Taking TheDailyFemme to the streets, coffee shops, libraries, art galleries, sports games, buses,  trains, and using e-mail, we ask women (and this time men as well) all over the country (and sometimes the world) one simple question. What we get in return is a lot of insight, advice, some nervous confusion and even a hug or two.

Interviews were contributed by Annamarya Scaccia, Maria Rubio, Kate Friedman, and Cherie Hannouche

This week’s question: A feminist Swedish group protested the gender pay gap by burning 100,000 kronor ($13,000). The Feminist Initiative party says the money set ablaze on the Swedish island of Gotland on Tuesday represents the amount of money the country’s women miss out on every minute in comparison to men. Do you think this move was effective activism or just a ridiculous statement?

Clelia – Philadelphia, PA

The point of activism is to bring about change. Bringing attention to an issue is not enough in order for change to occur. Did the Feminist Initiative Party bring the issue of the gender wage gap to the forefront? Yes; but the act of burning money alone, I do not see as activism. I don’t see it as a ridiculous statement either. It was indeed a statement- a strong statement – and for activism to be effective sometimes a strong statement, such as burning money, is a catalyst for further activism. I hope that the Feminist Initiative Party has taken other steps to not only bring this issue to the forefront, but to validate the importance of this message where it matters and where a difference could be made.

Christina – Salt Lake City, UT

I think we sometimes forget that in order to create changes and address certain issues, we have to think outside of the box. This is certainly a radical idea but I think other radical ideas have instated real change for example at the time Sylvia Pankhurst’s Women’s Suffrage Federation took certain actions during World War I that many thought went too far and were ridiculous given the confines of war and yet they made strides that have brought women to where we are today. I just think we need to keep an open mind when it comes to these types of actions.

Iris – Hephzibah, Georgia

I have to lean toward this being a ridiculous statement. I do understand that the money was donated but at the same time I feel they could have put the money to better use then burning it. I don’t know the state of the country however I can’t help but feel that an amount that large could have gone toward helping the cause by funding funding work towards changing legislation. Simply burning the money, while a dramatic statement and one that garnered attention to the problem as seen by the story being covered by the AP, won’t help bridge the gap between what men and women who are equally qualified are paid. Yes now the world is aware of the problem but awareness to an issue does not always translate into a government working towards a solution.

Meredith – Brooklyn, NY

This seems to me like a case of “cutting your nose to spite your face”. That money could have gone towards raising awareness in a very different way. Sure, now the problem is out there, and the Swedish government is in the spotlight, but that doesn’t mean that they’re going to DO anything about it. Governments tend not to listen to overzealous radicals, especially in comparison to more levelheaded groups.

Becky – Rice Lake, WI

I think it’s hard to gain respect for a cause if you do not act in a respectful manner. By burning money, it’s entirely possible to alienate some people who may have responded favorably to a different campaign. It certainly seems to be hypocritical on some level for a group of people to complain about a lack of money going to the women, and those same people actually burning money.

Richard – Philadelphia, PA

It’s a shame that this had to come to pass. It’s not right that in this day and age that there is still such a gap in wages between men and women – that in modern times, you would think that modern pay and ethics would apply. I don’t feel it’s effective because there’s a chance people will just see it as a waste of money. There may also be negative backlash and because there is such sexism in the world, I feel that people would look at them as a bunch of crazy women. That is not right. I think they could have found a different way to get this message across, however, I am not there and

Read more…

Contributed by Cristen

Der Spiegel recently published an interview with Mariela Castro, daughter of Cuban president Raul Castro and Fidel Castro’s niece. In addition to her notable paterfamilias, Castro has also become a well known champion for gay rights in Cuba. As director of Cuba’s National Center for Sex Education (CENESEX), Castro lobbied the National Assembly to adopt a gay rights bill. Cuba has been known for fierce homophobic policies, subjecting gays and lesbians to “reeducation camps” and violence at times. Even last year, groups of young homosexuals were arrested at different times based solely on their sexuality. That included the imprisonment of student Mario José Delgado Gonzáles, who was taken into custody for organizing the Mr. Gay Havana pageant, and even following his release, Gonzáles was banned from returning to university.

According to a 2008 BBC report, Mariela Castro’s proposed bill would’ve been one of the most liberal gay rights policies in Latin America, and included provisions to “recognize same-sex unions, along with inheritance rights. It would also give transsexuals the right to free sex-change operations and allow them to switch the gender on their ID cards, with or without surgery.”

Castro later withdrew the bill, but she noted that the opposition came from the Catholic Church and certain government factions – not her father, which is interesting. In explaining her reasons for withdrawing the bill, Castro told Der Spiegel:

(Cuban President Raul Castro) understood it and supported it. But there are people in his environment and in some governing bodies of the church who cannot understand it. We continue to fight. Where there are people there are sexual differences and homosexuality, even in the Communist Party. The opponents must recognize that our policy also benefits many party members by allowing them to have political careers.

She also called out the United Nations for not taking a more proactive stance on supporting gay rights as well:

For me, sexual identity and orientation is a human right, which should also be accepted by the United Nations. Of course, innovations in this area provoke contradictions, especially in a society like ours, which has so many revolutionary processes.

Cuba still has a way to go toward realizing Castro’s vision of equal rights for homosexuals. But for a country fraught with social problems whose living standards are far below those in the U.S., Cuba has managed to take more proactive steps toward legalizing same sex marriage than its northern neighbor. Today, the New York Times even noted that Argentina’s recent passage of same sex marriage legislation marks the ninth Latin American country to do so. Meantime, in the United States, a mere five states allow it. Maybe once Mariela Castro pushes equal rights through in Cuba, she can head our way.

Click here for the full Interview

Contributed by Ashleigh

I read about “Man Up” the other day on the Daily Beast: the activist group is leading a groundbreaking conference to convince men to end violence against women, which kicked off in South Africa during the World Cup. American journalist Jimmie Briggs founded Man Up after writing Innocents Lost, a book about the child soldiers forced to fight and rape in the wars of Central Africa.

Lewis Kasindi Kilongo, 26, is a participant and believes in gender equality—making him an anomaly in his home in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. “My friends in different villages consider women an object of pleasure,” he said. “Many guys think they can’t marry a really educated woman because it will be like having two men in the house. It’s a fear for them. They just want someone they can control.”

Kilongo was one of 85 youth delegates who traveled to Johannesburg, South Africa for the conference. The delegates, ranging in age from 18 to 30, represented both genders and traveled from Liberia, the United States, Uganda and more than 20 other countries. Many had been touched by the very violence they are now fighting against, be it domestic violence or as a result of war. “All of us believe that violence against women and girls is the human rights issue of our time,” said Karen Robinson-Cloete, Man Up’s executive director.

One in three women worldwide will be the victim of some kind of violence in her lifetime. There are 27 million slaves in the world today—mostly women and children trafficked into forced sex work. I think Man Up is doing something incredible in a country where gender inequality and sexual assault is a way of life. I commend the men brave enough to participate and hopefully pass on this essential knowledge to others, because as we’re shown time and again, countries in crisis must heal from the inside out.

For more information on Man Up, click here.

The Daily Beast: Africa’s Men Fight for Women’s Rights

Contributed by Meridith

Last week, I wrote a piece about a new vaginal gel that seems to have great promise for preventing women in Africa, especially, from contracting HIV. The New York Times has published a new article about the drug, listing some of the many questions raised by this drug. These questions got at issues I hadn’t even thought about when I was initially reflecting on the drug. For instance, is it safe to use every day? How about for prostitutes or other people who have a very high number of sex partners? Would the drug protect against HIV transmission through anal sex? And how do patent laws affect the production and delivery of this, and other, drugs? (The cost per dose of the drug, I learned from this new article, represents 40 cents for the applicator and 2 cents for the drug itself, a ratio that really surprised me. This article suggests, though, that competition in the market could drive down the price of the applicator immensely, as long as patent laws don’t prevent the production of the applicator by different companies.) The answers researchers are finding to these and other questions have been encouraging so far, but it’s definitely a reminder that we still have a lot of work to do before eradicating HIV. This new drug certainly seems like a step in the right direction.

New York Times: Advance on AIDS Raises Questions as Well as Joy

Contributed by Sara

A St. Louis jury ruled yesterday that the sexual assault of a twenty-year-old woman could be featured on Girls Gone Wild because (as the jury foreman said in his official statement) “she knew what she was doing.”

Jane Doe, now married with two children, filed a law suit against Girls Gone Wild on the grounds that they damaged her reputation after she heard from her husband’s friend that she had been featured in the series’ “Sorority Orgy” video.  Girls Gone Wild featured Doe despite the fact that her refusal to participate beyond dancing for the camera can be clearly heard on the video.  Partick O’Brian, jury foreman, said that the jury felt that Doe’s dancing constituted implied consent—that she was “asking for it.”  After hearing O’Brian’s comments, Jane Doe commented that she was in fact “having fun until [her] top was pulled off” but “now this thing is out there for the world to see.”  The jury took only ninety minutes to reach its verdict with an eleven to one majority vote.

The lawyers for both parties centered their argument on whether or not the young woman had given consent to be included in the video, and whether or not consent is needed for the Girls Gone Wild videos.  The implications of the verdict: the dancing and “teasing” of the young woman gave others the permission to expose her breasts, and the camera men permission to publish the incident in a porno; the verbal refusal to expose her body was less important than her “behavior.”  Another implication of the jury verdict: the young woman was responsible for her own sexual assault.

Girls Gone Wild and its founder have had other consent issues in the past, including one informal rape allegation.  The company does not pay its participants, but rather eggs on behavior in bars and gives participants T-shirts.

That rape and sexual assault apologism is so widespread that it could form the foundation of a jury’s ruling goes beyond making me angry—it makes me terribly, terribly sad that we live in such an unshakable rape culture.  Girls having fun turns into “girls going wild” not when the women choose to do so, but when men decide.  Consent optional.

Imagine: some people get off to that.

Jezebel: “Jury Decides Consent is Not Required for Girls Gone Wild”

Contributed by Cristen

This headline from tech magazine Wired caught my eye today: “Zack Synder’s ‘Sucker Punch’ Rocks the Girl Power.” So of course I clicked onward.  Wired says the upcoming Warner Bros. film is about a band of ridiculously attractive women who play “ferocious loony-bin inhabitants who unleash their wildest fantasies as subjects of a bizarre psychological experiment.”  Interestingly, Vanessa Hudgens of High School Musical fame is playing the gun-wielding buxom Blondie, which is a bit of a shift for the young actress to say the least.

I haven’t taken the time to figure out the premise of ‘Sucker Punch’, although clicking through the promotional posters indicates that you don’t really need to know much. Whatever the knock-em-up plotline entails, the studio is selling the idea of watching these leather-clad beauties kick ass on screen for 90 minutes. Gotta say though, I am interested to know how the lovely Amber plans to fight off evil forces with that candy sucker dangling in her mouth. That just sounds like a dental emergency waiting to happen.

Using phrases like “fierce” and “girl-powered” to describe the flick is just troubling to me because it clearly co-opts feminist language for derogatory purposes. While I could see something like, say, “The Runaways” being marketed like this,  it’s always the more violent and overly sexualized scripts that get that kind of treatment. Or think about Uma Thurman and Lucy Liu in Tarantino’s “Kill Bill” series who both play violent and undeniably attractive characters. No faux girl power messaging necessary. Yes, this is Hollywood and I understand that sex sells. But is there any need to tie “girl power” into all of this? Can’t studios just call a spade a spade when they produce these flesh fests? Surely with all of the marketing geniuses out there, we could have moved beyond this unnecessarily hackneyed sexualized “girl power” theme a long time ago.