I came across your petition about the bic razors being demeaning to women.
First of all, I believe women are much more sexual creatures than men. For example, it's much rarer for a man to have multiple orgasms than a woman. If I could have multiple extended orgasms, I'd definitely spend much more effort on attracting mates.
Sex is an incredible thing. Something pretty much everybody wants, and almost nobody has enough of. A woman who is comfortable with her body, rather than ashamed of it is HIGHLY empowered. If your parents didn't have sex, you wouldn't exist to complain about things, now would you?
Here's something interesting. What would you say about a woman who goes out and has sex with many many men, without ever dating them? Would you say she has no self-respect? Would you call her a slut? Many people would. "That girl has no self-respect because she didn't date the guy first! She didn't get something of value from him (his time and effort) before putting out! Slut!" What would you call someone who gets something of value in return for sex...? Yes, a whore. So on the one hand, we have girls who go out and have sex as much as they want without going into a long term relationship, apparently they're called sluts. On the other hand, we have the good girls, the ones that make sure they're getting something from a man, like a relationship, or security. We can call them whores. The high class whores will sign their sex over to one man. We can call these contract whores, or wives. A pretty terrible situation, isn't it? And it's being perpetuated by men AND women. I don't buy into this.
Wouldn't it be surprising if men were outraged if there was an ad depicting a man as being very sexual, doing his best to attract women? It would. Because men haven't been raised with this horrible idea that their chastity was valuable, and that their sexuality should be repressed and denied outright.
Sexuality, like any part of your personality, is something to be BROADCAST, not something to be ashamed of. It is a very high compliment to be thought of in a sexual manner. And no, it's not alright to be JUST thought of sexually. It's no secret that women can be mechanics, everyone knows that. But this isn't an ad for technical school. It quite frankly IS a sex ad. "Want sex? Men like shaved legs. We can help."
****Women shave their legs because they want sex. And that's okay!****
Men will see women sexually whether advertisements exist or not. Women are using fashion to do what they can to attract their mates of choice.
Would you prefer if she was a dominatrix? Female dominance sure isn't traditional.
When I see cartoon characters depicting macho men, their chests are outrageously huge with obscenely broad shoulders. This does not bother men.
If you're of the opinion that women shouldn't be assigned roles - then why does it upset you that SOME women are depicted in traditional roles?
On another note, would you happen to know any powerful female executives? I'm an attractive young man and I'd like someone to take care of me in exchange for signing over exclusive sexual services. Let's flip the roles!
ps - the girl in that ad is a lesbian... prove me wrong.
Jenni requested my help to refute this person's argument. So, I recruited Kelsy and together we came up with this:
Dear ******,
Your argument makes little to no sense. Here's a breakdown of why:
To begin with, see this blog post for a groundwork of why this ad is offensive: http://inspireme9.blogspot.com/2010/09/price-to-pay-for-smooth-legs.html
“Women are much more sexual creatures than men...”
Cite a source for this – it's completely untrue. The common conception is actually that men are far more sexual than women, but the reality is that both genders are equally as disposed to arousal. What I think you're referring to is the fact that the female body has been commonly used as a symbol for sexuality, which is exactly why this ad is problematic.
“It is much rarer for a man to have multiple orgasms than a woman.”
This makes no difference whatsoever. Unless you want to delve into the realm of female biology and anatomy and discuss the undisputed fact that a vast majority (over 70%) of women will never orgasm from intercourse alone, and that pornography – a multi-billion dollar industry denies and masks this fact – then let's stick to discussing razors.
“If your parents didn't have sex then you wouldn't exist to complain about things.”
So I shouldn't complain about sexual discrimination because sex is what created me? We aren't talking about the portrayal of sex here – we're talking about the portrayal of sexist imagery that demeans women. Sex is fantastic – sexism is not.
“Here's something interesting...”
To be honest, this point isn't interesting (or concise) at all. I would say that a woman who goes out and has plenty of sex is in control of her sex life – as long as she's doing it because she wants to rather than for the pleasure of men. Apparently you disagree. The point you've made is that there's a mediatized dichotomy between the notion of “good girl” and “bad girl” that is so binarized that it leaves little room for transition or the representation of healthy female sexuality. This, ******, is why the ad is so offensive in the first place – it does nothing to subvert this notion. You say you don't buy into this, but the ease with which you articulate it is extremely telling.
And absolutely – more men should be getting upset about the representation of their own sexuality as rampant, aggressive, brutal and uncontrollable. We're not saying that sexuality should be repressed and denied, but only that it should be represented in a more realistic way.
“Sexuality is something to be broadcast...”
Absolutely – broadcast it. But broadcast it realistically.
“It is a high compliment to be thought of sexually”
But isn't it also true that it's a high compliment to be thought of as smart? Or funny? Or any other personality trait not associated with sexual availability and prowess? Furthermore, this attitude of “it was just a compliment” is what validates people who harass women on the street or grab them as they walk past. You cannot presume to dictate what another person feels is a compliment – your right to compliment someone does not trump their right to be seen as a multi-dimensional being. Is it still a compliment if a man in my workplace tells me I have a nice ass? Because according to Bill 168, the new legislation for respect and violence in the workplace, it isn't the person's intent that matters, it's how a compliment was perceived. If you make someone uncomfortable with your advances, then you're legally in the wrong.
“Want sex? Men like shaved legs.”
Why is it that I can't shave my legs because I want to? Why is it always assumed that my first priority is to aestheticize myself for the enjoyment of men? Why can the message not tell us that if a man won't have sex with us based on the fact that we have hairy legs, then he should probably go to hell?
“Men will see women sexually whether these ads exist or not.”
True, but why do we need to only see one type of female body as attractive? We see this one type of body in every ad for every product, and it's extremely tiresome. And why does this female body have to be framed within the 1950's and idealized because of this association – this is an era where women were extremely oppressed. To add insult to injury, this woman is dressed more provocatively than she would have been in the 1950's in an attempt to sexualize her even further.
“...dominatrix”
I'd still take issue with this ad because it's still a sexualized vision of a woman, where her sexuality is at the forefront of the advertisement and is what is being used to sell the product. In an age where Cialis and Viagra can be advertised freely on tv, but female sexual enhancers such as Zestra are censored, it's flagrantly sexist to exploit an image of a woman's sexuality and then turn around and deny her sexual agency when it comes to her own pleasure.
“Cartoon men with chests...”
Some men do get upset about things like this. However, if you move beyond the realm of cartoons you'll find far more depictions of men who are not conventionally attractive and who are in powerful roles and often married to extremely beautiful women. 'Ugly' men are often portrayed as “cute” while 'ugly' women are portrayed as the butt of a joke.
Your last line in your email seems to be solicitation of prostitution. I'd be careful with that language if I were you.
Sincerely,
Megan, Kelsy and Jenni
Ps. Her sexuality makes no difference.
While we understand that some feminists feel as though it is not their job or obligation to school people on such issues, we feel that if we have the time and feel inclined to do so - we're entitled to take an active role and make things better for ourselves by teaching or informing others about these issues that affect us everyday. So if that means taking the time to write a blog or sending the occasional email to set things straight, then we're willing to make that commitment.
We're posting this email because we are sure there are other people out there who think the same way, or along the same lines, as ******. We wanted to broadcast our response and opinions on the matter so that they can be taken as a sort of FAQ on where we stand. We hope that this will become a way to track the kind of responses that we're so used to hearing.
No comments:
Post a Comment