In which I think about feminism

I am lucky enough to be surrounded by people who teach me things about life and myself every day. They also force me to really think about the answers to questions I am posed. I am blessed for this, as it encourages me to grow, learn and develop as a human being.

One topic which has become much bigger in my life is feminism. I am a feminist-newbie in the sense that I am still learning about the different waves of feminism and what they mean, and how feminism is growing and changing with society. I have also become more aware of, and uncomfortable with, the sexism in my life and am acting to change it.

Since I was tiny, I have held the belief that everyone should be equal. That regardless of gender, age, colour, sexual orientation or any other label, the human race should be given all the same rights and opportunities. To say otherwise, in my mind, was just ridiculous.

And it sounds so simple, doesn't it? If only it were. But when people can't decide on the "right" type of feminism, or when the definition of the word is so contorted by some that it resembles something bad and wrong, the focus is taken away from the intent and onto the person advocating it.

I see women talking about how they aren't feminists and it makes my heart hurt, because it shows that this attempt to derail feminism and the feminist fight is working. Words like feminazi were coined as hate speech - to make the attempts to achieve equality look like persecution. That could not be more wrong. The people of privilege - who are the ones who fight to make feminism look like a bad thing - are scared. They are scared that they will have to give up some of that privilege to make things equal. And they have gotten fat and lazy and used to a certain way of life, and you can be damned sure that they won't give it up without a fight.

Which means we need to fight back. And that's when the fingers are pointed at the serious activists, because in that snapshot they look angry and on the attack. Because they are. But very rarely is it asked why they are so angry and rebellious. It's because they have to be.

For feminism to succeed, we need to combat this image of a feminist as a man-hating bitch who wants to cut the balls off men and hang them from the rafters. We need to show all sides of feminism, from the quiet people leading by example and changing the lives of people immediately surrounding them, to the marching, campaigning women who are front and centre trying to get their message to as many people as possible. And on top of that, we need to understand that there is no "right" form of feminism, as long as everyone is working towards the same goal, then the means of getting there are irrelevant.

In every movement - every single movement - there is a group that can be tagged "extremist" or "fundamentalist". Feminism no doubt has those. But, like other groups, they are a small minority. We shout down anyone who tars all Muslims with the terrorist brush, so why would it be any different for feminists?

But I understand that feminism isn't just about equality for women, it is the fight for equality for all. And even if white women get their equality, then those white women should still fight for trans rights, for minority rights, for gay rights. Because we don't live in a vacuum, and our rights overlap.

I may not be a scholar in feminist studies, but I am beginning to understand the facets and nuances of the fight for equal rights for all. And that is what feminism is all about.

Technology guilt

I work in technology, well in a job that is predicated on technology. Without technology, the role of online editor wouldn't exist.

I'm sitting in my living room and in the room with me is a PS3, a blu ray player, an iPad, my laptop, my iPhone and a Petcube. In my handbag through the house is a Kindle and my work mobile. 

So, as the above illustrates, I am a fan of gadgets and tech. However, I regularly wrestle with some guilt about the use of technology.

The way I see it is that the more technology we use, the less people are needed. Think about it. We have self serve checkouts in supermarkets, pay in and withdrawal machines at banks, even some GPs' surgeries you sign in for your appointment not by speaking to a receptionist, but via a touch screen. And for every machine used to carry out a transaction in our lives, we need one less person.

I understand, and take advantage of, the benefits the tech brings. Efficiency, the lack of human error, and the convenience to name but a few. But do those pros really weigh up against the con that we are putting people out of work?

Some would argue that it's not a loss of jobs, just a transference. You need less frontline staff, but you need people to create, maintain and upgrade the machines. However, I disagree. You don't switch one for one in that scenario. If you have 10 self serve tills, you only need one person to keep an eye on them, compared to 10 traditional checkouts. If you work for a chain, one or two people could cover servicing the machines of a few stores in their area. There is no like for like.

Cost-cutting is a big deal for businesses but is replacing the workforce with a computer really the answer? 

I never see people having issues with the fact they can go shopping and never speak to an actual person. They walk in, get what they need, self scan and leave. You could do it in headphones without ever taking them off.

And if it is truly about reducing the operating costs for a company, why are those costs not reflected in the price to the consumer?

Whether it's about reducing your bills or about the fact that the number of jobs overall is decreasing, why is more noise not being made about this technological dominance? If it doesn't stop, do we risk making ourselves obsolete?

The difference between like and respect

I have issues with a lot of people. Fuck it, at times I'm downright antisocial. I prefer my own company, or the company of a few choice friends and family members, as opposed to a massive crowd of people. And as much as I like spending time with loved ones, I like withdrawing just as much.

I used to think that it was a by product of my job. As a journalist, I would speak to dozens of people a week, on a whole range of topics. And when I moved up and was put in charge of two papers, I then had to attend events as a representative of the company and the brand.

However, I think it is more than that. As much as "bullshit fatigue" is probably part of my need to drop out of the human race for a bit, the fact is that a lot of people annoy me. They always have.

I was an advanced child, reading and writing before I started school. In primary, teachers would frequently have to give me work of older children because I would blast through the class work in a fraction of the time the rest of the class needed. I was also conversing regularly with adults - the benefit of having parents who wouldn't dismiss me up to my room at all times - so I was always mature for my age.

As a result, I would see the stuff my peers were doing as silly or childish. It never occurred to me that they were doing the normal things of children their age. Sometimes I did play, but in a "proper" way. I am more prone to whimsy and flights of fancy now than I ever was back then.

Anyway, the reason I explain that is to show that my dislike of people has been ingrained in me from a young age. But, what I have learned over the years, and it's something I'm proud to say I have learned, is that you don't need to like people to respect them.

Doesn't sound too revelatory, does it? Well, it's amazing how many people can't respect people they don't like. 

There are people I downright hate, but I can still respect them for who they are. I might think they are total bastards, but they might be good at their jobs, a good parent or have a great talent. The fact that they are a horrible human being to or in front of me doesn't negate all that other good stuff.

What gets me through many a day is the  understanding that I may not like a person, but I respect them. I don't want to ever go for a pint with them, but I can respect their achievements and who they are. Hell, I can even respect someone who can maintain a complete and utter veneer of bullshit in the face of reality. That takes a lot of work!!

Now, don't get me wrong, respect isn't automatic. I hate people who demand respect before they have shown they deserve it. "Respect your elders" - why, because they have managed to live a long time? Some old people are shitbags, so no. But tell me why I should respect them and at least I can base the decision on merit. I have respect for people who show that they should have it. 

And there's some people I neither like nor respect. But they are the ones I spend zero time and energy on, so I won't waste another word on them.

Roller derby isn't a business, but it should be run like one...

I have been involved with roller derby in Scotland for four years now. Although I am not a skater (I'm a repeat failure of fresh meat programmes with two different leagues) my experience doing line-up and bench managing, as well as being involved in the running of leagues and the UKRDA, the governing body of the sport in the UK, has given me vast experience and insight. And what it boils down to is this...

People need to start treating roller derby like a business.

Unfortunately, for now, very few people can actually be paid to be a part of roller derby. It is a sport that has grown to the place it is now thanks to the hard work, dedication and sacrifices of numerous people up and down the country. This does not mean that we can't treat the sport in a business-like fashion. In fact, it is my belief that it would benefit massively if we did.

Here are a few things that can be done to shift the focus towards a more business-like structure, and away from shaky volunteer-run structures:

1. Hire the right people, not the most enthusiastic
It's great that someone wants to get involved in running a roller derby league or event. However, should they? If this was a company (Derby Co.), that person would more than likely be passed on if they did not have some relevant experience or qualifications for the position. With the growth of the sport, and the diverse range of participants, its likely you can get the right person for the job. And it should be sold as a job, with a full description of duties and essential and desirable skills. Enthusiastic people are great, and absolutely they should be nurtured and encouraged, but put them into roles they can learn from, or roles they are already suited to.

2. Make people accountable
You wouldn't let people away with not doing their duties in a job - you would sack them and find someone who will. Admittedly, this can be hard when you are working with volunteers, you don't want them to just up and quit. However, they need to do what you need them to do. If they aren't, why aren't they? If you follow the ideas in point one about giving them detailed descriptions of their job, then it's easy to show them where they are falling down.

3. Keep track of people's performance
This can be speaking to their superiors (committee heads, directors), or outside "customers" to see show their performance has been. And speak to the person themselves, to see how they are feeling about the role. Do this regularly, particularly in the first six months following their appointment. This period is vital for ensuring that they know what they are doing and have the tools to do it.

4. Be prepared to invest in your "staff"
Whether this is paying for them to do training (roles like grievance would especially benefit for this), covering some of the costs associated with the role (software etc), or starting a wee scheme to give well-performing staff a wee treat every so often, be prepared to spend money making your staff happy and able to do their job. Also, invest time in them, by tracking performance and checking in with them, by training them yourself if needed, by providing proper handovers. What you put in, you will get out.

5. Acknowledge hard work
Remember these people are volunteers - they should be praised for the work they do because they are doing it for free. The one thing that doesn't cost any money is a bit of praise. A lot of the plaudits go to the hard work on the track (and it should, the team are athletics giving blood, sweat and tears to win), but that doesn't mean you can't give props to the work that happens behind the scenes. These are the people who ensure the league's present and future. Why not take your committee heads and directors out for a celebratory/thank you meal once a year?

6. Let people move on
This can be one of the hardest things to do, in business or in roller derby. However, sometimes things need to end for new things to begin. Don't begrudge someone for not wanting to do the same job forever, their situation may have changed, they may be tired, they may be fed up. All of that is allowed. As long as you make sure they leave their role in a neat and tidy place, with an appropriate handover, then let them go. Better than then have them disappear forever.

In which I contemplate the future....

I honestly can't say I have a vision of what my life will be like in 10 years. Hell, I don't even know what it will be like a year from now. I know I will still have cats (and probably still the Mockingcats, unless some tragic accident befalls any of them). Other than that, not a clue.

But here's the thing: That doesn't worry me. I know that I should be thinking about buying a house, but there is no way I can save the near £20k needed for a deposit. So it's not a viable option, therefore I put it aside. I can afford to rent a fairly decent home, that's all I need.

I might be in a relationship, but I doubt it. I don't leave the house, other than to go to work, to go to roller derby and to go to the gym. Not a lot of options for meeting guys in any of that. Especially where I currently work. No offence to the guys there, but really not my type.

I will hopefully probably be in another job. It's not in my nature to stay in the one position too long, I need to move and grow and challenge myself. I've already been in my current job longer than I would care - usually the 2 year mark is my limit (the shortest period in one journalism job being six months, the shortest ever in my working life being one day). After that I get itchy feet and want to move on.

If I were to have my dream life I would be a published author who doesn't need a day job, living in a home I own, with my cats. I would have a cleaner to keep the house tidy and I could afford to indulge myself more than I currently can. I would have a nice car, which I would own outright, and wouldn't have to worry about an overdraft, the bills or any of the money worries I currently have.

I don't want to be JK Rowling (although it would be nice), but making £40k a year writing would mean I could give up the day job, and focus on what I really love.

Probably should restart that partially-written novel!!

I wish I could be more ethical about animals

Not that I abuse animals or anything (are you kidding me??) but I have meat lover's guilt. I also have leather and fur wearer's guilt.

I could possibly become a vegetarian. I am aware enough of how to get the nutrition you need while removing bad things from your diet (see my adherence to the Paleo diet as proof). I do love bacon and lamb, but I think like most things it has become a habit. There are so many tasty meat substitutes and vegetarian recipes now - I think I could enjoy being a veggie.

The sole reason I would do this is because of the animals. Most of the time I try and ignore the fact that the bit of meat on my plate was once a living, breathing (possibly cute) animal who had no choice about whether or not it ended up on my plate. But as I get older and become more aware of the rights and wrongs of the world, this is a guilt that increases.

But then I think, "is that enough?" Am I really helping the animals unless I also give up wearing leather, suede and fur too? And then do I need to give up any and all products that have been animal tested? In the UK there is a ban on testing cosmetics on animals, but some products are shipped over from other countries and there aren't the same restrictions.

And do I need to go full vegan in order to stop contributing to the horrible mass production of dairy products etc?

If I am going to be ethical do I need to go the whole hog, or can I comfortably play a small part by reducing, but not entirely cutting out, the killing of animals to live my life?

Can I ever live with another person?

This isn't me begging, more something I have been thinking about. I have lived on my own for nearly 6 years now, since permanently leaving my mum's house. And in that time I have become very used to doing things my way.

So if I were to get some kind of housemate (platonic or otherwise) I'm not sure I could cope. Having to consider someone else, not being able to do the things I want (or having to do the things I don't want), compromise.

I like leaving my house a tip if I can't be arsed cleaning or tidying up. I like not showering if all I'm doing is slobbing about the house (and I like being able to laze around with no-one seeing or being encroached on by me). And most of all, I like not having to talk to people if I don't want to.

Besides, I have three cats as housemates and they dictate everything - when I eat (always after when they eat), when I sleep, who comes to visit. And I know that I don't need to live that way, I choose to because I want to give my kitties the best home possible. Perhaps I will feel like that if it was a person I cared about? But when I think about it, my instinct says "love me, love my ways". I am not going to become a house proud, neat freak who sits primly on her perfectly maintained couch in her spotless livingroom. Who has the time?

That makes me sound horrible, doesn't it? But the thought of living with another person makes me feel uneasy. If I ever have a relationship, we will need to do the HR Giger thing and just live next door to each other. That always sounded like a good idea to me - I think some of the biggest problems in being in a relationship is proximity. We move in together and all of a sudden all the quirks and foibles become apparent, and it's that stuff rather than the big stuff that puts us off.

Full disclosure: This is coming from someone who has never lived with a man, btw, just someone who has had to listen to LOTS of friends bitching about their other halves and the little things that drive them mad.

When did being a mum make women untouchable?

I understand that being a mum must be a hardcore experience. Although I'm not one myself, I am a daughter of a woman who was a single mum. And I wasn't exactly an angel growing up, I gave her a ton of grief and worry over the years.

I state the above to clarify that I am not one of those people who think that mums "have it easy" or aren't as stressed or busy as working women. However....

What I have noticed is that you cannot question a woman once she becomes a mum. If she needs time off work then you can't argue because her children are more important than any reason a childless person may have to get time off. You can't question their dedication to their work, that their priorities may have shifted (which is natural, saying that isn't a criticism) or that they get special treatment.

The fact is that more allowances are made for parents than for any other part of the workforce. The same provisions aren't put in place for religious people, carers or just the ordinary worker. Not being a parent doesn't mean you don't have dependents. 

Last year I was in a situation where a colleague went on maternity leave. The manager advertised for maternity cover for a week before she left, and made no secret of how half-arsed he was doing it. So the rest of us had to take on parts of her role for the year she was off. We didn't get a choice, it was just the way it was.

It was during that year that I was signed off with depression. I now know that a wee bit of that was grief after losing Molee but the fact is I was overworked, not doing my job well (and that was really disheartening for a perfectionist like me) always tired, drinking a lot to try and not feel like shit and being a really crappy person. It was too much.

The fact is, I don't blame the woman for getting pregnant and taking the maternity leave she is perfectly entitled to take. I blame the management who let her go without a replacement and piling work on a management team already handling a hell of a lot. I raised my concerns about the work at the time, and had them brushed aside.

Where I work, there is no choice and when you inevitably hit breaking point, you are seen as the weak one, it's never the boss's fault.

I'm not short on opinions, I just know when to keep them to myself

On a personal Facebook page, on my locked personal Twitter account, and in the company of trusted friends and family, I let rip on issues I feel like letting rip on. I'm not very politically correct, I'm not very polite and I hold views on family and relationships and other subjects that many wouldn't appreciate hearing.

But here's the thing...Outside of the above situations, I keep my mouth shut. I tailor how much I say to my audience. I'm not saying I lie about things, or keep quiet about things that I fundamentally believe to be wrong, but I do understand that some things are better left unsaid.

I don't feel the need to tell a group of mums about how I definitely do not want children, and how little I enjoy their photos/stories/anecdotes about their offspring. Because they love them, and that's what's important. Also, they may hate my incessant cat talk!!

But I will set straight anyone making assumptions and judgements about women who don't have children.

I won't tell someone I think their outfit looks shit, but I also won't say they look great. I will either keep silent, or focus on their haircut or something that isn't hideous and unflattering.

And if I feel that I cannot support a person's choices or beliefs then I will quietly step away. I don't feel the need to kick and scream and shout about it. If they get dramatic it will be dealt with.

I will always be respectful of another person's opinions, and if I disagree and feel the need to address their opinion, I will try and do so in a constructive way. But if we still are at odds then I respect that as long as it doesn't descend into an argument.

Knowing when to shut up can be just as important as knowing when to speak.

Introduction: The fundamentals of being a crazy cat lady (part 1)

This is where Atticus wants to lie. And I let him.

Becoming a card-carrying, flag-waving crazy cat lady involves more than just labelling yourself as one. There are certain criteria that must be met.

For instance, you have to be "crazy". This doesn't mean that you lick windows or talk to invisible people, but you have to be slightly unhinged. I talk to myself, have conversations with my cats, dance when there's no music, and am a general weirdo. I also have depression. This means that at times, when I get low, I behave in a not normal way. Ergo, crazy.

You need cats. Notice the "s" at the end of that word? One cat is not enough, two is better, but three or more definitely puts you in the realm of crazy cat lady. And you have to put them above everything else in your life. If one of your cats is comfy on the couch, but you want to sit down, you don't disturb them. They can have the seat, they were there first.

And third, you need to be a lady. Not a Lady, just a female. I'm sure men can be "crazy cat men," but it doesn't mean the same thing. When I say "crazy cat man", there isn't an image that instantly springs to my head. Say "crazy cat lady" and you get the head to toe: unkempt hair, fluffy cardi, a cat under each arm, and a pair of well-worn slippers. (I don't say this in a derogatory way, this is years of observation of women with cats.)

And there is a level of commitment that comes with being a crazy cat lady. You can't just pick and choose when to be crazy cat lady and when not. Partly because you can never truly rid yourself of cat fluff on your clothes or scratch marks on your hands. But mostly because you need a lot of time to perfect "the look".

50 Shades of Abuse

So the 50 Shades movie is released this week. Women around the world are getting wet in the knickers at the thought of actually seeing the badly-written sex brought to life on the big screen, and how Christian Grey's jeans actually sit on his hips.

I personally won't be seeing it. Much as I couldn't get past the second page of the book (the WORST published fiction I've ever read, and worse than a lot of the unpublished fan fiction in the Pit of Voles) I have read a lot of articles and blogs that take the trilogy apart chapter by chapter detailing not just the bad grammar, worse sex descriptions and passages that pretty much rip the source fiction (Twilight) off shot-for-shot. And the one thing I take away from it is this - what is described between Ana and Christian is abuse. Pure and simple.

Having sex with someone against their will is rape. There's no other word for it. Forcing them to do sex stuff they don't want to do is sexual assault.

Threatening to hit a woman, not because it's part of a sex game but because she has pissed you off, is domestic violence.

Imploring someone to stay with you, not see their friends etc etc because you don't know what you will do without them is emotional blackmail.

Monitoring emails/phones to see what your girlfriend is doing and who she is talking to is weird and stalkerish. I know the CIA does it, but that doesn't make it right.

Christian does all of those things on multiple occasions in the books.

But Ana's no better. She's a mean girl dressed up as a nice, normal, 'plain-Jane' type. She's shitty about any woman within a three mile radius, she has no sympathy for the mentally ill and she too emotionally blackmails her way to "true love".

I understand that not everyone sees the sinister side of 50 Shades. I hope those people don't ever get into a relationship with an abuser, because I don't see a happy ending in their future. However, how people don't recognise the above as wrong and not sexy astounds me. Maybe I just have my eyes open to that stuff. Or maybe I don't need to drop myself into a fantasy to get my rocks off. But if I did, it would be someone who loves me for who I am, not someone who tries to make me "better" (again, a big part of these books). Someone who doesn't command me to eat when I don't want to and threatens to smack my arse in the middle of a restaurant if I don't. Someone who doesn't go mad if I choose to go topless on the beach because other people can see.

So don't go and see it - stop giving money to EL James and her badly-written abuse-fest of a book series. Donate that money to a domestic abuse charity instead. You will feel better for doing it.