The post Period poverty: How the intimate became political appeared first on The Third Eye.

Despite the EU’s reputation for progressivism, for its value-based aspect, and its Nobel Peace Prize, European governments are not collecting reliable and comparable data on domestic violence, rape, and femicide – just to name a few. Furthermore, there is inconsistency in legal definitions and criminalisation of gender-based violence. It is ironic that the EU, which is known for its norms and values (human rights, equality, human dignity, freedom, rule of law, and democracy), is failing to address this “silent war on women”.

Now that I have gotten your attention, let’s dive into the nitty-gritty stuff and get to the heart of the matter.

What’s this guy’s deal with blabbering about this topic anyway?

Data and definitions are crucial for identifying and addressing issues related to social inequality. The lack of data and definitions (or well the absence of consistent and reliable data) can make it difficult to measure progress and identify areas that require improvement. However, in the spirit of recent local issues and the 8^th of March, the scope of this article will be to focus on a subcategory of social inequality (furthermore, addressing this topic in its entirety would be an enormous undertaking, quite a behemoth task): gender equality. By delving into the belly of the beast of inequality here I hope we can understand a bit more that in our society we still have unequal treatment, opportunities, and outcomes that individuals face based on their gender.

This social issue affects both men and women, but can disproportionately impact women, leading to discrimination, poverty, and violence. In various aspects of life, including education, employment, politics, social norms etc; gender inequality can limit women’s access to healthcare, education, and economic and political opportunities, whilst potentially perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes and norms.

Oh where, oh where is the data?

The absence of consistent and reliable data, along with the lack of cross-border frameworks, weakens both national (member state) and the EU-wide efforts to achieve justice, protection, and convictions in cases of violence against women. With the COVID-19 pandemic and the (on-going) war in Ukraine already straining state resources across Europe, NGOs are bearing the brunt of meeting women’s needs. Additionally, authorities’ inability to collect accurate data or define domestic violence and femicide further complicates the situation.

The European Commission lacks a clear overview of the situation regarding violence against women in the EU, and even when asked for figures and trends, they do not have a complete answer. Additionally, the European Women’s Lobby highlights the issue of a lack of data and proper definitions of femicide and domestic violence at both levels of governance, leading to the underestimation of the scale of the problem. Women’s organisations report that existing figures do not provide a complete picture, making it difficult to fully address the issue with policies currently in place. The lack of comparable EU-wide data on violence against women has resulting in the EU not receiving a score in this domain, which is something that simply cannot and should not be happening in this day and age.

We are all too familiar with the prevalence of femicide…

UN Women defines femicide as “an intentional killing with a gender-related motivation”. Yet, several European countries lack reliable data on femicide, domestic violence, and convictions.

For example: in France, femicide is not legally recognized, while NGOs are largely responsible for keeping track of cases. Austria, Belgium, Bulgarian, and Germany also fail to maintain centralised records of femicide and domestic violence, with some countries authorities fail to gather information on rape as well. The Czech Republic records instances of violence against women but does not recognize the concept of domestic violence. In Albania, domestic violence is classified as `family violence`, and femicide is not legally defined.

This behaviour risks further holes in the data that lays the foundation for policy development, to inevitably actually wage an effective war on gender-based violence.

Violations on other fronts

There is divergence among EU member states in criminalising psychological violence and coercive control, with only 4 EU member-states being compliant with the article on psychological violence in the Istanbul Convention. A 2022 report found that a whopping 44% of women in the EU have experienced psychological violence, emotional abuse, or coercive control in their lifetime.

This is very much a serious problem, and deeply concerning, all of which goes against the very values of equality, respect, and human rights that the EU upholds and preaches internationally. It is important to take a strong stance against violence towards women and to work towards creating safer communities for everyone.

However, it is crucial to recognise that responsibility for this issue is not solely on the EU’s fault, but shared by its member states as well. Across Europe, low conviction rates in cases of violence against women are preventing victims from reporting crimes against them. A lack of trust in the judiciary and high rates of cases dismissed for lack of evidence or an unknown perpetrator contribute to this problem.

For example, in Belgium, 53% of rape cases are dismissed, while in France only 1% of complaints result in conviction. Increasing conviction rates requires clearer recognition of violence against women, and better recording of these crimes. Additionally, a more common method of documenting and measuring such pervasive crimes would help authorities actually address the situation.

Roughly what has been done so far?

The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) is working to gather data from each member state on violence against women, but the collected data is not up to date. However, this proposed system regarding data gathering would extend well beyond the intimate partner violence. The EU has established a common helpline number for women experiencing violence and proposed a directive on combating violence against women and domestic violence. The European Women’s Lobby is calling for swift adoption of the directive and final ratification of the Istanbul Convention, despite opposition from 6 member states.

This is merely the beginning. We need to continue to improve and take further action. One critical step towards addressing such major disparities within our society is acknowledging that there is a problem both within the society, and within the systems meant to run it.

Food for thought to ponder over.

Gender inequality is an essential social issue that demands attention and action from individuals, communities, policymakers and the EU itself in order to promote gender equity and ensure equal opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their gender. Although International Women’s Day has passed, the fight against gender inequality must continue to achieve a more equal, just, and inclusive society.  

This article was written by an independent writer whose views are not associated with The Third Eye. The Third Eye strives to be the student’s voice, and that entails giving them a platform to voice their opinions.

The post How the Mighty have fallen: the EU’s failure to Protect Women appeared first on The Third Eye.

Before making any uninformed judgements, let’s see how the University justifies the implementation of this unit at a compulsory level. In an informational article on their website, the University describes the unit as a way for students to learn how to think critically and develop communicative skills. The idea, from what I gather, is to bring forth certain traits and skills that are beneficial to all students. In and of itself, this is not a bad idea. Teaching students to think critically is fundamental. And there was an absence of this type of teaching in the courses that already exist.

However, the anger and annoyance felt by students was not aimed exactly at the unit itself but at the fact that it seemed to completely come out of nowhere. Students during exam period got emails regarding the unit, the venue and that it is compulsory. While they did not even know they would have this unit when they applied for their undergraduate course. To add to the ridiculous nature of the situation, the units -which will have 8 ECTs- will not affect the course’s grade and the student’s ability to graduate. Therefore essentially, this unit is mandatory yet carries no official weighting as of this moment.

In essence, the University has introduced a unit that does give importance to an aspect of research and learning that has been missing for some time. Nevertheless, the manner in which they just introduced this, out of the blue, has brought criticism. A petition signed by over 1,000 students to block the unit is currently amassing signatures.

Humbly, I must say that this unit should make an entrance into the curriculum. Regardless, making it mandatory for everyone and not giving it any weighting is not reasonable. At best students will attend but largely ignore this unit as it bears no meaning on their ability to graduate. It would be more effective to make it an optional unit with an ability to affect the student’s grades. That way those who choose it have an obligation to put effort in, rather than how it is now. The University has shown an embarrassing lack of foresight in this situation and has rendered the unit counterproductive.

This article was written by an independent writer whose views are not associated with The Third Eye. The Third Eye strives to be the student’s voice, and that entails giving them a platform to voice their opinions.

The post CASP: Right Idea, Wrong Timing? appeared first on The Third Eye.

In 2015, 85% of victims of sexual assault in Malta did not report the crime to the authorities. This statistic is shocking, but it did not surprise me. As a young woman in Malta, I personally know of quite a few victims of sexual assault, and yet none of these cases have ever been legally pursued.

What are the reasons behind unreported sexual assault? There are a multitude of factors that play into this; guilt and self-blame, not considering the crime as serious enough to report, concerns regarding the criminal justice system, and most notably the relationship between the offender and the victim. Formosa Pace et al., (2015) informs us that the reason why 85.7% of Maltese victims in their study did not report their assault could be due to the fact that the victims know their offenders – mainly husbands, partners, exes, or close friends. This sheds light on a common and dangerous misconception which is that rape or sexual assault mainly occurs between strangers. In reality, in most cases, the assault takes place between people who already know each other, and this includes romantic partners.

Another common and dangerous misconception is that rape or sexual assault only refers to an act that is performed by physical force. This could not be further from the truth. The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) defines force as any emotional, physical or psychological coercion, manipulation, threat or intimidation which an offender employs to encourage the victim into participating in sexual activities. Thus, begging and guilt-tripping fall under the umbrella of what constitutes as force. It is also recognised by most legislations that consent could be withdrawn at any time, thus if someone participating in a sexual act asks their partner to stop and they don’t, this is considered an act of sexual assault.

In my personal experience of seeing what happens when someone gets accused of any type of sexual assault, I think the biggest cultural problem we have in allowing this abuse to continue is the phenomenon of the enabler.

Consider this scenario. Your best friend, a young man, is accused of sexual assault. You’ve known this guy for years and he’s so kind and thoughtful, he would never do such a thing. There are two sides to every story, right? The girl must be lying. Or maybe he didn’t do it on purpose. It was a long time ago, so it’s no use getting angry about it now. And so you defend him, or you sweep it under the rug. The average person might agree that rape or sexual assault is disgusting behaviour, but the second that the abuser is their friend, that’s what the excuses start rolling out.

If you do this – you’re an enabler.

I understand it to some extent. It’s difficult to accept the fact that someone you trusted could be an abuser. We all have a mental image in our head of what a rapist or an abuser looks like, and our best friend is not this image. Neither is our brother, our partner, our teacher, or our aunt (women can be abusers too!). But one must consider that oftentimes, an abuser is manipulative. They will act friendly and charming, but this is just a façade. If their victim does come forward, they will twist the story to wash their hands of any wrongdoing, or even worse, make themselves out to be the victim.

“But what about false accusations?”

Fair enough. False accusations can occur, regardless of how small the chances of this happening may be. But before you make the choice to side with the alleged abuser, ask yourself the following: Do I believe that the accusation is false for a valid reason, or do I believe that the accusation is false because the person being accused is my friend?

The issue of sexual abuse is a very touchy and sensitive subject, and I’m aware that the problem is a lot deeper than what I have described in this article. For example, the impunity of abusers is an institutional problem as much as it is a cultural one, with police reports not being taken seriously and individuals having to wait a very long time for court cases to see the light of day.

In spite of this, I think it’s important to be aware of how our behaviour affects victims and contributes to this culture of impunity. It takes a lot of courage to call out your friends for their misogynistic and predatory behaviour, but I believe that we all have it within ourselves to be the change.

This article was written by an independent writer whose views are not associated with The Third Eye. The Third Eye strives to be the student’s voice, and that entails giving them a platform to voice their opinions.

The post How Our Culture Perpetuates Sexual Abuse appeared first on The Third Eye.

When I was a first year at University, a general election took place. This was the first general election that I would ever vote in. As most of you know, it has become a tradition at this point that every election a debate takes place at University between the party leaders, an event in which attendance is limited to University and Junior College students. The event was so high in demand that the website crashed as soon as seats became available for booking, and my friends and I had to refresh for 45 minutes before we managed to secure our spot. 

In truth, it wasn’t as much of a debate as it was a mass meeting. The spectacle was dominated by cheering, yelling, and booing from the student audience, and the party leaders were repeatedly interrupted by the students. KSU members were running around frantically trying to convince attendees to calm down and be respectful, but to no avail.

What stuck out to me the most was something that happened in the middle of the debate. I was sitting behind a man who looked like he was around 20 or 21. He kept on shouting “viva l-labour” until a KSU member came up to him and asked him to stop heckling. He then exasperatedly argued that the Nationalists were also heckling and therefore he should be able to as well. The KSU member told him that if he didn’t stop, he would be asked to leave. He then turned around and started pouting and muttering to himself like a 5 year-old.

My only thought at that moment was, “I can’t believe these people vote”.

Politics seeps its way into our educational experience in subtle ways as well. The Pulse/SDM rivalry at Junior College was a huge deal when I attended. And while one could argue that Pulse and SDM aren’t officially partisan organisations, I think any politically literate person understands the connotations. SDM literally stands for “Studenti Demokristjani Maltin” and uses the colour blue. Pulse brands itself as “Social Democratic Students” and up until a few years ago used the colour red, although they eventually rebranded to orange.

In reality, most JC students only cared about Pulse and SDM because they got to attend their PV meetups and boat parties. But once politics was at play, the atmosphere became a very toxic one. Anonymous Instagram accounts would pop up to make targeted memes about the candidates. The first time that online voting was introduced, screenshots circulated of candidates encouraging voters to send them the link so that they could vote on their behalf. On election night, policemen stood outside the gates of the college to break up fights between Pulse and SDM supporters.

Today, this culture of rivalry has died down. Pulse have a complete monopoly over KSJC to the point where SDM have stopped contesting, and conversely, SDM have a complete monopoly over KSU to the point where Pulse have stopped contesting. This of course creates a new problem whereby students are no longer given a choice over who represents them, although that is a topic for another day.

Prior to writing this article, I messaged a few of my friends who are studying abroad; three are on Erasmus in England and one is a full-time student in Amsterdam. Their Universities’ student councils are composed of candidates who run independently. This phenomenon of unofficial junior political parties running for student councils is something that seems to be unique to Malta.

Politics affects every aspect of life, including work and travel. Education is no different, however the pure extent to which political fanaticism affects education in Malta is simply absurd.

Is it too much to ask for a world in which true leadership and change can come about without our culture of partisan loyalty setting us back?

Read more by Katrina Cassar on her blog!

This article was written by an independent writer whose views are not associated with The Third Eye. The Third Eye strives to be the student’s voice, and that entails giving them a platform to voice their opinions.

The post Political Fanaticism In Malta From The Eyes Of A Student appeared first on The Third Eye.

Written by Alice Battistino

Here in Malta, little is being done to safeguard animals from exploitative practices. Twenty-four-hours prior to publishing, a rather troubling decision was made to amend the draft legal notice in order to allow the petting of wild cubs.  Using cubs as a means of a photo opportunity, and profit, all the same, is one example among many, of animal exploitation.

It is rather clear that the well-being of animals is placed secondary to commercial interests. As deputy-chairperson of ADPD, Mark Zerafa put it, the so-called zoos are simply “money-making enterprises or vanity projects”.

“They serve to reinforce the dangerous idea that animals should serve people and that we are above what happens to the natural world.” Said Miguel Azzopardi, a member of the non-governmental organization ‘Extinction Rebellion’.

It is scientifically proven that cub petting can provoke extensive and detrimental long-term consequences on the well-being of animals. Being passed from stranger to stranger can trigger effects such as dehydration and psychological stress. Illness rests not too far behind the former two, with cub immune systems too premature to handle the diseases they might find themselves exposed to. The last-minute changes to the Legal Notice is essentially terrible news for cubs who can now so easily be torn away from their mother and handled by human strangers.

In a paper published in response to the draft legal notice, Moviment Graffitti, a Maltese non-governmental organization and cause that speaks out against exploitation, they referenced a study carried out on caged animals in the National Zoo in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; “While zoo animals may seem to live in proper conditions, the artificial environment in which they live for long periods may result in various forms of abnormal behaviors.”

Unfortunately, these zoos are far from concerned with the conservation efforts of wild species they so claim to admire. The environments that these animals are kept in will never be large enough for them to live comfortably and can never in any way, shape, or form come close to mimicking the wild.

The post No Place for Zoos In Malta appeared first on The Third Eye.