A.

Alma’s question

Gender Equality and “Feminism”, whatever these terms might mean, have become
increasingly more ‘fashionable’ in the last years. You can walk in to numerous high street stores
in the developed world and grab yourself a t-shirt stating your position as, ‘Feminist’, in many
different shapes and guises (Guardian, 2017, Huffington Post, 2017), with even high-end
designer brands, for example Dior, jumping on the feminist band wagon (Vogue, 2016). To
declare, as Katy Perry did at the 2012 Billboard awards, that "I am not a feminist, but I do
believe in the strength of women." (Time Magazine, 2014), is seen as ignorant in today’s society,
supported by statistics like those from Great Britain where 58% (The Statistics Portal, 2017) of
people declared themselves supporters of gender equality in 2017 (The Statistics Portal, 2017)
compared to 22% in 2014 (The Statistics Portal, 2015). Yet simultaneously as ‘Feminism’
becomes something ‘fashionable’ and mainstream there is still an observable reluctance from
both men and women to declare themselves as feminists, with 43% of Americans identifying
feminism as something imbibed with anger (Washington Post, 2016), and an average of 54%
(YouGov Poll, 2015) of men and women in Great Britain who would not identify themselves as
feminists, despite 53% (YouGov Poll, 2015) thinking it is still relevant and needed today. So,
feminism today, in the west, appears at once, a ‘brand’ to sell clothing and influence, and
simultaneously an unattractive political value. Having taught Feminism as part of a Gender
course at an international school in Denmark for the last 3 years it is apparent that this is not only
a western phenomenon, I have been met many times with a question from both Japanese and
Korean students about how they can maintain a feminist outlook, a feminist identity upon
returning home.

The research proposal is thus to undertake a cross cultural study of what does it mean to
individuals to identify as a, “feminist”? And how this identification is impacted upon by their
geographical location, gender, education and by current trends in society? It is hoped that this
study might uncover some reasoning behind why being a ‘feminist’ is at once promoted and
reviled in modern society, and also to enrich and transform our global perception of what it
means to be a ‘feminist’. Having studied more deeply in to the concept and theory of feminism,
the author herself feels less inclined to publicly state ‘I am a feminist’ because the term seems at
once an obvious, i.e. that every human loving individual should be for gender equality, and yet
simultaneously imbued with a plethora of connotations with which the author does not identify,
i.e. angry, anti-men, racist etc.

The methodologies to be used to undertake this study are questionnaires, to be distributed to

a wider audience, perhaps 100 participants. All participants will be above the age of 17 and
students of the international school where the researcher is working. It is not imagined that all
100 participants will respond, but hoped for a 60% return rate at least. These questionnaires will
be accompanied by in-depth interviews. It is proposed to interview a maximum of 16 students
(although 8 might be more realistic), 8 male and 8 female, preferably from 4 different regions,
Asian, African, European and North American. Although the distribution will depend on
students choosing to participate in the Gender course, as it is proposed to have a male and a
female from each region who are studying the course, and a male and a female from each region
who are not studying the course, the reasoning for which will be expanded upon later. This
distribution is however not likely given that the class often has a maximum of 4 males in
attendance and they are not always distributed by the regions proposed. The interviews will
consist of questions but also asking participants to look at material, for example images from
women’s marches, popular culture and fashion to observe if these have an impact on their
personal positions. It would be advisable to have follow up interviews when the participants have
returned home, as the questions centers partly on the geographical impact, and whilst this can be
imagined whilst the participant is located at a third location of the school, it will truly be felt
upon returning to the original geographical position.

The methodologies above have been chosen for a variety of reasons. The questionnaire has
been chosen to see if the participants of the interview are reflective of a wider audience, as they
can also serve as anomalies, and whilst their opinion, thoughts and experiences are made no less
valuable by this status, it may not help to answer the research question set. As Ramazanoglu &
Holland (2002, p. 9-12) also point out feminist research has to compliment and address the
reliance of western knowledge on truth and fact in its striving to be recognised and
acknowledged, limited personal experience is rarely taken as solid fact or reliable information,
and so supporting the individual stories with a quantity of other stories can help to strengthen the
viability of the research to others. Asking questions of a wider audience may also help to reveal
phenomena that the researcher is unaware of, and thereby strengthen the questioning in the
interviews and strengthening the researcher’s knowledge in general.
 Best (2003) refers to ‘negotiating the researcher role, issues relating to the outsider/ insider
status of the researcher’ (Best, 2003, p. 896) and this is in a two-fold manner one of the
foreseeable challenges of this research proposal. Firstly, the researcher is an ‘outsider’ in terms
of cultural background and language, which means that some responses may potentially be lost
in translation. Given the predominant interpretation of ‘feminist’, is that given in western
literature, this researcher is apprehensive about asking questions and understanding responses in
a culturally sensitive manner. For example, the word gender does not exist in different
languages, it is imagined that the word ‘feminist’ might also not exist or exist in a different
formulation in different cultures and languages and how will the researcher capture this
information. Merely asking the question, are you a feminist? Might conjure up different
scenarios and understandings and whilst knowledge as Ramazanoglu & Holland (2002) point out
is created by language (Ramazanoglu & Holland, 2002, p. 153) how do we understand these
creations when they are made in a foreign tongue in a foreign setting. To be succinct there are
limitations of translation and understanding that need to be taken in to consideration. The
researcher must be careful not to re-interpret the responses given by participants in to a cultural
stereotype that she understands. Is the researcher prepared to be open-minded enough to different
interpretations of a ‘feminist’? Is the researcher aware of her own interpretation of a ‘feminist’?
Being aware of one’s own interpretation and limitation in understanding concepts can help to
avoid dismissing and downplaying interpretations and experiences which do not match up to
one’s own understanding.

The second fold to this outsider/insider dynamic is the role of the researcher in relation to the
participants in a threefold of power dimensions. Ramazanoglu & Holland (2002) refer to the idea
of power in feminist knowledge, ‘power makes a difference to who is able to know what’
(Ramazanoglu & Holland, 2002, p. 13), and it certainly plays a role in the dynamic of teacher
and student, a dynamic that is present in this researcher/ participant relationship. As the resident
teacher of gender studies at the educational facility where the students are studying and
participating in this research, it is acknowledged that this relationship may impact on the
responses given, and the responses offered. Often when a person is posited in a position of
greater ‘expertise’ we colour and flavour our responses to what we imagine they expect to hear,
of course this could be said of a number of types of interactions, but it needs to be made explicit
in this scenario. It may make sense for the researcher to be absent from the room, and have
recorded peer conversation sessions, where the participants may feel freer to express themselves.
Although they will of course be aware of the recording and who will listen to the recording. A
neutral third person interviewer could also be employed, to remove the power dynamic of
teacher/ student.

One also has to take in to account that there may be an age power dimension, as whilst
students at the school can vary between 17 and 100 years of age, most are in their early twenties,
and this may also impact on their ability and drive to respond in certain ways to the questions
proffered, given that the researcher is older. Finally, there is also a potential for a racial power
dimension, with the researcher coming from a white European background, and participants
varying from other regions of the world.

These dilemmas of insider/outsider position and that of power dimensions are just a fraction
of the limitations and obstacles that exist in undertaking this research. However, a clear
awareness of and acknowledgement of them can start to situate and contextualise this research
and the knowledge it produces.
 B. Desireé’s question

‘Are you one of those couples that have decided not to have a baby then?’, I remember
meeting this question in the hairdresser’s chair, and different formulations of this question in
different scenarios in the nine years since meeting, getting engaged and marrying my partner. I
take this as my everyday ‘delicate’ ethical situation from which to discuss the idea of what could
‘embodied ethics’ mean.

This scenario, this ‘delicate’ situation, which is expressed in increasingly less delicate ways
as the years advance, will be used to demonstrate the dichotomy of how ‘ethics’ as a concept is
understood as a word and is experienced as a reality. Ethics is often something that is
linguistically internalised, it is posited in writing, as an internal radar that governs the
individual’s decision-making process. The Oxford English dictionary defines ethics as, “Moral
principles that govern a person's behaviour, or the conducting of an activity” (Oxford English
Dictionary, 2017), implying perhaps that ethics is perpetually seen as ‘embodied’, in that it
belongs to the singular person enacting the decision making.

Arguably this is not how we actually perceive or express our ‘ethics’, the reality of our
singular person is not usually considered when we are questioned or probed on the reasoning
behind our ethical decision making. Contrarily individuals will often rely extensively on cultural
references, upbringing, country of origin, or religious background as justifications for their
ethical decision making, all of which are external to our individual person and in many senses
also our body’s placement at the time of decision making. Indeed, the thought of referencing
ourselves in ethical decision making, conjures images of the ‘abnormal’ that Shildrick (2000)
refers to in her article, only sociopaths and crazy people are the ones who can reference because I
felt like it as their rationale behind ethical decision making.

This dichotomy of the internalized language around ethics and yet the externalised
conception of the origin or basis of one’s ethics, is quite interesting when we consider the issue
of ‘embodied ethics’, and what this could mean. Embodiment is defined as the “tangible of
visible form of something, or to include or contain something as a constituent part” (Oxford
English Dictionary, 2017), and as already explained the second part of this statement is the most
common understanding of personal ethics, that they are somehow external values included to
become part of the individual’s identity. In order to conform and present as ‘normal’ we must
present our ethics as societally digestible, they are ‘relational’ (Ahmed, 2004, p.8) to others, just
as our emotions are.

Yet how does this relate to the situation of people commenting on the reproductive capacity
and will of a married couple? Despite the number of people that believe in this being my body,
and it being my choice, if for example I asked about the issue of abortion, contraception or
consent, they would advise me to make the decision based on my feeling and needs, yet they feel
they have the right to expect me to reproduce. Ahmed (2004) writes, “who are ‘not us’, […]
endanger what is ours?” (Ahmed, 2004, p.1) and this perhaps explains the feeling behind their
expectation, that somehow as a ‘couple’ we endanger other couples and potential couples, indeed
the human races, capacity to reproduce by not reproducing. That somehow the sanctity of
marriage and all its connotations and feelings is disrupted and defiled by refusing to embody our
love in offspring. In short, we all exist because somebody else exists, and therefore we have a
duty, a responsibility, to continue to contribute to humanity’s existence, choosing not to do this is
choosing a slippery slope to human destruction. I am allowed choices over my body, until I am
in a happy and stable relationship and then my body seems to become an obligation. An
obligation to prove my love through reproducing, an obligation to prove the purpose of a
woman’s body through reproducing. So the borders of my body are not ‘closed and secure’
(Shildrick, 2000, p.226) as Shildrick (2000) purports, they are moved and prescribed by others, if
I reproduce I am stable and defined, if I do not then I become one of the “‘broken’ ones’”
(Shildrick, 2000, p.226) that others need to be protected against.

Ahmed (2004) also writes that, ‘some emotions are ‘elevated’ as signs of cultivation, whilst
others remain ‘lower’ as signs of weakness’ (Ahmed, 2004, p.3.) and this applies very much
when we consider ‘maternal’ feelings in women, as opposed to feeling of independence and
choice. These maternal feelings are defining of women, they inscribe their bodies in society, they
define their relations with other bodies, and when they are not present, it is something to be
ashamed of. Here one can think of the taboos still surrounding post-partum depression, taboos
that are often internalised by women, who label themselves as ‘bad mothers’ ‘incomplete
women’ or ‘monsters’ when the infamous and embodied ethics idea of a maternal instinct does
not miraculously appear upon the pushing of a child out of one’s vagina. Women who choose not
to reproduce are labelled ‘selfish’, as if the sole purpose of a woman’s body is to carry another
body.
 ‘Emotions shape the very surfaces of bodies’ (Ahmed, 2004, p.4) is the last idea I choose to
engage with her, and I engage with it in terms of how the embodiment of the emotions around
the choice to reproduce may impact on the surface of my body. I am drawn and understood as
less of a ‘woman’ until the day I reproduce, irrespective of my physical capacity to do so or not.
This capacity question being another question’s where the societal position on women’s bodily
purpose becomes an entirely different ethical question, we are presumed to be able to ask openly
and freely about a woman’s current reproductive state, for example the hairdresser as stranger
asking me, without this question presenting as offensive or intrusive, yet we are drawing the
boundaries around another person’s womanhood without thought to their desire or capacity. This
is also irrespective of their gender identity or sexual orientation, both of which determine the
ease, and legal capacity to fulfil such boundaries of female identity, for example many
transgender individuals are forcibly sterilised in their transition process, and many same sex
couples are unable to access surrogacy, adoption or other reproductive services.

Embodied ethics, asks us to understand how these situations, presumptions and positions
described here lose the interconnectedness, or perhaps highlight too enthusiastically the
interconnectedness between you and I, that determines our ethics. If embodied ethics is about me
feeling whole, feeling heard rather than prescribed, about recognising that our positions in
society are relational, not predetermined, that there need not be a predetermined values to
emotions, because emotions are not tangible and existent but created in the space between you
and I, then perhaps it offers hope that I can be a woman, without being maternal, and this does
not make me less, or you threatened, it just is one formulation of woman, in an endless array of
formulations.
 C. Marietta’s question

The clip that has been chosen, perhaps wisely or unwisely, is the most recent Gap advert
(Bridging the Gap, 2017), chosen primarily because of the description given for the premise of
the video, which this author finds fascinating in light of the question of intersectionality. The
description is included below:

Figure 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cbbd1gPIxU

As you can read the director’s aim with this video is to represent the diversity of
America, and to highlight how differences can become a strength, a ‘uniting’ force. If we engage
with many intersectional theorists they have a similar aim to redefine the concept of difference,
perhaps not in so far as to unite, but certainly to alter difference from a negative to a positive.

It is pertinent to look at the use of the white ‘tee’ as blank canvas strategy used by the
director. The director seems to be insinuating that the use of a white t-shirt can have a threefold
use in our self-identification with the video. We can see the white t-shirt as offering a blank
space upon which as Balsamo (1996) writes, ‘we are promised whatever body we want’
(Balsamo, 1996, p. 627). Yet if we look at the bodies represented in the video (see image below)
they are not the bodies of the differently abled, there is not even a person wearing glasses, let
alone a person with a visible and prominent bodily difference, all the bodies are ‘healthy’ and
‘happy’, and indeed the sound track of Boney M’s ‘Sunny’ reproduces this idea that to be able
bodied and beautiful is the desired condition of humanity. As Berger (1972) writes, ‘those who
are not judged beautiful are not beautiful. Those who are, are given the prize’ (Berger, 1972,
p.51), so whilst the video description seems to say all of these identities represent America, and
the blankness of the white t-shirt canvas is a call to the viewer to self-identify, were the viewer to
be differently abled, or unhappy, the video sends the message that they are then un-American,
perhaps even unwelcome.

Figure 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cbbd1gPIxU

The second fold of the white t-shirt has to do with an idea set out by Haraway (2011),
precisely she states that ‘there is a premium on establishing the capacity to see from the
peripheries and depths. But here lies a serious danger of romanticizing and/ or appropriating
the vision of the less powerful while claiming to see from their positions’ (Haraway, 2011, p.
679). The director aims to show the physical representation of the ‘peripheries and depths’
(Haraway, 2011, p 679) of America by the bodies presented in the video, the gaze we are asked
to have is one of openness and acceptance. America is not white men anymore, there is only one
white male in the video and he represents an alternative sexuality, being the openly gay actor
Jonathan Groff, the other apparently male bodies are Wiz Khalifa and Miles Chamley-Watson,
who are non-white, and in Chamley-Watson’s case non-American, and finally Casil McArthur,
who is white but Transgender. The only white female presented, Christie Turlington, is of a
different age bracket, representing perhaps that young America is vastly different to the white
middle class young stereotype of the past. However, this smattering of different identities still in
many ways supports and promotes the American Dream ideal, firstly many of the individuals
filmed, are not American by birth, or even legally American today, perhaps trying to ask us to
accept America as open and inviting to all persons, from all destinations. This is of course in
sharp contrast to the political policies of the current president. Secondly all of the bodies
presented represent, ‘the perfection of the body’ (Haraway, 2004, p. 252), as expanded upon
above, they do not have physical flaws. They are also in terms of class only representing those
that we associate with wealth and fame, these are not ordinary Americans, these bodies represent
the top of their fields, they are Olympic Athletes, Models, Actors and Musicians. They represent
the American obsession with fame and celebrity, and yet it seems as though the white t-shirt is
intended to ask us to imagine that we too could advance to such heights. That we too should
advance to such heights if we want to embody the American dream.

- British model of Ghanian Descent

- South Sudanese British Model
- American Transgender model
- American Model
- Brazilian Model
- Australian Model
- American Model of German/ African
American Descent
- American Actor
- Dominican Model
- Angolan Model
- American Olympic Fencer- British born
- Indian Actress
- African American Rapper
- American Actress- Persian descent

Figure 3: Cast List from video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cbbd1gPIxU)

 In conclusion, it is a noble goal that Enninful (Bridging the Gap, 2017) sets out to
achieve, aiming to show the diversity of race and the American creationary dream through
simple tricks of different bodies and white t-shirts. However, it falls short in many ways of
presenting a true picture of America, where are the non-perfect bodies, where are the different
economic classes, where are the different races? To exemplify, with Hispanics making up 17.8 %
(United States Census Bureau, 2016), they are not represented at all in the video, and with
foreign born individuals making up a mere 13.2% of the population they are over-represented in
the video. Mulvey (1975) proffers that, ‘there is no way we can produce an alternative out of the
blue’ (Mulvey, 1975, p.58), and this needs to be remembered when we consider the producer of
the video. The video is intended to represent a clothing brand, clothing represents a way for
individuals to re-create their body and personality image. Clothing brands are selling us the
perfect body, they are selling an image of wealth and belonging, and so to suddenly embody the
discourse of abnormality, less than perfection, non-beautiful, would be asking the director to
produce an alternative out of nothing. Clothing masks the body, re-designs the body, re-imagines
the body and this is what Enninful (Bridging the Gap, 2017) is offering in this video. The gaze is
that of Lacan’s mirror image, the bodies in the movie represent that perfect mirror image that we
both know we can never embody and yet continually strive to.
Bibliography

Books and Articles:

 Ahmed, Sara (2004) “Introduction: feel your way”, The Cultural Politics of Emotion,
Routledge: New York & London, pp. 1-19.

 Ahmed, Sara (2006) “Introduction: find your way”. In: Queer Phenomenology:
orientations, objects, others. Routledge: New York & London, pp. 1-24

 Andrews, Molly (2004): “Memories of mother: Couner-narrative of early maternal

influence”. Chapter in: Considering Counter-Narratives: Narrating, resisting, making
sense. Ed. Molly Andrews & Michael Bamberg. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publ.Co.
pp. 7-26. (19 pp).

 Balsamo, Anne (1996), “The Virtual Body in Cyberspace” (fragments). In: The
Feminism and Visual Culture Reader. Ed. Amelia Jones. London: Routledge. pp. 623-631

 Berger, John (1972): “Ways of seeing” (fragments). In: The Feminism and Visual Culture
Reader. Ed. Amelia Jones.London: Routledge. Pp. 49-52.

 Best, Amy L. (2003) “Doing Race in the Context of Feminist Interviewing: Constructing
Whiteness Through Talk” In: Qualitative inquiry,pp. 895-914

 Bremer, Signe (2013): “Penis as Risk: A Queer Phenomenology of Two Swedish

Transgender Women’s Narratives on Gender Correction” Article in: Somatechnics vol.3,
no. 2. pp. 329-350.

 Buikema, Rosemarie and Marta Zarzycka (2011): “Visual Cultures. Feminist

Perspectives” Chapter 8 in: Theories and Methodologies in Postgraduate Feminist
Research: Researching Differently. Ed. Nina Lykke, Rosmarie Buikema, Gabriele
Griffin. London: Routledge. pp. 119-134.

 Butler, Octavia E. (1984/1996): ‘Blood Child” In: Bloodchild and other stories. New
York: Seven Stories Press.

 Denscombe, Martyn (2007). The good research guide: for small-scale social research
Projects, 3rd ed. Maidenhead: Open Univ. Pres. Chapter 10 (pp.173-205) & Chapter 11,
pp. 206-226.
  Grue, Jan (2015): “Why Discourse Analysis? Disability and Language”. Chapter 1 in:
Disability and Discourse Analysis. Farnham: Asgate. pp. 7-23.

 Haraway, Donna (2004), “Race: Universal Donors in a Vampire Culture. It's All in the
Family: Biological Kinship Categories in the Twentieth-Century United States”. In:
Haraway Reader. London: Routledge. pp. 251-293.

 Haraway, Donna (2011): “The Persistence of Vision”. In: The Visual Culture Reader. Ed.
Nicholas Mirzoeff. London: Routledge. Pp. 677-684

 Hyvärinen, Matti (2008): “Analysing Narratives and Story-Telling”. Chapter 26 in: The
SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods. Ed. Pertti Alasuutari, Leonard Bickman,
Julia Brannen. SAGE. pp.447-460

 Lukić, Jasmina and Adelina Sánchez Espinosa (2011): “Feminist Perspectives on Close
Reading”. Chapter 7 in: Theories and Methodologies in Postgraduate Feminist Research:
Researching Differently. Ed. Nina Lykke, Rosmarie Buikema, Gabriele Griffin. London:
Routledge. pp. 105-117

 Lykke, Nina (2010) “A Guide ́s Introduction”, In: Feminist Studies: a guide to

intersectional theory, methodology and writing. Routledge: London. pp. 3-13

 Mulvey, Laura (1975), “Visual pleasure and narrative cinema”. In: The Feminism and
Visual Culture Reader. Ed. Amelia Jones. London: Routledge. pp. 57-65.

 Ramazanoglu, Caroline & Janet Holland (2002). Feminist methodology: challenges and
choices. London: Sage. Chapter 1 & 8, pp. 1-20, 145-164.

 Shildrick, Margrit (2000) “Becoming Vulnerable: Contagious Encounters and the Ethics
of Risk”, Journal of Medical Humanities, Vol. 21, No. 4, 2000, pp 215-227

Lectures:

 Gustavson, Malena, 2017, “Story Telling Cross Roads: Techniques for interpreting
stories” Linköping University, 01.10.2017

 Ljungcrantz, Desireé, 2017, “Bodies, emotions, ethics- relationality and situated

knowledges”, Linköping University
  Persson, Alma, 2017, “Ethnographic methods: A Feminist approach and hands-on tools”,
Linköping University, 27.09.2017

 Persson, Alma, 2017, “Qualitative Interviews: A Feminist approach and hands-on tools”,
Linköping University, 27.09.2017

 Radomksa, Marietta, 2017, “Seeing/Sensing differently- visual culture and Feminist

Theory”, Linköping University, 09.10.2017

Videos:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cbbd1gPIxU Bridging the Gap, Edward

Enninful, Published 06/06/2017, Last Accessed 28/10/17

Websites:

 https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/?utm_source=od-panel&utm_campaign=en Oxford
English Dictionary, Accessed 27/10/2017

 http://time.com/28554/katy-perry-feminist-after-all-confused/ Katy Perry: Maybe I Am A

Feminist After All, Time Magazine, Published 18/03/2014, Last Accessed 28/10/17

 https://www.statista.com/statistics/312161/define-self-feminist-advocates-supports-equal-
opportunities-women/ “Would you define yourself as a feminist - someone who
advocates and supports equal opportunities for women?”, The Statistics Portal, Last
Accessed 28/10/17

 https://www.statista.com/statistics/312294/great-britain-define-self-feminist-advocates-
supports-equal-opportunities-women/ Great Britain: Share of men and women who
define themselves as feminist 2014, The Statistics Portal, Last Accessed 28/10/2017

 https://www.vogue.com/article/dior-we-should-all-be-feminists-t-shirt-maria-grazia-
chiuri Maria Grazia Chiuri Makes a Feminist Statement at Her Dior Debut, Vogue
Magazine, Published 30/09/2016, Last Accessed 28/10/2017

 http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/christina-dean/feminism-is-in-
fashion_b_16121212.html Feminism Is In Fashion, Huffington Post, Published
23/04/2017, Last Accessed 28/10/2017
 https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2017/jan/24/this-is-what-a-feminist-t-shirt-looks-
like This is what a feminist T-shirt looks like: Street protesters and fashion designers
have fallen in step with their slogans. What are they saying?, The Guardian, Published
24/01/2017, Last Accessed 28/10/2017

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/feminism-project/poll/ What
Americans think about feminism today, Washington Post, Published 27/01/2016, Last
Accessed 28/10/2017

 https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/11/09/still-need-feminism-dont-call-us-feminism/ We
still need feminism, just don’t call us feminists, YouGov Poll, Published 9/11/2015, Last
Accessed 28/10/2017

 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US#viewtop United States Census Bureau,

July 1st 2016, Last accessed 28/10/2017