Why #ImWithHer (Hillary Clinton) Part 2: Hillary Has Decent Policies (But Some Require A Little Tweaking)

I've already dealt with my feelings regarding Donald Trump in my previous blogpost which was important to do for my sanity and to show my readers just how much I detest Trump's deliberate attempt to re-embed misogyny into the moral fabric of American (and international society). If you haven't seen that blogpost, you can view it here: http://sassysvensknorsk.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/why-imwithher-hillary-clinton-part-1-im.html

However I believe that Hillary supporters often spend YUGE amounts of time picking out Don the Con's faults without selling why we back Hillary so emphatically and without much regret. I'm a fan of Hillary's policies ideas so wanted to share and comment on some of the best here. Some critics might think that these policy areas "don't matter", that a presidential candidate can't focus on trying to help HIV/AIDS patients by implementing a National Strategy whilst at the same time defending the US from ISIS attacks or you can't help tackle LGBTQIA bullying in the education system by creating a $500 million plan whilst addressing economic inequalities in coal mining communities in Michigan or Ohio by encouraging retraining of the workforce and modernisation of the mines themselves. You don't have to choose between the two if you have a solid plan to tackle both issues unless you believe that you don't have the intellectual stamina or grit determination to address both of them simultaneously.

Here I outline a few of Hillary's policies to show you just how in-depth, progressive and thoughtful they really are (despite the fact they seem to receive little attention from the mainstream media (MSM) outlets these days). These are the policies that I would care about if I was able to vote in Colorado; yes they are mainly social in nature but I tend to vote for a party based on their social positions. Many Millennials on the left are more likely to vote based on preserving progressive values rather than vote based on fear of the "Other".

Hillary's LGBTQIA Policies:

1. Establish the Equality Act by amending the Civil Rights Act (1964) adding gender identity and sexual orientation as protected characteristics to ensure LGBTQIA people have explicit protection from discrimination "in all facets of American life", including housing, education and jury service.
2. Hillary will honour all of President Obama's LGBTQIA Executive Actions, including nondiscrimination protections for federal employees and regulations prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in federal housing programmes.
3. Support efforts in Congress and in the states to end "conversion therapy" for LGBTQIA children.
4. Pass the Safe Schools Improvement Act to specifically prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexuality.
5. Pass the Student Non-Discrimination Act to prevent public schools from discriminating against LGBTQIA pupils. This includes the Better Than Bullying Plan announced by Hillary on the 4th November 2016 which promises to provide $500 million to tackle bullying against children based on "labelling" and will ensure all states abide by their anti-bullying laws.  
6. Provide adequate funding for shelters that help LGBTQIA homeless youth. When 45% of the youth homeless population identifies as LGBT, they need and deserve help and support to turn their lives around.
7. End discriminatory treatment against LGBTQIA couples wanting to adopt by passing the Every Child Deserves A Family Act which will prevent child welfare organisations from discriminating on the basis of gender identity or sexuality.
8. Allow transgender military personnel to continue serving openly and treated with dignity and respect (there are 15,500 actively serving trans people in the military making the Dept. for Defence the biggest employer of trans people in the US).
9. Amend records of LGBTQIA vets dismissed due to their sexual orientation or gender.
10. Invest in police training to ensure transgender people are treated with respect in a fair and impartial manner.
11. Make it easier to change gender markers on official documentation.
12. Promote LGBTQIA rights around the world and increase support for the Global Equality Fund, that Hillary launched in 2011 by increasing funding by $50 million.
13. Create a National HIV/AIDS Strategy- see below:

Hillary's National HIV/AIDS Strategy:
There are currently 1.2 million people living with HIV in the US and 50,000 people get diagnosed with HIV annually. Hillary understands that HIV is not only contracted by gay men or people of colour but by women and children too. Hillary wants to work towards creating an AIDS-free generation and has created a Strategy in order to make this happen. Trump has not announced such a comprehensive strategy nor has he shown any particular concern for HIV/AIDS patients during his Presidential campaign. Here's what Hillary wants to do in a nutshell:

• Invest in research conducted by organisations such as the NIH (National Institute for Health) to enable them to carry on trying to find a cure for HIV without worrying about funding shortfalls.
• Cap monthly and annual out-of-pocket expenses for HIV/AIDS patients to $250 and ensure Medicare is empowered to bargain for lower drug prices from pharmaceutical companies. Hillary will also end drug subsidies that pharmaceuticals get for direct-to-consumer advertising and use the subsidies to invest in research instead.
• Raise knowledge about PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis) medication to increase uptake especially amongst those populations at greatest risk of infection - transgender people and black men who have sex with men. Hillary will ensure that everyone who needs HIV medication will have access to it.
• Extend Medicaid coverage- 70,000 people with HIV were uninsured before the Affordable Care Act but now 47,000 should be eligible to receive new Medicaid. Hillary wants to make sure every state expands Medicaid and she'll fight tooth and nail to make this happen.
• Reform HIV Criminalisation Laws (attempting to repeal/abolish if possible) by working with advocates, HIV and AIDS organisations, Congress and the Senate.
• Hillary will enforce the Disability Act to fight discrimination against people living with HIV/AIDS.
• Increase global funding for HIV and AIDS treatment and prevention (showing how compassionate a President Hillary would really be!)

Hillary's Autism Strategy:
Hillary is currently the only candidate to offer a comprehensive strategy to help improve the lives of autistic children and adults in the US, who have often felt undervalued and ignored in government decision making in the past. More than 3.5 million people in the US are believed to have autism and improving support will help to transform their lives. Hillary wants to extend the Expanding the Promise for Individuals with Autism Act that she introduced when a New York Senator and which gained bipartisan support, demonstrating that she can inspire her political opponents to believe in improving equal rights for those living with autism and other disabilities, something Trump has failed to prove during his Presidential campaign.

1. Expand insurance cover for autism services so autistic people don't have to worry about being able to access services - whether through private insurance or government healthcare plans.
2. Work with the Department for Defence to ensure military families have full access to autism services through the TRICARE system.
3. Conduct an early national screening outreach campaign so autistic children can receive the help they need education and social wise to improve work and life chances.
4. Invest in autism research and conduct the first-ever nationwide survey of autistic adults (long overdue!)
5. Launch a new Autism Works Initiative which will guarantee a post-graduate transition plan for every student with autism.
6. Enact the Keeping All Students Safe Act banning all physical and chemical restraints that could endanger a pupil's life and restrict physical restraint to protecting the student from endangering other students with schools required to write to parents to explain why they used the restraint.

Hillary's Environmental Policies:

1. Remain fully committed to honouring the Paris Climate Change Agreement (that's gone into effect on 4th November 2016) by reducing green house gas emissions by up to 30% and put the US on track to cut emissions by 80% by 2050.
2. Install half a billion solar panels in US homes by the end of Hillary's first term (with a desire to allow every home in the US to become Clean-Energy powered).
3. Reduce oil consumption by 1/3.
4. Ban oil drilling in the Arctic.
5. Launch the $60 billion Clean Energy Challenge - partnering with states, cities and rural communities to cut carbon pollution for all, including low-income families to ensure nobody is left behind by the energy revolution.
6. Eliminate lead poisoning within 5 years and clean up more than 450,000 toxic brownfield sites.
7. Create an Environmental and Climate Justice Task Force thereby fostering a sense of "collaborative stewardship" and an emphasis on our "collective responsibility" to help combat Climate Change and protect the Environment.
8. Create an Energy Plan that would pay $9 billion annually to help fund pensions and health of coal workers and cut carbon emissions.
9. Block attempts to resurrect construction of the Keystone XL pipeline (unlike Trump who wants to finish it).

Note on Hillary's Environment Policies:
Green supporters have criticised Hillary for not speaking out against the proposed North Dakota Access Pipeline which will cross Native American (Sioux) lands at Standing Rock after the pipeline plans were redirected from Bismarck (which happens to have a population that is 90% White). Native American protestors see the pipeline as encroaching on their land, making them feel inferior to other Americans. For them it is more than a protest about water or generic "climate change" conversations. It is important to note that the pipeline would cost $3.7 billion if completed and cover 1,170 miles of land (according to American Friends Service Committee: https://www.afsc.org/blogs/news-and-commentary/what-we%E2%80%99re-reading-nodapl-occupation-standing-rock).  I can see from other policies from Hillary that she would be sympathetic to blocking construction of the pipeline and President Obama has responded to requests from Senator Bernie Sanders to ask the construction companies to reconsider their plans to take into account environmental impact, but the lack of vocally speaking out in favour of the #NODAPL protestors and condemning recent violence shown to them by local police forces is slightly disappointing. I can only say that Hillary would be more receptive to discussions about DAPL than Trump, who hasn't shown much regard for Native American issues or Environmental issues during his campaign.

Hillary's Economic Policies:

1. Keep tax rates the same for most tax payers but add an additional bracket (the 4% "fair share surcharge") for those earning over $5 million to pay for programmes such as free college education for low and middle-income earners. This College Affordability Plan would spend $35 billion a year to refinance student debt and pay states to guarantee free tuition.
2. Hillary would create a 30% tax rate for those earning $1 million a year.
3. Hillary will raise the short term capital gains taxes for taxpayers earning $400,000 or more a year (only 0.5% of taxpayers).
4. Create a National Infrastructure Plan allocating $27.5 billion annually to improve US roads, bridges, public transportation, rail,  airports, water systems and Internet provision in rural areas.
5. Raise the National Minimum Wage to $15 an hour.
6. Limit the number of deductions taxpayers can claim at 28%.
7. Oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) after much consideration over its validity and having discussed its popularity with fellow Dems including Bernie Sanders.
8. Extend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act so that a risk fee is levied on banks with more than $50 billion in assets, high debt to asset ratios or have a reliance on short term funding.
9. End corporate inversion so US companies cannot move their headquarters abroad to avoid paying US taxes. Propose an "exit tax" if they attempt to move abroad and pay American taxes on any deferred foreign earnings. These taxes could raise $80 billion a year!
10. Eliminate the carried interest tax.

Hillary's Foreign Policies and National Security Policies:

1. Increase co-operation with China whilst ensuring the US takes a stronger stance against China's human rights record.
2. Abide by the multinational nuclear deal (most focus on Iran) but reimpose sanctions if necessary.
3. Establish a no-fly zone over parts of Syria, conducting air strikes against ISIS and arming Kurdish and Sunni Arab fighters to defeat ISIS.
4. Prohibit the use of harsh interrogation techniques, including waterboarding on terrorists as they are unhelpful and inhumane- Trump wants to approve them.
5. Maintain current restrictions on National Security Agency surveillance (as defined under the USA Freedom Act) - Trump wants to reinstate the bulk surveillance program.
6. Increase sanctions against North Korea and ensure allies such as Japan and South Korea feel supported and protected.
7. Increase sanctions against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and ensure Baltic States are protected as per NATO agreements.

My view of Hillary's Foreign Policy:

I can understand the argument advanced by some progressives that Hillary isn't the "perfect candidate", especially when it comes to her foreign policies. The No-Fly zone in Syria and the re-commitment to fighting ISIS shows that she is hawkish but after years of fighting wars in the Middle East, Americans and Brits want to go through a period of peace. It is incorrect to assume Trump is any less of a hawk than Hillary though; his rhetoric on Syria, whilst it has been all over the place at times, seems to now indicate a desire to increase the Armed Forces (for example, increasing the number of Army soldiers from 490,000 to 540,000) to "defeat ISIS". If you're a fan of reducing military engagement and fostering peace (with all countries, not just Russia) it's probably not a good idea to vote for Trump. In fact I believe there's a strong chance Trump could provoke tensions if he is elected, especially in the Middle East.

What is great to see from Hillary in terms of her National Security and Foreign Policies is that she wants to close Guantanamo Bay and to prohibit the use of waterboarding techniques to torture terror suspects. As I wrote in my last blogpost on Trump, it is better to treat opponents with compassion rather than take away their humanity, even if they are accused of committing atrocities. The fact that Hillary is willing to challenge China on it's human rights record shows that Hillary cares about how others are treated.

Conclusion:
From having identified and examined a range of Hillary's policies, I can see that she is a woman who has truly thought about how to make America more diversity friendly and more environmentally friendly whilst at the same time not being afraid to make difficult decisions regarding foreign policy. I may not agree with every policy on her platform and I certainly have frowned a bit at her reluctance to engage openly on issues that Bernie Sanders cares about deeply-for example I can see from her platform that Hillary wants to bring pharmaceutical companies to heel to ensure they don't profit from HIV/AIDS patients or Autistic individuals who rely on lifelong medication but she hasn't talked about it in any great depth; Bernie has  made fighting pharmaceutical companies a major part of his own platform and he has gained many supporters as a result. However, one reason why I have come to respect Hillary over the past year is that she has been able to adapt her policy platform to make it more progressive: Bernie always made a point of stating in his rally speeches that the US should have a $15 an hour national minimum wage. Hillary saw how popular support for this policy was with Democrats and Independents and so has now made it central to her Economic Policy and she now mentions this during her rally speeches. I think it's amazing that Bernie had such a positive effect so as to convince Hillary that a Minimum Wage is essential to help improve the lives of ordinary working class and middle class Americans who may be working up to 50-60 hours a week to try and save enough money to buy a house or to attend college. Trump didn't seem to favour this important Bernie policy despite wanting to "appeal" to Bernie supporters but we all know whose side he is really on...his own and that of his wealthy Republican friends.

If you like the policies you have seen on my blogpost and are yet to vote in the US Election and aren't quite sure who to vote for, ask yourself this question: Do you want a President that cares about domestic social issues just as much as economic or foreign policy ones? If you think a President should espouse progressive values and be prepared to act on them and already has plans to be able to do this, then you must choose Hillary this Tuesday 8th November. If you believe in division rather than union or protecting the rights of those at the top without having a care for those who may be disabled or those facing abuse because of their gender identity or sexuality or duping those working class young adults labouring in entry-level jobs in catering or hospitality to earn enough money to be able to go to college to fulfill their dreams, vote Trump. The choice really couldn't be any clearer.

Why #ImWithHer (Hillary Clinton) Part 1: I'm #NeverTrump

"There is nothing more rare, nor more beautiful than a woman being unapologetically herself; comfortable in her own perfect imperfection". Steve Maraboli

I don't know where to begin with this blogpost. 2016 has been a year of political shake-ups of the super cray cray variety and not necessarily with the public's best interests in mind. Progressives have been steadily losing ground thanks to a whipping up of Islamophobic, anti immigration rhetoric by Alt-Right journalistic hacks and opportunistic partisan politicians who would rather divide us than bring us together to achieve their perverted ends. Terrorist attacks have been widely reported by the Mainstream Media (MSM) outlets with the blame being solely laid at Islam's door. Ordinary Muslims have been found guilty by association with radical terrorist groups and now feel less trusted and less welcome in the West than never before.

Brexit continues to concern me greatly, especially with the raft of legislative proposals that have been sneaked through the UK Parliament without much ability to scrutinise those measures in any great depth. Brexit voters are meant to have voted to leave the EU to "Take Back Control" of
Parliament in order to "Make Parliament Sovereign Again" but so far the decisions made re fracking in Lancashire, higher energy bills for consumers as a result of a deal between China, France's EDF and the Government to build a new nuclear power station (Hinckley Point C) and to build a third runaway at Heathrow do not seem to chime well with progressive voters. Nor with centrist/moderate like me either. I guess many will dismiss my concerns because I am a Remainer. My views have not changed. If you've been a keen blog reader of mine, you'd know I am a Remainer at heart, a globalist that believes more international cooperation on social issues such as abortion rights, workers rights, transparency and LGBTQIA rights is needed, not less.

Perhaps what is more troubling to me than lack of sovereignty being realised is that hate crime has risen in the UK as a result of the Brexit vote, with Eastern European immigrants and Muslims (both
British and foreign-born Citizens) feeling they are no longer valued for the solid contribution they have made to the success of the UK economy and society over the past 40 years. I feel the blame is truly misplaced; instead of mocking and insulting hard workers based on their nationality or creed, we should be blaming successful Governments for not investing enough in regional areas, especially in the North.

It's been quite sad to see a visceral amount of hate towards immigrants and Muslims also being emulated in US Presidential Election coverage. I've read on Twitter about a recent story (October 2016) about an Arizonan teacher telling a 10 year old Muslim student that he'll no longer be allowed to stay in the US if Donald Trump wins, purely based on his religion. Such statements get dismissed as "rare" by Trump supporters. However, having watched the US Election campaign unfold in its entirety (first time ever), I know that Trump's built his campaign around alienation tactics that were designed to only speak to a certain base: "angry white people" who hate progressive liberalism with a passion that could rival Jesus's unfiltered compassion.

Only recently, loud mouth Trash filled Donald Trump decided to stereotypically categorise Latino immigrants as "Nasty Hombres" and he is yet to fully row back his proposal to "Build a Wall" on the Mexican border and to make "Mexico Pay For It" (without ironically seeing that "illegal" immigrant builders might actually be helping to build the wall which is meant to "keep them out" in the first place). Donald Trump's campaign is all about "Building a Wall of Ideas"- whether it be preventing women and girls from obtaining an abortion when they have a right to choose what they want to do with their own bodies and lives, to allowing transgender, queer, gender-neutral/fluid folks to use the bathroom that most closely aligns to their gender or no gender. Trump never spoke openly against the draconian North Carolinian HB2 law; in fact he seems to suggest that LGBTQIA rights should be entirely devolved to state governments to decide, meaning that same sex marriage laws could come under threat in the event of a Trump presidency emboldening Alt-Right, homophobic conservatives to repeal rights at will to suit their own bigoted agendas, all in the name of "Christian ethical purity".

Trump can't help but be a beacon of "hope" for the Alt-Right media (essentially white supremacists/ fear mongers/ hate peddlers packaged under a new name to make them seem "hip"). When Trump make recourse to Lügenpresse principles (where the Mainstream Media (MSM) outlets are demonised as rigged to delegitimise any sentient analysis of a political candidate's personal/moral character temperament or even their basic policy details that would matter to ordinary Americans, unless the  MSM is critiquing their opponent(s), it leads to an emboldened enthusiasm from this crowd of self-confessed narcissists. They see Trump as a way of destroying the mainstream media outlets, silencing liberal opponents, repealing progressive laws, making American "Evangelical Christian" again at the expense of other Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, agnostics and atheists. To use religious principles to control a woman's body by denying them abortion rights appears to be the very height of hypocrisy when they know Islamic terrorists use theirs to enforce an anti-LGBTQIA agenda on the Syrian people. The semantic battles surrounding Terrorism in America is just beyond uber stupid; we all know that some terrorists identify with Islam, regardless of whether you feel the need to use the "right term" to describe them. Yes Americans and Brits want solutions to prevent terror attacks from occurring in the West, but if you think putting an outright ban on foreign Muslims from entering the country or deporting domestic Muslim to internment camps will stop every attack from happening, you're living in cookoo land. The key is de-radicalisation schemes which allow close teamworking with liberal Muslims to try and combat fundamentalist Islamic Jihadi ideology, coupled with teamworking with allies in the Middle East (not just Russia) to destroy the capability of ISIS to destroy their dream of a "Hate Homeland State". You think Trump has the awareness or temperament needed to set up these teamworking schemes without peddling hate discourse against Muslims at the same time? Every speech, every press conference I've seen during the Republican primary and every Presidential debate/ supporter rally I've seen during the Presidential campaign makes me doubt his ability to foster appropriate relations with foreign powers. Unless you count Russia. Or North Korea. I'm guessing he goes down pretty well with any dictator/ autocrat that may be salivating at the prospect of a compromised USA over the next 4 years.

What makes me most angry at Trump even being a Presidential candidate is his treatment of women. I've seen and heard about some of the scandals- grabbing his daughter Ivanka by her chest in public being one which I guess is open to interpretation (I'd say he was grabbing inappropriately) but many are clear-cut examples of a man who has mastered the art of misogyny.

Recently, Trump has started a hate campaign against NBC reporter Katy Tur, who has been covering his rallies comprehensively since mid-2015 by bullying her during a rally in Miami, Florida. Apparently Trump was angry with the media for not accurately reporting the size of his rallies because the cameras "didn't show the crowd" to the public viewing NBC news at home. It's part of Trump "Winning" myth that he has to have the "biggest rallies" because it apparently shows he has the majority of support in the US needed to become POTUS. So he has a go at Katy in front of 4000 people which resulted in mass booing of her. OK it adds to the Lügenpresse dialogue mentioned earlier, but I don't think I've heard such an explicit attempt to humiliate a journalist by lying about her not doing her job when the camera playback shows she was actually doing her job well. Besides Katy isn't a camera-operator so isn't fully responsible for how NBC reports his rally. It just seems he wanted to bully a journalist in public and the journalist in question just happened to be female.

Trump's singling out of women and accusing them of mistakes doesn't seem to be a rare occurrence. Trump seems to have an on-going feud with female conservative presenter Megyn Kelly of Fox News
who dared to question Trump's moral character and misogyny head-on at the first Republican Presidential debate on August 6, 2015: "You’ve called women you don’t like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals." Trump twitter trolled Megyn by saying she "bombed" at the debate and "had blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her whatever" a deliberate alluding to women's menstruation cycles and an attempt to blame going through a "period" on Megyn Kelly's harsh criticism. Ironic that Megyn was only drawing attention to the fact that Trump had made misogynistic comments in the past and Trump answered that criticism with more misogyny. You'd think that would have reduced his support during the Primary but alas, No. Now Trump continues to attack Megyn Kelly and has emboldened supporters to use misogyny and slut shaming to carry on doing it for him; for example, Newt Gingrich blew up after Megyn tried to question him about Trump being labelled a "sexual predator" in the press and Gingrich accused her of being "fascinated with sex" to which Megyn replied "I'm fascinated by the protection of women, and understanding what we're getting in the Oval Office", which I feel was a most dignified response to Gingrich's unfounded insinuations.

The Gingrich Interview was an attempt by Trump to address a tape that was released by The Washington Post on October 7th, 2016 of a conversation between Access Hollywood presenter Billy Bush and Trump talking about women in an extremely lewd fashion in September 2005. Now I believe we all pretty much know the contents of the tape by now; a failed attempt at seducing Bush's co-presenter Nancy O'Dell who he moved on "very heavily" despite her married status. I don't think his comments about attempting to commit adultery shocked liberals particularly, it was more his demeaning of O'Dell's looks after she decided to go through breast-enlargement surgery that caused offence. Lookism seems to be at the heart of Trump's campaign against women. If they don't fancy him or they do something he disapproves of, he demeans them. Yet the worst comments came when Trump was talking about Arianne Zucker, whom he was going to meet in the recording. Trump was bragging that he could grab any woman by their genitals because they are objects drawn to him being in a position of power. Describing women as objects to be grabbed is the very essence of misogyny and Trump and his supporters must realise that it is not acceptable to demean women on tape knowing that other men/boys could follow his example and start treating women as "objects" that can be grabbed by their genital parts and can be rated out of 10, just because they are "stars" in a position of power afforded to them by cis-white patriarchal privilege. 

Now I know some are "forgiving" Trump for what he said on the 1996 tape because he offered a tepid, forced apology on camera (which I didn't feel was sincere, honest or even well thought out at the time) but his actions during the Presidential campaign have been nothing short of deplorable and entirely misogynistic. For example, in the second debate, Trump seemed to be hell bent on stalking Hillary around the stage rather than trying to engage with undecided voters. Moments where Trump was literally behind Hillary, leaning in on her, breathing behind her made me feel extremely uncomfortable. No man has a right to violate a woman's personal space and I'm in awe of the fact that Hillary didn't even flinch! I guess one reason why I love Hillary so much as a candidate is her refusal to let Trump intimidate her, to let him know he has knocked her self-confidence. Some interpret this as vanity but it is a sign of strength. FLOTUS Michelle Obama gave a voice to Hillary's lack of Trump-Flinching, something she shares with millions of members of Team #NeverTrump: "When he goes low, we go high".

Trump, unlike Hillary, never seems to be able to "turn the other cheek" when he gets challenged; it seems his only real "Trumpcard" is to threaten to sue them in the hope of intimidating them into silence. His Alt-Right supporters emulate this, falsely believing it is a "sign of strength" to intimidate, bully and slander. Yet when Hillary and her supporters get threatened with physical violence, illogical incarceration or assassination by the NRA "2A protection even at the cost of 1A" crew (btw not all gun owners belong to that crew) because of Trump emboldening them to do this, I can't see how anyone can vote for him. Honestly.

Hillary is an amazing candidate in her own right (I'll be demonstrating that in my second blogpost). However I know that some voters will be #NeverTrump and will vote for the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, the Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson or the Independent candidate Evan McMullin. I am encouraged that there are voters who are prepared to exercise their democratic right to vote for whoever they choose to support and that they want to make the US less of a 2-party monopoly democracy. The movement of Bernie Sanders during the Democratic Primary (who I supported emphatically before Hillary won) was inspiring and showed that Millennials want to make their voices heard within the political system and fight against corruption and big business lobbying controls and fight for LGBTQIA and Pro Choice rights, Renewable Energy and Gun Sense policies. I believe that Bernie's message hasn't been in vain and that even if you have not voted for Hillary, you are at least engaged in progressive, liberal politics in some way. As for McMullin/Johnson voters, I guess I'm just grateful you didn't choose Trump. I am hopeful that Hillary will win the US election, if only by a whisker but all those voting against Trump will have the right to pat themselves on the back for saving the US and the international community from having to deal with a self confessed conspiracy peddling, xenophobic, misogynistic ego-maniac. I don't hate Trump as a human being; Jesus taught us to love our enemies as we would love ourselves as Luke 6:27-32 tells us: "But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you." This is the essence of the FLOTUS's "When they go low, you go high" message, founded in Christian doctrine from over 2000 years ago. I pity Trump for his need to be bitter and unforgiving towards those who differ ideologically from him. I hope one day Trump will be able to follow Jesus's example and be prepared to "turn the other cheek" instead of trying to sue his opponents on a daily basis.
  

Challenging #RapeCulture: The Lincolnshire #AskForAngela Poster Campaign Making A Real Difference

Hello Everyone!

So it's been a while since I blogged about Lincolnshire but I just had to talk about an amazing poster that I've been seeing on social media platform discussions about how to help prevent sexual assault and rapes from occurring in the first place. The poster was created by the Lincolnshire Rape Crisis team, which includes the wonderful Hayley Child, Substance Misuse and Sexual Violence and Strategy Coordinator for Lincolnshire County Council and gives advice to pub, bar and nightclub goers about what to do if they are stuck with a bad date that they may have met through online dating sites or through mutual friends/family. The poster forms part of the #NoMore campaign, which "aims to promote a culture change in relation to sexual violence and abuse,  promote services in Lincolnshire and empower victims to make a decision on whether to report incidents" ("Code word campaign help people escape bad dates by alerting bar staff discreetly", The Independent, October 20th 2016).

I reprint the poster below :

Essentially the poster tells you to notify a member of bar staff if you are feeling uncomfortable and the "date" is starting to get emotionally aggressive or threatens your physical safety and then that member of staff will help you by either calling a taxi/cab for you or to help you out discreetly; for example if you suspect your drink might be spiked, the staff member can dispose of the drink and pour you another one or if the date wants to go for a walk with you on your own and you don't want that because you don't know what might happen, the staff member can make that clear to the person concerned and then prevent them from reacting aggressively whilst they call for the taxi. All practical, easily implementable advice which requires only basic diversity training in pubs, bars and nightclubs to get off the ground with minimal cost to the owners. Great!

Now most of the time such poster campaigns only garner very limited interest, usually from local bar and nightclub goers who wouldn't give a second thought to the poster after merely glancing at its content. However, thanks to a wonderful student tweeter from Lincoln/Scunthorpe called Isobel O' Brien (IZ), who took a mobile selfie of the poster on October 18th because she believed it "shouldn't just be seen in Lincolnshire bars and nightclubs", the Twittersphere got to see the #AskForAngela poster. Suffice to say it went viral. As of 25/10/2016, IZ's tweet has been liked 35,000 times and retweeted 27,000 times. The Australian newspaper, The Age Australia picked up on the #AskForAngela poster and several Australian radio stations have asked for interviews with Lincolnshire Rape Crisis. It would be fantastic to see regional variations of the poster being distributed across the UK, Australia, New Zealand and even in countries such as Norway or Sweden, albeit with regional variations being applied when necessary.

I'm proud to know my home county council and Marc Jones, my local Police and Crime Commissioner have taken such a firm stand against sexual assault and rape and want to prevent as many from happening in the first place. We don't have enough councils and PCCs taking the matter of prevention seriously enough.

Of course after IZ tweeted an image of the #AskForAngela poster, the Twitter trolls came at her with the predictable putdowns. Marcus J, for example said that "women should learn just to say "no thanks" on a bad date", not realising that some people may be frightened of speaking out openly against a bad date person  for fear of being followed out of the bar/club and then being sexually assaulted or raped out in the streets or even at home.  Marcus retorted that he'd expect people to "have a minimum amount of self-awareness and self-confidence to handle the situation like an adult" so as to not "make themselves" a victim (October 18th 2016). Yet what Marcus doesn't understand is that actually by using the #AskForAngela codeword, people would be acting with self-confidence by making sure they protect themselves. So I was glad to see a guy actually speaking up for IZ and the poster campaign by pointing out the need to protect women from the possibility of being sexually assaulted/raped by a bad date. As IZ has pointed out, it is a "safety net" (Oct 19th 2016) and what is actually wrong with having one in place? Naturally Mr Marcus said that the "Feminist Circlejerk" has been closing in on him since he made the comments but I don't think you have to be a feminist to support such a vital campaign. That being said, there is nothing wrong with being a proud intersectional feminist and I certainly am one and shall forever be one.

Then we have another predictable putdown by Daniel Clarke who criticised the poster for being too geared towards women because of its layout and its use of language. Firstly he mentioned the whole "the poster is making women hate men because of the patriarchy broad smear" wah wah argument. Why do guys feel the need to denigrate poster campaigns like this just because it might have been created by Lincolnshire Rape Crisis (who they instantly perceive as being a women's only organisation)?  Daniel then says that the poster asks a person to "ask for a woman...because females are more likely to approach other females if they feel threatened/in danger." (October 24th 2016). OK so what happens if the bad date happens to be a woman? Do you think lesbian/bi/pansexual/queer/gender-neutral women would want to use the code word Angela if one uses Daniel's logic? Or perhaps we all want to ensure we are safe and don't care what code word we need to use in order to guarantee our safety? Hmmm...
Finally Daniel goes back to the idea of women being portrayed as "helpless" that is just so ludicrous that he should go and join Marcus on that extremely naughty step! Women are not helpless because they use their judgement to keep themselves safe. The "damsels in distress" narrative that some blokes have been brought up on needs to be thrown out the window.

So let's address the "elephant in the room" that Daniel and Marcus and others brought up. Is the poster designed just for women? The amazing point that was made by IZ several times on her Twitter Feed was that the poster was found in a GENDER NEUTRAL bathroom and was intended to be seen by men as well as women. It is important to remember that gay, bisexual and heterosexual men can find themselves on a bad date where they may feel they could be taken advantage of physically. You think just because men are "meant" to "look strong enough" and can "sound tough and firm" by saying No to their bad date that they would be immune from being sexually assaulted or date raped? What a "Stone Age" to take! I'd have thought that guys would want to protect their bros from being in this situation and if guys who criticise the poster based on its layout, colour scheme or use of language really care about protecting their fellow bros from being sexually assaulted or raped, they should either get on board with the poster's message and stop critiquing the "femininity" of it or create their own posters that could be displayed in men's bathrooms to help them keep safe on a night out? I'm assuming that Daniel and Marcus do care about heterosexual and gay/bi/transmen or gender/fluid/queer/non-binary individuals enough to want to protect them from being sexually assaulted or raped by an aggressive bad date in the first place?

So yes, I applaud Lincolnshire Rape Crisis, Lincolnshire County Council and  Marc Jones for creating the #AskForAngela posters. I'm glad that the #NoMore campaign will be "relaunched in February 2017 to tie in with the National Sex Violence and Abuse Awareness Week". (Hayley Child, The Independent). It'll be amazing to see how many regional and international variations of the poster appear on social media inspired by the posters. I stand in solidarity with IZ over her tweeting of the poster and her take down of the patriarchal Twitter Trolls who trot out the same lines to try and delegitimise the poster without coming up with any ideas as to how to contribute to sexual assault and bad date rape prevention for Men as well as women, trans, non-binary or queer individuals, hetero as well as lesbian, gay, bi, pansexual people. We need to continue fighting against the #RapeCulture that exists in the world to help all concerned. It's not just a Feminist issue that can be swept under the carpet at will. After what's happened with Trump's sexual assault comments we have to be practical and enact systems that will help prevent sexual assaults and rapes from occurring in the first place. Code word posters are a small but vital practical part of the process and yet again, Lincolnshire leads the way. I couldn't be more proud.