28

Feminist politics in the

festival space
Tasmin Coyle and Louise Platt

Introduction
Feminism in the context of festivals from a Western perspective has been examined across
disciplines but rarely synthesised within the festival studies literature. Within the leisure
studies literature, there has been a more substantive examination, and the distancing of
‘event management’ (within which festival studies often sits) as an area of study from lei-
sure studies, we suggest, has led to a lack of engagement with this literature. For example,
Aitchison’s (1999, 2000) work is rarely drawn on in events (exceptions of work which cite
these works include: Browne 2009; Finkel & Matheson 2015), and the work of Watson and
Scraton (2011) on thinking intersectionally in leisure studies has only been cited in relation
to sport rather than ‘events management’ explicitly. We contend that lack of engagement
with these concepts is a missed opportunity in thinking critically about festivals in relation
to intersectional feminism.
There is evidence of literature which examines gender performance within the festival
space (for example Goulding & Saren 2009; Pielichaty 2015) and experiences of women
at greenfield festivals (Browne 2009); however, this chapter addresses the role of feminist
politics specifically in the production of festivals within the arts sector. This has been placed
within the context of the ‘wave narrative’, the evolution of feminist politics and the influence
that this has had on growing numbers of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) arts festivals in urban loca-
tions. It offers critical case studies from an organiser perspective of festivals that put feminist
politics to the fore.

The wave narrative: the evolution of feminist politics

Whilst problematic, the wave narrative is used to define specific time periods of feminist ac-
tivism and social change took place. Whilst scholars are dependent on the wave narrative to
articulate the evolution of feminist thought, they are consciously critical of its usage, citing
that the waves are generationally divisive. This section will briefly offer an overview of the
wave narrative in order to place subsequent discussions in context. It is beyond the scope of
this chapter to offer a comprehensive social and political history of feminist movements, but it
is important to understand their contemporary relevance in order to analyse feminist festivals.

273
 Tasmin Coyle and Louise Platt

In summary, ‘first-wave’ feminism refers to the period of the Woman Movement (Suffrage
Movement) in the late 19th to the early 20th centuries and campaigns for votes for women.
‘Second-wave’ feminism (Women’s Liberation Movement) is characterised as beginning in
the 1960s influenced by the publication of the translation of Simone de ­Beauvoir’s The Second
Sex in 1953 and subsequent publication of The Feminine Mystique by Betty ­Friedman in 1963.
This took place alongside events in the UK, such as the introduction of the contraceptive
pill in 1961, the strike of the machinists at the Ford factory in Dagenham in 1968, and the
passing of the Sex Discrimination Act in 1975. Agreement over what equality was within
this period are debated within the movement, and this period has come under criticism for
treating women as a homogeneous group; indeed, a group which was white and relatively
privileged. Therefore, a key aspect that distinguishes ‘third-wave’ feminism is that of in-
tersectionality (Evans 2015). Bell hook’s seminal work Ain’t I am Woman (1981) brought
attention to the devaluation of black femininity within the movement. Further, queer theory
defines this era with feminists working to break down gender binaries, such as Teresa de
Lauretis (1991) who coined the term ‘queer theory’ and Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble (first
published in 1990). The ‘third-wave’ has been criticised for a focus on individual emancipa-
tion and micropolitics that is by no means resolved within ‘fourth-wave’ feminism; yet the
attention to intersectionality maintains a strong focus (Brown, Ray, Summers, & Fraistat
2017; Zimmerman 2017).
Social media and online activism is often cited as the primary differential of the ‘fourth-
wave’ (Chamberlain 2017), although there is contention over this, particularly in the UK con-
text. In their work, Aune and Holyoak (2017) suggest that the third-wave in the UK started
much later than in the US, and the cultural and political particularities of the context within
which feminist politics is being enacted need to be examined. They further suggest that the
affordances new technologies offer (i.e. online activism) do not alone signal a new wave.
In the UK, there has been a renewal of interest in feminism amongst young people in
the early 2000s. This media-driven image is said to be undoing feminism. This neo-liberal,
post-feminist sensibility is subsumed into popular culture, ‘as an identity that any young
woman might like to have – it is stylish, defiant, funny, beautiful, confident, and it “cham-
pions” women’ (Gill 2016, p. 625). However, there is a danger that this critique of younger
feminists renders their political activism invisible (Aune & Holyoak 2017).
Nonetheless, social media allows women to organise activism; for example, the swift organ-
isation of 2011 ‘SlutWalk’, a reaction to a police officer in Ontario, Canada, suggesting women
should ‘stop dressing like sluts’ in order to avoid sexual harassment (for example Borah &
Nandi 2012; Dow & Wood 2014; McCormack & Prostran 2012). Other campaigns include No
More Page 3, calling for an end to use of topless models in British tabloid newspapers (Glozer,
­McCarthy, & Whelan 2015), and the Twitter account (and subsequent book) Everyday Sexism,
which encourages women to call out sexism in everyday rhetoric (Bates 2016). More recently,
debates around ‘safe spaces’, ‘trigger warnings’, and ‘no-platforming’ (Byron 2017; Dunt 2015;
Lewis, Sharp, Remnant, & Redpath 2015) have all played out on social media as well as issues
of trans identities (Jackson, Bailey, & Foucault Welles 2017; Johnson 2013).
What has also developed from this engagement in the online sphere is a ‘call-out culture’
(Cochrane 2013), and the phrase ‘privilege checking’ has emerged. This encourages women
to reflect on where their viewpoint stems from and to remember that all forms of feminisms
are valid (see Freeman 2013 for a summary of the emergence of the term). Further, the on-
line environment can be viewed as facilitating intersectionality, as it allows women from
different communities, ethnicities, and backgrounds to engage in conversation with each
other (Chamberlain 2017; Cochrane 2013; Dobson 2016). Yet the anonymous nature and

274
 Feminist politics in the festival space

relative freedom of the internet now opens women to backlash, often in the form of threats
of physical violence and sexual abuse (Baer 2016; Eckert 2017; Jane 2014).
Therefore, in summary, the wave narrative is helpful in understanding the evolution of
contemporary feminist politics. Whilst contentious and often culturally specific, there is,
however, a call to reframe the narrative to be more nuanced in order to avoid a privileging
of one particular cultural perspective.

Festivalising feminism
It is generally accepted that one of the roles of festivals is to provide an opportunity for ca-
tharsis (Bennett, Taylor, & Woodward 2016). Using festivity to champion a particular polit-
ical viewpoint or as an act of collective activism is nothing new. Most notable examples are
Pride parades, which are not only a celebration of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and
Queer (LGBTQ) identities but also emerged in the 1970s in the US as a ‘liberation march’
in commemoration of the Stonewall Riots (Browne 2007; Johnston 2007; Johnston & Waitt
2015). Further to this, there is a strong historical link between music festivals and political
activism from the 1960s onwards (Martin 2016; McKay 2004, 2015; Partridge 2006). In
July 2017, the leader of the UK Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, spoke at Glastonbury Festi-
val. These are examples of ‘civil leisure’ (Mair 2002), and using festivity to engender social
change is emerging as a field of interest for event scholars (de Jong 2017; Lamond & Spracklen
2014; Sharpe 2008).
Whilst festivals have always had elements of pleasure, the emphasis on political activism
perhaps has diminished, and festivals are increasingly becoming commercialised and san-
itised for the purpose of enhancing the visitor experience (Anderton 2008) or utilised in
destination marketing (Quinn 2010). It can be argued that we are seeing a festivalisation of
feminism, which could potentially be critiqued as an example of the post-feminist sensibility
where activism has been subsumed into the entertainment industry. However, it is important
to view feminist festivals with critical lens, one that can leave space for a critique of neo-­
liberal post-feminism without making collective feminist activism invisible or reduced to a
mere fashion trend.

Festivals as spaces for women

Festivals have the potential to provide spaces for women to gather as a collective. Feminist
geographers have reminded us that when we think about spaces, they cannot be thought of as
neutral (Massey 2013; Rose 1993). Leisure spaces have been examined in relation to gender
and sexuality (Aitchison 1999; Scraton & Watson 1998) with fear and apprehension of risk as
a common mechanism of women’s self-exclusion from public spaces.
In relation to specific festivals related to feminism and women, there is an uneasy rela-
tionship with public spaces; however, solutions are often problematic. An example widely
examined in academic literature is Michigan Womyn’s Festival (or Michfest) which grew out
of the lesbian feminist movement in the 1970s US. The festival had a strict ‘womyn born
womyn’s space’ policy, which was challenged by those who claimed the policy was discrim-
inatory. Whilst the inclusion/exclusion of transgender women in this festival was complex
(see Gamson 1997; McConnell, Todd, Odahl-Ruan, & Shattell 2016 for an in-depth discus-
sion), it was identified by Browne (2011) that even long-standing, dedicated festivalgoers also
criticised cisgender attendees as ‘weekend converts,’ casting doubts on their lesbian feminist
politics. As previously discussed with the wave narrative, generational divisions emerge.

275
 Tasmin Coyle and Louise Platt

The boundaries of ‘woman’, ‘feminist’, and ‘lesbian’ are negotiated in this space, and inter-
sectional diversity comes under the microscope. As McConnell et al. (2016) argue, there is a
danger that a dominant intersectional identity (in the case of Michfest – cisgender, white, les-
bian, feminist) can lead to further separatist spaces and reflect oppressive systems the festival
is seeking to counteract. Also, whilst the temporal festival space can be problematic in issues
of inclusion/exclusion, it is also possible, as indicated earlier, that this temporal space could
also mean only temporal engagement. The eventual demise of Michfest also exemplifies the
evolution of feminist politics and its role within the rise and fall of festival trends.
Festival spaces can be spaces of risk for women; for example, there is an increasing num-
ber of sexual assaults at British greenfield festivals. Following the rape of a festivalgoer at
Latitude festival in 2010, Melvyn Benn, the chief executive of Festival Republic (Topping
2010), released a statement:

[…] When you go to a festival with your friends and you drop your guard, but you are
living in what is essentially a small town, and in a town you wouldn’t leave your door
open without expecting some crime.

This is the familiar territory of ‘victim blaming’ – a key issue that has been raised on social
media by contemporary feminists and echoes the ‘SlutWalk’ movement discussed earlier.
Festivals have experimented with so-called ‘safe spaces’, a notion that is tied up with con-
temporary feminism despite origins in 1970s US. The production of The Sisterhood, Glaston-
bury’s women-only space in the area of Shangri-La, is described on Twitter as ‘Glastonbury’s
first ever women only venue! Intersectional, Queer, Trans & Disability inclusive’. Whilst
more inclusive than Michfest, it saw a backlash from women in the UK conservative press
who believed it to be a patronising gesture (Whelan 2016). Indeed, just because a space is
designated as a women-only space does not guarantee safety (Lewis et al. 2015). Yet, as an
article in Vice Magazine’s online music site Noisey pointed out,

It’s not as if all the women at Glastonbury are getting together to hurl all the men on
a bonfire in the stone circle at dawn in a mass sacrifice, with Emily Eavis at the front
chanting ‘Safe space! Safe space! Safe Space!’ It is just a tent for women to hang out,
dance and get drunk in. It’s that simple – and that’s why it works.
( Jones 2016)

The ‘outcry’ in relation to this space is an example of the prominence of highly mediated
debates related to the role of online interactions in feminist politics today.
The festival space also can provide a platform for women as artists. Although women
make up most of the creative workforce, they are under-represented at the top levels and on
boards. This has led to women creating their own DIY spaces. For example, the Riot Grrrl
movement encouraged female punk bands, self-publishing zines, and knowledge sharing
amongst women. This ethos was born out of necessity and a reaction to industries that ig-
nored women and will be evidenced in the following discussions of the festival case studies.

Critical case studies

The chapter will now proceed to present illustrative critical case studies of UK festivals
which place feminist politics to the fore. These festivals are arts-led festivals that take place in
the urban environment (as opposed to greenfield festivals). The festivals (and the participants)

276
 Feminist politics in the festival space

have been anonymised for confidentiality. All four case studies festivals are small scale and
voluntarily run by creative women emerging from a DIY ethos. The following discussion
draws on semi-structured interviews with four festival organisers and illustrates the role that
feminist festivals are playing in activism, and the challenges that they face as part of negoti-
ating the evolution of feminist politics.

Festivals as platforms for feminist politics

Participants all suggested that their festivals were a platform for feminist politics, but they
expressed concern over the usage of the wave narrative. One interviewee stated, ‘I think
the Wave metaphor isn’t really helpful because it kind of presupposes there’s this distinction
across the generations and actually that’s not really true’. Further, it was agreed that the wave
metaphor is problematic in moving feminism forward due to the lack of communication
across generations of feminism: ‘there is an issue here around, around inter-generational
communication between different levels, or different generations of feminists’ (Festival A).
This reinforces the arguments made earlier that a more nuanced approached to the wave
narrative needs to be taken.
When asked if the different forms within feminist ideology have ever posed a challenge
in the organisation of the festivals, one participant responded,

In the early stages, we found there was two different ideas of what feminism is about and
what [festival] could do. So one natural division kind of happened between one kind of
perspective of feminism which was a little bit more exclusionary than we were wanting
to go with.
(Festival B)

Another participant shared that their organisation remains open to displaying different ideas
about feminism without ‘eating itself up’ (Festival A) and stated that the divisions within
feminism are hindering the feminist movement. These participants clearly expressed a more
inclusive and intersectional view of feminist politics within their organisation, which is
typical of the third- and fourth-wave movements. Whilst the four festivals had different
ideologies across their organisations and found the wave narrative problematic, it was found
that having a clear vision of what feminism meant to them was integral to the success of the
festival.
Further, all participants viewed their festivals as a potential catalyst for their audiences to
become more engaged in feminist politics:

Our thinking is that you don’t go from your sofa to the picket line in one fell swoop,
you have to have those interactions along the way and that’s what we’re trying to do,
is be something which doesn’t feel really overwhelming and academic or like elitist or
exclusive.
(Festival A)

Helping women become more confident in engaging in both feminist politics and politics
in general is something all participants agreed on. These festivals could potentially provide
women with an accessible introduction to politics. There is the danger, however, like Mich-
fest, that ‘versions’ of feminist politics can become outmoded and fall out of favour, challeng-
ing the sustainability of such festivals.

277
 Tasmin Coyle and Louise Platt

There was an acknowledgement of the increased popularity of feminism, and it was felt
that a post-feminist sensibility was an opening to develop meaningful discussions about ac-
tivism in the festival space:

Suddenly every pop star was like, I’m a feminist. And it did maybe feel a little motivated
by something that wasn’t quite feminist, but at the same time like that is exposing loads
of young girls who’ve never heard that word to the word feminist, that’ll hopefully go
and Google it and find out like what it actually is.
(Festival A)

However, there was a more critical view which could present a challenge in maintaining
political relevance of the festivals, especially in light of individualistic narratives of feminism:

I sometimes go to things and I talk to younger generations of feminists, you know it

seems to be they’re only engaged with a very tiny aspect of what affects them personally.
There’s a lack of global awareness, there’s a lack of international perspective.
(Festival C)

There was evidently a challenge in engaging new audiences. Social media provided a plat-
form, but it had to then translate into physical spaces:

I think we’ve managed to build this community which very much does exist online but
also translates to the real world and kind of like the vibe that we’re giving off online… I
think that’s something that we’re really conscious of … we don’t just want to be another
social platform sharing inspirational memes.
(Festival A)

Taking the example of the SlutWalk mentioned previously, this campaign may have mobilised
online; however, it was only able to deliver an impact once it manifested in a physical space.
Therefore, festivals offer the opportunity to blur the online/offline activism spaces and further
challenge the distinction of ‘fourth-wave’ being defined by online activism or indeed the ex-
istence of this wave at all.

Feminist festivals as space of empowerment

When asked if feminist festivals could provide a solution for women to safely engage in the
festival scene, participants were keen to stress that what they can offer is an ‘add on’, not a
solution due to the temporality of the festival format.

Feminist festivals are not a substitute for, they’re an addition to. And it’s really important
to make sure that is your aim, it’s like this is just one aspect where you can talk about
issues where you can kind of maybe come up with a plan.
(Festival B)

It is also possible that feminist festivals can offer women support in their creative practice.
One festival organiser commented that

Learning how to design your own flyers and to do decent social media marketing and
to write a good press release and empower yourself to be able to know how to run your

278
 Feminist politics in the festival space

own tech, all those skills are really important to then be able to produce and run your
own shows and therefore be a more successful artist. And they’re the kind of things that
we try and offer within the Festival, but we are limited at capacity.
(Festival D)

This supportive and DIY ethos was something that all participants interviewed commented
on and stated was deeply ingrained in their festivals ethos. This DIY style is reminiscent
of the third-wave feminist movements, empowering each other to take control in a male-­
dominated industry. Since there is still a serious inequality issue in the creative industries,
this DIY ethos is still driving feminist creative as a collective.

I think feminist festivals have had to fight really hard because those positions, […] we’ve
had to prove that we can do it and then also we end up doing it 20 times better because
we’re working harder.
(Festival B)

Yet, whilst these festivals offer a supportive environment, nonetheless, they were mindful of
their capacity to pay.

There’s always a debate, an issue around payments of performers and payment of par-
ticipants, and that is a feminist issue as far as I’m concerned because there’s so much
expected as goodwill from participants, particularly women and women are always
underpaid, or not paid.
(Festival C)

Whilst these festivals can form a supportive community for women artists, due to their lack
of funding, there is an issue with the fair payment of artists. Again, this tension emerges
around a DIY ethos, but it creates limitations around being financially sustainable.

Festivalisation of feminism
Wider institutions potentially take advantage of feminist festivals for their own marketing
gains, and there is perhaps a festivalisation of feminist politics to serve a particular agenda.
At least two of the festivals noted that established institutions were starting to approach them
with collaboration opportunities. However, they were both cautious when choosing who to
work with in order to maintain their DIY ethos.

I think we’re going to have to be quite careful about how we negotiate that… but often
what venues want to do is basically tap into your audience and be like, oh you’ve got
loads of like women under 30.
(Festival A)

Some expressed frustration related to International Women’s Day: ‘everybody is like Rent
a Feminist for the month because it’s International Women’s Day in March’ (Festival A).
The trend for feminist politics, as examined earlier, can make activism less visible, and it
is important that these festivals maintain a balance between establishing a profile for what
they do, which might mean collaborating on national events or with wider institutions, but
ensure that the politics remain meaningful.

279
 Tasmin Coyle and Louise Platt

In order to achieve this, there was an awareness that organisers had to engage with au-
diences outside of themselves and existing feminist activists. If the festivals are unable to
engage with wider audiences, it becomes difficult to establish to what extent they are achiev-
ing bringing communities together and translating the temporal space of the festivals into
activism and social change. ‘It was showcasing some sort of feminist work that’s taking place
but it didn’t really connect with audiences outside of itself ’ (Festival C).

Conclusions
The four festivals examined in this chapter are helping women become more confident in
engaging in both feminist politics and general politics by providing them with an accessible
introduction to politics. There is also a deliberate effort to engage with popular culture but
not to allow the collective aspect of feminist activism to be diminished. Indeed, the power
that the online sphere offered was recognised, but the interaction of festivalgoers in physical
spaces is still salient. This is all the more true in relation to festivals that intend to inspire
social change and collective action. However, there needs to be further consideration around
how to make the physical spaces of such festivals as accessible as online spaces in terms of
collective activism (whilst acknowledging debates around online access).
Aligned with the contentious nature of the wave narrative, feminists who are organising
these festivals are conscious of what feminism means to different audiences and how they
can present bring younger women into activism. A continued engagement with the wave
narrative as affective rather than hierarchical is essential in order to create inclusive spaces
that are relevant and sustainable, and able to respond to the changing and evolving nature of
politics today without forgetting the activism of those that came before or diminishing the
lived experiences of diverse groups of women.
There is rich potential for further study in this area, not least as the work presented here
is solely offered from an organiser perspective. Further research could focus on how feminist
festivals are spaces where multiple identities are negotiated. This would build on previous
leisure studies work on intersectionality and further related critical festival studies under a
critical feminist lens.

References
Aitchison, C. (1999). New cultural geographies: the spatiality of leisure, gender and sexuality. Leisure
Studies, 18(1), 19–39.
Aitchison, C. (2000). Poststructural feminist theories of representing others: a response to the ‘crisis’
in leisure studies’ discourse. Leisure Studies, 19(3), 127–144.
Anderton, C. (2008). Commercializing the carnivalesque: the V Festival and image/risk management.
Event Management, 12(1), 39–51.
Aune, K. & Holyoak, R (2017). Navigating the third wave: contemporary UK feminist activists and
‘third-wave feminism’. Feminist Theory. doi:10.1177/1464700117723593.
Baer, H. (2016). Redoing feminism: digital activism, body politics, and neoliberalism. Feminist Media
Studies, 16(1), 17–34.
Bates, L. (2016). Everyday Sexism: The Project that Inspired a Worldwide Movement. London: Simon &
Schuster.
Bennett, A., Taylor, J. & Woodward, I. (eds.). (2016). The Festivalization of Culture. Oxon & New York:
Routledge.
Borah, R. & Nandi, S. (2012). Reclaiming the feminist politics of ‘SlutWalk’. International Feminist
Journal of Politics, 14(3), 415–421.
Brown, M., Ray, R., Summers, E. & Fraistat, N. (2017). # SayHerName: a case study of intersectional
social media activism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(11), 1–15.

280
 Feminist politics in the festival space

Browne, K. (2007). A party with politics? (Re)making LGBTQ Pride spaces in Dublin and Brighton.
Social & Cultural Geography, 8(1), 63–87.
Browne, K. (2009). Naked and dirty: rethinking (not) attending festivals. Journal of Tourism and Cultural
Change, 7(2), 115–132.
Browne, K. (2011). Beyond rural idylls: imperfect lesbian utopias at Michigan Womyn’s music festival.
Journal of Rural Studies, 27(1), 13–23.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.
Byron, K. (2017). From infantilizing to world making: safe spaces and trigger warnings on campus.
Family Relations, 66(1), 116–125.
Chamberlain, P. (2017). The Feminist Fourth Wave: Affective Temporality. New York: Springer.
Cochrane, K. (2013). All the Rebel Women: The Rise of the Fourth Wave of Feminism. London: Guardian
Books.
de Jong, A. (2017). Rethinking activism: tourism, mobilities and emotion. Social & Cultural Geography,
18(6), 851–868.
De Lauretis, T. (1991). Queer Theory: Lesbian and Gay Sexualities. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
Dobson, A. S. (2016). Postfeminist Digital Cultures: Femininity, Social Media, and Self-Representation. New
York: Springer.
Dow, B. J. & Wood, J. T. (2014). Repeating history and learning from it: what can SlutWalks teach
us about feminism? Women’s Studies in Communication, 37(1), 22–43.
Dunt, I. (2015). Safe space or free speech? The crisis around debate at UK universities. The Guardian,
6 February. Available from: www.theguardian.com/education/2015/feb/06/safe-space-or-free-
speech-crisis-debate-uk-universities. Accessed 18 August 2017.
Eckert, S. (2017). Fighting for recognition: online abuse of women bloggers in Germany, Switzerland,
the United Kingdom, and the United States. New Media & Society. doi:10.1177/1461444816688457.
Evans, E. (2015). The Politics of Third Wave Feminisms: Neoliberalism, Intersectionality, and the State in Brit-
ain and the US. New York: Springer.
Finkel, R. & Matheson, C. M. (2015). Landscape of commercial sex before the 2010 Vancouver W ­ inter
Games. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 7(3), 251–265.
Freeman, H. (2013). Check your privilege! Whatever that means. The Guardian, 5 June. Available
from: www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jun/05/check-your-privilege-means. Accessed 17 Au-
gust 2017.
Gamson, J. (1997). Messages of exclusion: gender, movements, and symbolic boundaries. Gender &
Society, 11(2), 178-199.
Gill, R. (2016). Post-postfeminism? New feminist visibilities in postfeminist times. Feminist Media
Studies, 16(4), 610–630.
Glozer, S., McCarthy, L. & Whelan, G. (2015). # NoMorePage3: feminism and institutional work
in corporate constructed arenas of citizenship. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2015(1),
16085.
Goulding, C. & Saren, M. (2009). Performing identity: an analysis of gender expressions at the Whitby
goth festival. Consumption Markets & Culture, 12(1), 27–46.
hooks, b. (1981). Ain’t I a Woman Black Women and Feminism. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Jackson, S. J., Bailey, M. & Foucault Welles, B. (2017). #GirlsLikeUs: trans advocacy and community
building online. New Media & Society. doi:10.1177/1461444817709276.
Jane, E. A. (2014). ‘Back to the kitchen, cunt’: speaking the unspeakable about online misogyny. Con-
tinuum, 28(4), 558–570.
Johnson, J. R. (2013). Cisgender privilege, intersectionality, and the criminalization of CeCe Mc-
Donald: why intercultural communication needs transgender studies. Journal of International and
Intercultural Communication, 6(2), 135–144.
Johnston, L. (2007). Mobilizing pride/shame: lesbians, tourism and parades. Social & Cultural Geogra-
phy, 8(1), 29–45.
Johnston, L. & Waitt, G. (2015). The spatial politics of gay pride parades and festivals: emotional activ-
ism. In: Patternotte, D. & Tremblay, M. (eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Lesbian and Gay
Activism (pp. 105–120). Surrey and Burlington: Ashgate.
Jones, D. (2016). Do we need a women’s only venue at Glastonbury? Noisey. Available from: https://
noisey.vice.com/en_uk/article/6e4e3k/do-we-need-a-womens-only-venue-at-glastonbury.
­Accessed 18 January 2017.

281
 Tasmin Coyle and Louise Platt

Lamond, I. R. & Spracklen, K. (2014). Protests as Events: Politics, Activism and Leisure. London: Picker-
ing & Chatto Publishers.
Lewis, R., Sharp, E., Remnant, J. & Redpath, R. (2015). ‘Safe spaces’: experiences of feminist women-only
space. Sociological Research Online, 20(4), 9–17.
Mair, H. (2002). Civil leisure? Exploring the relationship between leisure, activism and social change.
Leisure/Loisir, 27(3–4), 213–237.
Martin, G. (2016). The politics, pleasure and performance of new age travellers, ravers and anti-road
protestors: connecting festivals, carnival and new social movements. In: Bennett, A., Taylor, J., and
Woodward, I. (eds.), The Festivalization of Culture (pp. 87–106). Oxon and New York: Routledge,
Massey, D. (2013). Space, Place and Gender. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
McConnell, E. A., Todd, N. R., Odahl-Ruan, C. & Shattell, M. (2016). Complicating counterspaces:
intersectionality and the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival. American Journal of Community Psychol-
ogy, 57(3–4), 473–488.
McCormack, C. & Prostran, N. (2012). Asking for it. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 14(3),
410–414.
McKay, G. (2004). ‘Unsafe things like youth and jazz’: Beaulieu jazz festivals (1956–61), and the or-
igins of pop festival culture in Britain. In Bennett, A. (ed.), Remembering Woodstock (pp. 90–110).
Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
McKay, G. (2015). The Pop Festival: History, Music, Media, Culture. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing
USA.
Partridge, C. (2006). The spiritual and the revolutionary: alternative spirituality, British free festivals,
and the emergence of rave culture. Culture and Religion, 7(1), 41–60.
Pielichaty, H. (2015). Festival space: gender, liminality and the carnivalesque. International Journal of
Event and Festival Management, 6(3), 235–250.
Quinn, B. (2010). Arts festivals, urban tourism and cultural policy. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism,
Leisure and Events, 2(3), 264–279.
Rose, G. (1993). Feminism and geography: the limits of geographical knowledge. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Scraton, S. & Watson, B. (1998). Gendered cities: women and public leisure space in the ‘postmodern
city’. Leisure Studies, 17(2), 123–137.
Sharpe, E. K. (2008). Festivals and social change: intersections of pleasure and politics at a community
music festival. Leisure Sciences, 30(3), 217–234.
Topping, A. (2010). Rapes at Latitude prompt launch of safety awareness campaigns. The Guardian.
Available from: www.theguardian.com/culture/2010/jul/19/latitude-festival-safety-campaign.
Accessed 24 June 2017.
Watson, B. & Scraton, S. J. (2013). Leisure studies and intersectionality. Leisure Studies, 32(1), 35–47.
Whelan, E. (2016). Glastonbury’s ‘women-only’ venue deserves to sink into the mud. The Specta-
tor, 6 June. Available from: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/glastonburys-women-venue-
deserves-sink-mud/. Accessed 18 August 2017.
Zimmerman, T. (2017). #Intersectionality: the fourth wave feminist Twitter community. Atlantis:
Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice, 38(1), 54–70.

282