TEA

We have 20 days left until exams are OVER and we can update you all again with what we've been doing - which we're really excited about! 

But to set the scene of what we've been working on since New York, and what we're doing with NAWO & Peabody tomorrow in London, here's a little - important - entertaining video to watch with a cup of tea. 

AWOL

You may have noticed that in the last few weeks we haven't been updating the blog as frequently as we like to! 

Unfortunately the reality of exams have hit and with less than a month to go we are getting our heads down and revising every other second we have.

However, the seconds which aren't being spent revising have been spent organising, tweeting, emailing, setting up, collaborating and creating a lot a lot of exciting plans which we are looking forward to sharing with you very soon!

Since we've been back we've been doing lots of assemblies, meetings, talks and feedback sessions about what we got up to and the learning and issues we want to share and take forward. 

In the mean time before we're able to share the events and programs in the pipeline, as well as get back to uploading our thoughts and blog rants (of which we have scribbled down as drafts excessive amounts) we thought we'd upload a few pictures of our time in New York!

YWCA Young Women and Girls' Forum
Selfie with Lopa Banerjee
(Head of Civil Society section of UN Women)

IWD2015 March to Times Square

Hillary Clinton at the UN Women Event, CSW59

The only whole-group picture! with Annette, Co-Chair of NAWO

Speech #2: Equality: A Universal Right, Annie Thomas

Annie Thomas

'My Vision for the Future of Equality in Volatile Areas'

BASIRA's event in the Baha'i International Center, CSW59 New York

No harmful religious, cultural or social practice can be allowed to supercede human rights. I have drawn on my experiences as a young girl from the UK and some areas within BASIRA's Middle East and North Africa region to propose what I believe must be the path forward, towards true gender equality.

The experience of CSW was utterly incredible, this is how I summed it up to Humans of CSW59:

Speech #1: How to Get People's Voices Heard and Heeded for Gender Equality, Gemma Welsh

Gemma Welsh

'Looking to the future of Institutional Mechanisms'

To see a transcript, click here

Firstly, what actually are "Institutional Mechanisms"?

Twenty years ago, at the World Conference on Women in Beijing, 189 countries made a commitment to reach gender equality; a 12-part framework called the Beijing Declaration.

The 8th critical area of the Declaration (or Platform for Action) was "Institutional Mechanisms".

This is a fancy name for a body funded by government, to work independently with government and civil society (charities, academia, business - not government basically) in order to make sure that governments are and can do their best to achieve a gender-equal world. A national institutional mechanism's job is to consult people about their lives, consult civil society about their expertise, and work with and advise their government. This includes making sure that a country's laws and policies don't unfairly affect groups of people based on their gender.

Things which may not appear to be discriminatory may in fact impact groups of people differently when they're implemented. 

• For instance, women may be able to own a property under a country's legislation. However, in practice, if in that country a woman is not able to take out a bank loan, that would mean that realistically she's unlikely to be able to buy a house, and therefore the law about property-ownership is not going to be of any use. 

This is why it's important to have a body in place to check for any gaps or any hidden or unintended implications. It is shocking that barely any countries in the world have effective national mechanisms, despite the 20 years that have passed since they internationally and legally committed to doing so!

For me, this is because that barely any people know about Beijing, or are incredibly passionate about institutional mechanisms - I mean the name doesn't exactly inspire passion does it? But, without these essential parts in place, progress to change things which are embedded into our lives: the pay gap; stereotypes; workplace and academic bias; harassment etc...) cannot happen. 

All over the world, people raise their voices in attempts to call for change, however in many parts of the world it is dangerous for people to fight exercise these rights. And it is legally the job of the 186 countries who have signed up to Beijing to make sure they are making every effort to ensure that people (at least with regards to gender equality), don't have to.

Just in the UK, the average woman works 1 in every 6 working days free compared to the average man; men are three times more likely to end their own lives than a woman; and 1 in 3 girls will experience unwanted sexual touching in school.

Worldwide, 1 in 3 women experiences sexual abuse; the equivalent of 5 jumbo jets full of women die in labour every day, in majority from very preventable reasons; and there are 107 million women and girls missing from the world due to gender discrimination: more than all of the men who died in all the conflicts in the 20th Century. 

Clearly there are vast inequalities to be eradicated, not just by responses but also through prevention, and areas such as policies and lawmaking are key to this. 

As such, I called for everyone at CSW59, and call for everyone who reads this to consider how they can add their voice and show their governments they care about gender equality. 

Women in Film: The Bechdel Test

Maya Owen

The Bechdel test is a test which rates films based on three simple criteria. Its not a test of whether the film is a feminist one, or whether it is a good film, but simply if there is female presence in it.

Criteria: A film must have...
1. At least two (named) female characters in it,
2. Who talk to each other,
3. About something other than a man.

A film passes the test if all three are achieved which, looking at them, surely can't be hard?

You'd be surprised at how many films fail.

The films below are a small sample of those which failed the test.
- The Amazing Spider-Man 2
- The Grand Budapest Hotel
- How to Train Your Dragon 2
- The Boxtrolls

Both 'How to Train your Dragon 2' and 'The Boxtrolls' are children's animated films that portray women in a certain way.

And if young girls are presented with female characters who only talk to each other about men or who only ever interact with men then they will instantly connect this with reality.

If they are not shown that women can be as strong and as independent and as heroic as the other male protagonists that so many films show, then what is to become of their desire to do this themselves; to count themselves as equal to men?

Equally, if young boys are constantly shown these images of strong male heroes always saving the 'damsel in distress' then they will begin to judge and measure themselves against these images and expect certain behaviour or attitude from women.

You could say the entire film industry is built upon creating films that cater to and are about men, but this is changing.

Films like 'The Hunger Games' and 'Divergent' show strong female protagonists and have become so popular.

Evidently, the film industry needs to change its tune.

Women make up half of the world. Shouldn't their bravery and strength make up half the films as well?

Below is a link to the Bechdel test web page where you can see all the films that have been tested and whether they failed or passed.

http://bechdeltest.com/

Women's presence in STEM subjects

Olive Jackson

The imbalance of genders within STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) has been a long developed and well-known tradition. Whilst physics and mathematics are renowned for being more “masculine”, teachers and students alike see “softer” subjects such as art, music and English as a lot more “feminine”.

One study of Canadian secondary school children showed that 14% of girls said that art was their favourite subject compared to only 5% of boys, whereas 6% of boys preferred ICT versus a shockingly small 2% of girls. 

Although this is only one school, we can quickly see a trend forming and a separation between boys and girls towards school subjects. 

As this continues to sixth form and college and students have more freedom with their options, it’s seen that over half of the boys achieving A* in GCSE Physics will continue it to A level, whereas only 1/5 girls will. 

In A level mathematics, 60% of the students sitting exams last year were male, however in English Literature this was only 30%. 

 

Each subject is important in its own right, however the gender imbalance towards STEM subjects continually causes concerns for teachers and academics, and schemes to get women and girls to continue in subjects like the sciences haven’t had any lasting impact.

According to WISE, women still only make up 13% of the STEM workforce.

As an A level student hoping to go into the field of biochemistry (classed as a STEM subject) and although biology has a reputation for being the “girly” science, I am shocked at how little women are encouraged into these subjects – with an ever increasing demand for research, medical and scientific cures and new engineering techniques, isn’t the input of intelligent women essential to our world’s development?

How can we continue repressing the input of 50% of the population due to an age-old social stigma that should have been ousted years ago, when there may be a wealth of knowledge contained in women’s brains that we just aren’t allowing to be unlocked?

Out of the entire history of the Nobel prize for Physics (started in 1901), only 2 have been female. That’s 2 out of a total of 198 prizes, despite the fact that women make up 50% of the worlds population.

So what can we do about it? Encouraging women into the STEM subjects doesn’t seem to be working – a quick google search and you can find bursaries, funding and courses specifically tailored to getting women into science, yet there is still a significant lack of female input.

The way to combat this is to fight the social stigma, to educate children from an early age about gender equality, power and knowledge and allow them to choose for themselves what they are truly interested in, without the stigma of mathematics, science and ICT being a “boy’s subject” and making them turn to the more widely “feminine” ones.

Give women the choice and we may have the next Einstein arriving – and this time it’s a Mrs.

Women in decision-making - what the Charlie Hebdo march photoshopping really showed us

Read the full article here

A HuffPost review - Annie Thomas

           This is a really interesting article. These publications were released following the Charlie Hebdo tragedy, and focus on the political identities featured in the Paris march. 

           Moving past the political elements of the separate publishers’ decisions to release the images, the pictures alone highlight the absence of female political leaders in governments and decision-making roles today.            The troubling reality of the unequal and low representation of women is shown brutally in the first image, and truly highlights the problems faced by professional women in a male-dominated society.

           However, the controversial act of the HaMevaser Israeli newspaper cutting out the women from the photograph seems only to have drawn attention to the women’s cause, in contrast to what its image would have purported, that NO women have a role to play in federal legislation within governments.

           The satirical images that follow, in particular the one showing the ‘Million Merkel March’ is, in a feminist’s eyes, hyperbolic genius in protest to these narrow-minded newspapers, and fits the purpose of gaining ever-increasing support for the advancement of women’s professional and political involvement at higher levels.

           If you have a chance to read it, it’s an interesting visualisation of where women stand internationally in decision-making positions, and also gives an insight into different media’s interpretations on the roles of women to boot.

Naserian - empowering Maasai widows and their communities

Gemma Welsh

The problem:
           In many places around the world, widows are one of the most vulnerable segments of society.
           In traditional Maasai culture, widows have very few rights. They become part of their late husband’s family and their property rights transfer to his family too. Originally this was for the protection of the women and their children. To some extent this is still the case.
           The lived experience of the women themselves however, attests to the pain of their loss both of their husband and their status as first wives. In polygamous cultures, the inherited wives become the lowest on the status ladder and lose their home and their belongings and often the choices for their children. Taboos against widows are often so strong that they are a hidden group.
            Naserian has found that once the widows start meeting and it seems acceptable to be a widow, more emerge and are ready to share their own experience.  Naserian empowers Maasai widows to uphold their rights and live fulfilling lives. 

See this link for the full original statement from Naserian

The solution: 
           Naserian is a grass-roots charity with a connection straight from fundraising done here, directly to funding its work in Tanzania.
           Projects are then set up by Alias, a Maasai tribesman who has begun to change things for widows in his tribe.
           By extension, the widows are enabled to support themselves and their families, lifting them out of poverty, and the message of equality is disseminated throughout their communities.

           His work, started in his own village, has been enabled to spread through the help of funding to the seven surrounding villages. It has even inspired a national conference due to the prestige which international recognition has afforded him and Naserian, which will spread the message of their work even further. 

What Naserian does:

• educates widows about their rights
• empowers them to earn a living through teaching them skills which provides the means to  support themselves and their families
• supports them to rebuild their lives following this trauma
• trains widows and members of villages to carry on this work and educate their communities

Click here to see specific examples of present goals and those which have already been achieved

 Two projects which we would like to specifically fund:

1. Alias, the coordinator, is injured and has difficulty making the long journey to nearest villages (5 hours away), to which there are no roads. We have sourced him a motorbike as a mode of transport to continue this work, which will cost £400
2. A three day training course in human rights for 5 widows in each of the seven villages has been planned. This would enable widows to train their entire communities, and thereby disseminate this essential work for a cost of just £540

The Plan:
          With our school FemSoc, we are currently planning a large fundraising event which we hope will enable us to fund these important causes, and more.
          We will keep this blog updated as we are able to, however in the mean time (as the sooner we can enable these efforts the better!) we would like to take the opportunity to share the opportunity to donate anything you may be willing to this cause!
          Just £10 would fund two days of training for a widow (and by extension, if you like, 1/5 of a village), or make headway to meaning that Alias can carry on his work.
          If you feel you are able to, please follow this link to donate £10, or visit this page to donate any other amount, or support the charity in any other way!



The Imperfect Woman

Kathryn McGrotty

Nowadays it is a crime for women to be anything other than perfect, yet nothing short of being computer-modified is perfect by the media's standards. Images of women are composed, constructed and contorted to make them seem flawless, but can you really be perfect in real life?

A few weeks ago, I read an article about a woman who was criticised for being too “skinny”, her response was how she has always been naturally slim and eats healthily but has never needed or followed a diet to keep her slender figure.

I find it ironic; the media constructs images of women to make them thin, but when a woman is like that in reality she is abused and condemned for “being unhealthy” and “promoting dieting and eating disorders to young women”.

Unfortunately, if a woman is overweight they are presented as being lazy and unattractive.

There is no way for us to succeed in meeting the criteria.

Magazines, television, video games and even children’s media engross themselves in images of the “perfect woman” and this utter obsession with this portrayal of women, and men, is having a lasting effect on younger generations, who will soon grow up living a body-obsessed life.

81% of 10 year olds are afraid of getting fat.

53% of 13 year old girls are unhappy with their bodies, and this number increases to 78% as they reach 17.

These statistics are outrageous and things must change.

Why should we allow the media to construct the lives of women today? The “perfect woman”, apparently, has to be skinny, tall, tanned, toned, curvy, petite and elegant, all at the same time. In reality, this must make everyone imperfect, because no one can match up to the form that the media request.

The definition of perfect is: ‘having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be’

But who really decides what these ‘elements, qualities’ and ‘characteristics’ should be? The media has plucked imaginary ones out of thin air in order to create a standard for women to live up to in the 21st century, but personally I think it’s time for a change and time for a new rule-book of standards for woman.

Number one: being, not computer-modified, but simply yourself.

A New Media Image

Olive Jackson

            Trawling through images of women in adverts, from Gucci to Aldi, across the covers of Vogue and Cosmo, you can't help but question, "Who the hell comes up with this stuff?!"

Cosmo advertising a woman's body
              as the focus of their front page...

            The idea of a woman bending in a confusingly contorted position, wearing nothing but a thong, purely for the purpose of advertising this new fragrance or that new shampoo, is truly out of my grasp.

            Yet this seems to be the norm wherever you look - the objectification of women within the media has become commonplace, and, despite all the advances in women's rights elsewhere, we seem to be slipping in this essential area.

            As a feminist, a woman and an optimist for change, I see this as another area where women can and will strive for change.

            Women, as much as men, have equal rights to power, dominance and their own dignity. 

...whereas it's completely acceptable for a man
to be shown in a shirt and geeky bow-tie

            However this is not seen in the media, where women are seen for their bodies, whilst men are seen for their skills and intelligence. This, in turn, is having a poor effect on the younger generation, meaning girls are focussing on appearance over intelligence and skills.

            I'm not saying men aren't also subject to this prevalent objectification - the images of overly muscular bodybuilders are also rampant.

            My point is that the presentation of body, weight and shape is affecting the population, and not for the better. 

Even in 8-10 year-old girls, 80% admit to have dieted; a shocking amount at such a young age.

 But what can we actually do about this media barrage of the "perfect" look? Sit back as models get thinner, buffer, and more unrealistic?

  We, as a society and a population, must make a change. We must show the companies, the advertisers, the media barons, that: We. Do. Not. Agree.

  We need realistic standards for both us and the younger generations, and the freedom to look, wear and weigh what we want.

   We need change, and we need it now.

Gender Inequality in the Olympic Games

Olympic Games

Annie Thomas

The Olympic Games held in London in 2012 was heart-warming to many. People were engaged in events they had never heard of before, and patriotism was at its peak. The motto to ‘inspire a generation’ encapsulated the happiness and aspiration for success of future sport in Britain and, ideally, internationally.

To a large extent it gave women’s sport a platform. Athletes such as Jessica Ennis-Hill, Rebecca Adlington and Jade Jones became household names, figureheads for the games, and inspirations to many women. Nicola Adams became the first female Olympic champion in boxing history; a landmark achievement in the fight for equality, despite the while it took for them to deem women capable of taking part in such a discipline. 

Victoria Pendleton became the most successful female Olympic athlete, with 2 gold medals and a silver medal, leading the way for women in an effort to inspire a new generation of female sporting champions.

However, the Olympics still failed to perform in regards to providing a truly fair and equal summer games. 

It fell at the first hurdle, when it was found that only 5% of the contracting workforce for the Olympic Park, and an even more shocking 3% of those employed for the Athlete’s Village, were women. This amounts to an already determined attitude towards the effectiveness of women before the games had even begun.

Another startling finding was when Saudi Women raised the issue that their country would only be bringing an all-male team to the Olympics. Further investigation led me to discover that in Saudi Arabia girls are banned from participating in sport in state schools, and strict rules and regulations have to be followed in order for them to exercise in a gym.

Sheikh Abdullah al-Maneea, who represents the official Supreme Council of Religious Scholars in Saudi Arabia, produced a declaration that the excessive “movement and jumping” involved in sports such as basketball and football could cause girls to lose their virginity, as they could tear their hymen.

Neither are females allowed to attend sporting events held in stadiums as spectators, and they are publicly slammed if they become professional participants for going “against their natural role”. Although this was not a direct action of the Olympic Committee in Britain, there was a lack of action. Could an agenda have been put in place?

First-hand viewing and additional research has, in fact, enabled me to discover the true injustices of some of the sporting events held in an Olympic games. 

Cycling, for instance; the road race held in and around the city of London was an event that many geared-up spectators came out to see, yet the lengths of the courses were vastly different for male and female cyclists - giving a very different experience for the separate races. With the men’s race being set over 250km, the women’s race over 140.3km looked pitiful in comparison.

Former Olympic champion Nicola Cooke summated this excellently, stating, “There is no doubt that there are important physical differences between men and women… That, of course, is why we separate men and women for the purposes of competition. But the short answer is: there’s no good reason that women don’t have the events that men do.”

This along with diving, which allows men to take six dives, but limits women to five, is one that I personally cannot physically comprehend, to even begin to understand. I suppose they must believe female athletes, after taking their fifth dive, suddenly lose the ability to function, let alone take another dive!

And tennis is another one, with women only able to play in three sets despite men playing five. 

I could go on; gymnastics, swimming, athletics, are all examples of sports that contain unequal rules and events, and it’s upsetting to think that budgeting and “organisational difficulties” are excuses being used to stop women from having the same opportunities and experiences as men.
Whatever the incomprehensible reasoning behind it, I don’t believe they’ll change it in a hurry when there are traditions to maintain.

No More Page 3

Gemma Welsh

            In case you have been living in a blissful, Page 3-less bubble, for the last 44 years the third page of The Sun been reserved solely for showcasing a half-naked woman - its largest photo of a female in the entire publication. 
           
            For me, it is important to make this issue crystal-clear.             

  
            The issue with Page 3 is not about pornography, nor being “prudish” about women’s bodies, or taking away women’s sovereignty over their bodies. It is not about hating breasts, hating men, or hating The Sun, although as it stands I’m not the biggest fan.

            It is not even about the women who feature on it who, many argue in justification of the page, may choose that career and be treated well.

            The reason why it is so imperative that we rid the world of Page 3 is, actually, about freedom, and about context.

1. The context in which the images are presented: a “family” NEWSpaper, and the message that sends.
2. And the freedom of people to choose whether or not they see these images in public places.

To quote the campaign, NEWS not BOOBS

No More Page 3

           In 2014, women should be represented with respect - in the same way that (ahem, the disproportionately represented) men are.

           The selling of these images in a NEWSpaper, sends the unrelenting daily message to the readers, and to the many who unwittingly see it littered about their daily lives, that regardless of all of the progress made in the last 44 years, the primary contribution of women in today’s society is to strip off, force their chest out, and pout coquettishly for the gratification of men.

          On the day that Jessica Ennis-Hill won her Olympic gold medal for Great Britain, she earned an image which could, with a large stretch of the imagination, be generously termed half the size of the woman on Page 3.

           If you’re not a white, conventionally “beautiful”, size ten, with perfect, D-cup breasts, on average aged 22 ½, you merit virtually no consideration by The Sun. The average woman is represented in the paper (I use the term extremely loosely) by no woman, with a picture even ⅕ of the size of the image on Page 3. Even those who are all of those things, are rewarded by the declaration of their value as the sum total of those attributes, and nothing more.
          Oh and, by the way, of the 22% we’ve managed to wangle into Parliament in the past 97 years, the chances of any of them, or - god-forbid - their policies, being discussed in The Sun (besides critiquing their clothing and physique) is second to none.

Freedom of choice

          It is the consumer’s choice to view pornography or not, just as, yes, it is the consumer’s choice whether to buy The Sun or not.
          But the issue of Page 3 is not just about the message presented to readers of The Sun. This is as much, if not more, about the countless women, men, and children who do not choose to view it.
          The many people every day who are forced to watch the man next to them on the train linger on Stacey, 21, from Newcastle’s breasts, and see her submissively contorted, nude, strewn across café tables.
           I very much doubt that the vast majority of people would feel it acceptable to whip out a copy of Playboy or Nuts on the way to work, or stream a snippet of a porn video on their tablet on the train. The key difference he being that virtually the same content is miraculously deemed acceptable to view, and force others to view, precisely because it is in newspaper.

A family newspaper

           I vividly remember the awkward nervousness of delivering The Sun on my paper round, aged 13, to the “pervy” man who answered the door every Saturday in a string vest to receive his copy of The Sun.
           Aged 13 I had no idea of feminism, of gender issues, or of the message that the images sent. But despite not knowing any of that, walking hurriedly away from the flat, I felt uncomfortable. Vulnerable, even. And that is not the way that children, or anyone, should be made to feel.
           To ask the question, “Mummy, why is the girl on Daddy’s paper naked?”. How would you answer that? “Because Daddy likes to look at young, pretty ladies naked while he catches up on current affairs, darling.”?!

           If this wasn’t enough there is an overwhelming amount of evidence from an enormous range of sources which attest the negative impact that exposure to this kind of content can have on mental health and all aspects of life for girls, boys, women and men; the link for which is below.
           A recent survey by the Girlguiding (The Guide Association) found that 70% of girls aged 13-18 have been sexually harassed in school, 62% (and 76% of young women aged 16-21) have been shouted at in the street.

The real message behind Page 3

           Whether the comment is “Smile, it might never happen.” “You’d get it.” a minimalistic, “Alright, love.” or, a particularly pertinent “Get your tits out.”, cat-calling, as just one form of the barrage of sexualisation women and girls are confronted with, is not limited to whether a woman fits, even, the archetype which Page 3 says they should.
            It is hurled at any female, based on the primitive principle which underpins Page 3: they are women, therefore it is somehow acceptable/expected/their role to be considered solely as a sex object for others’ gratification.

Sexual objectification
            
             Page 3 reminds people, and women themselves, of a woman’s “place”. 
             You only have to look at a handful of the horrendously, explicitly threatening tweets received by Caroline Criado-Perez. Her crime? Simply raising the view that, when choosing a new British figure to be celebrated on banknotes for their achievements, it might be nice to have one (of the four) notes celebrating a woman for something she’d achieved in the few centuries we’ve been kicking around.
              A massive proportion of the tweets threatened sexual violence - misleadingly termed, as it is nothing to do with sexual gratification or enjoyment. Rape is a tool of control, intended to disempower, to terrorise, and to oppress.
              While we still live in a society where a woman who “dares” to use her voice is threatened in this, or any other, way we have to ask ourselves why that is.

Why bother?
              So while some may say, “Why does it matter? There are bigger issues to be fighting against.” Yes, there is an enormous array of inequities today which directly impair women’s lives, perhaps in a more "obvious" way. But Page 3 is a remnant and a reminder of the views of 1970 which continue to plague society, albeit in a more insidious way than they may have done then.
              If nothing above has persuaded you of the danger of Page 3 and the morals in our society that it represents, consider why it is that in the same Girlguiding survey 87% of girls said that they believe women are judged more on their appearance than by their merit. Or ask Jessica Ennis-Hill.

             Finally, then - if you haven’t already - please sign the petition to David Dinsmore, winner of the ‘Sexist of the Year, 2014’ Award, and editor of The Sun, to help end Page 3. 
Better 44 years late than never.

 -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

If you’re still not convinced, or would like to find out more, here are some great links, for all occasions:
I highly doubt that:
Page 3 makes people feel uncomfortable on a daily basis. Why would it?!

• see the 200,000+ people who have signed the petition

It damages anyone; people are just getting all P.C. about a bit of fun.

• To delve into a hearty collection of evidence from experts, the European Parliament, government-commissioned reports, and non-governmental organisations which reveal the ways in which exposure to sexualised content affects both men and women of all ages, in terms of self-confidence, mental wellbeing, aspirations, social skills and in many other ways.

Cat-calling and sexual harassment is that big an issue. Maybe the odd comment, but you’re waaaay over-exaggerating:

• www.everydaysexism.com, a fantastic website, set up by Laura Bates, which has provided women with a forum to share a downright demoralising but incredibly useful archive of the harassment which goes on every day.

Anyone apart from you and a few other fools believe this!

• Under supporters, here’s a (pretty mahoosive) list of all of the organisations who have said, “yanno what NMP3? You’re just a teensy bit right.”