AFLW Forward And Mum Of Two Sophie Abbatangelo

It’s been said that sport has the power to effect cultural change and advance gender equity. What does it mean to you, and your daughter Meika, to be a part of this?

I grew up watching men in my family play football, from my Dad and brother to my uncles and cousins. Even though I preferred to kick with the boys, I was still supported when I wanted to play competition.

I have always been passionate about equal rights and recognition, not just for athletes but for women in general. If Meika grows up to love sport as much as I do, I feel confident that she’ll be encouraged and accepted within any sport she chooses to play. And if she does aspire to play football, it excites me to think how amazing she could be with the talent and growth that is coming through now. I just hope she uses her strength and ferocity in competitive sport rather than on Hendrix and me!

As for following in my footsteps, I hope she feels empowered to challenge herself with things she might find difficult and if she does choose a sporting pathway, listens to her coaches and finds herself a great group of friends.

Revisit the original story here.

Que and Alfie (4) at home. Photo – Alisha Gore for The Design Files.

Que Minh Luu Talks Parenting Through Producing, Class Systems + Grief

What’s your experience with self-doubt? Any advice on how to not let it stop you doing ‘The Thing’?

I think age really helps. I’m in a job now that gives me some level of agency to make some kind of change, but for years I was highly anxious and full of self-doubt. I had a really great partner and he was my cheer squad, critic and fellow brainstormer. All through my 20s, I just couldn’t visualise where I wanted to be and how I was going to do it. He helped me to be strategic, rather than just focussing on whatever problem was in front of my nose. I spent a lot of time being afraid of looking like an idiot and now I’m okay with being an idiot.

Revisit original story here.

John, Augie and Alison cruising around Collingwood. Photo – Sarah Collins.

Alison Bell On The Joys And Humiliations Of Working Mum Life

How do you work through the guilt that comes with being away from home?

I am no role model there. It’s really, really tough. One consolation, and this is going to sound overly earnest and ridiculous, is that I believe in the work that I’m doing. I know not everyone has that luxury. I’m in a very privileged position where I get to practice my craft and make something I believe in. It does help to acknowledge that fact and recognise this great opportunity I’ve got. I can’t pretend that the feedback doesn’t help. That probably sounds ego-driven, but I don’t want to make work that doesn’t speak to people. I don’t want to put all of my creative/work energy into something that no one connects with.

Revisit original story here.

Royce is the Creative Director of VICE Australia, where he’s been working for the last 11 years. Photo – Sarah Collins.

Kalu and Royce make RIDICULOUSLY cute kids! Photo – Sarah Collins.

VICE Australia’s Creative Director Royce Akers On Dad Guilt + Life In The Suburbs

What’s your experience with Dad guilt? Is it a thing?

I feel guilty about constantly talking about them. I feel guilty when I’m not with them. When I get mad at them I feel guilty afterward. So without googling Dad Guilt, I’m pretty sure I get it from time to time. I’ve had other Dads tell me they feel guilty watching Bluey. The Dad on that show has become a low-key role model, which is hilarious and awesome.

Revisit the original story here.

The family pictured with the newest addition, Veda (4 months). Photo – Sarah Collins of Work + Co.

Stripping-Down The Family-Business Juggle With Pop + Scott

Moving across time, how might you like the girls to remember you to their own families – what do you think your parental legacy will be?

I’d love for them to remember us as a team! That their Mama and Papa were equals, and that their roles in caring for them and the family home were shared.

Revisit the original story here.

0 notes

wcva · 5 years

Text

Can volunteering help to achieve better health and care?

A seminar, organised by Helpforce and Wales School of Social Care Research, together with Social Care Wales, brought together 36 people from different backgrounds in research, volunteering practice, planning and policy. Fiona Liddell, Helpforce Cymru Manager, reflects on the event, the emerging themes and the role of Helpforce.

Am ddarllen hwn yn Gymraeg?

Helpforce Evidence manager, Dr Roland Marden, gave a presentation based on a general evidence review commissioned by Helpforce and also some early findings from Helpforce Volunteer Innovators programme. Helpforce is working with 12 NHS Trusts in England who are undertaking pilot intervention projects (funded by NHS England) and exploring how to transform volunteering in and around hospital settings, to increase the impact on patients, staff, services as well as on volunteers themselves.

The experience of these projects and partners, together with the impact data collected and the sharing of ideas through a wider learning network, are helping us to grow an understanding of how to develop and design impactful volunteering within healthcare settings and what needs to be in place for this to flourish. The aim is to identify what are the essential ingredients of success that enable good models of volunteering to be transferable, and what needs to be locally adapted or improvised.

These are significant questions for the NHS as whole, although often not of major interest to those who are running projects at a local level.

Wales’ perspective

Three panel members responded to Roland Marden’s presentation: Carl Cooper, Angela Hughes and Nick Andrews, bringing the perspectives of a county voluntary council, nursing and patient experience and social care research, respectively. They set the stage for some wide ranging discussions.

Our strategic frameworks in Wales (in A Healthier Wales and the Social Services and Wellbeing Act) encourage thinking about the prevention of ill-health, provision of services closer to home and building integrated models of care which cut across the traditional boundaries of health, social care and voluntary sectors.

Regional Partnership Boards give an opportunity for integrated thinking, planning and commissioning and for involving a wider range of partners in shaping services that are fit for the future. There is vast potential for individuals to contribute to better health and care, both as citizens in their communities and as volunteers within voluntary and public sector organisations, such as the NHS.

Wouldn’t it be good if, as a matter of course, regional planning included volunteer solutions to meet identified health priorities and that appropriate resources were channelled to enable this?

What gets in the way?

Arguing for volunteering is like arguing for ‘motherhood and apple pie’. Everyone knows it is a ‘good thing’ for individual and community wellbeing. It contributes to several of Wales’ wellbeing goals; not only A Healthier Wales, but also a Resilient Wales, a More Equal Wales and a Wales of Cohesive Communities. (Where volunteering is a pathway to employment it contributes also to a Prosperous Wales and where Welsh language is used it contributes to a Wales of Vibrant Culture and Welsh Language).

But this is not enough to convince planners and funders to invest in volunteering, nor to trust its potential to make a difference to health and social outcomes.

We need evidence. There is a place for academic research, to answer key questions with robust evidence that is valid (measures what it is supposed to) and reliable (produces consistent results). But there other kinds of evidence too - more iterative methods of evaluation that can help to improve practice and to demonstrate impact. It is possible to ‘learn backwards’, reflecting on what has happened and what has contributed to a desired and identified outcome.

The Developing Evidence -Enriched Practice project at Swansea University is leading the way on building links between research and practice in social care and developing methodologies for measuring meaningful impact. Inspiring Impact offers online resources and training which is geared particularly at voluntary organisations as well as the opportunity to engage in peer learning networks Helpforce is developing an Insight and Impact toolkit, based on its experience of evaluating the Volunteer Innovators programme. When complete, this will be available as a framework for others to use.

We need more asset-based and joined up thinking – to draw on and build upon the existing resources available. When it comes to volunteering, voluntary organisations have skills, experience and a capacity for innovation which cannot be ignored. But the environment in which voluntary organisations operate is fragile and the vagaries of funding and commissioning mean that good projects, good staff and continuity are lost for all the wrong reasons. The challenge remains to build up integrated systems of care in which different players have their place: professionals, paid workers and volunteers in statutory and voluntary organisations, creating a joined up and sustainable fabric.

We need to continue developing flexible and appropriate patterns of volunteer involvement. In formal settings, consistent standards of behaviour and practice are important. But that should not mean ‘one size fits all’ in relation to recruitment and support, for example. Volunteering could be made more attractive and more accessible for young people, for those with a limited period of time available, and for those with particular skills or needs.

A recent survey of more than 10,000 adults, Time Well Spent, gives a good insight into what makes for a quality volunteering experience for volunteers and this can help us to tailor our volunteering ‘offer’ to a more diverse range of volunteers. The Investing in Volunteers quality standard, currently undergoing review, offers a practical framework for volunteer management.

More informally, community spirit and neighbourliness contribute significantly to our health and wellbeing, with large amounts of human kindness nurturing health and happiness at the grassroots!

What can Helpforce do?

Helpforce began barely 3 years ago, born out of the NHS in England and with a vision of transforming volunteering within the NHS. It has developed rapidly and now works with a range of NHS and voluntary sector partners. As well as working with local projects as described above, it is creating readiness and capacity for volunteer involvement by, for example, working with clinical leaders and by developing educational resources and a peer learning network. It has recently been contracted by NHS England to support the process of developing integrated, regional health and care services which embed volunteering.

Helpforce works with partner organisations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland who are developing the work in ways that are relevant to their own national contexts.

In Wales, Helpforce Cymru, hosted by WCVA, has a role in continuing to raise the debate, influencing those in power to think differently about the possibilities for volunteer involvement and urging investment in the resources and leadership that support this. It flags exemplary practice, sharing stories for others to learn and be inspired. It connects individuals and projects with national initiatives (Wales and UK) and wider expertise. It is bringing a Wales perspective to some of Helpforce UK wide developments, including an education portal for volunteers and volunteer managers and induction standards for volunteers in health and care. Last but by no means least, it has obtained funding from Welsh Government to enable the development of some pilot projects in Wales, as part of a UK wide Helpforce/Marie Curie programme to recognise, enhance and expand the role of volunteering in end of life care.

Helpforce is working with Third Sector Support Wales (WCVA and 19 CVCs), Welsh Government and other partners to develop the potential of volunteering to support health and social care services in Wales.

For more information contact Fiona Liddell [email protected] 029 2043 1730

0 notes

freaoscanlin · 7 years

Text

Given Unsought, Part 3

Jemma came back from Maveth with a little something in tow. She and Daisy attempt to deal. Part 1, 2

A/N: hey, all! Welcome to part 3! Daisy and Jemma have a heart to heart about consequences of Jemma’s choices, and a little trio bonding over horror movies is had. This is the last part of the first trimester, which according to the websites is when all the morning sickness typically happens. Canon-compliant warnings apply. Rated PG-13, 3912 words.

Week Ten

Part and parcel of surviving life in the Playground, with their rooms stacked like Legos and the walls thinner than the shell around Hunter’s masculinity, meant developing a knack for finding spots to be alone, and for avoiding others who wanted to do the same. As Mack put it, sometimes quality alone time at SHIELD meant pretending not to see the other fifteen agents brooding in the room with you.

Daisy had her spots. The lounge on sublevel C that smelled like old man and shoe polish. The mess hall on Tuesday afternoons. Fitz and Simmons’ lab when they had assays to be run downstairs. And as a courtesy, she left others alone to brood—with the exception of Fitz. She needed a scapegoat to make her watch those horror movies that would invariably keep her awake, and whatever, Fitz brooded way too much anyway. She left Hunter to his sulks, Bobbi to her pensive reverie, and Mack to his philosophical musings. If May’d had a brooding spot before she left, well, Daisy had never found it, but no way would Daisy have ever disturbed her. There was a woman who believed in “me time,” and Daisy could respect that.

But now Daisy broke all her rules and picked her way through the hydraulic supports for the hangar doors, careful not to step anywhere that would make Mack sigh at her. She had two brown bottles dangling from her left hand and a determined look in place.

“Hey,” she said.

Jemma, who’d been staring at her feet rather than the clear skies overhead, looked up swiftly. A smile appeared. “Daisy. You found me.”

“Should’ve disabled the cameras if you were gonna give the warden the slip. Here.” Daisy held out one of the bottles. “Got you the closest thing to beer you can have.”

“Just because it has the word ‘beer’ on the label does not actually make it similar, I must point out.”

Daisy took a seat, grimacing as the cold immediately ate through her jeans. She could see a comm unit, no doubt “borrowed,” resting by Jemma’s knee, which would warn her of any incoming or outgoing quinjets and allow her time to get out of the way of the doors. But apart from that, it was a peaceful spot for quiet reflection. Nobody would think to look atop the Playground, and it held a really pretty view of the stars. The November wind was particularly cutting tonight. Daisy wished she’d grabbed cocoa instead of root beer, even if it would’ve made climbing more difficult.

Carbonation hissed as she cracked open her bottle of root beer. She tapped it against Jemma’s. “Feels like all those times we used to sneak Ward’s beers on the Bus.”

“Mm-hmm. He hated that.”

“Good.”

Jemma traced her finger along the edge of the bottle label. “You could’ve brought a beer for yourself. There’s no need to abstain simply because I am.”

“Drinking beer when you can’t is cruel, Simmons.” Though she would have preferred it. The root beer was too sweet, cloying and sticky and cold. “Solidarity, sister.”

“I notice this noble sacrifice doesn’t extend as far as your morning coffee.” Jemma bumped her shoulder against Daisy’s, smirking.

Daisy grinned back at her. “It’s better for everyone if I don’t give up my morning coffee. Morale plummets, things get shaky, you know.”

“You could try going to bed at a reasonable hour.”

“Too sensible. Coffee’s easier and bonus, it doesn’t judge me for my sleep cycles.”

“Fair.” Jemma sighed. “I dreamed about coffee in the other dimension.”

Daisy raised her eyebrows.

Fond exasperation laced a second sigh from Jemma. “Very well. I’ll confess: I dreamed about tea. Brewed in a proper, actual kettle—”

“Someday you’ll have to tell me about the microwave that hurt you, to make you hate them so much.”

“—at just the right temperature, and steeped to absolute perfection. A dollop of milk. The taste, the warmth. The caffeine.” Jemma rested her head back, her eyes closed like she was dreaming of it then, too. “After hugging Fitz, and you, and Coulson, and everybody, it was going to be the first thing I did. Brew myself a proper cuppa and drink it at the window, basking in proper sunlight.”

Daisy’s lips curled up. She’d seen Jemma do exactly that on countless mornings on the Bus. “Sounds like a good dream.”

“It was. I’ve had every part of it but the caffeine now.” Jemma set the root beer aside without drinking any. She let out a long breath and rubbed her hands down her thighs. “I’m ten weeks along.”

“Congratulations,” Daisy said slowly, suspecting this might be why Jemma had come up to the roof in the first place.

Jemma surprised her by leaning over and resting her head on Daisy’s shoulder, not saying a thing. She rarely initiated contact first, and it was usually only a hand pat or a hug. But it felt like a storm might be brewing deep inside, and all of the words kept quiet in the past four weeks might come spilling out. She’d been back a month and the only person she’d really talked to, it seemed, was Dr. Garner. With May and Hunter still gone, Jemma quiet, Coulson obsessed with Rosalind Price, and Fitz buried in portal calculations, it had been a very odd and disconnected time for Daisy. She wrapped an arm around Jemma.

“Is ten weeks significant?” she asked. “Confession: I haven’t read the books yet. I mean, I started, but maybe Bobbi had a point about me never reading.”

“It’s near the end of the first trimester. The books cautioned about waiting to tell others until after the ten-week mark had passed,” Jemma said, her voice dull. “Well, ten to twelve weeks. The chances of a miscarriage decrease significantly then. So it’s prudent to wait just in case it didn’t take. To avoid awkwardness and painful reminders.”

“Did you even want kids?” Daisy asked, as she’d never really had that sort of conversation with anybody on the team. Growing up in the system, kids were such a weird subject. She liked them, and babies were cute, but the whole motherhood thing felt strange and ill-fitting to her. Possibly because she’d been taken from her own mother, and the woman had turned out to be kind of a vampire.

It was bound to leave a mark.

“Someday, I did,” Jemma said. “In the distant future. I’m a scientist, with plans. I have goals. I’m not—I’m not careless. There was supposed to be a proper order. I’d meet someone, fall in love, an acceptable amount of time would pass, they would propose or I would, and then a wedding, time to be married as adults enjoying each other. I’d be running a proper lab, by then, and writing groundbreaking papers in my field. Then, and only then, children.”

“Equal-opportunity proposals? Very forward of you.”

“I’m a strong woman, Daisy, I know my own mind.”

“It’s one of my favorite things about you,” Daisy said, letting out a laugh without meaning to. Jemma wrinkled her nose at her. “I’m a little bit in awe of you for even having a plan. I can’t even figure out what I’m having for breakfast when I wake up in the morning.”

��You’ve got other admirable qualities.” Jemma’s voice grew quiet and impossibly small. “It wasn’t supposed to happen this way.”

“You have options, you know. Whatever you choose to do, I’ve got your back. And nobody will judge you, whatever choice you make.” Daisy took a sip of her root beer, which definitely hadn’t improved. She added, “Unless you name him Alistair. Then I’ll judge.”

“Hey! I have an uncle named Alistair and I’ll have you know he’s a lovely man.”

“Them’s the breaks,” Daisy said.

“Oh, Daisy.” Jemma shook her head, finally lifting it off of Daisy’s shoulder. She didn’t pull away, so Daisy could feel the tension rippling up her shoulders. “I don’t think I want to…not what you’re suggesting. What if Will never makes it back and this baby is all that’s left of him?”

“And what if he does come back and he wants nothing to do with it? You’re the one here and now, you have to make the choice that’s right for you and that’s right for this baby. I saw so many kids that their parents didn’t care, or didn’t take them into account and they ended up in those homes, just like me.” The words came tumbling out before Daisy could stop them. She swallowed hard and shut up, mostly because if she kept talking, she suspected her voice might break.

Jemma grabbed her hand. “It wouldn’t be like that, ever, if I have this child. I wouldn’t be doing that out of a sense of obligation, and I wouldn’t leave the child without backups in place.”

“Right. You’re right. Sorry for even suggesting—”

“No, Daisy, no, you’re completely in the right.” Jemma grabbed her hand. “It’s a sore subject, I have to figure.”

“A little.” Daisy’s laugh was humorless. “And in the end, it turns out that I’m one of the rare cases. My parents did want me. But…is it too flippant to say ‘shit happens?’”

“Sore subject,” Jemma said again. “I don’t know if I want—actually, no. What I mean to say is that it doesn’t feel real, even though I’ve seen the tests. But now ten weeks have passed and I have to make choices. I was hoping it would feel real by now.”

“Choices?”

“I’ll need to decide my future with SHIELD. Less fieldwork, obviously, and I’ll need to reduce my working hours dramatically. I don’t think Agent Coulson would approve a crèche, not with how dangerous things get in the Playground, so naturally I’ll need to look into that eventually.”

Daisy made a mental note to look up what a crèche was.

“Bobbi will need to step up and take over more of my responsibilities in the field.” Jemma was fully rambling now, lost in her own thoughts. She tilted her head. “And of course I’ll need to prepare Fitz so he accepts that, and my moving out of the Playground.”

“Wouldn’t he just go with you?” Daisy asked, baffled.

Jemma frowned. “Why would he—oh! We’re not together. We went—he took me to a restaurant right after I came back, and it was…” She blew out a breath. “It was a bloody disaster, honestly.”

The correct and friendly response would be to offer sympathy. Daisy felt more like dancing, and had absolutely no idea why. “That sucks. I was pulling for you two.”

“I think we both were, but I need him as my friend. Navigating coming back from another dimension whilst pregnant, on top of a romantic relationship that could ruin everything? Can you imagine the stress?”

“Right,” Daisy said. Strangely, she no longer felt like dancing. “Going from friends to being together while dealing with all of that, it’d be a nightmare.”

“Thank you for seeing it right away. It took me forever to persuade Fitz.” Jemma sagged a little. “And I’ll have to tell my parents. The easiest lie might be that Will was a fling of some sort. Just in case…”

“We’re going to get him back.”

“As ever, I appreciate your optimism, but in this case, I must be pragmatic. Even if we get him back…he was somebody who was there, you know? I don’t know how a relationship in the real world would work, or if I even want that. So, a fling it is.”

“How’re the elder Simmonses going to react? Are they super traditional about this sort of thing?”

“I expect Dad would have preferred that I get married and the like first, but Mum’s somewhat of a free spirit.”

Daisy twisted suddenly, giving her friend a wide-eyed look. “Free spirit? Simmons, is your mother a hippie?”

“She may have taken part in protests and marches.” Jemma straightened up primly.

Daisy laughed and finished her root beer. “Go Mama Simmons.”

“She’ll be very pleased, no doubt, to have your approval. I’m grateful that Coulson never told them I was missing, as that might’ve invoked more questions that I’m willing to answer.” Jemma glanced over when Daisy gave her a confused look. “They think I took a lab job when SHIELD fell. Fitz, too. They have no idea about what we do, and I’ve no desire to tell them. Adding a baby to that mix? It’s something of a nightmare. In addition, once I tell them I’m pregnant, it really is real.”

Daisy looked down at Jemma’s midsection. “Hate to be the one to tell you this, but it’s real,” she said.

“I know.” Jemma sighed and rested her elbows on her knees, staring up at the sky and falling silent.

Daisy would have been content to sit beside her all night and let her have her quiet reflection, but: “Simmons?”

“Yes?”

“I lost all feeling in my ass, like, twenty minutes ago. It’s cold. Let’s go inside.”

Jemma laughed. “Yes. Let’s.” She collected the neglected soda bottle and comms unit and climbed to her feet, holding out her hand. Daisy wasn’t sure why she didn’t let go as they made their way back across the hangar roof to the stairs. But she definitely didn’t mind.

Week Eleven

“Why are men so frustrating?” Daisy asked as Mack lowered the quinjet ramp. “Is it, like, a thing that you learn in the womb? Is there a secret man school where you take lessons? Is it sponsored by Axe body spray?”

“I don’t know, but yes it’s probably a thing like that, there’s no school, we might take lessons—I’ll never tell, and no, we prefer to smell better than that.” Mack wheeled a flat of boxes down the ramp, parking it out of major hangar traffic. He walked past her, back onto the jet. “Let me take a wild stab in the dark here—someone’s having man troubles.”

“What gave it away?” Daisy climbed aboard the quinjet to help him unload the cargo.

“Lincoln again?”

“The ATCU almost caught up to him. In getting away, he fried the power grid for a small city near Augusta.”

“Maine or Georgia? Never mind, not important,” Mack said, catching Daisy’s expression.

“The more property damage he does, the harder it is to convince the ATCU to bring him in peacefully.” Daisy held up a bag. “This is a lot of potatoes.”

“Bobbi’s a fan. Lincoln will come in when he’s good and ready. He’ll learn there are people he can trust here.”

Daisy wasn’t so sure. The longer Lincoln remained on the run felt like a personal slight, even though she knew it had nothing to do with her. Coming from Afterlife, he’d been skeptical of SHIELD from the start. And he wasn’t wrong to be—Coulson had pretty much sold him out to the ATCU. But he couldn’t just kiss her and decide she wasn’t capable of handling all this weird shit.

“I guess I’m just a little upset because I was kind of hoping this whole thing would’ve passed by now. And if he comes in now, he gets stuffing and turkey.” Daisy grabbed the last box to carry down and load onto the flat, trailing behind Mack. She’d really hoped Lincoln would be done with this fugitive thing by now. Having him there with her team on Thanksgiving would have been amazing.

But no, the world continued to be stupid.

She helped Mack transport all of the food for the feast to the kitchens for the staff to whip into shape under the direction of Coulson, who’d made the holiday his personal mission this year for some reason. Afterward, she spent a couple hours trying to break through ATCU firewalls—unsuccessfully—until a text from Fitz arrived. Daisy glanced over the message once and immediately set her laptop to the side, heading for the den.

“Mack says you’ve been asking about why men are terrible again,” Fitz said when Daisy dropped onto the couch next to him. He held out the bowl of popcorn as an offering.

“You, Coulson, and him, you’re all excluded from that.”

“Good. Wouldn’t want you to think I’m terrible.”

“Never.” Daisy rested her head on his shoulder, which she knew he hated—or pretended to hate. Sometimes she and Jemma messed with him by using excessive amounts of affection, and he’d bat at them irritably. It was such a high school thing to do, but it wasn’t like any of them had had a normal experience there. They had to make up for lost time. “What’s on the cinematic menu tonight?”

“Even though it’s a Wednesday and not our typical Saturday?” Fitz stressed, as he generally liked to gripe about Thanksgiving being on a Thursday. “We’re now considered off-duty, so we’ll be doing a double showing. Funny Face and Duck Soup.”

“What? Those aren’t horror movies.”

“Jemma’s joining us as soon as she’s off the phone with her parents.”

“After everything we’ve lived through, horror movies can’t be that scary for her. She should be able to deal! C’mon. Something with a lot of blood and some quality creepiness. You know you want to.”

Fitz definitely did look tempted. After a moment, he nodded but he gave her a sideways glance. “Fine by me, but it’s your bed she’s crawling into when she can’t sleep later, not mine. I’m locking my door. She’s a cover hog and maintenance still hasn’t fixed that draft in my room.”

“Acceptable losses,” Daisy said, sitting up. “Play the scary movie, Fitz.”

She’d already jumped three times—and had gotten into two arguments with Fitz about the plausibility of torture scenes—before she heard Jemma’s footsteps. Jemma tiptoed in, made a face as the viscera onscreen, and settled herself between them, collecting the popcorn bowl from Fitz. “You two are going to give yourselves nightmares,” she said.

“I’m not scared,” Fitz and Daisy said in unison, and Jemma shook her head at them.

As much as it delivered on the creepy front, the movie wasn’t one of their better selections, even though it made the three of them jump. When Fitz let out an involuntary “no!” at the main lady being menaced, Daisy and Jemma teased him mercilessly. He tried to return the favor, picking on them about drooling over the main dude in a shirtless scene, but Daisy and Jemma merely giggled.

“You two are the worst,” Fitz said in disgust, stealing the popcorn bowl from Jemma. “Should be ashamed of yourselves, you should, ogling him like a piece of meat. Of manflesh!”

“Clearly he takes the time to work out, and we’re…appreciating his hard work, aren’t we, Simmons?”

“It’s only right to acknowledge it, Fitz,” Jemma said, giving him a gigantic smile. “He works so hard.”

Fitz took a giant handful of popcorn and muttered something about bad influences. Daisy threw a kernel at him and pointed innocently at Jemma when he whipped about in indignation.

Hot men or not, though, the plot grew a little predictable for her and the jump scares became passé. Fitz continued to absently shovel popcorn into his mouth, absorbed in the film, but Daisy noticed that Jemma had begun to stare off into space, mind clearly somewhere else.

Daisy nudged her shoulder and gave her a questioning look. “What’s going on?”

“I told my mum and dad,” Jemma whispered, leaning away from Fitz.

“How’d they take it?”

“Shocked, I think. But happy for me. I pretended I was happy about it, for their sake.”

“Yikes,” Daisy said, as that sentence left a lot to unpack.

“It’s fine,” Jemma said. She forced a smile, leaning even closer to Daisy so that she was whispering directly in her ear. “They asked if it was Fitz’s. That was a bit awkward.”

“A bit?” Daisy asked a little too loudly, and Jemma shushed her. Daisy wrinkled her nose back at her and dropped back to the whisper. “Bet you feel better now that you told them, though.”

Jemma frowned, looking upward as she gave the matter some thought. “You’re right. I do feel better.”

“I always feel loads better when I break down and tell Coulson whatever I’ve been keeping from him. Last week, I—”

“I’m sorry, am I interrupting gossip night? I thought this was movie night,” Fitz said.

“Sorry, Fitz,” Jemma said.

“Yeah, sorry,” Daisy added.

On screen, the killer swung his machete. Entrails flew everywhere, inspiring Jemma to gasp “Oh good lord!” and hide her face in Daisy’s shoulder.

“Now that’s properly gruesome!” Fitz said, his eyes lighting up.

“You okay there, Simmons?” Daisy asked.

She didn’t move. “Let me know when it’s over.”

“The gross part? That’s over.”

“No, the movie. The whole thing.”

Daisy laughed and shifted to get more comfortable and to make it easier for Jemma to hide her face. From the squeaking sounds occasionally emerging from under her arm, she figured Jemma had to be peeking. They stayed that way for the rest of the movie, Fitz occasionally shushing them whenever they whispered to each other.

When the credits rolled, and the main character had successfully vanquished the killer at the cost of all of her friends’ lives, Daisy carefully sat up and extricated her arm from beneath Jemma. She tried to be nonchalant about getting the feeling to return.

“Can’t we watch a comedy?” Jemma asked, blinking owlishly as she sat up. “Ooh, a romantic comedy. Something with dancing.”

“Nothing black and white,” Daisy said.

“No Cary Grant,” Fitz said at the same time. He thought about it. “And no cats.”

After a good deal of bickering, mostly from Fitz, they found a movie in the archives that met all of their criteria. Fitz relinquished the popcorn and laid down on his part of the couch, resting his head in Jemma’s lap. He didn’t even complain when Daisy scrunched her fingers through his curls. The movie, however, did not get such consideration. “I’ve always wondered how everybody automatically knows the words to these songs,” he said as Gene Kelly and Donald O’Connor tapped their way through an elocution lesson.

“Oh, Fitz. It’s make-believe.”

“That doesn’t make me any less curious. Make-believe or not, it should be based on reality, shouldn’t it? You don’t see Daisy bursting into song randomly, with—with Coulson joining in!”

“No, but I would pay good money to,” Daisy said.

“I took two years of tap-dancing lessons as a kid,” Coulson said, making all three of them jump as he crossed behind the couch to collect a beer from the fridge. He settled on one of the overstuffed chairs and pointed his beer at the tap-dancing on screen. “I was not up to this level, however.”

“Maybe you should practice,” Daisy said. “I’ve heard dancing’s a good way to keep in shape for older people.”

Coulson smiled benignly at her. “I’ll take that under advisement.”

Boy was she going to pay for that crack later, Daisy could tell. But it was worth it, for the way she could feel Jemma giggling next to her. As the movie played on, other members of various teams drifted in and grabbed beers and snacks, settling on comfortable surfaces to watch Don Lockwood and Kathy Seldon fall in love.

It was, Daisy decided, a pretty good start to what was rapidly becoming her favorite holiday.

Part Four

#skimmons #bioquake #jemma simmons #daisy johnson #leopold fitz #agents of shield #aos #aos fanfiction #fanfiction #avengers #avengers fanfiction #given unsought

15 notes · View notes

elisadeveloping-extendedpractice · 6 years

Text

Reading research by Clare Jonson / change of direction?

Interviews...

There’s lots of different research methods with interviewing. I wanted to be equals. Involve participants in discuss what the questions and topics should be. It turned about being more of a monologue than a conversation. Would I be trusted to make a podcast about adoption? I can immerse myself in the community, but I haven’t adopted or been adopted. Louis Theroux makes documentaries about stuff he’s not part of...

Interviewing: Power Relationships and an Ethics of Care Dr. Clare Johnson Associate Professor (Art & Design)

Model of ‘thinking with artworks’ – use of artworks that visualise a wide range of emotions connected to the experience Challenge to dominant representations License to articulate emotions that participants felt unable to show health professionals Intention to find out about the emotional complexity of the participants’ experiences and to put their voices at the heart of debates

My hypothesis was that such artworks enable conversations to take place that would not otherwise happen and, therefore, have the potential to increase wellbeing. Six participants recruited through social media

• Participants chose where the interview took place and interviews lasted one hour

• Importance of location and duration of interviews for both interviewer and interviewee (where it happens makes a difference to what is said)

• Safety for both interviewer and interviewee

• Use and storage of data (Participant Information Sheet and Consent Form)

Ethics not only relates to the interview itself, but what’s done with the data gleaned • Most of the women I interviewed were breastfeeding during the interview and dividing their attention between childcare, looking at the artworks and talking to me

• I asked about the experience of becoming a mother, pregnancy, birth, maternity leave and how their experience of early motherhood compared to their expectations

• By asking about and recording people’s memories, experiences and opinions I was engaging in oral history: a “living history of everyone’s unique life experiences” (https://www.ohs.org.uk).

Oral history Passing on of knowledge, memory and experience by word of mouth Method of constructing histories by conducting interviews Benefits • Gathering, recording and preserving a diverse range of personal experiences often left out of historical accounts

• Insight into the impact of an event on people’s lives and feelings – personalizes history

• Empowers people to tell their stories, sometimes in contrast to ‘official’ accounts

• First-hand accounts through lived experience

• Capturing vital historical information before it is lost

• Tells us about people and experiences that are not mentioned in ‘standard’ sources or that will otherwise be forgotten

• Brings historical information to life for others

• Values members of a community

• Can give ‘ownership’ of history to a wide range of people

• Can contain spontaneity and candor not always present in written accounts

Limitations

• Relies on memories, which can be partial or inaccurate

• Past events can be cast in a nostalgic light

• Possibility of self-serving motives of interviewee eg. casting their experience as more significant or more universal than was the case

Interview Methods There are different ways to understand interviews eg. as ‘constructed narrative’, transparent reflection of ‘experience’, or ‘co-produced account’ There are different ways to approach interviews.

The level of structure has a big impact on the kind of material/data collected.

Structured

• Ask all interviewees the same questions in the same order

• No prompting or improvisation

• Useful for comparing different respondents’ answers to the same questions

• Useful for quantitative research eg. comparing data; attempts neutrality

• Difficult to determine an interviewee’s values, attitudes and feelings

• Restricted by the set questions Semi-structured

• Interviewer tries to build a rapport with interviewee eg. through knowledge of and/or interest in the project

• Open-ended questions or a guide to topics prepared in advance eg. “tell me about…”

• Can use follow up questions to explore ideas, meanings and values in more detail eg. “can you tell me more about…”

• Purpose is to understand the interviewee’s point of view, not to make generalisations

• Flexibility – interviewer can adjust questions and ‘think on their feet’

• Questions will, therefore, not necessarily be the same for all interviewees

• Less direction from interviewer than in structured interviews; interviewee can speak for themselves

• Probing – can reveal thoughts and feelings not predicted by either interviewer or interviewee beforehand

• Less pre-judgment of what is important than in structured interviews

• Interviews can be lengthy

• Difficult to compare results (only relevant if this is necessary for the research)

• Depth and amount of qualitative information can be difficult to analyse eg. working out which parts of this are important

• Interviewer may give out unintended signals that ‘shape’ the conversation eg. body language

• An interviewee’s memory may be incomplete, partial, ‘rose-tinted’, effected by experiences after the event being discussed

• Possibility of an interviewee saying what they think an interviewer wants to hear, or to tell their story in such a way that it fits a wider narrative of the event (eg. in popular culture and wider public consciousness) and their sense of their own identity

• A conversational, in-depth interview can be an opportunity for the interviewee to re-live the events and make sense of their behavior at an earlier point. Their explanation in the present may differ from how they felt at the time. We do not have direct access to history.

Questions that arise

• To what extent are interviewees true partners in the process? • Does their power in the process recede once the interview is over? • Do they have any say over how the material they have offered will be treated/analysed/used? • Interviewers typically walk away from the situation - there can be an imbalance in power and privilege

• Be aware that some of the material may be important even if it is presented as an aside

• Look out for unexpected testimony and anything that is not in line with your own expectations

• This may indicate a different narrative (eg. of maternal experience) that is not yet in the public consciousness

Ann Oakley: ‘Interviewing Women’ (1981)

Oakley’s project involved repeat interviews with 55 women about becoming a mother.

Feminist critique of: • the idea that an interview is a one-way process (sometimes interviewees ask questions back) • the treatment of interviewees as valuable only inasmuch as they are sources of data • the idea that interviews have no personal meaning in terms of social interaction

• Lack of fit between theory and practice of interviewing

• Oakley challenges the textbook idea of the social research interview as a “mechanical instrument of data collection” in which both interviewer and interviewee are depersonalized • Understands this approach as masculinist eg. to do with objectivity, detachment, ‘scientific rigour’ and hierarchy (unequal relationship between interviewer and interviewee), treating interviewees as subordinates: “extracting information is more to be valued than yielding it”. Oakley suggests an alternative, feminist, approach in which: • The masculinist approach is morally indefensible • Contradictions within this approach are exposed • The most effective approach to the interviewer-interviewee relationship is to be non-hierarchical and to invest something of our personal identity in this relationship • Attempt to avoid exploitation or objectification of the women interviewed Idea of the researcher/interviewer as friend rather than data gatherer “…personal involvement is more than dangerous bias – it is the condition under which people come to know each other and to admit others into their lives” (pg. 58).

BIG QUESTIONS: 1)To what extent are interviewees true partners in the process? 2)Are interviews ‘constructed narratives’, transparent reflections of ‘experience’, or ‘co-produced accounts’?

****

Am I also trying to make a point of record of celebration in history in my project? *CHANGE TO PURPOSE OF PROJECT?* (As if it’s not just a resource for advocating a cause, but a time capsule/validation of the narrative of those for those effected?)

Potential alternative questions/aims of project:

1. Provide some support to people who are adopted or are adopting to see their experiences reflected.

2. How might one better represent adoption in a way that presents the reality?

3. Investigate a range of experiences and represent it visually

0 notes

nebris · 5 years

Text

The Scum Manifesto

by Valerie Solanas

From the back cover of the Phoenix Press booklet:

"Valerie Solanas' SCUM Manifesto was written in 1967 and published in 1968, the year she shot and wounded Andy Warhol. The text used here is that of the 1983 edition of the Manifesto that was published by the Matriarchy Study Group."

The SCUM Manifesto by Valerie Solanas

Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and destroy the male sex.

It is now technically feasible to reproduce without the aid of males (or, for that matter, females) and to produce only females. We must begin immediately to do so. Retaining the male has not even the dubious purpose of reproduction. The male is a biological accident: the Y (male) gene is an incomplete X (female) gene, that is, it has an incomplete set of chromosomes. In other words, the male is an incomplete female, a walking abortion, aborted at the gene stage. To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease and males are emotional cripples.

The male is completely egocentric, trapped inside himself, incapable of empathizing or identifying with others, or love, friendship, affection of tenderness. He is a completely isolated unit, incapable of rapport with anyone. His responses are entirely visceral, not cerebral; his intelligence is a mere tool in the services of his drives and needs; he is incapable of mental passion, mental interaction; he can't relate to anything other than his own physical sensations. He is a half-dead, unresponsive lump, incapable of giving or receiving pleasure or happiness; consequently, he is at best an utter bore, an inoffensive blob, since only those capable of absorption in others can be charming. He is trapped in a twilight zone halfway between humans and apes, and is far worse off than the apes because, unlike the apes, he is capable of a large array of negative feelings -- hate, jealousy, contempt, disgust, guilt, shame, doubt -- and moreover, he is aware of what he is and what he isn't.

Although completely physical, the male is unfit even for stud service. Even assuming mechanical proficiency, which few men have, he is, first of all, incapable of zestfully, lustfully, tearing off a piece, but instead is eaten up with guilt, shame, fear and insecurity, feelings rooted in male nature, which the most enlightened training can only minimize; second, the physical feeling he attains is next to nothing; and third, he is not empathizing with his partner, but is obsessed with how he's doing, turning in an A performance, doing a good plumbing job. To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo. It's often said that men use women. Use them for what? Surely not pleasure.

Eaten up with guilt, shame, fears and insecurities and obtaining, if he's lucky, a barely perceptible physical feeling, the male is, nonetheless, obsessed with screwing; he'll swim through a river of snot, wade nostril-deep through a mile of vomit, if he thinks there'll be a friendly pussy awaiting him. He'll screw a woman he despises, any snaggle-toothed hag, and furthermore, pay for the opportunity. Why? Relieving physical tension isn't the answer, as masturbation suffices for that. It's not ego satisfaction; that doesn't explain screwing corpses and babies.

Completely egocentric, unable to relate, empathize or identify, and filled with a vast, pervasive, diffuse sexuality, the male is pyschically passive. He hates his passivity, so he projects it onto women, defines the make as active, then sets out to prove that he is (`prove that he is a Man'). His main means of attempting to prove it is screwing (Big Man with a Big Dick tearing off a Big Piece). Since he's attempting to prove an error, he must `prove' it again and again. Screwing, then, is a desperate compulsive, attempt to prove he's not passive, not a woman; but he is passive and does want to be a woman.

Being an incomplete female, the male spends his life attempting to complete himself, to become female. He attempts to do this by constantly seeking out, fraternizing with and trying to live through an fuse with the female, and by claiming as his own all female characteristics -- emotional strength and independence, forcefulness, dynamism, decisiveness, coolness, objectivity, assertiveness, courage, integrity, vitality, intensity, depth of character, grooviness, etc -- and projecting onto women all male traits -- vanity, frivolity, triviality, weakness, etc. It should be said, though, that the male has one glaring area of superiority over the female -- public relations. (He has done a brilliant job of convincing millions of women that men are women and women are men). The male claim that females find fulfillment through motherhood and sexuality reflects what males think they'd find fulfilling if they were female.

Women, in other words, don't have penis envy; men have pussy envy. When the male accepts his passivity, defines himself as a woman (males as well as females think men are women and women are men), and becomes a transvestite he loses his desire to screw (or to do anything else, for that matter; he fulfills himself as a drag queen) and gets his dick chopped off. He then achieves a continuous diffuse sexual feeling from `being a woman'. Screwing is, for a man, a defense against his desire to be female. He is responsible for:

War: The male's normal compensation for not being female, namely, getting his Big Gun off, is grossly inadequate, as he can get it off only a very limited number of times; so he gets it off on a really massive scale, and proves to the entire world that he's a `Man'. Since he has no compassion or ability to empathize or identify, proving his manhood is worth an endless amount of mutilation and suffering and an endless number of lives, including his own -- his own life being worthless, he would rather go out in a blaze of glory than to plod grimly on for fifty more years.

Niceness, Politeness, and `Dignity': Every man, deep down, knows he's a worthless piece of shit. Overwhelmed by a sense of animalism and deeply ashamed of it; wanting, not to express himself, but to hide from others his total physicality, total egocentricity, the hate and contempt he feels for other men, and to hide from himself the hate and contempt he suspects other men feel for him; having a crudely constructed nervous system that is easily upset by the least display of emotion or feeling, the male tries to enforce a `social' code that ensures perfect blandness, unsullied by the slightest trace or feeling or upsetting opinion. He uses terms like `copulate', `sexual congress', `have relations with' (to men sexual relations is a redundancy), overlaid with stilted manners; the suit on the chimp.

Money, Marriage and Prostitution, Work and Prevention of an Automated Society: There is no human reason for money or for anyone to work more than two or three hours a week at the very most. All non-creative jobs (practically all jobs now being done) could have been automated long ago, and in a moneyless society everyone can have as much of the best of everything as she wants. But there are non-human, male reasons for wanting to maintain the money system:

1. Pussy. Despising his highly inadequate self, overcome with intense anxiety and a deep, profound loneliness when by his empty self, desperate to attach himself to any female in dim hopes of completing himself, in the mystical belief that by touching gold he'll turn to gold, the male craves the continuous companionship of women. The company of the lowest female is preferable to his own or that of other men, who serve only to remind him of his repulsiveness. But females, unless very young or very sick, must be coerced or bribed into male company.

2. Supply the non-relating male with the delusion of usefulness, and enable him to try to justify his existence by digging holes and then filling them up. Leisure time horrifies the male, who will have nothing to do but contemplate his grotesque self. Unable to relate or to love, the male must work. Females crave absorbing, emotionally satisfying, meaningful activity, but lacking the opportunity or ability for this, they prefer to idle and waste away their time in ways of their own choosing -- sleeping, shopping, bowling, shooting pool, playing cards and other games, breeding, reading, walking around, daydreaming, eating, playing with themselves, popping pills, going to the movies, getting analyzed, traveling, raising dogs and cats, lolling about on the beach, swimming, watching TV, listening to music, decorating their houses, gardening, sewing, nightclubbing, dancing, visiting, `improving their minds' (taking courses), and absorbing `culture' (lectures, plays, concerts, `arty' movies). Therefore, many females would, even assuming complete economic equality between the sexes, prefer living with males or peddling their asses on the street, thus having most of their time for themselves, to spending many hours of their days doing boring, stultifying, non-creative work for someone else, functioning as less than animals, as machines, or, at best -- if able to get a `good' job -- co-managing the shitpile. What will liberate women, therefore, from male control is the total elimination of the money-work system, not the attainment of economic equality with men within it.

3. Power and control. Unmasterful in his personal relations with women, the male attains to masterfulness by the manipulation of money and everything controlled by money, in other words, of everything and everybody.

4. Love substitute. Unable to give love or affection, the male gives money. It makes him feel motherly. The mother gives milk; he gives bread. He is the Breadwinner.

5. Provide the male with a goal. Incapable of enjoying the moment, the male needs something to look forward to, and money provides him with an eternal, never-ending goal: Just think of what you could do with 80 trillion dollars -- invest it! And in three years time you'd have 300 trillion dollars!!!

6. Provide the basis for the male's major opportunity to control and manipulate -- fatherhood.

Fatherhood and Mental Illness (fear, cowardice, timidity, humility, insecurity, passivity): Mother wants what's best for her kids; Daddy only wants what's best for Daddy, that is peace and quiet, pandering to his delusion of dignity (`respect'), a good reflection on himself (status) and the opportunity to control and manipulate, or, if he's an `enlightened' father, to `give guidance'. His daughter, in addition, he wants sexually -- he givers her hand in marriage; the other part is for him. Daddy, unlike Mother, can never give in to his kids, as he must, at all costs, preserve his delusion of decisiveness, forcefulness, always-rightness and strength. Never getting one's way leads to lack of self-confidence in one's ability to cope with the world and to a passive acceptance of the status quo. Mother loves her kids, although she sometimes gets angry, but anger blows over quickly and even while it exists, doesn't preclude love and basic acceptance. Emotionally diseased Daddy doesn't love his kids; he approves of them -- if they're `good', that is, if they're nice, `respectful', obedient, subservient to his will, quiet and not given to unseemly displays of temper that would be most upsetting to Daddy's easily disturbed male nervous system -- in other words, if they're passive vegetables. If they're not `good', he doesn't get angry -- not if he's a modern, `civilized' father (the old-fashioned ranting, raving brute is preferable, as he is so ridiculous he can be easily despised) -- but rather express disapproval, a state that, unlike anger, endures and precludes a basic acceptance, leaving the kid with the feeling of worthlessness and a lifelong obsession wit being approved of; the result is fear of independent thought, as this leads to unconventional, disapproved of opinions and way of life.

For the kid to want Daddy's approval it must respect Daddy, and being garbage, Daddy can make sure that he is respected only by remaining aloof, by distantness, by acting on the precept of `familiarity breeds contempt', which is, of course, true, if one is contemptible. By being distant and aloof, he is able to remain unknown, mysterious, and thereby, to inspire fear (`respect').

Disapproval of emotional `scenes' leads to fear of strong emotion, fear of one's own anger and hatred. Fear of anger and hatred combined with a lack of self-confidence in one's ability to cope with and change the world, or even to affect in the slightest way one's own destiny, leads to a mindless belief that the world and most people in it are nice and the most banal, trivial amusements are great fun and deeply pleasurable.

The affect of fatherhood on males, specifically, is to make them `Men', that is, highly defensive of all impulses to passivity, faggotry, and of desires to be female. Every boy wants to imitate his mother, be her, fuse with her, but Daddy forbids this; he is the mother; he gets to fuse with her. So he tells the boy, sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly, to not be a sissy, to act like a `Man'. The boy, scared shitless of and `respecting' his father, complies, and becomes just like Daddy, that model of `Man'-hood, the all-American ideal -- the well-behaved heterosexual dullard.

The effect of fatherhood on females is to make them male -- dependent, passive, domestic, animalistic, insecure, approval and security seekers, cowardly, humble, `respectful' of authorities and men, closed, not fully responsive, half-dead, trivial, dull, conventional, flattened-out and thoroughly contemptible. Daddy's Girl, always tense and fearful, uncool, unanalytical, lacking objectivity, appraises Daddy, and thereafter, other men, against a background of fear (`respect') and is not only unable to see the empty shell behind the facade, but accepts the male definition of himself as superior, as a female, and of herself, as inferior, as a male, which, thanks to Daddy, she really is.

It is the increase of fatherhood, resulting from the increased and more widespread affluence that fatherhood needs in order to thrive, that has caused the general increase of mindlessness and the decline of women in the United States since the 1920s. The close association of affluence with fatherhood has led, for the most part, to only the wrong girls, namely, the `privileged' middle class girls, getting `educated'.

The effect of fathers, in sum, has been to corrode the world with maleness. The male has a negative Midas Touch -- everything he touches turns to shit.

Suppression of Individuality, Animalism (domesticity and motherhood), and Functionalism: The male is just a bunch of conditioned reflexes, incapable of a mentally free response; he is tied to he earliest conditioning, determined completely by his past experiences. His earliest experiences are with his mother, and he is throughout his life tied to her. It never becomes completely clear to the make that he is not part of his mother, that he is he and she is she.

His greatest need is to be guided, sheltered, protected and admired by Mama (men expect women to adore what men shrink from in horror -- themselves) and, being completely physical, he yearns to spend his time (that's not spent `out in the world' grimly defending against his passivity) wallowing in basic animal activities -- eating, sleeping, shitting, relaxing and being soothed by Mama. Passive, rattle-headed Daddy's Girl, ever eager for approval, for a pat on the head, for the `respect' if any passing piece of garbage, is easily reduced to Mama, mindless ministrator to physical needs, soother of the weary, apey brow, booster of the tiny ego, appreciator of the contemptible, a hot water bottle with tits.

The reduction to animals of the women of the most backward segment of society -- the `privileged, educated' middle-class, the backwash of humanity -- where Daddy reigns supreme, has been so thorough that they try to groove on labour pains and lie around in the most advanced nation in the world in the middle of the twentieth century with babies chomping away on their tits. It's not for the kids sake, though, that the `experts' tell women that Mama should stay home and grovel in animalism, but for Daddy's; the tits for Daddy to hang onto; the labor pains for Daddy to vicariously groove on (half dead, he needs awfully strong stimuli to make him respond).

Reducing the female to an animal, to Mama, to a male, is necessary for psychological as well as practical reasons: the male is a mere member of the species, interchangeable with every other male. He has no deep-seated individuality, which stems from what intrigues you, what outside yourself absorbs you, what you're in relation to. Completely self-absorbed, capable of being in relation only to their bodies and physical sensations, males differ from each other only to the degree and in the ways they attempt to defend against their passivity and against their desire to be female.

The female's individuality, which he is acutely aware of, but which he doesn't comprehend and isn't capable of relating to or grasping emotionally, frightens and upsets him and fills him with envy. So he denies it in her and proceeds to define everyone in terms of his or her function or use, assigning to himself, of course, the most important functions -- doctor, president, scientist -- therefore providing himself with an identity, if not individuality, and tries to convince himself and women (he's succeeded best at convincing women) that the female function is to bear and raise children and to relax, comfort and boost the ego if the male; that her function is such as to make her interchangeable with every other female. In actual fact, the female function is to relate, groove, love and be herself, irreplaceable by anyone else; the male function is to produce sperm. We now have sperm banks.

In actual fact, the female function is to explore, discover, invent, solve problems crack jokes, make music -- all with love. In other words, create a magic world.

Prevention of Privacy: Although the male, being ashamed of what he is and almost of everything he does, insists on privacy and secrecy in all aspects of his life, he has no real regard for privacy. Being empty, not being a complete, separate being, having no self to groove on and needing to be constantly in female company, he sees nothing at all wrong in intruding himself on any woman's thoughts, even a total stranger's, anywhere at any time, but rather feels indignant and insulted when put down for doing so, as well as confused -- he can't, for the life of him, understand why anyone would prefer so much as one minute of solitude to the company of any creep around. Wanting to become a woman, he strives to be constantly around females, which is the closest he can get to becoming one, so he created a `society' based upon the family -- a male-female could and their kids (the excuse for the family's existence), who live virtually on top of one another, unscrupuluously violating the females' rights, privacy and sanity.

Isolation, Suburbs, and Prevention of Community: Our society is not a community, but merely a collection of isolated family units. Desperately insecure, fearing his woman will leave him if she is exposed to other men or to anything remotely resembling life, the male seeks to isolate her from other men and from what little civilization there is, so he moves her out to the suburbs, a collection of self-absorbed couples and their kids. Isolation enables him to try to maintain his pretense of being an individual nu becoming a `rugged individualist', a loner, equating non-cooperation and solitariness with individuality.

There is yet another reason for the male to isolate himself: every man is an island. Trapped inside himself, emotionally isolated, unable to relate, the male has a horror of civilization, people, cities, situations requiring an ability to understand and relate to people. So like a scared rabbit, he scurries off, dragging Daddy's little asshole with him to the wilderness, suburbs, or, in the case of the hippy -- he's way out, Man! -- all the way out to the cow pasture where he can fuck and breed undisturbed and mess around with his beads and flute.

The `hippy', whose desire to be a `Man', a `rugged individualist', isn't quite as strong as the average man's, and who, in addition, is excited by the thought having lots of women accessible to him, rebels against the harshness of a Breadwinner's life and the monotony of one woman. In the name of sharing and cooperation, he forms a commune or tribe, which, for all its togetherness and partly because of it, (the commune, being an extended family, is an extended violation of the female's rights, privacy and sanity) is no more a community than normal `society'.

A true community consists of individuals -- not mere species members, not couples -- respecting each others individuality and privacy, at the same time interacting with each other mentally and emotionally -- free spirits in free relation to each other -- and co-operating with each other to achieve common ends. Traditionalists say the basic unit of `society' is the family; `hippies' say the tribe; no one says the individual.

The `hippy' babbles on about individuality, but has no more conception of it than any other man. He desires to get back to Nature, back to the wilderness, back to the home of furry animals that he's one of, away from the city, where there is at least a trace, a bare beginning of civilization, to live at the species level, his time taken up with simple, non-intellectual activities -- farming, fucking, bead stringing. The most important activity of the commune, the one upon which it is based, is gang-banging. The `hippy' is enticed to the commune mainly by the prospect for free pussy -- the main commodity to be shared, to be had just for the asking, but, blinded by greed, he fails to anticipate all the other men he has to share with, or the jealousies and possessiveness for the pussies themselves.

Men cannot co-operate to achieve a common end, because each man's end is all the pussy for himself. The commune, therefore, is doomed to failure; each `hippy' will, in panic, grad the first simpleton who digs him and whisks her off to the suburbs as fast as he can. The male cannot progress socially, but merely swings back and forth from isolation to gang-banging.

Conformity: Although he wants to be an individual, the male is scared of anything in himself that is the slightest bit different from other men, it causes him to suspect that he's not really a `Man', that he's passive and totally sexual, a highly upsetting suspicion. If other men are "A" and he's not, he must not be a man; he must be a fag. So he tries to affirm his `Manhood' by being like all the other men. Differentness in other men, as well as himself, threatens him; it means they're fags whom he must at all costs avoid, so he tries to make sure that all other men conform.

The male dares to be different to the degree that he accepts his passivity and his desire to be female, his fagginess. The farthest out male is the drag queen, but he, although different from most men, is exactly like all the other drag queens like the functionalist, he has an identity -- he is female. He tries to define all his troubles away -- but still no individuality. Not completely convinced that he's a woman, highly insecure about being sufficiently female, he conforms compulsively to the man-made stereotype, ending up as nothing but a bundle of stilted mannerisms.

To be sure he's a `Man', the male must see to it that the female be clearly a `Woman', the opposite of a `Man', that is, the female must act like a faggot. And Daddy's Girl, all of whose female instincts were wrenched out of her when little, easily and obligingly adapts herself to the role.

Authority and Government: Having no sense of right and wrong, no conscience, which can only stem from having an ability to empathize with others... having no faith in his non-existent self, being unnecessarily competitive, and by nature, unable to co-operate, the male feels a need for external guidance and control. So he created authorities -- priests, experts, bosses, leaders, etc -- and government. Wanting the female (Mama) to guide him, but unable to accept this fact (he is, after all, a MAN), wanting to play Woman, to usurp her function as Guider and Protector, he sees to it that all authorities are male.

There's no reason why a society consisting of rational beings capable of empathizing with each other, complete and having no natural reason to compete, should have a government, laws or leaders.

Philosophy, Religion, and Morality Based on Sex: The male's inability to relate to anybody or anything makes his life pointless and meaningless (the ultimate male insight is that life is absurd), so he invented philosophy and religion. Being empty, he looks outward, not only for guidance and control, but for salvation and for the meaning of life. Happiness being for him impossible on this earth, he invented Heaven.

For a man, having no ability to empathize with others and being totally sexual, `wrong' is sexual `license' and engaging in `deviant' (`unmanly') sexual practices, that is, not defending against his passivity and total sexuality which, if indulged, would destroy `civilization', since `civilization' is based entirely upon the male need to defend himself against these characteristics. For a woman (according to men), `wrong' is any behavior that would entice men into sexual `license' -- that is, not placing male needs above her own and not being a faggot.

Religion not only provides the male with a goal (Heaven) and helps keep women tied to men, but offers rituals through which he can try to expiate the guilt and shame he feels at not defending himself enough against his sexual impulses; in essence, that guilt and shame he feels at being male.

Most men men, utterly cowardly, project their inherent weaknesses onto women, label them female weaknesses and believe themselves to have female strengths; most philosophers, not quite so cowardly, face the fact that make lacks exist in men, but still can't face the fact that they exist in men only. So they label the male condition the Human Condition, post their nothingness problem, which horrifies them, as a philosophical dilemma, thereby giving stature to their animalism, grandiloquently label their nothingness their `Identity Problem', and proceed to prattle on pompously about the `Crisis of the Individual', the `Essence of Being', `Existence preceding Essence', `Existential Modes of Being', etc. etc.

A woman not only takes her identity and individuality for granted, but knows instinctively that the only wrong is to hurt others, and that the meaning of life is love.

Prejudice (racial, ethnic, religious, etc): The male needs scapegoats onto whom he can project his failings and inadequacies and upon whom he can vent his frustration at not being female. And the vicarious discriminations have the practical advantage of substantially increasing the pussy pool available to the men on top.

Competition, Prestige, Status, Formal Education, Ignorance and Social and Economic Classes: Having an obsessive desire to be admired by women, but no intrinsic worth, the make constructs a highly artificial society enabling him to appropriate the appearance of worth through money, prestige, `high' social class, degrees, professional position and knowledge and, by pushing as many other men as possible down professionally, socially, economically, and educationally.

The purpose of `higher' education is not to educate but to exclude as many as possible from the various professions.

The male, totally physical, incapable of mental rapport, although able to understand and use knowledge and ideas, is unable to relate to them, to grasp them emotionally: he does not value knowledge and ideas for their own sake (they're just means to ends) and, consequently, feels no need for mental companions, no need to cultivate the intellectual potentialities of others. On the contrary, the male has a vested interest in ignorance; it gives the few knowledgeable men a decided edge on the unknowledgeable ones, and besides, the male knows that an enlightened, aware female population will mean the end of him. The healthy, conceited female wants the company of equals whom she can respect and groove on; the male and the sick, insecure, unself-confident male female crave the company of worms.

No genuine social revolution can be accomplished by the male, as the male on top wants the status quo, and all the male on the bottom wants is to be the male on top. The male `rebel' is a farce; this is the male's `society', made by him to satisfy his needs. He's never satisfied, because he's not capable of being satisfied. Ultimately, what the male `rebel' is rebelling against is being male. The male changes only when forced to do so by technology, when he has no choice, when `society' reaches the stage where he must change or die. We're at that stage now; if women don't get their asses in gear fast, we may very well all die.

Prevention of Conversation: Being completely self-centered and unable to relate to anything outside himself, the male's `conversation', when not about himself, is an impersonal droning on, removed from anything of human value. Male `intellectual conversation' is a strained compulsive attempt to impress the female.

Daddy's Girl, passive, adaptable, respectful of and in awe of the male, allows him to impose his hideously dull chatter on her. This is not too difficult for her, as the tension and anxiety, the lack of cool, the insecurity and self-doubt, the unsureness of her own feelings and sensations that Daddy instilled in her make her perceptions superficial and render her unable to see that the male's babble is babble; like the aesthete `appreciating' the blob that's labeled `Great Art', she believes she's grooving on what bores the shit out of her. Not only does she permit his babble to dominate, she adapts her own `conversation' accordingly.

Trained from an early childhood in niceness, politeness and `dignity', in pandering to the male need to disguise his animalism, she obligingly reduces her own `conversation' to small talk, a bland, insipid avoidance of any topic beyond the utterly trivial -- or is `educated', to `intellectual' discussion, that is, impersonal discoursing on irrelevant distractions -- the Gross National Product, the Common Market, the influence of Rimbaud on symbolist painting. So adept is she at pandering that it eventually becomes second nature and she continues to pander to men even when in the company of other females only.

Apart from pandering, her `conversation' is further limited by her insecurity about expressing deviant, original opinions and the self-absorption based on insecurity and that prevents her conversation from being charming. Niceness, politeness, `dignity', insecurity and self-absorption are hardly conducive to intensity and wit, qualities a conversation must have to be worthy of the name. Such conversation is hardly rampant, as only completely self-confident, arrogant, outgoing, proud, tough-minded females are capable of intense, bitchy, witty conversation.

Prevention of Friendship (Love): Men have contempt for themselves, for all other men whom they contemplate more than casually and whom they do not think are females, (for example `sympathetic' analysts and `Great Artists') or agents of God and for all women who respect and pander to them: the insecure, approval-seeking, pandering male-females have contempt for themselves and for all women like them: the self-confident, swinging, thrill-seeking female females have contempt for me and for the pandering male females. In short, contempt is the order of the day.

Love is not dependency or sex, but friendship, and therefore, love can't exist between two males, between a male and a female, or between two females, one or both of whom is a mindless, insecure, pandering male; like conversation, live can exist only between two secure, free-wheeling, independent groovy female females, since friendship is based upon respect, not contempt.

Even amongst groovy females deep friendships seldom occur in adulthood, as almost all of them are either tied up with men in order to survive economically, or bogged down in hacking their way through the jungle and in trying to keep their heads about the amorphous mass. Love can't flourish in a society based upon money and meaningless work: it requires complete economic as well as personal freedom, leisure time and the opportunity to engage in intensely absorbing, emotionally satisfying activities which, when shared with those you respect, lead to deep friendship. Our `society' provides practically no opportunity to engage in such activities.

Having stripped the world of conversation, friendship and love, the male offers us these paltry substitutes:

`Great Art' and `Culture': The male `artist' attempts to solve his dilemma of not being able to live, of not being female, by constructing a highly artificial world in which the male is heroized, that is, displays female traits, and the female is reduced to highly limited, insipid subordinate roles, that is, to being male.

The male `artistic' aim being, not to communicate (having nothing inside him he has nothing to say), but to disguise his animalism, he resorts to symbolism and obscurity (`deep' stuff). The vast majority of people, particularly the `educated' ones, lacking faith in their own judgment, humble, respectful of authority (`Daddy knows best'), are easily conned into believing that obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, ambiguity and boredom are marks of depth and brilliance.

`Great Art' proves that men are superior to women, that men are women, being labeled `Great Art', almost all of which, as the anti-feminists are fond of reminding us, was created by men. We know that `Great Art' is great because male authorities have told us so, and we can't claim otherwise, as only those with exquisite sensitivities far superior to ours can perceive and appreciated the slop they appreciated.

Appreciating is the sole diversion of the `cultivated'; passive and incompetent, lacking imagination and wit, they must try to make do with that; unable to create their own diversions, to create a little world of their own, to affect in the smallest way their environments, they must accept what's given; unable to create or relate, they spectate. Absorbing `culture' is a desperate, frantic attempt to groove in an ungroovy world, to escape the horror of a sterile, mindless, existence. `Culture' provides a sop to the egos of the incompetent, a means of rationalizing passive spectating; they can pride themselves on their ability to appreciate the `finer' things, to see a jewel where this is only a turd (they want to be admired for admiring). Lacking faith in their ability to change anything, resigned to the status quo, they have to see beauty in turds because, so far as they can see, turds are all they'll ever have.

The veneration of `Art' and `Culture' -- besides leading many women into boring, passive activity that distracts from more important and rewarding activities, from cultivating active abilities, and leads to the constant intrusion on our sensibilities of pompous dissertations on the deep beauty of this and that turn. This allows the `artist' to be setup as one possessing superior feelings, perceptions, insights and judgments, thereby undermining the faith of insecure women in the value and validity of their own feelings, perceptions, insights and judgments.

The male, having a very limited range of feelings, and consequently, very limited perceptions, insights and judgments, needs the `artist' to guide him, to tell him what life is all about. But the male `artist' being totally sexual, unable to relate to anything beyond his own physical sensations, having nothing to express beyond the insight that for the male life is meaningless and absurd, cannot be an artist. How can he who is not capable of life tell us what life is all about? A `male artist' is a contradiction in terms. A degenerate can only produce degenerate `art'. The true artist is every self-confident, healthy female, and in a female society the only Art, the only Culture, will be conceited, kooky, funky, females grooving on each other and on everything else in the universe.

Sexuality: Sex is not part of a relationship: on the contrary, it is a solitary experience, non-creative, a gross waste of time. The female can easily -- far more easily than she may think -- condition away her sex drive, leaving her completely cool and cerebral and free to pursue truly worthy relationships and activities; but the male, who seems to dig women sexually and who seeks out constantly to arouse them, stimulates the highly sexed female to frenzies of lust, throwing her into a sex bag from which few women ever escape. The lecherous male excited the lustful female; he has to -- when the female transcends her body, rises above animalism, the male, whose ego consists of his cock, will disappear.

Sex is the refuge of the mindless. And the more mindless the woman, the more deeply embedded in the male `culture', in short, the nicer she is, the more sexual she is. The nicest women in our `society' are raving sex maniacs. But, being just awfully, awfully nice, they don't, of course descend to fucking -- that's uncouth -- rather they make love, commune by means of their bodies and establish sensual rapport; the literary ones are attuned to the throb of Eros and attain a clutch upon the Universe; the religious have spiritual communion with the Divine Sensualism; the mystics merge with the Erotic Principle and blend with the Cosmos, and the acid heads contact their erotic cells.

On the other hand, those females least embedded in the male `Culture', the least nice, those crass and simple souls who reduce fucking to fucking, who are too childish for the grown-up world of suburbs, mortgages, mops and baby shit, too selfish to raise kids and husbands, too uncivilized to give a shit for anyones opinion of them, too arrogant to respect Daddy, the `Greats' or the deep wisdom of the Ancients, who trust only their own animal, gutter instincts, who equate Culture with chicks, whose sole diversion is prowling for emotional thrills and excitement, who are given to disgusting, nasty upsetting `scenes', hateful, violent bitches given to slamming those who unduly irritate them in the teeth, who'd sink a shiv into a man's chest or ram an icepick up his asshole as soon as look at him, if they knew they could get away with it, in short, those who, by the standards of our `culture' are SCUM... these females are cool and relatively cerebral and skirting asexuality.

Unhampered by propriety, niceness, discretion, public opinion, `morals', the respect of assholes, always funky, dirty, low-down SCUM gets around... and around and around... they've seen the whole show -- every bit of it -- the fucking scene, the dyke scene -- they've covered the whole waterfront, been under every dock and pier -- the peter pier, the pussy pier... you've got to go through a lot of sex to get to anti-sex, and SCUM's been through it all, and they're now ready for a new show; they want to crawl out from other the dock, move, take off, sink out. But SCUM doesn't yet prevail; SCUM's still in the gutter of our `society', which, if it's not deflected from its present course and if the Bomb doesn't drop on it, will hump itself to death.

Boredom: Life in a society made by and for creatures who, when they are not grim and depressing are utter bores, van only be, when not grim and depressing, an utter bore.

Secrecy, Censorship, Suppression of Knowledge and Ideas, and Exposes: Every male's deep-seated, secret, most hideous fear is of being discovered to be not a female, but a male, a subhuman animal. Although niceness, politeness and `dignity' suffice to prevent his exposure on a personal level, in order to prevent the general exposure of the male sex as a whole and to maintain his unnatural dominant position position in `society', the male must resort to:

1. Censorship. Responding reflexively to isolated works and phrases rather than cereberally to overall meanings, the male attempts to prevent the arousal and discovery of his animalism by censoring not only `pornography', but any work containing `dirty' words, no matter in what context they are used.

2. Suppression of all ideas and knowledge that might expose him or threaten his dominant position in `society'. Much biological and psychological data is suppressed, because it is proof of the male's gross inferiority to the female. Also, the problem of mental illness will never be solved while the male maintains control, because first, men have a vested interest in it -- only females who have very few of their marbles will allow males the slightest bit of control over anything, and second, the male cannot admit to the role that fatherhood plays in causing mental illness.

3. Exposes. The male's chief delight in life -- insofar as the tense, grim male can ever be said to delight in anything -- is in exposing others. It doesn't' much matter what they're exposed as, so long as they're exposed; it distracts attention from himself. Exposing others as enemy agents (Communists and Socialists) is one of his favorite pastimes, as it removes the source of the threat to him not only from himself, but from the country and the Western world. The bugs up his ass aren't in him, they're in Russia.

Distrust: Unable to empathize or feel affection or loyalty, being exclusively out for himself, the male has no sense of fair play; cowardly, needing constantly to pander to the female to win her approval, that he is helpless without, always on the edge lest his animalism, his maleness be discovered, always needing to cover up, he must lie constantly; being empty he has not honor or integrity -- he doesn't know what those words mean. The male, in short, is treacherous, and the only appropriate attitude in a male `society' is cynicism and distrust.

Ugliness: Being totally sexual, incapable of cerebral or aesthetic responses, totally materialistic and greedy, the male, besides inflicting on the world `Great Art', has decorated his unlandscaped cities with ugly buildings (both inside and out), ugly decors, billboards, highways, cars, garbage trucks, and, most notably, his own putrid self.

Hatred and Violence: The male is eaten up with tension, with frustration at not being female, at not being capable of ever achieving satisfaction or pleasure of any kind; eaten up with hate -- not rational hate that is directed at those who abuse or insult you -- but irrational, indiscriminate hate... hatred, at bottom, of his own worthless self.

Gratuitous violence, besides `proving' he's a `Man', serves as an outlet for his hate and, in addition -- the male being capable only of sexual responses and needing very strong stimuli to stimulate his half-dead self -- provides him with a little sexual thrill..

Disease and Death: All diseases are curable, and the aging process and death are due to disease; it is possible, therefore, never to age and to live forever. In fact the problems of aging and death could be solved within a few years, if an all-out, massive scientific assault were made upon the problem. This, however, will not occur with the male establishment because:

1. The many male scientists who shy away from biological research, terrified of the discovery that males are females, and show marked preference for virile, `manly' war and death programs.

2. The discouragement of many potential scientists from scientific careers by the rigidity, boringness, expensiveness, time-consumingness, and unfair exclusivity of our `higher' educational system.

3. Propaganda disseminated by insecure male professionals, who jealously guard their positions, so that only a highly select few can comprehend abstract scientific concepts.

4. Widespread lack of self-confidence brought about by the father system that discourages many talented girls from becoming scientists.

5. Lack of automation. There now exists a wealth of data which, if sorted out and correlated, would reveal the cure for cancer and several other diseases and possibly the key to life itself. But the data is so massive it requires high speed computers to correlate it all. The institution of computers will be delayed interminably under the male control system, since the male has a horror of being replaced by machines.

6. The money systems' insatiable need for new products. Most of the few scientists around who aren't working on death programs are tied up doing research for corporations.

7. The males like death -- it excites him sexually and, already dead inside, he wants to die.

8. The bias of the money system for the least creative scientists. Most scientists come from at least relatively affluent families where Daddy reigns supreme.

Incapable of a positive state of happiness, which is the only thing that can justify one's existence, the male is, at best, relaxed, comfortable, neutral, and this condition is extremely short-lived, as boredom, a negative state, soon sets in; he is, therefore, doomed to an existence of suffering relieved only by occasional, fleeting stretches of restfulness, which state he can only achieve at the expense of some female. The male is, by his very nature, a leech, an emotional parasite and, therefore, not ethically entitled to live, as no one as the right to life at someone else's expense.

Just as humans have a prior right to existence over dogs by virtue of being more highly evolved and having a superior consciousness, so women have a prior right to existence over men. The elimination of any male is, therefore, a righteous and good act, an act highly beneficial to women as well as an act of mercy.

However, this moral issue will eventually be rendered academic by the fact that the male is gradually eliminating himself. In addition to engaging in the time-honored and classical wars and race riots, men are more and more either becoming fags or are obliterating themselves through drugs. The female, whether she likes it or not, will eventually take complete charge, if for no other reason than that she will have to -- the male, for practical purposes, won't exist.

Accelerating this trend is the fact that more and more males are acquiring enlightened self-interest; they're realizing more and more that the female interest is in their interest, that they can live only through the female and that the more the female is encouraged to live, to fulfill herself, to be a female and not a male, the more nearly he lives; he's coming to see that it's easier and more satisfactory to live through her than to try to become her and usurp her qualities, claim them as his own, push the female down and claim that she's a male. The fag, who accepts his maleness, that is, his passivity and total sexuality, his femininity, is also best served by women being truly female, as it would then be easier for him to be male, feminine. If men were wise they would seek to become really female, would do intensive biological research that would lead to me, by means of operations on the brain and nervous system, being able t to be transformed in psyche, as well as body, into women.

Whether to continue to use females for reproduction or to reproduce in the laboratory will also become academic: what will happen when every female, twelve and over, is routinely taking the Pill and there are no longer any accidents? How many women will deliberately get or (if an accident) remain pregnant? No, Virginia, women don't just adore being brood mares, despite what the mass of robot, brainwashed women will say. When society consists of only the fully conscious the answer will be none. Should a certain percentage of men be set aside by force to serve as brood mares for the species? Obviously this will not do. The answer is laboratory reproduction of babies.

As for the issue of whether or not to continue to reproduce males, it doesn't follow that because the male, like disease, has always existed among us that he should continue to exist. When genetic control is possible -- and soon it will be -- it goes without saying that we should produce only whole, complete beings, not physical defects of deficiencies, including emotional deficiencies, such as maleness. Just as the deliberate production of blind people would be highly immoral, so would be the deliberate production of emotional cripples.

Why produce even females? Why should there be future generations? What is their purpose? When aging and death are eliminated, why continue to reproduce? Why should we care what happens when we're dead? Why should we care that there is no younger generation to succeed us.

Eventually the natural course of events, of social evolution, will lead to total female control of the world and, subsequently, to the cessation of the production of males and, ultimately, to the cessation of the production of females.

But SCUM is impatient; SCUM is not consoled by the thought that future generations will thrive; SCUM wants to grab some thrilling living for itself. And, if a large majority of women were SCUM, they could acquire complete control of this country within a few weeks simply by withdrawing from the labor force, thereby paralyzing the entire nation. Additional measures, any one of which would be sufficient to completely disrupt the economy and everything else, would be for women to declare themselves off the money system, stop buying, just loot and simply refuse to obey all laws they don't care to obey. The police force, National Guard, Army, Navy and Marines combined couldn't squelch a rebellion of over half the population, particularly when it's made up of people they are utterly helpless without.

If all women simply left men, refused to have anything to do with any of them -- ever, all men, the government, and the national economy would collapse completely. Even without leaving men, women who are aware of the extent of their superiority to and power over men, could acquire complete control over everything within a few weeks, could effect a total submission of males to females. In a sane society the male would trot along obediently after the female. The male is docile and easily led, easily subjected to the domination of any female who cares to dominate him. The male, in fact, wants desperately to be led by females, wants Mama in charge, wants to abandon himself to her care. But this is not a sane society, and most women are not even dimly aware of where they're at in relation to men.

The conflict, therefore, is not between females and males, but between SCUM -- dominant, secure, self-confident, nasty, violent, selfish, independent, proud, thrill-seeking, free-wheeling, arrogant females, who consider themselves fit to rule the universe, who have free-wheeled to the limits of this `society' and are ready to wheel on to something far beyond what it has to offer -- and nice, passive, accepting `cultivated', polite, dignified, subdued, dependent, scared, mindless, insecure, approval-seeking Daddy's Girls, who can't cope with the unknown, who want to hang back with the apes, who feel secure only with Big Daddy standing by, with a big strong man to lean on and with a fat, hairy face in the White House, who are too cowardly to face up to the hideous reality of what a man is, what Daddy is, who have cast their lot with the swine, who have adapted themselves to animalism, feel superficially comfortable with it and know no other way of `life', who have reduced their minds, thoughts and sights to the male level, who, lacking sense, imagination and wit can have value only in a male `society', who can have a place in the sun, or, rather, in the slime, only as soothers, ego boosters, relaxers and breeders, who are dismissed as inconsequents by other females, who project their deficiencies, their maleness, onto all females and see the female as worm.

But SCUM is too impatient to wait for the de-brainwashing of millions of assholes. Why should the swinging females continue to plod dismally along with the dull male ones? Why should the fates of the groovy and the creepy be intertwined? Why should the active and imaginative consult the passive and dull on social policy? Why should the independent be confined to the sewer along with the dependent who need Daddy to cling to? A small handful of SCUM can take over the country within a year by systematically fucking up the system, selectively destroying property, and murder:

SCUM will become members of the unwork force, the fuck-up force; they will get jobs of various kinds an unwork. For example, SCUM salesgirls will not charge for merchandise; SCUM telephone operators will not charge for calls; SCUM office and factory workers, in addition to fucking up their work, will secretly destroy equipment. SCUM will unwork at a job until fired, then get a new job to unwork at.

SCUM will forcibly relieve bus drivers, cab drivers and subway token sellers of their jobs and run buses and cabs and dispense free tokens to the public.

SCUM will destroy all useless and harmful objects -- cars, store windows, `Great Art', etc.

Eventually SCUM will take over the airwaves -- radio and TV networks -- by forcibly relieving of their jobs all radio and TV employees who would impede SCUM's entry into the broadcasting studios.

SCUM will couple-bust -- barge into mixed (male-female) couples, wherever they are, and bust them up.

SCUM will kill all men who are not in the Men's Auxiliary of SCUM. Men in the Men's Auxiliary are those men who are working diligently to eliminate themselves, men who, regardless of their motives, do good, men who are playing pall with SCUM. A few examples of the men in the Men's Auxiliary are: men who kill men; biological scientists who are working on constructive programs, as opposed to biological warfare; journalists, writers, editors, publishers and producers who disseminate and promote ideas that will lead to the achievement of SCUM's goals; faggots who, by their shimmering, flaming example, encourage other men to de-man themselves and thereby make themselves relatively inoffensive; men who consistently give things away -- money, things, services; men who tell it like it is (so far not one ever has), who put women straight, who reveal the truth about themselves, who give the mindless male females correct sentences to parrot, who tell them a woman's primary goal in life should be to squash the male sex (to aid men in this endeavor SCUM will conduct Turd Sessions, at which every male present will give a speech beginning with the sentence: `I am a turd, a lowly abject turd', then proceed to list all the ways in which he is. His reward for doing so will be the opportunity to fraternize after the session for a whole, solid hour with the SCUM who will be present. Nice, clean-living male women will be invited to the sessions to help clarify any doubts and misunderstandings they may have about the male sex; makers and promoters of sex books and movies, etc., who are hastening the day when all that will be shown on the screen will be Suck and Fuck (males, like the rats following the Pied Piper, will be lured by Pussy to their doom, will be overcome and submerged by and will eventually drown in the passive flesh that they are); drug pushers and advocates, who are hastening the dropping out of men.

Being in the Men's Auxiliary is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for making SCUM's escape list; it's not enough to do good; to save their worthless asses men must also avoid evil. A few examples of the most obnoxious or harmful types are: rapists, politicians and all who are in their service (campaigners, members of political parties, etc); lousy singers and musicians; Chairmen of Boards; Breadwinners; landlords; owners of greasy spoons and restaraunts that play Muzak; `Great Artists'; cheap pikers and welchers; cops; tycoons; scientists working on death and destruction programs or for private industry (practically all scientists); liars and phonies; disc jockies; men who intrude themselves in the slightest way on any strange female; real estate men; stock brokers; men who speak when they have nothing to say; men who sit idly on the street and mar the landscape with their presence; double dealers; flim-flam artists; litterbugs; plagiarisers; men who in the slightest way harm any female; all men in the advertising industry; psychiatrists and clinical psychologists; dishonest writers, journalists, editors, publishers, etc.; censors on both the public and private levels; all members of the armed forces, including draftees (LBJ and McNamara give orders, but servicemen carry them out) and particularly pilots (if the bomb drops, LBJ won't drop it; a pilot will). In the case of a man whose behavior falls into both the good and bad categories, an overall subjective evaluation of him will be made to determine if his behavior is, in the balance, good or bad.

It is most tempting to pick off the female `Great Artists', liars and phonies etc along with the men, but that would be inexpedient, as it would not be clear to most of the public that the female killed was a male. All women have a fink streak in them, to a greater or lesser degree, but it stems from a lifetime of living among men. Eliminate men and women will shape up. Women are improvable; men are no, although their behavior is. When SCUM gets hot on their asses it'll shape up fast.

Simultaneously with the fucking-up, looting, couple-busting, destroying and killing, SCUM will recruit. SCUM, then, will consist of recruiters; the elite corps -- the hard core activists (the fuck-ups, looters and destroyers) and the elite of the elite -- the killers.

Dropping out is not the answer; fucking-up is. Most women are already dropped out; they were never in. Dropping out gives control to those few who don't drop out; dropping out is exactly what the establishment leaders want; it plays into the hands of the enemy; it strengthens the system instead of undermining it, since it is based entirely on the non-participating, passivity, apathy and non-involvement of the mass of women. Dropping out, however, is an excellent policy for men, and SCUM will enthusiastically encourage it.

Looking inside yourself for salvation, contemplating your navel, is not, as the Drop Out people would have you believe, the answer. Happiness likes outside yourself, is achieved through interacting with others. Self-forgetfulness should be one's goal, not self-absorption. The male, capable of only the latter, makes a virtue of irremediable fault and sets up self-absorption, not only as a good but as a Philosophical Good, and thus gets credit for being deep.

SCUM will not picket, demonstrate, march or strike to attempt to achieve its ends. Such tactics are for nice, genteel ladies who scrupulously take only such action as is guaranteed to be ineffective. In addition, only decent, clean-living male women, highly trained in submerging themselves in the species, act on a mob basis. SCUM consists of individuals; SCUM is not a mob, a blob. Only as many SCUM will do a job as are needed for the job. Also SCUM, being cool and selfish, will not subject to getting itself rapped on the head with billy clubs; that's for the nice, `privileged, educated', middle-class ladies with a high regard for the touching faith in the essential goodness of Daddy and policemen. If SCUM ever marches, it will be over the President's stupid, sickening face; if SCUM ever strikes, it will be in the dark with a six-inch blade.

SCUM will always operate on a criminal as opposed to a civil disobedience basis, that is, as opposed to openly violating the law and going to jail in order to draw attention to an injustice. Such tactics acknowledge the rightness overall system and are used only to modify it slightly, change specific laws. SCUM is against the entire system, the very idea of law and government. SCUM is out to destroy the system, not attain certain rights within it. Also, SCUM -- always selfish, always cool -- will always aim to avoid detection and punishment. SCUM will always be furtive, sneaky, underhanded (although SCUM murders will always be known to be such).

Both destruction and killing will be selective and discriminate. SCUM is against half-crazed, indiscriminate riots, with no clear objective in mind, and in which many of your own kind are picked off. SCUM will never instigate, encourage or participate in riots of any kind or other form of indiscriminate destruction. SCUM will coolly, furtively, stalk its prey and quietly move in for the kill. Destruction will never me such as to block off routes needed for the transportation of food or other essential supplies, contaminate or cut off the water supply, block streets and traffic to the extent that ambulances can't get through or impede the functioning of hospitals.

SCUM will keep on destroying, looting, fucking-up and killing until the money-work system no longer exists and automation is completely instituted or until enough women co-operate with SCUM to make violence unnecessary to achieve these goals, that is, until enough women either unwork or quit work, start looting, leave men and refuse to obey all laws inappropriate to a truly civilized society. Many women will fall into line, but many others, who surrendered long ago to the enemy, who are so adapted to animalism, to maleness, that they like restrictions and restraints, don't know what to do with freedom, will continue to be toadies and doormats, just as peasants in rice paddies remain peasants in rice paddies as one regime topples another. A few of the more volatile will whimper and sulk and throw their toys and dishrags on the floor, but SCUM will continue to steamroller over them.

A completely automated society can be accomplished very simply and quickly once there is a public demand for it. The blueprints for it are already in existence, and it's construction will take only a few weeks with millions of people working on it. Even though off the money system, everyone will be most happy to pitch in and get the automated society built; it will mark the beginning of a fantastic new era, and there will be a celebration atmosphere accompanying the construction.

The elimination of money and the complete institution of automation are basic to all other SCUM reforms; without these two the others can't take place; with them the others will take place very rapidly. The government will automatically collapse. With complete automation it will be possible for every woman to vote directly on every issue by means of an electronic voting machine in her house. Since the government is occupied almost entirely with regulating economic affairs and legislating against purely private matters, the elimination of money wand with it the elimination of males who wish to legislate `morality' will mean there will be practically no issues to vote on.

After the elimination of money there will be no further need to kill men; they will be stripped of the only power they have over psychologically independent females. They will be able to impose themselves only on the doormats, who like to be imposed on. The rest of the women will be busy solving the few remaining unsolved problems before planning their agenda for eternity and Utopia -- completely revamping educational programs so that millions of women can be trained within a few months for high level intellectual work that now requires years of training (this can be done very easily once out educational goal is to educate and not perpetuate an academic and intellectual elite); solving the problems of disease and old age and death and completely redesigning our cities and living quarters. Many women will for a while continue to think they dig men, but as they become accustomed to female society and as they become absorbed in their projects, they will eventually come to see the utter uselessnes and banality of the male.

The few remaining men can exist out their puny days dropped out on drugs or strutting around in drag or passively watching the high-powered female in action, fulfilling themselves as spectators, vicarious livers*[FOOTNOTE: It will be electronically possible for him to tune into any specific female he wants to and follow in detail her every movement. The females will kindly, obligingly consent to this, as it won't hurt them in the slightest and it is a marvelously kind and humane way to treat their unfortunate, handicapped fellow beings.] or breeding in the cow pasture with the toadies, or they can go off to the nearest friendly suicide center where they will be quietly, quickly, and painlessly gassed to death.

Prior to the institution of automation, to the replacement of males by machines, the male should be of use to the female, wait on her, cater to her slightest whim, obey her every command, be totally subservient to her, exist in perfect obedience to her will, as opposed to the completely warped, degenerate situation we have now of men, not only not only not existing at all, cluttering up the world with their ignominious presence, but being pandered to and groveled before by the mass of females, millions of women piously worshiping the Golden Calf, the dog leading the master on a leash, when in fact the male, short of being a drag queen, is least miserable when his dogginess is recognized -- no unrealistic emotional demands are made of him and the completely together female is calling the shots. Rational men want to be squashed, stepped on, crushed and crunched, treated as the curs, the filth that they are, have their repulsiveness confirmed.

The sick, irrational men, those who attempt to defend themselves against their disgustingness, when they see SCUM barrelling down on them, will cling in terror to Big Mama with her Big Bouncy Boobies, but Boobies won't protect them against SCUM; Big Mama will be clinging to Big Daddy, who will be in the corner shitting in his forceful, dynamic pants. Men who are rational, however, won't kick or struggle or raise a distressing fuss, but will just sit back, relax, enjoy the show and ride the waves to their demise.

- end -

#The Sisterhood

0 notes