Archive | March, 2013

A Tale of Parliamentary Burlesque Act.II- EThics call home

27 Mar

Image

The picture above is part of a major reaction from Brazilian society against the election of a racist, homophobe and misogynist as President of the Federal Congress’ Human Rights Commission. It says: “I’m not from this Planet, but if I was, Marcos Feliciano would not represent me”.

Indeed, the Brazilian congress is famous for its detachment from society (keep reading this blog and you’ll never be bored by it), so much so that most Brazilians prefer not to talk or discuss about the National Congress. The election of Marcos Feliciano to preside the HRC, however, was not seen as yet another practical joke made by the congress on us. It hurt deeper.

His election was held on March 7th. On March 9th, hundreds of people were protesting in São Paulo.

Image

Image

FEMEN was there too! 🙂

Social media response was also fast, noisy and went right on spot: Feliciano Não me Representa became an intergalactic anthem, as seen above. (Don’t miss looking at the thousand pictures. Some are quite creative.) Artists expressed their revolt too. From the regularly opinionated, like Caetano Veloso, who gathered friends and activists in the Brazilian Press Association, to the most apolitical, like Xuxa, who called him a monster on twitter. A few Federal Congresspersons create a Parallel Front of Human Rights, as they refused to participate in a Human Rights Commission presided by Marcos Feliciano.

Protesters gathered at the HRC venue, making it impossible to hold any session. They yelled “Feliciano, Facista”and outvoice him. Until now, no session has been properly held by the HRC since Marcos Feliciano’s election.

But It is not that the members who elected Marcos Feliciano heard the protesters outcry passively. Another famously facist Federal Congressperson, Jair Bolsonaro, went on to confront the protesters, saying unpublishable things and showing this sign:

Image

The message above, showed inside CDH’s venue, expresses Jair Bolsonaro’s opinion on what the protesters do in their daily lives. It is a slang that I can only translate as “burn the donut everyday”. If you’re too classy, you’ll never get the meaning, sorry.

Despite the resistance, protests became so widespread that last thursday the president of the Federal Congress, acknowledging that the Congress’ popular image was peaking a historical low, urged the PSC to appoint another president to the HRC. This tuesday, however, the PSC decided to maintain Feliciano at the HRC presidency. And there is not much that the National Congress’ President can do about it, as he does not have the power to overthrow the Commission’s election.

If politicians do not come to their minimal sense, the only hope is a technicality that is pending judgement by the Supreme Court, for the session that elected Marcos Feliciano was a closed one and it should not have been an open session. 

So, ET, could you keep calling please?

Advertisements

A Tale of Parliamentary Burlesque. Act.I- Meet Marcos Feliciano

26 Mar

Marcos Feliciano is the Presidential Pastor of an evangelical church called Assembléia de Deus – Catedral do Avivamento. He is also a federal congressman of PSC – the Social Christian Party. Furthermore, he was blessed by God with unbeatable beauty and style.

Image
Don’t you girls (and naughty boys) even salivate, for he is a married man.

The political views of Marcos Feliciano are also sound and clear. He is an objective, prosperous man, who is not afraid to speak his mind. About same sex marriage he has said that it brings hate, crime and rejection. About black persons, he has said that africans are the descendents of a cursed member of Noah’s family, this being the explanation for the paganism, occultism, misery and diseases like ebola in Africa. About women’s rights, he has said that when you encourage women to have the same rights as men, they want to work and hence their maternal side is nullified.

In his political life, Marcos Feliciano faces many challenges: currently, he is the defendant in two cases pending before the Brazilian Supreme Court: one for inciting discrimination and prejudice and another for embezzlement. These little obstacles, however, are not strong enough to hold him down and he has recently been elected president of the Brazilian Federal Congress´ Human Rights Commission (CDH).

Traditionally, the Human Rights Commission has been presided over by the Labour Party – PT. This time, however, the Labour Party did not consider it a priority. It preferred to preside over other commissions. Therefore, as a result of a very complex parliamentary game (God’s will, for certain), the presidency of the Human Rights Commission was to be held by a member of the PSC.

The fact alone that the HDC was going to presided by the PSC caused outrage among the pagans, who knew that the HDC was no longer going to be ruled by the gay-women-and-black-alliance. Indeed, at the election day, several congresspersons left the commission’s venue, saying they were protesting. That very blessed day, in a closed session, Marcos Feliciano was democratically elected by 11 votes and 1 abstention. No vote against!

If you want to know more about Marcos Feliciano and his church, visit http://www.catedraldoavivamento.com.br/site/  The website is in portuguese, but you can certainly use google translator to find out more about him. Also, if you have a church already (I mean, if you OWN a church) you can affiliate it to Catedral do Avivamento. Just fill this form: http://form.jotformpro.com/form/22714443500948

Last, but not least, if you want to contribute financially to his church, It accepts that you send them your credit card, but, as Pastor Marcos Feliciano famously said (the recording is all over youtube): “It is the last time that I speak: Samuel de Souza gave his credit card, but didn’t gave his password. That’s not worth. When he ask for God’s miracle, God will not give it to him and he will say that God is bad.”

Oh, Glory. Praise the Lord!


To be continued.

No humanity here: the voices of asylum seeking children

23 Mar

There is no humanity here… that thing, I can promise you (Asylum seeking child in Norway)

I was lucky to go see Nowhere Home on Thursday night,  a documentary screened as part of the Human Rights Watch Film Festival in London this year. Lucky because of many things: I’ve always wanted to go to this festival but this is the first time I am in one of the cities it’s held. The documentary is fantastic, and I got to see the director, the Norwegian Margreth Olin, for a Q&A session afterwards.

The movie exposes the Norwegian treatment of asylum-seeking unaccompanied children.  Basically, unaccompanied children under 15 years receive similar treatment to those national children under the State’s custody and are under the responsibility of the Child Protection Agency.  However, children from the ages of 15 – 18 are under the responsibility of the Norwegian Immigration Directorate (UDI); a practice criticized by the Committee on the Rights of the Child,  along with the fact that children are not given effective protection by their guardians, that the asylum procedures take too long and that age determining procedures are indecent, culturally insensitive and generally unreliable.

If you are one of these children between 15 – 18, you will be allowed to stay in a reception center where you get a roof over your head and food. However, you have no access to education (except for the preparation they give you for the day of your return, according to Olin).  As an 18th birthday present you get a ticket back to your country of origin.

The painful stories of 20 children are portrayed in this film, most of them are from Afghanistan or Iraq, and some from different African countries. Three particular stories are developed more in-depth; one is the story of Hassan and Hussein from Afghanistan, two brothers who are left alone after their families were slaughtered. The youngest, Hussein, was stabbed the same day his family was murdered, he was only 11 years old. In Norway, he suffers from severe PTSD and his legs are paralysed. They are alone against the system.

Goli, an Iraqi Kurd who is returned to Kurdistan the day after he turned 18,  is another one of the main characters in this film.  After the murder of his dad, his mom married another man who physically abused him. He has countless scars in his body, some a gift from his stepfather, but the majority are self inflicted. He narrates with pride that he beat his stepfather: he hurts himself more that anyone could. He can’t control it, he states, he can’t control his acts. When the authorities call his family upon his return, they receive a clear threat that if they send him, his stepfather will kill him.

The hardest part of watching these children’s testimonies is identifying the one common trait between them: utter hopelessness. No dreams, no future. They live, as one of them said, awaiting the day they turn 18 and are sent back, in his words, to their deaths.

But Norway isn’t alone in this. The Swedish Migration Board leads the European Return Platform for Unaccompanied Minors (ERPUM), an EU project funded by the Return Fund – Community Actions. The Project partners are Sweden, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK. The projects make it possible to effectively and rapidly return rejected asylum-seeking children.  As the Platform’s website announces, it has established contacts and will cooperate with the governments, international organizations and non-governmental organizations in Afghanistan and Iraq, while the former has been described as UNICEF in 2010 as the “world’s most dangerous place to be a child”.

According to UNHCR, 17.700 unaccompanied children claimed asylum in 2011 in 69 countries. The majority of them from Somalia and Afghanistan, at least 12,000  are thought to enter the EU each year.  12,000 children! God forbid they will destroy the EU’s economy!

Living in the UK, I find myself constantly disappointed by the anti-immigration media coverage of refugee and migrant issues.  Disappointment is a understatement, I’m being polite.  Are refugees really a burden for these countries? The UK for example, is home to less than 2% of the world’s refugees, while 80% of the worlds refugees live in developing countries. However,  we are still constantly enlightened by The Daily Mail‘s brilliant reporting on the issue. This, however, is a matter for another blog post.

The documentary has some amazing reflections made by Olin and the children she interviewed. Some stayed with me and have been bouncing around my head for the last 24 hours:

What kind of humanity are we talking about, when we stop seeing the individual? What kind of societies are we living in, when we treat children from another nationality as criminals and less deserving than our own?

Hussein, one of the children interviewed, states in the beginning of the movie: ‘God divided happiness and sorrow, he gave some people sorrow and other people happiness. I am one of the people living in sorrow’. I wish I could think otherwise, but there is little in the treatment of asylum seekers in these countries that gives me that possibility.

Olin believes change might happen in Norway, her activism has had individual impact in some cases and hopefully will have a more general one impact on policy too. It is possible to make a difference.

She starts her movie by making viewers imagine Norwegian children swimming to shore from a boat, desperate and vulnerable, and then being rejected by authorities. Do we really need to do this to be able to demand the respect for these children’s human rights? It all seems to point at that fact that we do.

One of the powerful reflections one of these kids makes seems appropriate to end this. After knowing one of them was granted a leave to remain on human rights grounds, he says: They say he can stay because of human rights concerns. Does this mean I’m not human?  I wish I could explain what that means, legally, to him. I have been working with refugees and asylum seekers for some time, so as a lawyer, I know I could. But not as a person. That, I simply cannot do.

Let’s all cry for da poor widdle rapists

22 Mar

This week in the little town of Steubenville, Ohio, two man-boy-monsters were convicted of rape. Ma’lik Richmond, 16, and Trent Mays, 17, were found “delinquent” (juvi court code for “guilty”) after prosecutors presented copious evidence proving that they had digitally raped a 16 year-old girl while she was virtually unconscious (blacked out from booze, though recent allegations indicate she may have been roofied). This evidence wasn’t hard to come by, seein’ as how the man-boy-monsters photographed the victim’s limp, urine-soaked body, texted/Tweeted the pictures for everyone to see, and posted a 12-minute video to YouTube bragging about their conquests. (Can one be charged with “idiocy” in addition to rape? And is that an aggravating or mitigating factor?) For a detailed and gut-churning account of the more than 350,000 text messages from the 17+ phones confiscated for evidence during the investigation, read this article from Yahoo Sports. (And can I just say, I’m fucking embarrassed that I just linked to Yahoo Sports as a thorough journalistic source. Do your job, mass media outlets.)

Because they are minors, the perps received relatively short sentences — a minimum of one year in juvenile detention for Richmond, two years for Mays (added time for distributing photos of a naked minor), with the possibility of remaining in juvi until they are 21, at which time the case will be reassessed.

Both teens will also have to register with the sexual offenders registry, meaning that they will always and forever be linked with this rape.  From now until the day they die (or until Congress ends the registry, whichever comes first), their neighbors, colleagues, employers, prospective mates, and future children will always be able to trace them to this heinous crime. (For the record, I absolutely despise the sex offender registry, though I understand and am sympathetic to its origin and purpose.)

Everything about this tale is tragic. That said, let us remember that the tragedy stems from the actions of the rapists and centers around the effects on the victim.

Apparently CNN missed that memo. The network is currently taking a beating for its sympathetic (to the rapists!) coverage of the sentencing hearing. Nothing like two semi-handsome budding football stars crying in open court to make middle America feel twangs of sympathy. Reporter Poppy Harlow told anchorwoman Candy Crowley (yes, those are real names; I can’t make shit like that up): “I’ve never experienced anything like it, Candy. It was incredibly emotional — incredibly difficult even for an outsider like me to watch what happened as these two young men that had such promising futures, star football players, very good students, literally watched as they believe their life fell apart.”

Needless to say, other news outlets and the general public wasted no time in condemning Poppy, Candy and the rest of the Lollypop Kids for their failure to recognize that (a) the rapists brought this shitstorm on themselves, and (b) the victim — remember her, the little girl who was raped? —  is picking up the pieces of her life after it actually fell apart.

Many are comparing CNN’s coverage to a two-year-old story by the Onion, a satirical website that has been prescient in much of its coverage recently. Life imitating art?

In a three-way tie for “Most Shitastic Coverage of the Steubenville Rape,” CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC all aired the first name of the victim on live television. Really? You don’t think bleeping out the victim’s name would have been a wise use of the seven-second delay? Or is that only reserved for when Bono drops an F-bomb during his Golden Globes acceptance speech?

I find the Steubenville rape deeply disturbing at a very personal level. There have been a few times in my life that I have witnessed or been the victim of sexual harassment or (I now realize) rape. I was in my late teens or early twenties, so older than these kids, but I was a special kind of naive. I had no idea that what I was witnessing or experiencing “counted” as anything criminal. All I knew is that it made me feel icky — the kind of icky that is impervious to hot showers and heavy drinking.

So what made me not tell someone on the French train that an employee had tried to molest me while I was alone in a sleeper car? What made me not call the cops when I, in bed with a girlfriend sleeping off a bender at a close friend’s house, awoke to find a friend — who had been sleeping on the couch in the living room — dry humping me in his tighty-whities with his hand down my pants? (Although I did tell my brother a few days later and he, much to his credit, never once said “well, at least you learned a lesson”. Instead he called the dude and calmly threatened to kill him if he ever came near me again. So there’s that.) Why didn’t I intervene when a situation eerily similar to the Steubenville rapes unfolded before me at a small house party, except the rapists (and yes, now I realize they were rapists) wielded a VHS camcorder instead of cell phones and had no social media website to upload the video to?

Why did I stay silent? Because of the victim-blaming assholes that came out in droves following the sentencing of Richmond and Mays. “Public Shaming“, a Tumblr blog devoted to calling out social media douchebags, features three pages of posts to Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, and other forums espousing the “slut was asking for it”/”she shares responsibility” mentality. Public Shaming came across such gems as:

image

and

image

Then you have “Why don’t we have a Dumb Fucking Whore Registry? Now that would be justice” by the aptly named Judgy Bitch. Charming. She argues that the unconscious girl (who was dragged from party to party, finger repeatedly, urinated on, and left naked on a stranger’s couch) was not actually raped. Rather, it was a case of “boys being boys” and “stupid whores being stupid whores.”  (Did I mention there’s a 12 minute video of the boys bragging about “how hard she got raped”? So by THEIR definition, let alone that of the Ohio criminal code, she was raped.)

And you wonder why I, like so many scared teens, stayed silent.

In my mid-twenties, a bit older and a bit wiser, I began to fight back. One incredibly strange night, a large man began beating his teeny-tiny girlfriend outside my friend’s apartment while we were having a party. (We didn’t know either of them.) He dragged her across the lawn by her hair while she kicked and screamed, pulled her between two buildings, pinned her down across his lap like a small child, and repeatedly punched her face while she wailed. After all the guys at the party refused to help her, I ran up, grabbed the woman, and kept running with her until I got behind a closed door. Cops were called, statements taken, and the biggest asshole at the party (now a US Marshall) yelled at me for butting into the business of others. I was shamed for, uh, I still don’t know — my action highlighting his inaction? (I realize this was not actually a rape incident. Still, you get the idea.)

In Steubenville: this is rape culture’s Abu Grhaib [warning: graphic (though pixilated) photo included], Laurie Penny from the NewStatesmen is able to articulate the importance of the Steubenville rape far better than I:

The pictures from Steubenville don’t just show a girl being raped. They show that rape being condoned, encouraged, celebrated. What type of culture could possibly produce such pictures? Only one in which women’s autonomy and right to safety counts for so little that these rapists, and those who held the cameras, felt themselves ‘perfectly justified’… The Steubenville rapists claim that, when they drove a passed-out girl from party to party, slinging her into and out-of cars like a deflated sex-dolly and sticking their fingers inside her, they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. That’s plausible, although it’s no defence. It’s plausible if, and only if, you have internalised the assumption that women are not real human beings, just bodies to be manipulated with or without consent, pieces of wet and willing meat there for you to use for your pleasure. There’s a word for what happens when one group of people sees another as less than human and insists on its right to hurt and humiliate them for fun. It’s an everyday word that is often misused to refer to something outside of ourselves. The word is ‘evil’… Anyone can be outspoken about Steubenville after the fact. The question is: who will stand up when the next Jane Doe is attacked, without expectation of thanks or acclaim, at risk of derision and ostracism or worse, and speak out about all the other Steubenvilles that are still taking place, and will continue to until enough people say ‘stop’?

Could the horror inflicted upon Jane Doe be a catalyst for change? Maybe. A Change.org petition calling on CNN to apologize for its coverage has over 200,000 signatures. Internet terrorists/hacktivists (depending on your point of view) Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) has steadfastly refused to let the rape go gentle into that good night. It continues to build a case against the “rape crew”, compiling and releasing additional information implicating a huge number of people. Some argue that Anonymous has gone too far — that most people involved in the case, including the victim, just want the mess to go away. But isn’t victim shaming and rape culture part of the reason they want everything to go away?

From the ashes of this soul-destroying story rises one anecdote that gives me hope for humanity. The aforementioned Yahoo Sports article highlights what seems to be the only teen in the greater Steubenville Metro Area with morals. Sean McGhee, Richmond’s cousin and Mays’ best friend, was at one of the parties attended by Jane Doe. He saw her stumbling and slurring and knew she was shitcanned. So that night, when rumors (and photos) began to surface of Mays and Richmond abusing her, he confronted his best friend and his cousin via text: “…you are dead wrong. I am going to choke the [redacted] out of you for that. You could go to jail for life for that. What the [redacted].”

Maybe there’s hope after all.

[To get a full breakdown of the photos, video, and timeline of events, see So you’re tired of hearing about rape culture? Warning, graphic. Because, you know, a girl was raped. And that shit is horrible.]

The Black List

10 Mar

I recently moved to the UK. As many women before me, I had to get registered with a General Practitioner (GP) in order to get birth control. The joys of having yet another unknown person ask me the most personal questions, giving me unsolicited advice about my personal reproductive choices and even worse, getting acquainted with my vagina are, as also many women will agree, not the joys we daydream about.

The great thing -I was told by the NHS website- is that I could choose my GP as long as it is a practice that is appointed to my postcode. I went into a review for GP practices and was disappointed by the kind of reviews I saw: they all reflected the amount of time they had to wait, whether the secretary was nice, and other banal information.

So here I was, asking myself, how do I choose a vagina friendly GP? And by this I mean, how can I make sure I go to a practice where my choices are met by a respectful, open-minded health operator, that will provide any service I may need in the future without a judgement?

I know what you’re thinking: just say it. Yes, I want to know I go to a GP that will not sabotage me in the future in case I ever need an abortion. No, I’ve never had one and am not planning to ever need one. No, I don’t think I would be terrible if I ever do and actually believe it’s my right.  I do realize abortion is not a right in the UK, this post I believe illustrates greatly some of the issues around abortion in this country.

Maybe it’s not even about knowing I can get one, but making sure I’m not with a GP that in principle believes I shouldn’t get one in any circumstances, or even worse, would on purpose deny me of an abortion, a service I am supposed to be able to get in the UK.

While I was googling away to inform myself on this issue, I  found out that in 2007, nearly a quarter of GPs were refusing to refer women for terminations and a fifth wanted the procedure banned outright. Yesterday, the Independent also raised the issue by reporting that since July 1991, when the abortion pill RU486 was introduced, less than 3,000 women have received it, while more than 60,000 women should have had the option of this non-surgical termination. Less than a half of the NHS hospitals that practice abortions offer the pill. GPs fail to tell their patients they have this option over surgical pregnancy termination.

I’ve been whining about this to friends and they’ve expressed worries from “the other side”. Do I think all GPs should be forced to practice abortions? No, I am a true believer of conscientious objection and think GPs should have a right not to do something against their beliefs. And I believe the NHS system has addressed this and GPs can opt out of providing this service.

But I think: shouldn’t we, women living the UK, have the certainty that we will get a GP that will provide us this service? That’s when the shit hits the wall in some arguments and people suggest I am creating a black list of doctors based on their beliefs, which could create massive discrimination issues. Fair point.

But then, what about us? If we have evidence that GPs are, because of beliefs or any other reason, sabotaging thousand’s of women’s access to a health service, shouldn’t they be accountable for this? After all, once the legal period has passed, that’s it, you’re stuck in a very difficult situation. I briefly thought of the Seinfeld episode “The Pilot”, when Jerry and George write about a show in which a person is convicted with becoming another person’s butler for a while by a judge. Could we then, in such a world, give the baby once it’s born to the GP? Sorry man, you failed to provide me this service, the direct consequence being me having this baby, so here you go: have fun!

As cynical as this may sound, we do have to think about a solution. And I believe the fact that the provision of abortion by NHS personnel is addressed around a GP’s right to opt out, rather than their duty to do so is a critical starting point. If we knew we had GPs that don’t believe in antibiotics and refuse to prescribe them for infections, what would the NHS do? Would they say: don’t worry, you can opt out. Or would they say: the consequence of you not doing this is critical to a person’s health and access to services, so if you won’t do it, you need to tell us now.

I understand that the basic problem is that abortion isn’t a right. And yes, that would fix a lot of problems. But in the meantime…we don’t go around asking if every health service we get is a right in itself, do we? “But doctor, I have a right to chemotherapy when I have cancer”… or “I have a right to painkillers when I’ve hurt myself and am in pain”. Or would we accept a situation in which a person’s died because they didn’t get a blood transfusion in a hospital due to their doctor’s beliefs? We would all be outraged. We consider all these services as part of our right to health and the consequent obligation of this is our State’s obligation to provide us with all it entails. But we are not outraged in this case… not all of us anyway.

So yes, I do think there should be a list. Maybe not a black but a white list. Doctors that are willing to provide this service should enlist and women looking for this service should have a guarantee that the GP they go to will have no problem in giving them what they’re entitled to.

The system still sees this as a favor, an option, something women cannot demand, something for a holy GP to decide in her behalf. That’s the reality, and the consequence of the denial of such a service is as long-term as any can be.

Espaço da Feminista Cinéfila

feminismo, cinema, política, activismo, sketching, línguas

toastyinhell

Hell may not have a lot to recommend it, but at least it's toasty...

The Victorian Librarian

This is the life you lead when you can't decide between librarianship and research

Andres D Quinche

Young professional writing on international development, gender equity, and sustainability.

julia knaß

lia:writing

Latin-American Women Wear Earrings

Stories about Women, Cultural Identity and Self-Expression

fuck you very much

human rights, gender and other important stuff

EJIL: Talk!

human rights, gender and other important stuff

IntLawGrrls

voices on international law, policy, practice

Feministing

human rights, gender and other important stuff

delusions of equality

human rights, gender and other important stuff

%d bloggers like this: