Shoes for the boys

It's a shame I have to write this. Yet another retailer has resorted to lazy gender stereotypes in order to shift more wares.

This time it's high street shoe shop, Clarks.

Signs in their shop windows read: 'Because boys test their shoes to destruction, so do we' and 'Because girls love comfort and style, we design both into our shoes'.

So boys wear their shoes out by running about and having fun in them, while girls just like to sit around being comfortable and looking pretty. I think a lot of mothers of girls would disagree with this. Girls are just as capable of wearing out their shoes as boys, and boys are just as likely to want their shoes to be comfortable and look good.

And of course, the boy sign was in the inevitable blue, and the girl one the usual pink. Don't get me started on pink.

Clarks

I had a look at Clarks' website (there's no sign of these slogans there), and to their credit, both boys and girls are shown involved in an action activity and something a bit arty - boys on their bikes, and a boy playing a guitar, versus girls with a home-made cart, and one clutching a pile of schoolwork.

It looks like they have tried to get a good balance, and not go all pink princess. So it's a shame they did this.

Maybe they have done some research, and actually have some robust data that tells them that boys generally 'test their shoes to destruction' and girls prioritise 'comfort and style' in their footwear. If they do, then I'd really like to see it.

Online petition

The signs were pounced on by lawyer and parent Emma Dixon, who set up an online petition, asking Clarks to remove them.

There are a lot of online petitions, and you might wonder if they do any good, but this is the kind of simple issue that, by signing a petition, you can send a clear message to a retailer that you don't like what they are saying. And so I think there's a pretty good chance it will succeed. That would be another small victory for feminism, although it's a battle we shouldn't still have to be fighting.

Sign the petition asking Clarks to remove the signs here.

Feminism and peace

This weekend the Leamington Peace Festival rolled around once more.

This is a major annual event in Leamington Spa, the town that I was privileged to call 'home' for 13 years. It's basically a big excuse for a party in the name of peace.

The only tangible presence of feminism at the event was Amnesty International, which took its women's rights in Afghanistan campaign along.

Thinking about the links between feminism and peace, I am surprised that this was the only representation. It made me wonder where all the feminists are.

Peace

The moment that a Suffragette first chained herself to a railing began a war against inequality that is still waged today.

The Suffragettes refused to be appeased until women were given the vote. They were successful and a kind of peace followed, but that was really the beginning of women fighting for the right to be recognised as equal to men.

Feminism has a funny relationship to peace: it both breaks it and makes it. Feminism is a disruptive force which shakes up the discriminatory status quo. While women are discriminated against, then they cannot and should not be peaceful. For this reason, perhaps it has no place at a festival for peace.

But at the same time, we will be closer to peace once we have equality between the sexes - on a global scale. And so feminism and peace are inseparable ideas.

I hope, although feminism wasn't obviously in evidence, that the park today was crammed with feminists of all shapes and sizes who expect to be treated equally to men, and don't feel they could be at peace without this basic right.

Woman wears the same dress twice

Sarah Millican in the offending dress at the 2013 Baftas

The comedian Sarah Millican wore the dress that she wore to last year's Baftas twice. She wore it again for this year's Baftas (although she didn't actually attend). I know, it's pretty shocking.

This fact has been all over the internet. Millican was wearing the dress to make a point, as she explains in this article for the Radio Times, after last year her night out to the award ceremony ended in tears when she was slated for the way she looked on the red carpet.

Crimes against fashion and feminism

This story isn't about to rock the feminist world. It's a small tale about a single privileged and successful individual.

Having someone insult your dress at the Baftas isn’t the worst thing that can happen to you. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter.

As Millican points out, she’s a comedian. Her job is to make people laugh, not to stand about looking pretty.

Millican-gate is a symptom of the fact that we see women’s bodies and the way they clothe them as something for public consumption. How dare Millican show herself at a high-profile public event with her over-size-8 body and department store dress! Twice!

If we object to her dress, maybe we should be asking why, as she says: "Fancy expensive designer shops are out for me as I’m a size 18, sometimes 20, and I therefore do not count as a woman to them."

Red carpet action

Red carpet dresses (and people) at the 2012 Golden Globes

Showbiz events such as the Baftas are attended by actors and models, many of whom do make a living from looking pretty (and acting a bit too). The red carpet is also a showcase for designers, as exorbitant frocks are paraded for the camera, in the knowledge that the world is watching and judging. 

And so, watching and judging, lots of people on Twitter felt it was OK to comment on Millican's figure and attire. Forgetting, or not caring, that famous and successful though she is, she is also a woman. And we get very upset when other people (usually other women) mock the way we look.