To think that 62p an hour is NOT what feminism looks like...

[TheBogQueen]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2817191/62p-HOUR-s-women-sleeping-16-room-paid-make-Ed-Harriet-s-45-Feminist-Looks-Like-T-shirts.html

It's a daily mail so find your smelling salts.

But these t shirts are made by women sleeping 16 to a room paid 62 p an hour.

And then sold in Whistles.

This is (as we say at work) a WTF moment. It is possible to have a logo printed on Fair Trade T Shirts - we managed it fur our primary school polo shirts. You'd think that if the school PTA can manage this then the highly paid executives at Whistkes and the Fawcett society might manage that too.

but then is the uk minimum wage actually enough to live on? Would it be better if the clothes were made by low paid British people?

The actual amounts people are paid are pretty meaningless, without info on cost of living.

Schadenfreude, anybody?

Fawcett Society statement

Oh dear, PR fail for the pseudo feminists.

If the workers send their money 'home' it's their fault that they have little on which to live

Really?! That's what you have taken from this? That they are making poor choices?

FFS, I despair.

I personally don't like the campaign (although I fullt support the sentiments behind it, I don't feel like flogging a tshirt for £45 is actually going to help anyone). I also think that anyone who didn't see this coming is extremely naive.

That being said, almost all of our clothes are mass-manufactured by people in LEDCs on ridiculously low wages. It's an intrinsically difficult problem to regulate as a UK retailer cannot demand changes in law in an overseas nation (although they could boycott it), their "reputable" contractors may be operating as a front for what is effectively slavery, their contractors may be outsourcing labour themselves, each nation and population have very different wage expectations and needs (for instance, £6.50 an hour or local equivalent would be a fortune in some countries), and if the prices of manufacture went up then so, inevitably would the price of the clothes; cue much outrage and indignation here. How many people would (or would be able to afford to!) pay higher prices for properly made British clothing? I live near Leicester, which is full of old clothing warehouses from the 50s and 60s that are now empty or used for storage. The thing is, people don't want ethical and a fair price, they want cheap and lots of it.

Let's not try to get muddled up with the two very different issues. A tacky band-wagon tshirt has just served to highlight another issue. And probably given a few people red faces in the meantime.

Hmm. Good that the fawcett society are investigating.

Part of me wonders though whether e.g. Red Nose Day t-shirts would have been investigated by the press - not that I don't think that feminist organisations shouldn't be held to high standard in this respect, just that it doesn't surprise me that this is the one that is investigated. Of course it may be that every single other campaign-type t-shirt is fully ethically produced and there has never been anything to report on that front

Lots of feminists I have spoken to (and me included) think that DC was right not to have worn the t-shirt because it would be hypocritical

£45 for the tee shirt in the shops. What a rip off!!

at people simultaneously being outraged at the sweatshop conditions and at the price of the T shirt. Which was, presumably, priced as a ethically produced garment.

Anyway, as I just said on Facebook- all my T shirts are feminist T shirts.

So if you've got the t-shirt it obviously doesn't mean you understand the problem. What a total pain HH is.

so another question what would these women do for money if we didn't buy their goods? Get a better paid job? Go back to school? Do something worse?

Genuinely interested question I'm not saying all this is right but what is the solution?

Well I guess the point is Toby that it shouldn't be Hobson's choice for them. It shouldn't be the option of shit pay or nothing.

I don't know what the options are for the women in this specific situation, or how the pay compares to living costs there. I will look forward to clarification from te fawcett society and partners when they have investigated

no it shouldn't totally agree with that but it's how it is . Girls losing jobs in sweat shops often face being sold to old men for marriage (aka rape), starvation, destitution living off rubbish dumps, prostitution as alternatives or if they are lucky they may find another poorly paid job in awful conditions.

I fear that we have limited power to change the world.

Hmmm David Cameron isn't looking so bad now for not wearing it.

If Cameron had refused to wear it because he was concerned about the conditions under which it was manufactured, that would be correct. But we do all know that the reality is that he doesn't give a shit for that, and if anything probably endorses it.

I find the whole campaign really squirmingly awkward and embarrassing. If you're a politician your status as a feminist should speak for itself by the policies you advocate and promote.

Wearing a t-shirt is just pointless tokenism and flashing of 'right on' credentials. I choose to judge my representatives on their policies, not what t-shirt they choose to wear.

I find it astoundingly patronising too. It stoops to the level of addressing us as 'little wimmin' who are stupid enough to be impressed by a t-shirt rather than making decisions based on policies and actions.

So the Daily Mail cares about poor Bangladeshi women now, does it? Is that why it's been campaigning hard for the UK's overseas development budget to be cut?

Do you think they should hav ignored the story Fuzxywig?

The point is that the mail went out to find this story to discredit Fawcett's campaign and labour politicians. It's deeply cynical.

I used to work for a development org, working on labour rights in clothing supply chains and the Mail wasn't interested in publishing exposes of conditions in the factories used by its advertisers, despite highlighting worse conditions than those faced by women in this factory.

Fuzzy that's as a suspected further up. Also wrt t-shirts sold for other campaigns (charity, political etc) - it may be that these are all fully above board and there's no story to tell, but I am wondering why this one, which is about women's rights. Is this the only case? It should of course be reported, but I am cynical about what hasn't been investigated and held to the same standard

because the feminist T-shirt was a story this week

Hmmm David Cameron isn't looking so bad now for not wearing it.
If Cameron had refused to wear it because he was concerned about the conditions under which it was manufactured, that would be correct. But we do all know that the reality is that he doesn't give a shit for that, and if anything probably endorses it.

... but politically speaking he didn't wear it and there are pictures of the others wearing it. A t shirt that ultimately cost £45 to buy but exploited the women, at 62p an hour, who made it in Mauritius.

ArthurShappey, the point is that Cameron wasn't prepared to make any public statement supporting feminism. This is the man who publicly told a woman MP to "calm down dear". This is the man who reacted as follows when asked last year if he was a feminist:

"In the issue of Red magazine out later this week, a journalist asked David Cameron if he’s a feminist. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom was stumped. “Er…” he stammered, and stared out of the window for what the journalist described as “a long time.” “Umm…” he finally came up with something. “I don’t know what I’d call myself… it’s up to others to attach labels. But I believe that men and women should be treated equally.” (We’d have a real problem on our hands if he didn’t.)

The T shirt stuff is a classic "look over there" attempt by the Mail, which equally cares not one jot for the women in Mauritius.

I know... I'm not arguing. I dislike him as much as the next person.

But people will remember certain things, photos will be brought up again and again by newspapers and some people won't remember David Cameron's 'calm down dear', but they may remember Harriet Harman looking smug in her exploitative t shirt in the house of commons. I'm just saying it's all been very badly done and whistles and the Fawcett Society (yes I have read their response) have been complete idiots in this case and it's done the feminism cause no favours at all.

To the poster who said I wonder if the mail would do a similar story if it was found to be the case with Red Nose Day t shirts... You have a point. I think they might have done but at the same time where they're concerned who knows.

Arthur it was me who asked that and I'm aware that the question is a simplistic one because as Nancy says it's not a story until it's a story iyswim. Politicians have never been criticised for refusing to wear a Red Nose Day t-shirt so no one has investigated where they come from. But I still don't know whether that would have been followed up in the same way either as feminist issues seem to cause a particular reaction in the press

I am pleased DC refused to wear the t-shirt because he is not a feminist. I would question the hypocrisy of the other party leaders too