What does Gender Equality mean to you?

Today is Women's Equality day in the USA and while gender equality is something very important to us at breaking perceptions, it is a phrase that can mean different things to different people. This post looks at what different organisations, people and religions say about gender equality but more importantly we want comments to hear from you what you think gender equality means and whether you agree with the other views shown on here.

According to the wikipedia article, "Gender equality (also known as gender equity, gender egalitarianism, or sexual equality) is the goal of the equality of the genders or the sexes, stemming from a belief in the injustice of myriad forms of gender inequality."

UNICEF defines gender equality as "levelling the playing field for girls and women by ensuring that all children have equal opportunity to develop their talents."

The United Nations Population Fund declared gender equality "first and foremost, a human right."

For Unifem "it is the fundamental right of every woman to live a life free from discrimination and violence".

The United Nations Millennium Project claims, "Every single Goal is directly related to women's rights, and societies where women are not afforded equal rights as men can never achieve development in a sustainable manner."

According to Gary Younge of the Guardian newspaper in Britain, "Black presidents and women MPs do not alone mean equality and justice" and he argues that "The relationship between identity, representation and equality is neither inevitable nor irrelevant, but occasionally contradictory and always complex."

In an article for the Independent newspaper in Britain, E Jane Dickson said that "Women behaving like men does not mean equality". She says that "It's not right that men sexually and economically exploit women in foreign countries. But turning the tables is not in itself constructive."

Pelle Billing, who blogs about women's liberation beyond feminism, says that "Assuming that equality means sameness is inherently problematic since if you want men and women to make exactly the same career choices, family choices and lifestyles choices, then you are basically trying to fit individuals into your own preconceived notion of reality." Instead, "Equality between the sexes simply means that men and women have equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities."

During a talk to Ithaca College on Islam, Women and Equality, Asma Barlas said the Qu'ran "designates women and men each other’s “guides” (awliya) and establishes love and mutuality as the basis of marriage."

In the essay "Equality, Submission And The Role Of Women", Allan Turner says that "Equality and subordination are not contradictions. The Bible teaches that, as image-bearers of the divine nature, the female and male are totally equal. It teaches, therefore, that she is totally equal with the male in her humanity. Furthermore, the Bible teaches that the female is not a second-class citizen of the kingdom of God. It teaches, in fact, that she is totally equal in her access to the salvation that takes place in Christ. Nevertheless, the Bible emphatically teaches that the female role is to be one of submission"

For me, Robyn, gender equality means that my gender is considered unimportant in my ability to do anything. Like feminists, I distinguish between sex and gender and accept that, being the female sex, peeing standing up and growing facial hair are things I will never be able to do as equally well as men. Gender however, is what my role is considered to be in society and I see no reason why a woman cannot do just as much as a man in society, whether in terms of economy & earning money, or careers, or raising children. I believe if there is to be gender equality then not only do women need have equal rights and opportunities as men, but men need to be given equal rights with women on things as well, for example giving longer paternity leave. In places like the USA and most European countries however, where women do for the most part have equal legal and political rights as men, gender equality is a state of mind. Its all very well you legally having a law that women can be stockbrokers if all male stockbrokers have the belief that women could never be stockbrokers.

What does gender equality mean to you?

Racism in the UK Police Force

Here is a documentary from late 2008 by BBC Panorama where they investigate racism in the UK police force. Apologies but the last 10 minutes is not available.

We would like to make it clear that we do not own this documentary in anyway and all credit goes to the BBC and the creators of this documentary. We simple wish to share their work with the world.

Viewers be warned: there will be language some may find offensive and the videos will not be suitable for children.

To what extent is feminism a single doctrine?

Until the 1960s feminism was viewed as a sub-set of liberalism and socialism rather than an ideology. It is certain that feminism is a cross-cutting ideology, encompassing the three broad traditions of liberal traditions, socialist feminism and radical feminism, but whether it is today a single doctrine or still simply a sub-set of others can be greatly debated.

The core traditions of feminism each contain rival tendencies and have spawned ‘dual-system’ feminism and new feminist traditions have emerged, particularly since the 1980s such as Black feminism, cultural feminism and psychoanalytical feminism. It is easy, therefore, to dismiss feminism as too fragmented to form a single doctrine. Also the fact that these traditions are characterised more by disagreement than agreement suggests that they cannot form a unified ideology and are sub-sections of opposing ideologies that are likely to disagree. Nevertheless a range of common ground themes can be identified such as patriarchy, the public/private divide, equality and difference and sex and gender, so feminism is unified to a certain extent.

It can also be argued that there are rival traditions within all conventional ideologues. Classic and modern liberalism have contrasting ideas in economic versus social liberalism and positive versus negative freedom while socialists are at odds over the goal of socialism and the road to achieve that goal. In this sense feminism is completely typical of conventional ideologies.

The first wave of feminism was deeply influenced by the ideas and values of liberalism. The philosophical basis of liberal feminism lies in the principle of individualism. Individuals are entitled to equal treatment regardless of sex and so any form of discrimination against women should be prohibited. Liberal feminists also do not wish to abolish the distinction between the public and private spheres and accept that women’s leaning towards family and domestic life is influenced by natural impulses and so reflects a willing choice. The focus in liberal feminism therefore seems to be more on the liberal aspect than the feminist as they see no need to push for the sexless personhood goal of feminism but prefer the equality principle of liberalism. This means that liberal feminism can easily be argued to be only a sub-set of liberalism not a tradition within a feminist ideology.

Socialist feminists argue that the relationship between the sexes is rooted in the social and economic structure itself and only profound social change or a social revolution can offer genuine emancipation. Modern socialist feminists have found it difficult to accept the primacy of class politics over sexual politics. Again it appears that more emphasis is placed on the socialist aspect than the feminist as the main goal of feminism, to liberate women, is placed second to liberating the proletariat. Therefore social feminism can also be argued to be only a sub-set of socialism.

On the other hand one of the distinctive features of second wave feminism is that many feminists moved beyond the perspectives of existing political ideologies. They believed that gender differences were regarded as important in themselves and needed to be understood in their own terms. During the 1960s and 1970s the feminist movement sought to uncover the influence of patriarchy in all aspects of social, personal and sexual existence. Through radical feminism, feminism has therefore gone beyond other conventional ideologies which were viewed as inadequate vehicles for advancing the social role of women and criticised for harbouring patriarchal attitudes and assumptions. Radical feminism signifies an advancement in feminism as it moves from building on the ideas of other ideologies to defining its own ideas that oppose those of other ideologies. Radical feminism is therefore the one tradition within feminism that comes from and is purely dedicated to the ideas of feminism.

Before the 1960s, particularly with the first wave feminism was a set of separate doctrines that took ideas from other ideologies and moulded them for their own purpose. However during the 1960s and 1970s when the radical feminism formed, feminism changed from being a combination of different doctrines to a single ideology. This is because traditions were able to form solely out of the ideas of feminism, making it strong enough to stand out of the ideas of feminism, making it strong enough to stand as an ideology in its own right. Indeed the number of new feminist movements that arose in the 1980s such as cultural feminism and black feminism emphasize this point further as they are tradition which build on the ideas of feminism, just like feminism previously built on the ideas of liberalism and socialism. Therefore, though in its early days it was a set of different doctrines, feminism has now grown and defined itself as not just a single doctrine, but a single ideology encompassing a number of doctrines.

Analyse similarities and differences between liberal feminism and radical feminism

Feminism is a cross-cutting ideology, encompassing three broad traditions: liberal feminism, socialist feminism and radical feminism. The first wave of feminism was deeply influenced by the ideas and values of liberalism while radical feminism is one of the distinctive features of second wave feminism during the 1960s and 1970s.

While liberal feminism is deeply influenced by liberalism, radical feminism view conventional ideologies as inadequate vehicles for advancing the social role of women and criticised for harbouring patriarchal attitudes and assumptions.

The first major feminist text by Mary Wollstonecraft argued that women should be entitled to the same rights and privileges as men on the ground that they are human beings. She claimed that the distinction of sex would become unimportant in political and social life if women gained access to education and were regarded as rational creatures in their own right. However some radical feminist emphasize the differences between women and men. If sex differences are natural then the roots of patriarchy lie within the male sex itself: men are the enemy. This has led for radical feminist to believe in separatism.

This has also led radical feminists to believe that sexual equality and harmony is impossible because all relationships between men and women must involve oppression. This has led to the development of political lesbianism. Other feminists however, including liberal feminists, believe that it is possible to establish harmony between men and women in a non-sexist society. Hence they believe sexual preferences are strictly a matter of personal choice and not a question of political commitment. This also reflects their opposing beliefs on the public and private divide. Radical feminists proclaim the personal is the political and analyse the politics of everyday life. Although liberal feminists object to women’s access to the public sphere, they also warn against the dangers of politicizing the private sphere, which in liberal theory is a realm of personal choice and individual freedom. While radical feminists wish to abolish the public/private divide, liberal feminists merely wish to reform it.

This is also reflected in their rivalling ideas of equality. Liberal feminists champion legal and political equality with men. Equality thus means equal access to the public realm. Radical feminists however are primarily concerned about equality in family and personal life. This shows that while liberal feminists focus on women in the public sphere, radical feminists focus on women in the private sphere.

Nevertheless both seek equality with men and to end patriarchy in society. On the other hand, they use the term patriarchy in different ways. Liberal feminists use the term to draw attention to the unequal distribution of rights and entitlements in society. They highlight the under-representation of women in senior positions. Radical feminists see patriarchy as a systematic, institutionalised and pervasive form of male power that is rooted in the family. The pattern of male dominance and female subordination that characterises society is a reflection of the power structures that operate within domestic life. Once again, the differences between liberal and radical feminists boil down to the priority of the public or private sphere.

Although radical feminism formed the distinctive feature of second wave feminism, liberal feminism also formed a significant components, particularly within the women’s movement in the USA. Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique highlighted the problem with no name, the deep unhappiness and despair many women experience because they are confined to a domestic existence and unable to gain fulfilment in a career or through political life. Liberal feminists have also assumed that men and women have different natures and inclinations and accepts that women’s leaning towards family and domestic life is influenced by natural impulses and so reflects a willing choice. Friedan discussed the problem of reconciling the achievement of personhood with the need for love. Friedan’s emphasis on the continuing and central importance of the family in women’s life has been criticised by radical feminists as contributing to a mystique of motherhood.

Radical feminists disagree that men and women are different, but see this not as a lean towards the family but as a lean away from men. Their acceptance of unalterable differences has led towards cultural feminism, a retreat from the corrupt, aggressive male world of political activism into an apolitical, women-centered culture and life-style.

As the first feminists text was by the liberal feminist. Many Wollstonecraft and the first wave of feminism was heavily influenced by liberal feminism, it can be argued that liberal feminism is the mother of feminism and its ideas. As radical feminism began in the 1960s, it can be seen as the child of liberal feminism began in the 1960s it can be seen as the child of liberal feminism, building it on its predecessor’s ideas. In this sense the similarities between the two come from the common goals at the heart of feminism and their differences are part of the growth of feminism as it built and strengthened its ideas beyond that of other ideologies. Radical feminism symbolises the development of feminism and its ability to stand on its own as an ideology rather than draw from other ideologies as it had done with liberal feminism.

Batty Man.

Homosexuality has been legal in the uk for 40 years but to be gay in the black community is still looked down on. Gay comedian, Stephen K Amos, looks at why.

He starts by doing a social experiment in Croydon, South London. He takes 8 men, 1 who is gay and 7 who are straight and asks passersby to "spot the gay". Of the 9 men, 5 were black and 3 were white but it was constantly the white men who were chosen, even though all of them were straight. Stephen wonders if this is because being gay is more associated with being white than black. Stephen then took out the 3 white men and left the 5 black. People found it much harder now to choose, with one woman saying "none of them look gay". Stephen then asked people to pinpoint the person they thought was definitely not gay and there was one man in particular that kept being picked as the definietly straight guy, with people saying he looked like a "player" and a "womaniser". He was the only gay guy. When this was revealed, people were always in shock. When Stephen asked whether it proves you can't look gay, one woman said "stereotypical ennit...that views gone out of the window".

One night Stephen is doing stand up in Brixton, South London, to a predominantly black audience that do not know he is gay. For years Stephen hid his sexuality for fear of not being accepted by the black community. Then one event had a profound effect on him. In 2006 one of his friends was killed just for being gay. This inspired him not to hide who he was any longer and he created a one man show where, at the end, he revealed to the audience that he was gay. This gig in Brixton will be the first time he comes out to a mainly black audience. As soon as Stephen says it, the atmosphere completely changed and all fell silent. Suddenly the room felt full of tension and aggression. He went around the room to talk to some of the people. One man said, "I dont do that gay shit", another said "within the black community youre less likely to be accepted by your family if youre coming out and syaing youre gay you might not have a mum or dad anymore", another man said "there are some reasons why gay people dont come out and one of those is the levels of homophobia in our community that dont allow them to be gay", a woman said "when you asked if there were any gay people in the room,there was a hushed silence because no one wantd to say they were gay in brixton because you mght get stabbed outside". Afterwards, Stephen said it was the toughest gig he had done in a long time.

He then went Tooting, where he grew up, to speak to some youths about being gay. One said "they shouldnt have gay people on tv, or out on the road" another "my familys christian so im against gay peope" two girls agreed "if my brother was gay i would disown him" and later said "black gay people are putting the shame on our race they're making us not look black" one girl said "just make a different country for them ennit" one man said "i dont understand how balck people are thinking that they can be gay, i dont think that could actually run" another boy said "give me 2 women and i would be perfectly fine with that" but he was cussed out by the girls around him. This same boy said "if it wasnt for the music and that, i dont think no one here would have a problem with gays because we've been brought up to believe that gays are not right" They started singing an Elephant Man song where the chorus is "step on the chi-chi (gay) man! step on the chi-chi (gay) man!" Another 2 boys had most of what they said bleeped out apart for the words "batty boy". One of these boys said "tellin the truth, in Jamaica thats what they say: batty man must dead".

Stephen decided to go to Kingston, Jamaica to talk to Elephant Man. The strange thing is, Elephant Man said "i got nothing against gay people, do what you want to do, live your life, i cant come and tell you whatever, so do what you wanna do". Stephen wanted to find out what had changed his mind. He finds out that his lyrics had got him in trouble in places like USA so if he wanted to be successful there, he had to change that. Stephen said it was quite an eye opener to see what people will do when there are western dollars involved.

Homosexual acts are illegal on the island of Jamaica and those caught can serve up to 10 years in prison or hard labour.

Stephen met the band the Heavy Steppaz. His producer thought it would be safer if he stayed in the car and the producer would interview them. One of the band said "for a black person to be gay is really wrong...if a friend switched and turned to be a fish (gay)...theres one thing i think for anyone who turns fish...six foot deep." Another said "must be a man and a women...i say its wrong in many ways...to be a batty man you'll end up dead. straight bullet or gunshot or one of those things...if they really turn into a batty boy they cant see me or hail me they cant be my friend they cant even walk near me, much less look at me. thats a straight bullet. we dont see those things in our class or in our league. im telling you straight because right now a man to woman thing we deal with round here...the whole of jamaica, i know that certain men deal with those things...but if he wants to deal with that he'll have to take the backdoor where no one can see him...a straight bullet."

Stephen finally got to meet one young man called Kevin who risked his life to talk in front of the camera. "Being black and gay in Jamaica is very hard...there are times you have to hide because you're afraid to be who you are in public because you might get killed or those that should help you won't love you anymore...it all comes from the Bible and how people were brought up and dancehall, reggae music...i would pray and pray and pray that i would be happy with who i am and that God would still love me for who i am...i havent come out yet officially...if more gay people come out, i will be a lot easier for the younger generation to be acepting of who they are".

Stephen went to one of the jamacian churches to talk to the young christians to see if they thought it was ok to damn gay people using scriptures. The pastor said "as a pastor people come to me and say they have homosexual tendencies and i say bredrin, i dont see it the way you see it, i dont accept it the way you accept it but remember that you have a brother in me and im not gna kill you, im gna defend you. im not gna defend what you stand for, but im gna defend you as my brother, a human being". The people there believe that people can be conditioned to be gay, it is not genetic and they will be there to help people change this condition. Archbishop of Kingtson said "to use christiantiy is a lie... it usually comes from those with a limited understanding of the bible. You can justify anything by taking out a particular part of the bible. It was used to support apartheid. I certainly wouldnt be bashing homosexuals because they homosexuals, that is completely contrary to our christian faith".

Back in England, Stephen decided to come out to a group of young people face to face. their reactions were partly very encouraging with one girl saying "love is love, happiness is happiness and if that means being with another man, then that means being with another man, simple as that". However, not entirely: "I just see it as wrong...thats just my personal belief...i just feel uncomfortable". One boy said "if i was gay i would pray to god to be put down to dead because i cant see myself being gay".

Stephen talks to gay couple Perry and Olisa who have hidden their sexuality since they were teens. Perry said "before i came out, i was a homophobic. when you first realise it, you dont want it. you dont want to be gay". Olisa said "you can look at me and say im masculine. I could take you down the rugby field and break your nose and say yeah im masculine". Perry agreed "just because you sleep with a man, doesn't mean you aren't masculine". Perry said "my black friends dont know im gay. they wont talk to me again". Olisa said "i havent told my mum yet...i would have been on the first plane to Nigeria if i told her when i was young". Later that night, Olisa told his mum. He was really scared but said she was absolutely a brilliant mum. He said now hes got his approval he doesnt care what anyone else thinks.

Watching the programme back, Stephen hears all the arguments for homophobia and says none of them stack up. The religious argument doesn't wash, neither does the one that you arent masculine nor that pushing them out forces them to change. All fear of homophobics does is give homophobia a platform. The only way to dispell the fear is to face up to it, and thats the hardest lesson of all. Stephen said "I thought I was a strong ballsy comic with attitude and a lot of thinsg to say but i never thought i would have to regress into myself like i had to when we were in Jamaica. There were certain situations where i couldnt express myself and i dont owe anybody anything, i was denying myself and meeting Kevin who was younger, lived there and expressed himself so eloquently taught me something. Hey, stand up and be counted".

If you live in the UK, you can click here to watch this documentary

India: Motivation and Unity

This video is amazing. This video reaffirms exactly what me (Cortez) and Robyn are trying to do. We as HUMANS can all come together and promote the common good of humanity.




Question:
What is your current perception of humanity and its current state?

Political Ideologies: Liberalism - Which forms of equality do liberals support and which do they reject?

Here is an essay that I wrote in 2009 while studying liberalism

Robyn, UK

Which forms of equality do liberals support and which do they reject?

The liberal theory of justice is based on a belief of various kinds of equality. The liberal belief in individualism implies on commitment to foundational equality. All humans are born equal with each individual being of equal moral worth, an idea embodied in the notion of natural rights. Foundational equality implies a belief in formal equality and the idea that individuals should enjoy the same formal status in society, particularly in terms of the distribution of rights and entitlements. Liberals disapprove of any social privileges or advantages on the basis of race, gender etc.

The most important forms of formal equality are legal and political equality. Legal equality emphasizes ‘equality before the law’ and insists that all non-legal factors are irrelevant to the process of legal decision making. Political equality is embodied in the idea of ‘one person; one vote’ and underpins the liberal commitment to democracy.

Liberals subscribe to a belief in equality of opportunity as individuals should have the same chance to rise and fall in society. Liberals believe social equality to be undesirable because people are born the same but possess different talents and skills and some are prepared to work much harder than others. Equality means giving individuals an equal opportunity to develop unequal skills and abilities. This leads to a belief in meritocracy where inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills. A meritocratic society is believed to be socially just because individuals are judged by their talent and willingness to work rather than gender, race etc. Liberals believe social equality is unjust because it treats unlike individuals alike.

Harriet Tubman: "The Black Moses"

Today is Harriet Tubman day in the USA and to celebrate, we are going to tell you all about this stunning woman.

Harriet Tubman was born Araminta "Minty" Ross to slave parents and as with many slaves in the USA, her exact date of birth wasn't recorded and estimates of the year of her birth are between 1820-25. Her maternal grandmother arrived on a slave ship to the US from Africa, but no other information about her ancestors is known. She was the fifth born of nine children.

Her mother, Harriet or "Rit", struggled to keep the family together as slavery tore it apart. Her owner Edward Brodess sold three of her daughters, separating them from the family forever. When a trader tried to buy her son Moses, she hid him for a month, aided by other slaves and free blacks in the community.When Brodess and the potential buyer finally came to seize the child, Rit told them "You are after my son; but the first man that comes into my house, I will split his head open." The sale was then abandoned. Tubman's biographers agree that this event influenced her belief in the possibilities of resistance.

As a child Harriet took care of her younger brother and a baby. At 5 or 6 she was hired as a nursemaid to watch a sleeping baby and when the baby woke and cried, Tubman was whipped. Later, to protect herself from the abuse she wrapped herself in layers of clothing but cried out as if she wasn't protected. Another time she bit a man's knee while receiving punishment; afterwards he kept his distance. She also worked for a planter and was ordered into nearby marshes to check the muskrat traps. Even after contracting measles she was sent into waist-high cold water. She became very ill and was sent back gone, to be nursed back to health by her mother. As she grew older she was assigned to gruelling field and forest work. One day as a teenager she was struck on the head by a 2 pound weight which was aimed at a different slave. She was sent back to her owners house and left without medical care for 2 days and then sent back to the fields. Her boss said she wasn't "worth a sixpence" and returned her to Brodess who tried unsuccessfully to sell her. She began having disabling seizures, headaches, powerful visionary and dream activity and spells of hypersomnia which occurred throughout her entire life. A devout Christian, she ascribed her visions and vivid dreams to premonitions from God.

In or around 1844 she married a free black man named John Tubman. Their union was complicated due to her slave status. The mother's status dictated that of the children so any children born to Harriet and John would be enslaved. Tubman changed her name from Araminta to Harriet soon after her marriage though the exact timing is unclear.

In 1849 Tubman became ill again and her value as a slave diminished as a result. Brodess tried to sell her but couldn't find a buyer. Tubman began to pray that her owner would change his ways and stop trying to sell her. When it appeared as if the sale was being finalised, she changed her prayers, instead praying for God to kill him. Brodess died a week later and Tubman expressed regret for her earlier sentiments. Brodess' widow began selling the family slaves but Tubman refused to wait for the Brodess family to decide her fate. Tubman and her brothers Ben and Henry escaped from slavery on September 17 1849. Tubman was hired out to Dr. Anthony Thompson and it is likely her brothers labored for Thompson too. Two weeks later, Brodess' widow posted a runaway notice offering a reward for the return of her slaves. Tubman's brothers succumbed to second thoughts, fearful of the dangers ahead, and went back, forcing Tubman to return with them. Soon afterwards Tubman escaped again, this time without her brothers. Tubman made use of the extensive network known as the Underground Railroad. This nformal but well-organised system was composed of free and enslaved blacks, white abolitionists and other activists.

In 1850 Tubman received warning that her niece and her niece's two children were going to be sold. Horrified at the prospect of having her family broken up even more, Tubman returned to the land of her enslavement. Tubman's niece and children escaped and Tubman brought the family safely to Philadelphia. The following spring she went back to Maryland to help guide away other family members. This time she brought back her brother Moses and two other unidentified men. As she led more and more individuals out of slavery, she became popularly known as "Moses" - an allusion to the prophet in the Book of Exodus who led the Hebrews to freedom. In the fall of 1851 Tubman returned to Dorchester County to find her husband. While she had been gone, John had married another woman named Caroline and Tubman sent word that he should join her but he said he was happy where he was. Suppressing her anger, Tubman found some slave who wanted to escape and led them to Philadelphia. In December 1851 Tubman guided a group of 11 fugitives northward to Canada. For eleven years Tubman returned to the Eastern Shore of Maryland, rescuing some seventy slaves in 13 expeditions including her 3 other brothers, their wives and some of their children. She also provided specific instructions for about 50 to 60 other fugitives who escaped to the north. Slaveholders in the region never knew that "Minty" was behind the slave escapes. They began to suspect a northern white abolitionist was secretly enticing their slaves away. Despite the best efforts of the slaveholders, Tubman was never captured and neither were the fugitives she guided. One of her last missions into Maryland was to retrieve her aging parents. She travelled to the Eastern Shore and led them north to Canada.

When the American Civil War broke out in 1861, Tubman saw a Union victory as a key step toward the abolition of slavery. Tubman hoped to offer her own expertise and skills to the Union cause and soon she joined a group of abolitionists. Tubman served as a nurse in Port Royal, preparing remedies from local plants and aiding soldiers suffering from dysentery. She rendered assistance to men with smallpox. When Lincoln finally put the Emancipation Proclamation into effect Tubman considered it an important step toward the goal of liberating all black people from slavery. She renewed her support for a defeat of the Confederacy and soon she was leading a band of scouts through the land around Port Royal. She later provided Colonel James Montgomery with key intelligence which aided the capture of Jacksonville, Florida. Later that year Tubman became the first woman to lead an armed assault during the Civil War, a raid which rescued more than seven hundred slaves. For 2 more years Tubman worked for the Union forces scouting into Confederate territory and nursing wounded soldiers in Virginia. Despite her years of service, she had never received a regular salary and was for years denied compensation. She didn't receive a pension for her service until 1899. Her constant humanitarian work for her family and former slaves kept her in a state of constant poverty.

Tubman spent her remaining years in Auburn and married a Civil War veteran called Nelson Davis, who was 22 years younger. They spent the next 20 years together and in 1874 they adopted a baby girl named Gertie.

Tubman worked in her later years to promote the cause of women's suffrage. Tubman travelled to New York, Boston and Washington D.C to speak out in favour of women's voting rights. She was the keynote speaker at the first meeting of the National Federation of Afro-American Women.

At the turn of the century Tubman became heavily involved with the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in Auburn. In 1903 she donated a parcel of real estate to the church under the instruction that it be made into a home for "aged and indigent colored people". It was named the Harriet Tubman Home for the Aged and opened on June 23, 1908. By 1911 her body was so frail that she had to be admitted to the rest home. Surrounded by friends and family members, Harriet Tubman died of pneumonia on March 10, 1913. Just before she died, she told those in the room "I go to prepare a place for you".

This information is taken from the Wikipedia page on Harriet Tubman. To read the entire page on her life, click here.

Below is a youtube video of an edited documentary on Harriet Tubman.

Power List 2010: Britain's 100 most influential black people

After recently reading the Power List, I felt so inspired by the men and women inside it that I had to mention them in here. Obviously I cannot write out what the list says about each of them because that would be plagiarism but I will list them below with what they do and leave it to you to research who they are! (the names are not listed in any particular order)

I would highly recommend purchasing the power list (link to do so is at the bottom) as well as information on all of the people who have made it into the list, there are fascinating interviews with some of the people, articles and other lists for example the 25 most influential African Americans. It truly is a great read and extremely inspiring.

The Selection Panel

Baroness Amos of Brondesbury, British High Commissioner to Australia

Carol Lake, managing director: head of philanthropy, sponsorship and diversity EMEA at JPMorgan

Kwame Kwei-Armah is a renowned actor and playwright

Annmarie Dixon-Barrow runs a head-hunting agency specialising in sourcing diverse candidates.

Michael J Prest, former barrister that heads Petrodel Resources Ltd, a family company that is one of the largest independent energy investment groups in sub-Saharan Africa.

The Arts, Fashion and Design

Benjamin Zephaniah, poet

Tandy Anderson, co-founder and chief executive, Select Models

Ozwald Boateng, fashion designer

Edward Enninful, fashion designer, i-D magazine

Sokari Douglas Camp, sculptor

Ekow Eshun, artistic director, the institute of Contemporary Arts

Steve McQueen, artist/director

Aicha McKenzie, founder/director, AMCK Management

Jourdan Dunn, model

Kenneth Olumuyiwa Tharp, chief executive, The Place

Lady Sue Woodford-Hollick, chair, Arts Council England, London

Althea Efunshile, executive director, arts planning and investment, Arts Council England

Pat McGrath, Global cosmetics creative design director, Proctor & Gamble

Shirley Thompson, composer

Andrew Ramroop, proprietor, Maurice Sedwell

Stephen Wiltshire, artist

Elsie Owusu, architect

David Adjaye, architect

Business, Finance & Information Technology

Wilfred Emmanuel-Jones, farmer/Conservative parliamentary candidate

Alexander Amosu, founder and CEO, Amosu Luxury Ltd

Abib Bocresion, global head of complex interest rate derivatives trading, JPMorgan

Rene Carayol, business guru

Tim Campbell, founder, Bright Ideas Trust

Trevor Williams, chief economist at Lloyds TSB

India Gary-Martin, global head of equities integration, RBS global banking & markets

Patrick Clarke, director of connections, EDF Energy

Tom Ilube, CEO, Garlik

Anne Gates, executive vice president and managing director, Disney consumer products Europe and energing markets

Ric Lewis, chief executive and chairman, Tristan Capital Partners

Daniel Taylor, founder and MD, Metro Design Consultants

Karen Blackett, chief operations director, Mediacon

Piers Linney, director, outsourcery

Dambisa Moyo, best-selling author

Levi Roots, proprietor, Reggae Reggae Sauce

Wol Kolade, managing partner, ISIS Equity Partners

Phil Walker, senior vice-president, Capgemini Consulting

Media, Publishing and Entertainment

Ellah Allfrey, deputy editor, Granta

Sonita Alleyne, co-founder and chief executive, Somethin' Else

Robert Beckford, educator, author and broadcaster

Abigail Blackburn, editor, Now magazine

Patrick Younge, chief creative officer, BBC Vision Productions

Kanya King, founder, CEO of MOBO (Music of Black Origin Awards)

Claudine Moore, CEO, C. Moore Media

Malorie Blackman, author

Darcus Beese, co-president, Island Records

Peter Casely-Hayford, managing director Twenty Twenty Television

Noel Clarke, actor, director, screenwriter

Annette Thomas, chief executive Macmillan

Michelle Ogundehin, editor-in-chief, Elle Decoration, Real Homes, Elle Decoration Collections

Heather Rabbatts, non-executive chair, Shed Media

Penny McDonald, managing director, The Outside Organisation

Oona King, head of diversity, Channel 4

Politics, Law and Religion

Justice Dobbs QC, High court judge

Diane Abbott, MP for Hackney North & Stoke Newington

Daniel Alexander QC, barrister

Dawn Butler, MP for Brent South and assistant whip for the Labour party

Matthew Ashimolowo, senior pastor, Kingsway International Christian Centre

David Lammy, MP, under-secretary of state for innovation, universities and skills

Courtenay Griffiths QC, barrister

Oba Nsugbe QC, SAN (Senior Advocate Nigeria)

Sharifa Faure, head of buisness and legal affairs, MTV networks international, Emerging Markets

Fidelis Oditah QC, SAN

Adam Afriyie, MP, Shadow minister for innovation, universities and skills

Carmel Jones, founder and director, Pentecostal Credit Union

Trevor James, managing partner, Morrison and Foerster

Margaret Casely-Hayford, director of legal services, John Lewis Partnership

Public Sector and Third Sector

Mike Fuller, chief constable, Kent Police

Seyi Obakin, chief executive Centrepoint Soho Ltd

Tunde Banjoko, founder & chief executive, Local Employment Access Projects (LEAP)

Joe Montgomery, director general, Regions & Communities

Doreen Lawrence, social justice campaigner

Sharon White, director general and chief executive, Office for Criminal Justice Reform

Roger Lynch, founder & chief executive, Robust Training/Ruskin Private Hire

Sarah Ebanja, Deputy chief executive and group director of Strategies, Equalities & Performance, London Development Agency

Jean Tomlin, director, human resources, Locog

Trevor Phillips, chair, commission for Equality and Human Rights

Lord Victor Adebowale, chief executive, Turning Point

Science, Medicine & Engineering

David Waboso, director of engineering, London Underground

Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock, space scientist

Dr Yvonne Greenstreet, senior vice president (chief of strategy, R&D) GlaxoSmithKline

Michael Parker, chairman, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Professor Cynthia Pine, executive dean, faculty of Health & Social Care, Salford University

Laverne Antrobus, consultant child and educational psychologist

Nelson Ogunshakin, chief executive Association for Consultancy & Engineering

Sport

Lewis Hamilton, Formula 1 world champion

Chris Powell, chairman, Professional Footballer's Association and player, Leicester City FC

Luol Deng, basketball player, Chicago Bulls and Great Britain

Bobby Barnes, deputy chief executive, Professional Football Association

Hope Powell, head coach, England Women International football team

Garth Crooks, broadcaster and sports policy advisor

Top Ten

10. Tsega Gebreyes, founding partner and CEO, Satya Capital Limited

9. Dr John Sentamu, Archbishop of York

8. Vivian Hunt, director, Mckinsey & Co

7. Claire Ighodaro, independent director and trustee

6. Trevor Faure, global general counsel and partner, Ernst & Young

5. Ken Olisa, chair, Restoration Partners: non-exec director Thomson Reuters: non-exec director ENRC

4. Damon Buffini, chairman, Permira

3. Dr Mo Ibrahim, founder and chairman, Mo Ibrahim Foundation

2. Tidjane Thiam, chief executive, Prudential

1. Rt Hon Baroness Scotland of Asthal QC, Attorney General

You can purchase the power list as well as other inspiring publications here:

http://www.powerful-media.com/

Political Ideologies: Feminism - Distinguish sex and gender and explain its implications for feminist theory

Distinguish sex and gender and explain its implications for feminist theory

Feminists draw a sharp distinction between sex and gender. ‘Sex’ refers to biological differences between females and males which are natural and unalterable. ‘Gender’ is a cultural term which refers to the different roles that society ascribes to men and women. Gender differences are imposed through contrasting stereotypes of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’. Simone de Beauvoir summarised this with the line “women are made, not born”. This belief has had many implications for feminist theory.

Firstly they believe sex differences between men and women are minor and don’t justify gender distinctions. They therefore believe that human nature is androgynous so women shouldn’t be judged by their sex but as ‘persons’. The goal of feminism is therefore of genderless ‘personhood’.

Secondly, it has affected the ideas of liberal feminists. The first major feminist text by Wollstonecraft argued that women should be entitled to the same rights and privileges as men and the ‘distinction of sex’ would become unimportant in political and social life when the rights were attained.

In particular, the feminist ideas on sex and gender have affected the beliefs of radical feminists who believe gender differences are important in themselves and need to be understood in their own terms. Radical feminists believe the different roles of men and women have their origin or a process of ‘conditioning’ with boys and girls encouraged to conform to very specific gender identities. The oppression of women therefore originates in the family and female liberation thus requires a sexual revolution. This is also based on the assumption that human nature is androgynous.

The largest implication of sex and gender for feminist theory is arguably that they are the only ideology to place sex and gender as a supreme political idea. It therefore distinguishes feminism and makes it an ideology in its own right with its own set of individual ideas.

BNP Wives

These videos are from a programme that ran on Channel 4 called BNP Wives that aimed to highlight the racism of the party by following the activities of active wives of members of the BNP party.

WARNING: these videos contain strong and offensive language

BNP Video: Multiculturalism FAILING in Burnley

BNP Campaign Launch 2010

British Political Parties: The BNP

In Britain there are three main political parties: Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats. However there are also many small parties who try to gain support such as the Green Party, the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and the British National Party (BNP).

The BNP is a far-right political party. Until 2009, when it was challenged in the courts on grounds of racial discrimination, it restricted membership to people of "Caucasian origin". After a vote by members in a February 2010 extraordinary general meeting the party dropped this policy, with chairman Nick Griffin saying that the party will now "accept anyone as a member providing they agree with us that this country should remain fundamentally British".

The BNP seeks to restore the overwhelmingly white ethnicity of Britain that existed prior to 1948 through legal means, including "firm but voluntary incentives for immigrants and their descendants to return home", and the repeal of anti-discrimination legislation. It believes that there are significant differences between races.

The party has very little respect from other political parties and has never gained enough power to have an MP (member of Parliament). However in the 2006 English local elections the party doubled its number of seats in England. The BNP finished fifth in the 2008 London mayoral election with 5.2% of the popular vote and secured one of the London Assembly's 25 seats. They won their first county council seats in 2009 together with two seats in the European Parliament.

At its founding, the BNP was explicitly racist. In October 1990, the BNP was described by the European Parliament's committee on racism and xenophobia as an "openly Nazi party ... whose leadership have serious criminal convictions". When asked in 1993 if the BNP was racist, its deputy leader Richard Edmonds said, "We are 100 per cent racist, yes". Founder John Tyndall proclaimed that "Mein Kampf is my bible". When Nick Griffin became chairman in 1999, the party began to change its stance with regard to racial issues. Griffin claims to have repudiated racism, instead espousing what he calls "ethno-nationalism". He claims that his core ideology is "concern for the well-being of the English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish ethnic nations that compose the United Kingdom".

The BNP previously required that all members must be members of the "Indigenous Caucasian" racial group. The party does not regard non-white people as being British, even if they have been born in the UK and are naturalised British citizens. Instead, Griffin has stated that "non-Europeans who stay", while protected by British law, "will be regarded as permanent guests".

The BNP is opposed to mixed-race relationships on the stated ground that racial differences must be preserved; the party said that "when whites take partners from other ethnic groups, a white family line that stretches back into deep pre-history is destroyed." Nick Griffin stated: "...while the BNP is not racist, it must not become multi-racist either. Our fundamental determination to secure a future for white children is restated, and an area of uncertainty is addressed and a position which is both principled and politically realistic is firmly established. We don't hate anyone, especially the mixed race children who are the most tragic victims of enforced multi-racism, but that does not mean that we accept miscegenation as moral or normal. We do not and we never will".

In April 2006, Sky News confronted the party's national press officer, Phil Edwards (it has been claimed that this is a pseudonym for Stuart Russell) with a tape of a telephone conversation the previous year. On the tape, Russell could be heard to say that "the black kids are going to grow up dysfunctional, low IQ, low achievers that drain our welfare benefits and the prison system and probably go and mug you." He responded: "If I thought I was going to be recorded ... I would not have used such intemperate language, but let’s be honest about it, the facts are there".

The party states that "The BNP has moved on in recent years, casting off the leg-irons of conspiracy theories and the thinly veiled anti-semitism which has held this party back for two decades. The real enemies of the British people are home grown Anglo-Saxon Celtic liberal-leftists ... and the Crescent Horde—the endless wave of Islamics who are flocking to our shores to bring our island nations into the embrace of their barbaric desert religion".

Suggested policies to help police this "threat to all of us" include a Muslim no-fly policy, which would ban Muslims from flying in and out of the UK. The BNP erected a plaque in Oldham, Greater Manchester in memory of Gavin Hopley, a 19-year-old white man who was mugged and kicked to death by Asian Muslims in the street in Glodwick, in February 2002. The plaque was later removed by the local council.

The BNP states that homosexuality in private should be tolerated but believes that it "should not be promoted or encouraged". It opposed the introduction of civil partnerships and wishes to ban what it perceives as the promotion of homosexuality in schools and the media; and believes that homosexuality should be returned "to the closet".

BNP spokesman Phil Edwards stated that homosexuality "is unnatural" and "does not lead to procreation but does lead to moral turpitude and disease". Mark Collett, former chairman of the Young BNP and current Director of Publicity, described homosexuals as "AIDS Monkeys", "bum bandits" and "faggots" and said the idea of homosexuality was a "sickening thought".

The BNP was criticised over a list on their website titled "Liars, buggers and thieves" which grouped several gay politicians in with convicted murderers, rapists and paedophiles. The compiler of the list, BNP local councillor for Redbridge, Julian Leppert defended it and said that the reason why gay MPs were included was because "it fits in with the headline, the bugger part, I guess" and stated that the BNP are "a family party with family values".

Articles published in the Sunday Times and Daily Mail have alleged that Nick Griffin had a four year homosexual relationship with Martin Webster, although Griffin denies this. On his appearance on BBC One's Question Time on 22 October 2009, he stated in response to being asked about the death of Boyzone member Stephen Gateley, "I said that a lot of people find the sight of two grown men kissing in public really creepy. I understand that homosexuals don't understand that but that's how a lot of us feel, Christians feel that way, Muslims, all sorts of people."

According to their website, the BNP policy on immigration is to:

- Deport all the two million plus who are here illegally;

- Deport all those who commit crimes and whose original nationality was not British;

- Review all recent grants of residence or citizenship to ensure they are still appropriate;

- Offer generous grants to those of foreign descent resident here who wish to leave permanently;

- Stop all new immigration except for exceptional cases;

- Reject all asylum seekers who passed safe countries on their way to Britain.

They say that "India would not tolerate millions of non-Indians taking over that society. Pakistan would not tolerate millions of Hindus or Christians entering that country and changing it from a Muslim society into something else. Japan would not do it; China would not do it – so why should Britain?"

The BNP policy on education is:

- The restoration of discipline – including corporal punishment – uniforms, traditional teaching methods and stricter exams (e.g. ‘0′ levels);

- The reintroduction of grammar schools with entrance exams at 11 and 13;

- The reversal of the programme to close special needs schools which penalises the most vulnerable;

- The reintroduction of competitive sports and daily Christian assemblies;

- The teaching of old-fashioned literacy skills (as opposed to clearly failed “modern” teaching methods);

- The teaching of old-fashioned mathematics skills which have practical application to everyday life;

- The teaching of a full curriculum of British history. This will instil in our young people knowledge of and pride in the history, cultures and heritage of the native peoples of Britain, and not the cherry-picked politically correct drivel being fed to children today;

- The abolition of fees and the restoration of full grants to university students studying proper subjects (as opposed to fake “social sciences”);

- The improvement of school food as proper meals have been shown to be linked to behaviour and achievement;

- The ending of the scandalous and racist neglect that has left working class white boys at the bottom of the table for academic achievement;

- The introduction of tax breaks for home-schooling parents or direct subsidies as their fair share of the education budget;

- The introduction of a compulsory Community Award Scheme for all school-leavers to teach them work ethics and social and community values. This would consist of work caring for the elderly or handicapped people, or environmental or heritage restoration projects, or military training. These courses would be character-building and instil discipline, social and community values and work ethics in all young people. Service in this scheme would entitle each individual to get ’something back’ from the society to which they have learnt to contribute, such as free university education, a properly supported apprenticeship, or business training and start-up capital for would-be entrepreneurs.

The BNP foreign affairs policy is:

- Reach an accord with the Muslim world whereby they will agree to take back their excess population which is currently colonising this country, in exchange for an ironclad guarantee that Britain will never again interfere in the political affairs of the Middle East or try to dictate to any Arab or Muslim country as to what their internal government form should be; and

- Maintain an independent foreign policy of our own, and not a spineless subservience to the USA, the ‘international community’, or any other country.

- Resolutely oppose the single European currency;

- Support the overwhelming majority of the British people in their desire to keep the Pound and our traditional weights and measures.

The majority of the British public are highly against the BNP and the recent support they have received in British elections has been put down to the British populations frustration with the main political parties over immigration and the MP expenses scandal.

In 2002 the foundation Stop The BNP was created "to counter racism and fascism in elections and beyond". According to their website, "we want to make sure that people know the full story about who the BNP are and what they really stand for. The Stop the BNP website aims to do just that, serving the anti-fascist movement and providing up to date news, good practice and analysis."

(Information taken from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party, http://www.stopthebnp.org.uk/, http://bnp.org.uk/)

Click here to watch the BNP Campaign video

Click here to watch a BNP propaganda video

Click here to watch a documentary about the BNP

What do you think about the BNP? Are there any political parties like this in your country? Comment and let us know!

Dr. Michael Eric Dyson

Question:

Describe an individual that you greatly admire. Discuss the qualities that make this person so exceptional.

The individual that I greatly admire is Dr. Michael Eric Dyson. Dr. Dyson encompasses many qualities that make him exceptional such as noticing social ills, vocabulary, and his conviction. It is very rare that a teen finds an exceptional role model that commands attention when he enters a room. It is this presence that attracts thousands of people to his lectures and oratorical interviews.

Dr. Dyson fights for equality. During his lectures sometimes he may talk about African-Americans and their roles of today’s society or the concept of segregation in today’s society. The overall message that is gathered is that we has human people should treat each other with respect. The messaged is portrayed through his actions and his eloquence as he speaks.

In his other lectures he may talk about hip hop and how its degrading today’s society. It is obvious to see that children today are turning to hip hop as an outlet for their pain and the ticket to their dream. Too many times do these children lose their sights reasonable attainable goals such as becoming doctors, lawyers, executives, financial advisors and etc. Hip hop is taking away young peoples potential for greatness since it only portrays young women as whores and young men as impudent womanizers. Dr. Dyson advocates for rappers and singers to promote a positive image so that young people could do great things. Dr. Dyson believes that if this type of social behavior persists that America will be on a downward spiral to oblivion.

Dr. Dyson is an eloquent speaker. Dr. Dyson speaks with poise, dignity, and conviction. When Dr. Dyson speaks it is very profound that you can’t help but notice he is a great representation of African-Americans. For example when Dr. Dyson speaks he speaks with conviction that connects with the audience. It is this connection that allows people to understand and assist in fighting for his cause. For example, Dr. Dyson says “It is very important for me to deliver my message to students and faculty at this great institution of American society because it is the ideas and thoughts of these young people that are going to shape society in the future.” I interpret this quote as Dr. Dyson stressing the importance of education and positive images. He is stressing the importance of young people learning since they are the future of America. America’s future should be bright and secure in oppose to dark and exposed.

Cortez A., U.S.

South Africa Apartheid

Question:

Describe a contemporary international event, current event, or global issue, and discuss why you feel this event was important.

An international event that I think is important is the apartheid conflict in South Africa. The apartheid conflict has attracted viewers from all over the world. The actions that political leaders seem to have taken made this a crime against humanity. The crime that I am speaking of is the segregation of races in South Africa. This action was known as the apartheid laws.

The apartheid laws were laws that restricted blacks and colored people form interacting with whites. These laws were very similar to America’s segregation laws but on a different scale. The whites in power systemically controlled blacks. For example, blacks were educated to take employment in technical areas such as mechanics or construction. This perpetuated the idea of blacks being ignorant and incompetent, only a few blacks were achieved professional status, in doing so the blacks had to attend a black university.

Racist ideologies were portrayed throughout this time period which kept blacks virtually non-existent. During the apartheid, there were 19million blacks and 4.5million whites. The logical idea would be to have placed the blacks on the most land since they occupy the most percentage of people. Instead the whites occupied 87% of South Africa land while the blacks occupied 13% of the land. As you can see the land allocation is not properly proportioned. This move put blacks at the end of the end of the social and economic ladder.

This is considered an international event because it brought back ideals that the rest of the world thought had been eradicated. It has been established that one group of people should not be oppressed because they do not fit the criteria of other people. Due to globalization the world has become a more tolerant and accepting place. We promote the idea of diversity which is what makes the apartheid so horrifying. It was almost like a second age segregation act except it was in South Africa.

In conclusion, the apartheid was an international conflict since it attracted people from all over the world. During this period the whites systemically controlled blacks through economic, educational, and social laws. Also during this period that apartheid placed blacks who seemed to be low class on the lowest amount of land available. This is type of treatment that leads to this being a crime against humanity. Now during this new age of diversity and globalization all people have the right to life, liberty, and property.

Cortez A., U.S.

What do you think about the apartheid? Do you agree with Cortez? What contemporary event or global issue do you think is important?

Letter to Arne Duncan

This is a letter I wrote when I was in 8th grade. It is regarding school segregation. I felt that it should post it since I am feeling a resurgence of activism.

Cortez A. ,US

Arne Duncan July 17, 2006

CEO of Chicago Public Schools

Central Office

Chicago, IL 60603

Dear Mr. Arne Duncan,

My name is Cortez Alexander and I am a 14 year old ninth grade student at Jane Doe Magnet School. I recently graduated from an John Doe Elementary School on Chicago’s Westside. A few weeks ago we were having an in class discussion about school segregation. From this discussion I have concluded that schools are still segregated. Segregation is when there is only one ethnic group in a facility.

School segregation is currently done now because of segregated residential areas. Due to the fact many African Americans live in segregated areas, we are now stuck in segregated schools. There should be some way to allow students to attend schools out of their area. It may also be necessary to look into why Chicago continues to be one of the most segregated cities in America.

The difference between now and the past is that it was involuntary. When segregation was legal, kids did not have a chance to interact with different ethnic groups. They had to sit there and miss learning about different cultures. Now that segregation is illegal, it seems kids cannot interact with different ethnic groups.

Segregation has made a negative impact on today’s youth. There were countless children marching for the change of segregation. That tells me if we want change, we as children are going to have to act on the problem. Which brings me to my next question why are schools still segregated, and what will it take for them to become truly integrated?