Sunrise from Tynemouth Long Sands 

Seven short and interesting talks about hire to grow rather than make things. I especially like the last one: grow a forest in your back yard!

http://ted.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=07487d1456302a286cf9c4ccc&id=f9909197a6&e=a48d449cc3

Viva La Revolution!

Matthieu Ricard: How to let altruism be your guide #TED : http://on.ted.com/i0kAP

Yay, trees!

A fascinating talk! I love #TED : http://on.ted.com/c0RIo

Slow TV: This is actually a cool idea!

Thomas Hellum: The world's most boring television ... and why it's hilariously addictive #TED : http://on.ted.com/c0jpI

Do something good. It'll only first you 90s of your time.

The Butterfly Circus: http://youtu.be/y_MCwlY6zzg

Hi Everyone,

I've lost my phone so if you want to get hold of me, it'll have to be through here or email for the time being.

Yay!

Got my Christmas Jumper sorted. This thing is delightfully hideous and, as far as I can tell, created without the slightest hint of irony!

(Obviously, that's not how I'll be wearing it).

Good speech. Check it out before you read my response.

Despite the new hashtag, I think the main thing holding feminism back is choosing a bad "hashtag" in the very first instance. You can't argue authentically for gender equality when the very banner you've gathered under is gender biased.

The reason young women today don't self identify as feminists, despite having strong feminist values, and the reason there's a backlash from a growing minority of men who feel unjustly demonized and threatened by feminism, is because the movement is called feminism.

Yes, it's about recognising the equal validity of humans, regardless of what genitals they were born with, but that's not how it comes across. It comes across as women working in opposition to men, for women and against men.

Culturally, there's an underlying confusion between Gender (social, nebulous) and Sex (biological, polarised), and calling the movement 'feminism' fails to take that into account and thus sets itself up to face irrelevant, unnecessary difficulties.

I imagine the whole movement would have taken hold faster and be getting a much warmer welcome today if it were called 'Equalitism'.

I self identify as an Equalitist because I believe all people deserve equal respect, consideration and opportunities.

An equalitist is anti-sexism, anti-genderism, anti-racism, anti-classism, anti-heightism, anti-faithism, and anti-speciesism.


Put simply, I'm FOR equality and freedom in every useful sense of the word. The term Equalitist doesn't presuppose sex, gender, or race. The term Feminism at very least indicates the sex of those who started the movement and the gender of those who continue with it.

This is a great speech by Emma Watson but she mentions that becoming a feminist was "uncomplicated" for her. The term Feminism, however, is fraught with complications! The response of today's youth to the term is evidence of that.

Becoming an Equalitist, however, is intuitive and uncomplicated.

As an equalitist, I'm grateful to feminists for exposing a cultural gender bias and sex discrimination that breeds inequality. I'm grateful that they've finally invited men into the conversation as equals rather than oppressors, I'm grateful they they've understood - before men have - that this inequality has negative effects on both sexes.


But it's time to kill feminism. The term has too much history, too much gender bias and is too emotionally loaded to be useful anymore.

For example, Miss Watson describes gender as a 'spectrum' and this is helpful but still inaccurate. A spectrum has poles, gender is much more fluid. You can embody a mix of masculine and feminine traits/values because gender is a network, a matrix. You don't have to settle somewhere on a linear spectrum between masculine and feminine - it's more like pick 'n' mix!

The term 'Spectrum' still sets up opposition. The new hastag #HeForShe contains the idea that he and she are distinctly separate and could just as easily be against each other as for the other. It's already working against itself in that respect.

As an Equalitist, I suggest we start by untangling gender from sex and demonstrate that gender is not defined by biology nor trapped in a dichotomy. Then we can go on to show that the sex you're accidentally assigned at birth has very little to do with the gender nodes that you connect with to inform your personhood.

It's a small step from there to seeing that nobody gains by using biological sex to determine gender expression or cultural status; doing so limits everyone's freedom and undermines everyone's equality. And, hopefully, with this realisation comes the freedom to be who you are without fear of discrimination.

Mentally these are small steps and the fact that this process encompasses and expands on feminist ideals shows that it owes everything to the hard work of feminists everywhere.

I'm not trying to undermine feminism and it's achievements, I'm trying to keep the feminist ideal relevant and useful by appropriating it under a more neutral banner, before the rhetoric of opposition and the trope of man-hating render it powerless.