MNHQ Have you seen this yet? Can we discuss this blog here?

[MmeBodyInTheBasement]

A challenge to Mumsnet

Currently being retweeted (passed around) on Twitter.

She raises interesting points (and tells some horrifying tales).

Is this something that we would like to get involved in, and is it likely that we could actually do something?

It is not something that I have looked into but am willing to get involved.

I said at the time that the Girls Be Girls campaign made MN look daft

I think this blog has a point, tbh.

There was a transgender thread IIRC in feminism recently, got a bit.... yes well

why doesn't that site do something either.

and i think people realise that even mumsnet can't change much

it does seem a little as if, no matter what MN adopted as a campaign, someone somewhere could say ''ah now, look! MNetters don't care about saving the planet because they are so selfish!

Individually, I know I am not unique on here by thinking carefully about where I buy my family's clothes.
We all do what we feel we can.

Seems a little easy to take a pot shot at Mumsnet.
Yes I'm sure we can make a difference in lots of areas but ultimately we have to be aware of our own limitations.

We are a large group of peope spread across the globe, whose main interest in common is our children. Not only interest I do add.

It would be wonderful to think that we could rid the planet of child slave labour but ultimately we cant.

People still want to buy cheap clothes.
People will have to make the cheap clothes.
It will be the poor and the children who will do this work!

Hello all

I'm the author of the article.

First, I should probably point out that I have been ticked off several times (especially from the ed) for my confrontational tone - the ed of the site is on mumsnet's side!

Anyway, I take the point about the tone. I've not been writing in forums that people actually read for long, so I'm not used to people taking any notice of me! It wasn't meant to be confrontational, and I apologise for any offence caused.

Having said that, I should prob point out that the response to my article in another thread is rather misguided and a tad rabid.

OK now that's out of the way...

It's really great to see people debating the article on mumsnet, which is exactly what I wanted to happen.

There are three key points I want to make in response to the discussion here:

1. My main issue with the campaign is not that it is choosing one issue over another, it is that the issue you are pushing is inadvertently giving retailers a platform to misrepresent themselves. I find this particularly problematic, given that (I hope you don't mind me saying so) the Let Girls Be Girls campaign is one that could only really exist in a society that has the luxury of not worrying about the basic quality of life, or even the very survival, of its children. The issues I raised in the article seems like the one we should get right first.

1. The poster above encapsulates the next point I want to make. All too often people take the tack of 'oh we will never be able to end sweatshop labour, what can we do?' (in fact Adam Curtis does some great work on this - he calls it Western 'oh dearism' i.e. inaction resulting from perceived impotence). But the fact is, there ARE things we could do about sweatshop labour. It's true that we will probably never end it altogether, but if you look at work of organisations like the National Labor Committee, you'll see that real changes can be made. The NLC, for example, campaigns for changes like giving girls one day off a week, and raising the minimum wage to 35c an hour, which would be a living wage (Walmart is refusing to do this). The NLC campaigns to improve the quality of life and dignity of workers; it doesn't want to bring down capitalism.

As parents, mumsnetters have significant political and consumer clout. If you got behind an organisation like the NLC, you could really make a difference. After all, you are the target audience of companies like Next and George. You wouldn't have to silently boycott them, instead you could engage in dialogue with them and say that as part of the service they offer when selling you a garment, you want to ensure that those who made them were paid fairly and treated with respect. They would listen to you.

1. If you did decide to run with this campaign, I would love to be involved. My email is [email protected]. Please get in touch if you'd like to talk about it further.

Cheers
EM

Let Girls Be Girls is a very important campaign. I don't think it's "one that could only really exist in a society that has the luxury of not worrying about the basic quality of life"

I think premature sexualisation of girls is capitalist-driven. So it's most likely to be found in post-industrial developed societies, such as the US, UK, Japan etc...

It is inextricably wrapped up in capitalism.

And grooming young girls to be 'objects' is as an important issue as it gets

"Let Girls Be Girls campaign is one that could only really exist in a society that has the luxury of not worrying about the basic quality of life, or even the very survival, of its children. The issues I raised in the article seems like the one we should get right first."

So what? We do live in a society that has the luxury of not worrying about the basic quality of life or even the very survival of our children. (Although I could argue that given that my DD has a 1 in 4 chance of being raped or sexually abused, 1 in 4 chance of being subjected to domestic violence, will earn less than a man just because she's female, will have less leisure time because she's female etc., her basic quality of life will be worse than my son's, but that's by the by...) Do you tell other campaigning groups that they shouldn't pursue their campaigns because they haven't sorted out the problems of how the global capital markets work yet?

I thought that thread was quite thought-provoking actually, not rabid at all.

well said dittany, agree entirely.

Don't understand the focus on the US National Labor Committee (NLC) campaign against sweatshops. Wouldn't it be more useful to join the campaign being led by the UK War on Want

www.waronwant.org/campaigns/love-fashion-hate-sweatshops

or the UK based Labour Behind the Label

www.labourbehindthelabel.org/

or support other UK organisations like No Sweat.

Why support a campaign run from the other side of the Atlantic?

"the Let Girls Be Girls campaign is one that could only really exist in a society that has the luxury of not worrying about the basic quality of life,"

And here is why I struggle to engage with the male-dominated left wing. This stems from the same place as all will be fine for women after the revolution so they can wait till then. No. I want to fight for the rights of women and girls here and now. I will not wait till all the 'more important' problems have been solved. Maybe, just maybe, I can do both.

And to accuse the other thread of being misguided and rabid is a tad rich considering it is in response to comments started by the blog in question, which are not just misguided but ill informed and what women fighting for the right of women and girls hear all the time. And we are sick of it. As has already been said, activists should support one another, not play some activist olympics.

As for the issue at hand, yes I agree it is something that mumsnet should campaign about, and could really have an impact. The exploitative nature of consumerism is a really tough nut to crack, although I think the whole 'austerity' discourse means the now holds the potential for mindsets to be changed away from the dominance of consumerism, that drives exploitation. But is is a tough one to do and bring people with you, as when people are struggling in their own lives, they do not necessarily respond so well if they feel they are being told off for what they feel they can't control.

"I find this particularly problematic, given that (I hope you don't mind me saying so) the Let Girls Be Girls campaign is one that could only really exist in a society that has the luxury of not worrying about the basic quality of life, or even the very survival, of its children. The issues I raised in the article seems like the one we should get right first."

So should we drop a successful campaign, which addresses important issues, "Let Girls Be Girls", and which has gained press coverage, in order to help the US NLC campaign on sweatshops, because this would address issues that "we should get right first"?

To me, it's really obvious that what has riled this side is the gender aspect of "let girls be girls"

Some people simply cannot stand anything that supports the female sex

I am getting sick of this

We are not campaigning to push girls ahead of boys or give them some advantage over boys FGS; we are merely trying to envisage a future where our girls will one day be on an equal footing with boys. 'Let Girls Be Girls' is part of that vision: to live in a society where little girls are not groomed an objectified the way they are.

IF marketing was not gendered, and did not target girls/women in the way that it does, then the mumsnet campaign would be gender neutral.

But marketing/capitalism is not gender neutral, so we are not starting from an equal footing.

Assertions that the world/capitalism is gender neutral, (and therefore activism in favour of redressing the imbalances between the genders are insignificant and trivial), are factually incorrect

I'm not sure I agree with EM's first point.

I can easily see WOZA (in Zimbabwe) where I once lived taking up the issue should the shops start selling clothes that sexualise young girls

Yes actually, come to think of it, don't societies where children have a very high mortality rate, also police what women and girls wear quite heavily?

Yes I think some countries that's so HB.

I know in Zimbabwe plenty of women go out drinking (or used to before no-one had a job and women became particularly vulnerable from the current government regime) in "sexy" clothes. Though nothing like on the scale of here in the UK. But you could easily "glam up" for a night out if you had the cash to buy the clothes. There was no issue with showing legs, or cleavage (or even a bit of both)

I don't ever recall seeing little girls dressed in anything other than, well girls clothes, though and I can't imagine any of my exIL's dressing their little girls in some of the cr*p that we find in the shops here.

My 2 nieces that live in the UK I don't think I've ever seen in any of that stuff, they always look lovely,

My mind is boggling at the idea that someone who wants a group of people to get involved with her choice of campaign would come on and tell them they were being 'rabid'.

not the best strategy for getting people on side IME....

Oh I expect it's because we're silly mummies and therefore you can just tell us...