Swimming is a Feminist Issue

Why resist enforced charges at Hampstead Heath Women’s Pond?

By SD

Please note that the contents of this blogpost represent the views of the author as an individual, not the Kenwood Ladies’ Pond Association (KLPA).

Wild swimming, in Ponds, lakes, rivers and seas, reminds me of feminism. The water is unpredictable, murky, deep. There are risks: hidden currents, unknown dangers lurking under the surface. You’re at the mercy of the weather. You go in regardless of temperature, a brisk lap in freezing mid-winter or floating on your back in the sunshine of high summer. As the swimmer, or a woman figuring out how to use her voice about women’s issues – you practice, build confidence in yourself. Learn to listen to your intuitions, connect with your body and respect your inner Self. With feminism and swimming, the regular act of showing up, of simply getting into the water or just being there for your sister, seems key.  Trust that you are, in fact, capable of this. Decide you will do it.

My favourite place in London is Kenwood Ladies’ Pond* on Hampstead Heath. It is a women-only swimming space,** tucked away behind trees in a corner of the park. It is a balm for a turbulent soul, better than any anti-depressants and a sanctuary that I am completely enamoured with.*** Here,  “body consciousness” has nothing to do with how you look in your bikini, but how to gently warm up your hands and feet after your December dip in the 4°C water. 

A separate, independent voluntary group, the Kenwood Ladies’ Pond Association (KLPA), aims to preserve the special character of the space and represent the views of women Pond swimmers.  The issue swimmers & the City of London seem perennially at odds about is that of freedom to swim on the Heath and how to pay for the costs of running the Ponds. The KLPA provides a detailed history, breakdown and analysis of the situation, which I will attempt to relay here.

Hampstead Heath is an area of unmanicured greenery in London. It first appears in the history books in 1543, as part of an effort to preserve game for King Henry VIII, and has an interesting legacy of resisting urbanisation to preserve the nature for Londoners to enjoy. The Hampstead Heath Act of 1871 states an obligation for its managers to: “for ever keep the Heath open, unenclosed, and unbuilt on, except as regards such parts thereof as are at the passing of this Act enclosed or built on, and shall by all lawful means prevent, resist, and abate all encroachments and attempted encroachments on the Heath, and protect the Heath, and preserve it as an open space, and resist all proceedings tending to the enclosure or appropriation for any purpose of any part thereof.”

The Ponds were created in the 17th and 18th centuries as drinking water reservoirs. The Ladies’ Pond was established in 1926 as a women-only swimming space. It is lifeguarded by a team of valued and unflappable women. The Pond has a palpable sense of community; pre-coronavirus, some swimmers might stop by every day simply to say hello to their friends, and it gets decorated for events like the Halloween & Valentine’s Day swims (when women also bring cake). 

The Pond is overseen by the City of London, which took over the management of Hampstead Heath in 1989, including duties stipulated in 1871. There were no charges to swim until 2005 when a payment scheme was introduced. At that time, many swimmers opposed the changes as a violation of the principle of public access to the Heath and were victorious in keeping all of the Ponds open and making the fees nominal (and practically unenforced). Now, in March 2020, the City of London decided to both double the charges of the Pond (from £2 to £4 per swim for adults, and from £1 to £2.40 for concessions) and make payment compulsory. User groups, including the KLPA, are protesting against these developments. Swimmers have suggested instead to trial simple strategies to increase voluntary contributions, make it easier to pay and promote confidence that the money raised will specifically go towards paying running costs of the Ponds, rather than swimming becoming some kind of general revenue source for the City. 

Swimmers support paying lifeguards a fair wage and efforts to keep us safe. We understand basic economics. However, voluntary schemes would not exclude any swimmers who cannot afford to pay. They are egalitarian in principle and would not widen inequalities. During the consultative process regarding these proposals, the Hampstead Heath Consultative Committee, who understand the Heath on a local level, agreed with swimmers groups and recommended this option to the higher-level decision-makers at the City of London. In the past, the views of locals have been respected in matters regarding the Heath. But not in this case. The City of London decided to overturn the initial suggestion to listen to swimmers and instead impose mandatory charging, at twice the current rate. The KLPA has questioned whether the City’s exercise was “consultative in name only and that the result was a foregone conclusion.”

In the grand scheme of feminist issues, this seems small. It affects a minority of mildly eccentric women who are overwhelmingly white, and what’s the concern over a couple of pounds per swim?**** When faced with hugely complex women’s rights problems and the seemingly interminable battle against male violence, including huge industries such as in pornography, prostitution and surrogacy, why should we care about the fate of a handful of swimmers in a tiny green Pond in London? Well, for me it is personal. Obviously. But I’d argue it connects to broader feminist principles and the sense of liberation, of women’s ability to practice self-care, of what that Pond represents. 

The Pond is somewhere to retreat when you’ve got a brain full of troubles and a heart heavy with the weight of the world. That you run to through the rain & puddles of Millfield Lane for those 5 minutes in the water that will make you feel more human again. Where you are welcome, trusted, allowed to come regardless of your budget or the chaos of your schedule. Where you can build your own relationship with the water and surrounding nature. Where you are free. Allowing women and girls to swim when & how they wish to, in a space meant only for them, without being forced to pay or plan well in advance (or jump through hoops to prove a “hardship status,”) is a feminist issue. 

This story also connects with larger patterns of commercialising nature, commodifying what was intended as public space, ignoring lived experience (perhaps painting those who protest as “uppity swimmers”) and casually excluding those who do not have the same means to participate in certain activities (whether social or economic). To my mind what is happening locally with the Pond rhymes with other themes in feminism, including viewing women’s spaces (and bodies, for that matter) not as unique and worthy of nurture in their own right, but as something for others to dictate, seemingly without an understanding of what makes them so special. Why can’t we simply trust women to manage our own spaces?

The Ponds have been closed due to the pandemic and are slowly re-opening. They now have timed-slots that book up well in advance, alongside that higher enforced payment, with no ability to use a discounted season pass and no funding scheme for those facing economic difficulty. In the meantime, some women have “defected” to other spaces to swim, been frustrated by the stress of trying to obtain tickets or gotten upset by the perceived inaction of the Hampstead Heath Constabulary when they’ve reported men swimming in the Women’s Pond against the rules during Lockdown. The issue of who is allowed to swim seems particularly pertinent at a time of greater financial, physical and psychological difficulties due to coronavirus.

As my friend says: “for so many of us, women who love this Pond, it is more than just a water hole. It is like a place of spiritual pilgrimage that represents womanhood, femininity.”

It was 7.5°C in the water in March on my last “more normal” day of swimming. Now the temperature is over twice that. I’m absolutely overjoyed to be able to visit again and hugely thankful for the efforts of the front-line staff that make this possible. But I’m also worried about what these new conditions of entry will mean for women in the longer run. The water may be warmer, but the climate surrounding who will be able to swim there seems inhospitably chilly. I fear my beloved Pond may never be the same.

If you are a swimmer or interested in helping save our Pond and resist enforced charges, you can:

*This is the official title of the Pond, though you do not need to be a “lady” in any “sophisticated” sense to go… otherwise, this author may have been barred entry, as she is just an adult human female of the ordinary kind and will laugh if you call her a “lady.”

** The Pond has been the centre of the debates around women’s sex-based rights and does operate on a gender-identity basis. The KLPA has sided with the principle of allowing self-identified women into the space. In my experience, this remains a sensitive issue and not all Pond swimmers agree with such a policy (including this author). Please note: this is not the focus of this piece.

*** So much so that this post has arisen instead of explaining how great the Pond is for the umpteenth time to my FiLiA sisters. Swimming keeps me well. Losing access to the Pond during the pandemic has felt akin to being unable to connect with a dear friend and whose comforting presence I’ve missed the most.

**** The issue of whether women of colour or from different class backgrounds feel equally welcome to swim in the Pond is important, and one I’d welcome further dialogue about. My argument here is that higher, enforced charges seem to exacerbate the problem of swimming being perceived as an activity for white women with money. The City’s strategy would likely create more barriers for entry & participation, rather than breaking these down. 

BlogLisa-Marie TaylorHealth, Class Politics