NUS Opposed to Sexist Freshers' Week Promotions

The NUS National Women's Officer has launched campaign to oppose sexist marketing by a marketing company on University campuses. The company in question is involved in the promotion of the Miss University GB Competition and plan to distribute free copies of FHM at Freshers' Fairs. This competition and the magazine promote misogynistic views of women and promote the objectification of women and help propagate the deeply offensive idea that a woman's worth is contained entirely in her appearance.

Promotions such as these at Freshers' Fairs presents a lack of inclusivity that could well be alienating to young women who should be made to feel welcome as valuable members of the University. Furthermore it privileges heterosexual males and implies by the lack of inclusivity in the promotions that this group is the only one worthy of the marketeers efforts. This is clearly unacceptable.

From the NUS website:

The NUS Women’s Campaign is making a stand against two recent BAM promotions. BAM are a student’s unions marketing company who offer various promotions, advertising and events sponsorship. It has come to our attention that they supported and facilitated the promotion of the Miss University GB Competition and plan to distribute free copies of FHM at Freshers' Fairs and you can help take action.

In a society where 92% of women under the age of 22 have said that they “hate their bodies,” promoting competitions that openly objectify women and the distribution of a magazine based on the same principles is unacceptable. These sorts of competitions and media will only continue to fuel negative, unrealistic and damaging ideals of what women should look like. And, whilst pointing out the obvious, these two promotions are not accessible to all or in any way inclusive.

Olivia Bailey, the NUS National Women’s Officer, has taken action against these promotions and has sent an open letter to BAM, outlining the Women’s Campaign’s concerns about these promotions. In her letter to BAM, Olivia stated that “It is of course vital that we respect the rights of all students to engage in whatever activities they choose to, and as such we never extend our criticism to the women who choose to enter beauty pageants. Our criticism lands squarely on the shoulders of the corporations who make money out of the exploitation of women students.”

The NUS campaign provided a model letter which can be emailed to BAM (tb@bamuk.com) to register a complaint:

Model letter to BAM – feel free to adapt to include your own views

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to express my concern about two of your recent activities. First, I understand that you have written to all students’ unions on your books suggesting they advertise Miss University GB at their institution. Second, I understand that you have facilitated the free distribution of FHM magazine at the fresher’s fairs of the unions you are contracted to work for.

I believe that Beauty Pageants like Miss University GB, and ‘lads’ mags like FHM, send the dangerous message that it is OK to value women purely on a narrow conception of beauty that bears little relation to the majority of women.

I believe that my institution should be free of the sexism and objectification that women face every day in wider society. I am disappointed that you did not more seriously consider the equal opportunities implications of the products that you have chosen to advertise.

I ask that you retract both promotions, and apologise for the negative impact that your action has had on campuses across the country.

Yours Sincerely,

Name
Institution

Unions are a free-market solution

The Questionable Authority (That's the name of the blog by the way.) has a fantastic piece up about the Right's hypocritical hatred of Unions. Here's the start of the piece:

Like most people who pay attention to the news, I've been treated to several weeks of Republicans using the Detroit bailout as an excuse to bash unions. Like a broken record, it was easy to ignore for a while, but the repetitive droning of discredited canards (like $70/hr wages) is getting more and more and more annoying.

And it's particularly annoying because the vast bulk of the union-bashing is coming from the alleged free-market conservatives. What the hell is so conservative about beating up on unions, anyway. Unions are the quintessential model of a market based solution to a problem. The management and the money people might not like them, but that alone doesn't mean they're not a market solution - unless the real criteria for "free-market" is "stuff that makes people who already have money happier".

Yes, I'm serious. Let's take a minute or two to think about what unions actually are, and what they do.

At its most fundamental, a union is nothing more or less than a group of people who have figured out that if they act together to place limits on the supply of their own labor, the businesses that have a demand for that labor will need to pay more. Unions are basically employee-owned businesses that sell labor. Like any good business, they try to both encourage demand and control the supply.

You can find the rest here.

This article is about the US, but it has strong parallels in this country. To see how vilified Unions have been by the Tories you just have to look back to Margaret Thatcher's description of the 1984 Miners' Strike:

As she famously - and controversially - framed the dispute at the time, "We had to fight the enemy without in the Falklands. We always have to be aware of the enemy within, which is much more difficult to fight and more dangerous to liberty."

That's right the democratically elected Head of government directly compared the struggle of workers in this country to militaristic actions of a fascist dictatorship. In this internet age there's a phrase for that.

We have to ask ourselves where this hatred comes form. After all surely it's better for workers to do things for themselves, gain advancement through their own work rather by "Tax and Spend" politics that the Conservative so dearly loves to hate.

We're talking about groups of workers who don't need to rely on any outside assistance, they're standing on their own two feet. Surely the Tories should love them.

And yet they don't.

And it just shows the Tories for what they are. Unions are about societal justice, they work to ensure that the voices of the weak are heard by the powerful. They act to build a fairer job market in which workers don't have to accept whatever lousy conditions their all powerful employer deigns to hand out. And that's what the Tories hate, because in the kind of society that the Unions want to tear down it's the Tories with the money and the power, and that's why they don't want change.

David Cameron recently compared himself to Barack Obama. Well I'll take a leaf out of Obama's speech book; a smug Thatcherite bastard, thant's not change, that's more the same.

Britain doesn't want more of the same, that's why we kicked them out in '97, and if we work hard, and get our message out, we'll keep them out at the next General Election as well.

A bit of good news from the Council for a change

From the BBC comes the news that a factory that employs blind and disabled people is to be saved from closing by the council. [I should point out that the reason it was in danger in the first place was because the council cut its funding.]

"The troubled Glencraft furniture factory for disabled workers in Aberdeen has had its future secured, according to city council.

The council has agreed to buy the factory and lease it back to the firm.
Glencraft had its funding from the local authority cut as part of an earlier budget settlement.

Negotiations have been taking place since. About 60 staff are employed at the site which could now become home to other social enterprises."

Isn't amazing though how the council which had to slash its budget can somehow manage to balance the books and pay for things when they're really pushed to. Why not do this for other services in Aberdeen.

And a final note to the story would be to point out who it was that was campaigning to save this great place:

Union leaders plan factory fight

Union leaders representing staff at an Aberdeen workshop for the blind and disabled hope to legally challenge the council's decision to cut its subsidy.

If the £650,000 subsidy goes, the Glencraft factory which employs 60 people will have to close, possibly as early as April.

Aberdeen Council said it would try to help those who could not find work.

National officials from the Community union are meeting workers to discuss how to save the factory.

Great work from the Unions as always.