Props to Chloe at Feministing for her awesome rebuttal to Chelsea Fagan's essay about Slut Walk.
"Apparently, a police constable made the unfortunate choice of publicly saying, “Women should avoid dressing like sluts in order to not be victimized.”
The problem is not that he said it publicly. The problem is that he said it. Or thought it. At all. Period.
The goal is to start at the root of the problem and change this kind of backwards thinking.
"I want men to look at me and have thoughts other than, “I could have sex with her tonight if I wanted.”"
Uh, yeah Chelsea, we want that too. But, like a sign read at Slut Walk, "Clothes are not rape-proof". A man can have those thoughts of you even if you are wearing a baggy as hell Ghostbuster suit. THAT. IS. THE. WHOLE. POINT. OF. SLUT. WALK.
Perhaps Chelsea needs to do a little more research on a subject before she writes an entire essay on it.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
"I don't want to live in a Rape Culture"
So this past Sunday April 3rd, Kels and I participated in Slut Walk Toronto.
Slut Walk Toronto was organized partly in response to Toronto police officer Michael Sangunietti's fucked up comment about how if girls don't want to be raped, we should avoid dressing like sluts and partly in protest to victim-blaming and slut-shaming which is so evident in our justice system, the media, HELL...just life in general. This idea that a woman deserved to be raped/sexually assaulted or "was asking for it" is so fucking detrimental for SO many reasons, I don't even know where to begin.
This was my first political protest and I gotta say, it was absolutely awesome. Kels and I were blown away by how many people came out to the walk. I can't really put into words how it felt to see thousands of people walking down College Street towards Toronto Police headquarters - stopping cars, buses, and people in their tracks. I guess I sorta felt this "I am not alone" type of feeling. As a feminist, you go through moments of "Why doesn't anyone understand?!" and this coming together of people of all ages, sizes, races, sexes, etc. made me feel more at home than I sometimes do at places I go to every goddamn day.
I heard a lot of criticism about using the word "Slut" to promote a campaign/protest involving women's rights. However, I think it is a reclamation of the word that is used to judge a woman regardless of our appearance or behaviour. The point is that we are ALL labeled "sluts" - doesn't matter if we are wearing fishnets or sweatpants, high heels or combat boots, bra or turtleneck sweater.
Upon arriving at police headquarters, speeches were made. While not every single word was heard over the cheering crowd, the message was clear: women are in no way responsible for their own rape or sexual assault. It doesn't matter what they were wearing, what time it was, the number of sexual partners they've had, how much they've had to drink, where they were at the time - NOTHING. No one is deserving of that shit. EVER. Period.
Why is it that we are teaching "how not to be raped" instead of "how not to rape"?? Doesn't make a whole lotta sense.
The issue had with Toronto Police is that: only 6% of sexual assaults are reported. SIX FUCKING PERCENT. With the victim-blaming attitudes and lack of proper training in response to sexual assault victims clearly evident within our justice system, it is no wonder that women don't feel safe reporting assault and rape to the police. The fear of interrogation and of no one believing their story is the reason why this percentage is so low.
This needs to change. Society needs to stop reinforcing and further perpetuating the "slut" myth. This also coincides with the notion of enthusiastic consent: "no" means NO. If an individual is not able to say no - that is still a giant fucking NO. Even if someone has consented to having sex, that person has the right to change their mind. Consent is an ongoing conversation throughout the entire sexual act. If a person says "no" or "stop" or ANYTHING that indicates that they no longer wish to be involved in the act and they are ignored? That is rape.
A few of the chants heard from the crowd on Sunday:
"Whatever we wear, where ever we go - yes means yes, and no means no."
"Hey hey! Ho Ho! Patriarchy has got to go!"
"A dress is NOT a yes".
Also, a woman approached Kels and I after the walk was over and told us that she had been watching us as we walked, holding our signs. She said that our calm yet confident demeanor stood out and that that is the kind of attitude needed for a cause like this. She said we had inspired her and thanked us.
Rock on! It made my day that much better and made me realize that if I can inspire someone simply by believing in something and holding a sign/showing my support - then the possibilities for change are endless.
Slut Walk Toronto was organized partly in response to Toronto police officer Michael Sangunietti's fucked up comment about how if girls don't want to be raped, we should avoid dressing like sluts and partly in protest to victim-blaming and slut-shaming which is so evident in our justice system, the media, HELL...just life in general. This idea that a woman deserved to be raped/sexually assaulted or "was asking for it" is so fucking detrimental for SO many reasons, I don't even know where to begin.
This was my first political protest and I gotta say, it was absolutely awesome. Kels and I were blown away by how many people came out to the walk. I can't really put into words how it felt to see thousands of people walking down College Street towards Toronto Police headquarters - stopping cars, buses, and people in their tracks. I guess I sorta felt this "I am not alone" type of feeling. As a feminist, you go through moments of "Why doesn't anyone understand?!" and this coming together of people of all ages, sizes, races, sexes, etc. made me feel more at home than I sometimes do at places I go to every goddamn day.
I heard a lot of criticism about using the word "Slut" to promote a campaign/protest involving women's rights. However, I think it is a reclamation of the word that is used to judge a woman regardless of our appearance or behaviour. The point is that we are ALL labeled "sluts" - doesn't matter if we are wearing fishnets or sweatpants, high heels or combat boots, bra or turtleneck sweater.
Upon arriving at police headquarters, speeches were made. While not every single word was heard over the cheering crowd, the message was clear: women are in no way responsible for their own rape or sexual assault. It doesn't matter what they were wearing, what time it was, the number of sexual partners they've had, how much they've had to drink, where they were at the time - NOTHING. No one is deserving of that shit. EVER. Period.
Why is it that we are teaching "how not to be raped" instead of "how not to rape"?? Doesn't make a whole lotta sense.
The issue had with Toronto Police is that: only 6% of sexual assaults are reported. SIX FUCKING PERCENT. With the victim-blaming attitudes and lack of proper training in response to sexual assault victims clearly evident within our justice system, it is no wonder that women don't feel safe reporting assault and rape to the police. The fear of interrogation and of no one believing their story is the reason why this percentage is so low.
This needs to change. Society needs to stop reinforcing and further perpetuating the "slut" myth. This also coincides with the notion of enthusiastic consent: "no" means NO. If an individual is not able to say no - that is still a giant fucking NO. Even if someone has consented to having sex, that person has the right to change their mind. Consent is an ongoing conversation throughout the entire sexual act. If a person says "no" or "stop" or ANYTHING that indicates that they no longer wish to be involved in the act and they are ignored? That is rape.
A few of the chants heard from the crowd on Sunday:
"Whatever we wear, where ever we go - yes means yes, and no means no."
"Hey hey! Ho Ho! Patriarchy has got to go!"
"A dress is NOT a yes".
Also, a woman approached Kels and I after the walk was over and told us that she had been watching us as we walked, holding our signs. She said that our calm yet confident demeanor stood out and that that is the kind of attitude needed for a cause like this. She said we had inspired her and thanked us.
Rock on! It made my day that much better and made me realize that if I can inspire someone simply by believing in something and holding a sign/showing my support - then the possibilities for change are endless.
Friday, April 1, 2011
For Real? Gross.
You know how sometimes you just assume that the people surrounding you on a daily basis (especially in the workplace) are mature, responsible, hygienic people and that rarely do you feel the need to question this?
Well I'd like to introduce you to....The Gum Bandit.
(Back-story: it is part of my job at work to allow elevator access to the offices upstairs. For security reasons, I have buttons that connect to the elevator system that prevent people from gaining access to these offices unless they have an access card or have talked to me and I have deemed them worthy to go upstairs.)
It is just another day at work. Like any other day. Someone approaches my desk informing me that they have an interview upstairs. I call to ensure that this person is indeed expected for an interview and I inform the person to get on the elevator and head upstairs. I then reach to press the button that would allow the elevator to move but, wait, what is that? That doesn't feel like a button. Why is it sticky? WTF?! WHAT IS THAT??
My friends....what I was pressing my fingers into was....chewing gum.
I sat there in disbelief." How did this get there?" I thought. As I sat there in disgust, rubbing the hand sanitizer between my fingers, I realized...this was no accident. Someone put that chewing gum there. On purpose.There is no possible way it could have "accidently" gotten to that spot. There is a garbage can at the desk which, it must be noted, is no where near these buttons. I keep a roll of paper towel at the desk. For reals - someone had actually taken that piece of gum out of their mouth and stuck it to the elevator buttons!
The disgust I was feeling soon turned to frustration. "This needs to be addressed." I said to myself. Since I did not know who it was (as many people in my department use this desk) I had to address the department as a whole.
And now, ladies and gentlemen, I give you a narrative piece called "I'm Confused: Is This An Office Or A Daycare?":
Well I'd like to introduce you to....The Gum Bandit.
(Back-story: it is part of my job at work to allow elevator access to the offices upstairs. For security reasons, I have buttons that connect to the elevator system that prevent people from gaining access to these offices unless they have an access card or have talked to me and I have deemed them worthy to go upstairs.)
It is just another day at work. Like any other day. Someone approaches my desk informing me that they have an interview upstairs. I call to ensure that this person is indeed expected for an interview and I inform the person to get on the elevator and head upstairs. I then reach to press the button that would allow the elevator to move but, wait, what is that? That doesn't feel like a button. Why is it sticky? WTF?! WHAT IS THAT??
My friends....what I was pressing my fingers into was....chewing gum.
I sat there in disbelief." How did this get there?" I thought. As I sat there in disgust, rubbing the hand sanitizer between my fingers, I realized...this was no accident. Someone put that chewing gum there. On purpose.There is no possible way it could have "accidently" gotten to that spot. There is a garbage can at the desk which, it must be noted, is no where near these buttons. I keep a roll of paper towel at the desk. For reals - someone had actually taken that piece of gum out of their mouth and stuck it to the elevator buttons!
The disgust I was feeling soon turned to frustration. "This needs to be addressed." I said to myself. Since I did not know who it was (as many people in my department use this desk) I had to address the department as a whole.
And now, ladies and gentlemen, I give you a narrative piece called "I'm Confused: Is This An Office Or A Daycare?":
To the culprit who decided it was a fantastic idea to stick their gum behind the elevator buttons:
Since when is this ever a good idea? You, whoever you are, are disgusting. What are you - five years old? Obviously only someone with the mentality of a small child would even consider, let alone follow through with, sticking their unwanted piece of chewing gum in any place other than the garbage. You couldn't walk the two steps to the garbage can to throw it out after you were done chewing it? You didn't even have to get out of the chair - you could have rolled over to the garbage can if you were that lazy. But clearly, you ARE that lazy. How about this? How about you grow up. It is evident by your nauseating and careless behaviour that you think a) no one will notice how vile you are or b) that someone else will clean up your mess. I am not your mother and I refuse to clean up after you. Have some respect for your fellow employees and leave your repulsive habits at home.
This was sent as an all staff email.
I still don't know the identity of the Gum Bandit but I am hoping that my words caused them some embarrassment and forced some sort of self reflection on why this is NEVER A GOOD IDEA OR GOOD BEHAVIOUR. Gross.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
"Katy Fucking Perry" Strikes Again
"I got this Jesus tattoo on my wrist when I was 18, because I know that it's (religion) always going to be a part of me. When I'm playing, it's staring right back at me, saying, 'Remember where you came from." • Katy Perry
Remember where you came from, indeed.
So, I don't think it's a secret that I have a deeply growing contempt for Katy Perry.
But I found a fellow Perry hater who loves to blog about it too!! Hooray!!!
Sady Doyle discusses certain female music artists and where they fall on the spectrum of female archetypes. On one end of the spectrum we have the virgin - who somehow still manages to be sexualized in a creepy patriarchal old-school kind of way - and on the other we have the whore, the "bad girl" who, is not just whoring it up on her own terms, but is rather internalizing anti-feminist and patriarchal views. Katy Perry, however, falls right in the middle. She embodies both virgin/whore at the same time. And I am unsure as to whether she is a) fully aware of this and makes a conscious choice to do so or b) is too ignorant and caught up in the fame/money/patriarchal society in which we live to even pick up on the hypocrisy at play here. She has a heterosexual, monogamous marriage with comedian Russel Brand that is extremely important to her, as her Evangelical upbringing has, and still continues to, play, an important role in her life. Weird, though, her song "I Kissed a Girl" seems to contradict this (as well as everything else that seems to come out of her mouth) but oh, silly me, I forgot: as long as this display of affection between two women is just a performance (one that is consistently portrayed for male pleasure/entertainment, "lipstick lesbians" if you will), one for her boyfriend who she hopes "won't mind it" because, as Doyle says, "he has veto power on her sexuality", then all is well and everyone approves.
Wrong.
This is where the point about "complexity" arises. Doyle makes an excellent point about the "complexity" that is female sexuality. On one hand, girls/women are told that we need to be "pure" because no man is going to marry us if we are those filthy "bad" girls who do naughty, inappropriate things like have orgasms and sexual intercourse. But yet, we are told simultaneously, to BE "sexy" (not sexual, just sexy) - a performance in which we must be the leading lady in order for men to want us, desire us, accept us. We "perform" solely for men. But this performance is seen as "bad", something that only "bad" girls do - a "rebellion". But as long as you aren't ACTUALLY having sex (you gotta remain to be viewed as "pure" and good - don't forget, you NEED to find a husband), and just PERFORM sex then you are A-OK. And you do it for your boyfriend. Or husband. Or male co-worker. Or that random guy standing over there. It really doesn't matter because you're not doing it for yourself anyways - you don't get to define your own body/sexuality and should never reap any sort of benefit from it. Ever.
Katy Perry is living out the complexity of the double standard set in place for women to be pure/virginal while simultaneously being the whore. And by doing so without acknowledging it is making the statement that this is "normal" (not to mention teaching the young girls who listen to her music and who idolize her that this is how they, as females, should act: don't take control of your own sexuality but rather hand that control over to the males that you will encounter in your life. Because ultimately it is they who decide your worth). And somehow I highly doubt that this is a conscious choice she is making. While the images of Taylor Swift and Ke$ha appear to have been manufactured by the media and record lables, Doyle refuses to believe that this is simply an "image" that Perry is performing - it's not her "pop star persona" - but rather her true identity and it exemplifies her beliefs of what/how a woman should be.
In my post Katy Perry: "It's just pop!", I discuss an article in which Katy Perry is being compared to Lady Gaga. Gaga was the "bad girl" in this assessment, while Katy Perry was argued to be the "good girl":
"Ms. Stein noted that, unlike Lady Gaga — the totem to all female pop singers these days — Ms. Perry is not very threatening, obscenities and innuendo notwithstanding. “She hews to the model of a pretty girl being pretty and filling feminine roles, really while nominally subversive,” she said. “She might be winking, but the rest of her body is pretty naked while she does it.”"
This is a clear-cut example of what I'm talking about. She is "the model of a pretty girl being pretty and filling feminine roles, really while nominally subversive,". However she is not going against the norm AT ALL. She is exactly the "woman" that society wants: the pretty girl being pretty and filling her feminine roles all the while acting "sexy" (posing provocatively, singing about sex in cars and dirty motel rooms, etc.) but not sexual, being good and finding a husband, engaging in a heteronormative monogamous relationship. She is the "perfect" woman because that is precisely what a "perfect" woman is expected to be/do.
So, I completely 100% agree with Sady Doyle when she says that Katy Perry:
IS AN EXAMPLE OF EVERYTHING WRONG ABOUT THE PRESSURES ON WOMEN IN THIS OUR CURRENT ERA.
SHE JUST IS.
SHE’S AWFUL.
To bring it on more of a personal level, I too struggle with this virgin/whore dichotomy. While I fully feel in control of my own sexuality and my body, I still get that whole "Oh no, what will people think" fear when I tell someone about a sexual encounter I had. While, for the most part, I don't let a person's opinion bother me and attempt to shrug it off with a "Whatever, I am doing what I want with whomever I want and ain't nobody gonna shame me" kind of attitude, it doesn't mean that the reactions don't sting a little, especially coming from people I know personally - people whom I think a) are in no place to judge me and b) should be more empowered themselves and stop listening to this bullshit about how men won't marry women who fuck for themselves. Even more double standards at play! ARGGHHH it never ends!
On one hand, how can I blame them for thinking that way when that is ALL I hear coming from the guys around me? They love it when a woman is all over them or talks in a sexual manner, but if she acts on this then they talk about how much of a whore or slut she is or sexualize her even further. It is truly messed up.
But on the other hand, I think it's about time we, as women, quit internalizing this bullshit. It doesn't do us any good (clearly) and only gives others more control over our bodies and affects how others perceive us and how we perceive ourselves. Alana, in a post on fbomb, is bang on when she says:
" The slut is never the good girl in stories or movies. The slut is always Taylor Swift's enemy in her songs, the troubled girl in a family sitcom, or the simple-and-sexually-available archetype in movies. Sluts are shamed, to a great degree, by females themselves. Just ask any high school girl what her go-to insult is about another girl who stole her boyfriend, a girl who wears revealing clothing, or just a girl she doesn’t particularly care for. Women participate in slut-shaming and women-hating as much as anyone else."
I don't regret any sexual choice that I have made in my life because I made those choices. No one made them for me or coerced me into anything. While not every encounter has been a pleasant one, I was fully in control of my own sexuality and my body, and continue to learn from these experiences.
While society is telling me to be the "perfect" woman, I am quite content being imperfect. Perfection doesn't exist people.
Katy Perry should tattoo that on her wrist as a little reminder.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Notes for my Future....
Thanks to Feministe for posting this blog under the title "People not to marry".
While I definitely like that this guy seems to dig Back to the Future as much as I do and refuses to put his future children on leashes (No seriously, if you wanted a dog then get one. Children are not animals), I think it is very odd that he is putting this shit out there in the universe (via the interweb).
I think he is trying to be cutesy and romantic...? But, it just sorta reads as phony and....weird. I get it, everyone sets their own rules in a relationship and each individual has to decide what they are willing to sacrifice for the other person. He DID say in an interview that of course these notes aren't completely concrete - they are negotiable.Maybe he should be out there telling these things to women that he could potentially date/wind up with.
It seems, to me anyways, like this guy is throwing this shit out there to get dates. There is something about it that just sounds so "I'm Gonna Play The Role of Cute/Quirky Guy Who Is Secretly a Hopeless Romantic, Therefore Tricking Doe-Eyed, "I Need To Find A Husband NOW"-Type Women (Because That Is The Shit They Are Fed By The Media and The Universe) Into Falling For Me".
But again....that's just me.
ANYWHO the main reason for this post was to link to THIS which I think is unarguably HILARIOUS.
Oh man, I actually cried I was laughing so hard. Hey remember when I wrote that post a little while ago about how women ARE funny??
Point proven.
While I definitely like that this guy seems to dig Back to the Future as much as I do and refuses to put his future children on leashes (No seriously, if you wanted a dog then get one. Children are not animals), I think it is very odd that he is putting this shit out there in the universe (via the interweb).
I think he is trying to be cutesy and romantic...? But, it just sorta reads as phony and....weird. I get it, everyone sets their own rules in a relationship and each individual has to decide what they are willing to sacrifice for the other person. He DID say in an interview that of course these notes aren't completely concrete - they are negotiable.Maybe he should be out there telling these things to women that he could potentially date/wind up with.
It seems, to me anyways, like this guy is throwing this shit out there to get dates. There is something about it that just sounds so "I'm Gonna Play The Role of Cute/Quirky Guy Who Is Secretly a Hopeless Romantic, Therefore Tricking Doe-Eyed, "I Need To Find A Husband NOW"-Type Women (Because That Is The Shit They Are Fed By The Media and The Universe) Into Falling For Me".
But again....that's just me.
ANYWHO the main reason for this post was to link to THIS which I think is unarguably HILARIOUS.
Oh man, I actually cried I was laughing so hard. Hey remember when I wrote that post a little while ago about how women ARE funny??
Point proven.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
WTF?!
Um so, just came across this little gem.
I...don't...even...have...words.(That's a lie. I have many: "fuck", "bullshit", "douchebag", "strangle", "fucking bullshit", "fucking bullshitty douchebag", etc.).
The "about me" section:
It's catchy, don't ya think?
P.S I want to point out that it doesn't seem that this blog has a comment section. What a fuck-tard.
I...don't...even...have...words.(That's a lie. I have many: "fuck", "bullshit", "douchebag", "strangle", "fucking bullshit", "fucking bullshitty douchebag", etc.).
The "about me" section:
"I am an American man, and I have decided to boycott American women. In a nutshell, American women are the most likely to cheat on you, to divorce you, to get fat, to steal half of your money in the divorce courts, don't know how to cook or clean, don't want to have children, etc. Therefore, what intelligent man would want to get involved with American women?
American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.
This blog is my attempt to explain why I feel American women are inferior to foreign women (non-American women), and why American men should boycott American women, and date/marry only foreign (non-American) women.
BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN!"
American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.
This blog is my attempt to explain why I feel American women are inferior to foreign women (non-American women), and why American men should boycott American women, and date/marry only foreign (non-American) women.
BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN!"
A) Oh my bad, I didn't realize that men weren't capable of cheating on you, divorcing you, getting fat, stealing your money in divorce courts and that all men cook and clean and want to have thousands and thousands of babies.
B) Thank you so so SO much to this intelligent blogger for proving just how mature, selfless, humble, sane, responsible and pure men are.
C) This blog entry is MY attempt to tell you how completely fucked up this ignorant shithead's sorry excuse for a blog is.
This is prime evidence that there is still this ongoing ideology that women should be nothing but incubating robots who cook, clean, and fuck on command. Oh, who also don't have opinions, never say "no", and who keep their bodies (even through all the grueling house-hold duties and fuck sessions) in tip-top shape.
Absolutely appalling.
I think I may just start a new blog. I will call it "Boycott Misogynist Assholes Who Can't Find A Mate And Blame It On Women Because Their Egos Are Just Too Huge So They Resort To Male-Order Brides And Then Think That Their Traditional and Patriarchal Opinions Should Be Put Into Blog Format".
It's catchy, don't ya think?
P.S I want to point out that it doesn't seem that this blog has a comment section. What a fuck-tard.
My New Year's Resolutions
Well...I am almost a week late but, what the hell? Here are some resolutions I have for myself for 2011:
Let's go, 2011. Show me what you got.
Be more self-aware.
Take more risks.
Stand up for myself (stop avoiding confrontation).
Stop worrying about the future.
Let's go, 2011. Show me what you got.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
When Did This Become Beautiful....?
I first learned of Isabelle Caro on Jessica Simpson's show "The Price of Beauty".
She was made famous by the Italian campaign in which she poses nude to raise awareness about the dangers of anorexia.
While watching the sickly Isabelle describe her current state and her longtime struggles with the disease, I truly couldn't believe that this woman was still being hired by fashion designers. I could barely stand to look at her in that state - how the hell could people look at her in fashion ads and not want to turn away? How was it that this woman was still able to sell products?
Chloe at Feministing wrote an amazing piece on Isabelle Caro's death that was posted today on the site. She mentions that this new year brings the same old new year's resolutions of diet and weight loss.
Just last night Kels and I were discussing our resolutions to get into better shape. We talked about going for speed walks around our neighbourhood, eating healthier, and doing some workout videos in our living room. We had gone to the pool in our apartment building and were checking out our reflections in the windows! After reading Chloe's article, I am annoyed with myself for this. Yes, I would love to have a six pack and a tight ass but I hate the feeling that, as Steven Levenkron (psychotherapist and expert on anorexia) puts it, there is a "competition among women for physical perfection".
Yes, I do think I need to walk more and do more physical exercise. I for sure need to start eating healthier foods. But I should be doing it for health reasons - not just so that I will feel better about myself come summertime when I bust out the shorts and the bikinis.
WHY? Why this pressure to conform to one type of beauty that is so unrealistic and impossible to achieve? Why do we all desire to look the same?
As Chloe said: "no one can ever lose enough weight to satisfy the demands of this culture".
Anguish IS profit. And I don't want those fuckers profiting off of making me feeling shitty about my imperfect body.
She was made famous by the Italian campaign in which she poses nude to raise awareness about the dangers of anorexia.
While watching the sickly Isabelle describe her current state and her longtime struggles with the disease, I truly couldn't believe that this woman was still being hired by fashion designers. I could barely stand to look at her in that state - how the hell could people look at her in fashion ads and not want to turn away? How was it that this woman was still able to sell products?
Chloe at Feministing wrote an amazing piece on Isabelle Caro's death that was posted today on the site. She mentions that this new year brings the same old new year's resolutions of diet and weight loss.
Just last night Kels and I were discussing our resolutions to get into better shape. We talked about going for speed walks around our neighbourhood, eating healthier, and doing some workout videos in our living room. We had gone to the pool in our apartment building and were checking out our reflections in the windows! After reading Chloe's article, I am annoyed with myself for this. Yes, I would love to have a six pack and a tight ass but I hate the feeling that, as Steven Levenkron (psychotherapist and expert on anorexia) puts it, there is a "competition among women for physical perfection".
Yes, I do think I need to walk more and do more physical exercise. I for sure need to start eating healthier foods. But I should be doing it for health reasons - not just so that I will feel better about myself come summertime when I bust out the shorts and the bikinis.
WHY? Why this pressure to conform to one type of beauty that is so unrealistic and impossible to achieve? Why do we all desire to look the same?
As Chloe said: "no one can ever lose enough weight to satisfy the demands of this culture".
Anguish IS profit. And I don't want those fuckers profiting off of making me feeling shitty about my imperfect body.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
A Wee Bit of Inspiration
"Abandon the scripts you hear and ask yourself, “What kind of life do I want to live?” That is what constitutes liberation — defining your life for yourself".
- Beverly Guy-Sheftall (in her interview at TheRoot ).
Thursday, November 11, 2010
pure. hilarity
So I just peed my pants.
No, I don't have bladder issues! I just read this piece written by a woman named Wendy Molyneux in response to an article on a website that asked for women to write more comedy pieces.
Actually...the best thing I have ever read.
Why IS it that people think women are not funny?! It boggles my mind because A) I think I am fricken hilarious, B) I know many MANY hilarious ladies, C) Every time any group of ladies gets together they spend most of the time laughing and D) WHAT THE FUCK
Yes there are indeed female comedians but...now that I think about it...most of them are labelled as lesbians, feminists, butch dykes, or unattractive. And most of their material revolves around giving birth, tampons and periods, finding a husband, and the like. I was watching the comedy network a couple of months ago and they were having some sort of contest or whatever and there was only one female comedian to take the stage. I was excited to watch her schtick and was secretly chanting in my head: "Don't do it. Don't talk about your period or the last blind date you had." She started out great! She wasn't talking about womanly issues or anything. But slowly, veeeery slowly....that is where her routine headed. I don't know why but I was so disappointed. While I get that you have a vagina and that you can very much relate to female issues because you have a vagina...why does that always have to be at the centre of a female comedians' stand-up routine? Why can't she talk about sports without mentioning that guys think she's a lesbian because she loves football or about working in a male-dominated workplace but not having to flirt her way to the top? WHY? These issues aren't funny...they are just giving men more reasons to not take us seriously and to laugh us off.
.....just like how a lot of ethnic or "non white" comedians focus on race and make fun of themselves or their culture. Or "fat" comedians only make fun of their weight - which in turn makes these issues into a light-hearted joke.
I totally get that whole "If you can't laugh at yourself..." shit but I mean....is it doing more bad than good?
And for fuck's sake - WOMEN CAN BE FUNNY. Wendy does an amazing job at blatantly pointing out all of the female stereotypes that we face all the freakin time. She is using what she knows from her experience of being a woman but not in a way that will make men turn around and laugh in our faces. She makes them feel like the joke.
P.S my favourite parts included:
"My cats love to be symbols of my loneliness. Sometimes, I have to be like, “Stop signifying so loudly guys, I’m watching Grey’s Anatomy!”"
"But I guess my humor deficiency is one of those womanly crosses I have to bear, along with P.M.S., making seventy cents on the dollar, and paying for my own rape kit. You know what they say though, you can’t make the willing pay for their own rape kits! I think they say that. Probably somebody said that. God knows I didn’t say it myself! I only say things like: “What are numbers?”"
and
Hi.Lar.Ious.
No, I don't have bladder issues! I just read this piece written by a woman named Wendy Molyneux in response to an article on a website that asked for women to write more comedy pieces.
Actually...the best thing I have ever read.
Why IS it that people think women are not funny?! It boggles my mind because A) I think I am fricken hilarious, B) I know many MANY hilarious ladies, C) Every time any group of ladies gets together they spend most of the time laughing and D) WHAT THE FUCK
Yes there are indeed female comedians but...now that I think about it...most of them are labelled as lesbians, feminists, butch dykes, or unattractive. And most of their material revolves around giving birth, tampons and periods, finding a husband, and the like. I was watching the comedy network a couple of months ago and they were having some sort of contest or whatever and there was only one female comedian to take the stage. I was excited to watch her schtick and was secretly chanting in my head: "Don't do it. Don't talk about your period or the last blind date you had." She started out great! She wasn't talking about womanly issues or anything. But slowly, veeeery slowly....that is where her routine headed. I don't know why but I was so disappointed. While I get that you have a vagina and that you can very much relate to female issues because you have a vagina...why does that always have to be at the centre of a female comedians' stand-up routine? Why can't she talk about sports without mentioning that guys think she's a lesbian because she loves football or about working in a male-dominated workplace but not having to flirt her way to the top? WHY? These issues aren't funny...they are just giving men more reasons to not take us seriously and to laugh us off.
.....just like how a lot of ethnic or "non white" comedians focus on race and make fun of themselves or their culture. Or "fat" comedians only make fun of their weight - which in turn makes these issues into a light-hearted joke.
I totally get that whole "If you can't laugh at yourself..." shit but I mean....is it doing more bad than good?
And for fuck's sake - WOMEN CAN BE FUNNY. Wendy does an amazing job at blatantly pointing out all of the female stereotypes that we face all the freakin time. She is using what she knows from her experience of being a woman but not in a way that will make men turn around and laugh in our faces. She makes them feel like the joke.
P.S my favourite parts included:
"My cats love to be symbols of my loneliness. Sometimes, I have to be like, “Stop signifying so loudly guys, I’m watching Grey’s Anatomy!”"
"But I guess my humor deficiency is one of those womanly crosses I have to bear, along with P.M.S., making seventy cents on the dollar, and paying for my own rape kit. You know what they say though, you can’t make the willing pay for their own rape kits! I think they say that. Probably somebody said that. God knows I didn’t say it myself! I only say things like: “What are numbers?”"
and
"I’ve totally run out of time, and now instead of writing a comedy piece, I have to go report to my regular day job knitting tampon cozies and being best friends with everybody."
Hi.Lar.Ious.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
I'm a Feminist BLANK
I just read a really cool/interesting post on Feministing.
I've heard of a lot of people who are afraid of the term "feminist" and who hesitate to label themselves as such because, in a non-feminist society, it has such negative connotations and stereotypes. These literally scare people out of being able to identify with the term.
While I am not one of those individuals (yeah, I call myself a feminist - what the fuck is it to you?!), I do think that corroborating it with another word that you use to describe yourself definitely could take some of the pressure off and makes it a little easier to tell the world who you are. I think this will allow people to see that just because one chooses to call themselves feminist, or relate to feminist views, doesn't mean they are extremists or that they have a singular identity. We are still people who have hobbies, jobs, and lifestyles just like everyone else.
So, I will take a page out of Lori's book and describe myself as such:
I am a feminist thinker.
I am a feminist theatre artist.
I am a feminist security guard! (Ha ha)
I am a feminist blogger.
I am a feminist movie-goer.
I am a feminist reader.
I am a feminist daughter, sister, and friend.
I am a feminist dater. (It's difficult!)
I must say that, in my personal opinion, someone who identifies with feminism or feminist opinions really should be bringing that into everything they do. It doesn't really make sense to pick and choose different situations or encounters to bust it out. You should be looking at the world through that lens all the time, where ever you are or whatever you are doing.
...Right?
I've heard of a lot of people who are afraid of the term "feminist" and who hesitate to label themselves as such because, in a non-feminist society, it has such negative connotations and stereotypes. These literally scare people out of being able to identify with the term.
While I am not one of those individuals (yeah, I call myself a feminist - what the fuck is it to you?!), I do think that corroborating it with another word that you use to describe yourself definitely could take some of the pressure off and makes it a little easier to tell the world who you are. I think this will allow people to see that just because one chooses to call themselves feminist, or relate to feminist views, doesn't mean they are extremists or that they have a singular identity. We are still people who have hobbies, jobs, and lifestyles just like everyone else.
So, I will take a page out of Lori's book and describe myself as such:
I am a feminist thinker.
I am a feminist theatre artist.
I am a feminist security guard! (Ha ha)
I am a feminist blogger.
I am a feminist movie-goer.
I am a feminist reader.
I am a feminist daughter, sister, and friend.
I am a feminist dater. (It's difficult!)
I must say that, in my personal opinion, someone who identifies with feminism or feminist opinions really should be bringing that into everything they do. It doesn't really make sense to pick and choose different situations or encounters to bust it out. You should be looking at the world through that lens all the time, where ever you are or whatever you are doing.
...Right?
I just finished reading Gail Dines' Pornland and it is truly one of the best books I have ever read.
There were times when her vivid details would force me to put it down for a moment or two but it was still awesome and informative. She says things that I have always felt but could never put into words.
Read it, dammit!
Especially all the guys out there. Guys who watch porn and have no idea of its effects, not only on women, but on themselves.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Apologies
Sorry it has been WAY too long since I have posted.
L.A is currently soaking up my time.
But you better believe I've got some shit to blog about the minute I get back on Canadian soil.
L.A is currently soaking up my time.
But you better believe I've got some shit to blog about the minute I get back on Canadian soil.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
I Get By With A Little Help From My Friends
Jenni S (the brave soul who started the petition against the Bic Soleil ad I posted about earlier) wrote to me in regards to an email she had received in response to the petition. The email she received was as follows:
ps - the girl in that ad is a lesbian... prove me wrong.
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.
Friday, September 17, 2010
The Price to Pay for Smooth Legs
I was on the subway about 2 weeks ago. I was sitting next to an elderly couple - man and woman - who were both staring at one of the many advertisements that the TTC posts in their subway cars. The ad was for Bic Soleil razors:
The elderly couple sitting next to me began discussing the ad. They questioned what the image had to do with the product that was being sold. Yes, they understood the legs and that razors are used on legs but...what did a 1950s style woman grocery shopping and buying cakes have to do with selling razors? They were stumped by this. They turned to me and asked, "Do you get it?". I let out a laugh and shook my head. "I don't get a lot of advertising these days" I replied.
While it warmed my heart to see this elderly couple discussing such a topic on the subway and that someone out there other than me was confused about this ad and openly questioning/discussing it....the ad is still there. People see it everyday and don't discuss or question it. They just take it in and allow it to get into their heads - convincing them that this is normal and this is how all women are or should be.
Bic is actually "beckoning" us back to the 1950s - a time where women had very few rights or roles in society. The 50s was an era where women fought for equality at home and in the workplace. This is the era where the stereotype of the housewife was created and flourished! I get it - the 50s and 60s is a fad these days thanks to popular shows like Mad Men. But should we really be setting ourselves back after how far we've come over the past 50 years?
Not to mention that this is an incredibly idealized image of a woman. Yes, it is a cartoon version of a woman (which perhaps is what disguises the ad as "cutesy" with that sort of "wink and nudge" humour that makes it seem less offensive than it is). But it is still an idealized one nonetheless. As soon as I saw it, it reminded me of that study about Barbie (the popular doll that millions of little girls own and play with growing up - hell, I know I did). If Barbie were a real person, her body would not be able to function properly nor would she be able to stand. Her weight and measurements would be so off kilter that she could not survive. That is what I think of when I see this Bic ad. The woman's legs are so disproportionate from the rest of her body. I find that most forms of media do something to the female figure that, outside of this context, would be considered absolutely ridiculous and brutal: dismemberment. Through the male gaze, the female body is dismembered into pieces (body parts). Dismemberment is an extremely violent act but we do this all the time to women in ads (figuratively speaking). You will see a shot of a woman's legs cut to a shot of her breasts, then to her pelvic region, etc. Women are never shown as a whole being or realistically as a whole woman (body parts are emphasized or more in focus than others) . And when she is displayed as a whole being, it is made to seem like it's an accumulation of these body parts that make up who she is. By doing this, it places such an importance on physical characteristics which, in turn, makes real women feel inadequate to the women portrayed in media. Furthermore, this isn't just an idealized image of a woman because of her physical appearance - it is also idealized because she is a stereotypical "housewife". A hypersexualized one at that. What man wouldn't want a passive, compliant, sexual woman who does their laundry, cleans the house, goes out to buy groceries and cakes with her ass in the air while he is at work? Glorifying this type of image - this type of woman - leads to men wanting and desiring this type of woman. And hey, I'm not bashing the housewives out there. If it is your choice to stay home and take care of your family then all the power to you. But don't feel like you have no choice or that your husband won't want you if you decide to do something with your life other than cleaning and cooking. And if he doesn't? Well he can fuck right off. (Just my opinion).
The mere fact the the ad mentions the word "beckon" makes it appear that women are asking for, seeking, or desiring male attention and that we enjoy it. Or that we crave it. Or that the only reason we shave our legs in the first place (other than that we are culturally conditioned to do so) is for attention and acceptance from and by men. This leads me to my next point: Why is it that the ad seems to appeal to the male eye when it is a product made for and targeted towards women? The only answer that I can think of is that Bic is trying to shame us into buying their razors (and they aren't the first company to do this and they most definitely won't be the last). They use this ad to make us feel bad about our bodies, or our hairy ass legs, so that we will run out and buy a Bic Soleil razor to rid ourselves of our ugliness. Because, of course, the only way to make us feel shitty about ourselves is to make us feel that we are not worth male attention. And the only way to warm our spirits? Men desiring us! The best cure for a crushed ego, right?
Why is this the only image of "attractive" women that we ever see? It conditions us to reject difference while maintaining a standard of what is considered beautiful and what is not. I heard a quote the other day from Kels in a book she is reading that said "The only thing shameful to expose is ugliness". No wonder we are the way we are (ads and other forms of media objectifying women which then makes men think its okay to objectify women which leads women to objectify themselves and other women).
I was able to find an online forum (The Big Orange Slide) that directly asks people to post and comment on whether they think this particular Bic ad is sexist.
Check it out. It's really interesting to read other people's opinions.
A few that I liked were:
Leilah Ambrose: "Would it be more patronizing if the same scene had been rendered photographically instead?".
So, Bic..fuck off. And take your poorly thought out advertising campaign with you. That is the last thing I want to see during my commute to work.
The elderly couple sitting next to me began discussing the ad. They questioned what the image had to do with the product that was being sold. Yes, they understood the legs and that razors are used on legs but...what did a 1950s style woman grocery shopping and buying cakes have to do with selling razors? They were stumped by this. They turned to me and asked, "Do you get it?". I let out a laugh and shook my head. "I don't get a lot of advertising these days" I replied.
While it warmed my heart to see this elderly couple discussing such a topic on the subway and that someone out there other than me was confused about this ad and openly questioning/discussing it....the ad is still there. People see it everyday and don't discuss or question it. They just take it in and allow it to get into their heads - convincing them that this is normal and this is how all women are or should be.
Bic is actually "beckoning" us back to the 1950s - a time where women had very few rights or roles in society. The 50s was an era where women fought for equality at home and in the workplace. This is the era where the stereotype of the housewife was created and flourished! I get it - the 50s and 60s is a fad these days thanks to popular shows like Mad Men. But should we really be setting ourselves back after how far we've come over the past 50 years?
Not to mention that this is an incredibly idealized image of a woman. Yes, it is a cartoon version of a woman (which perhaps is what disguises the ad as "cutesy" with that sort of "wink and nudge" humour that makes it seem less offensive than it is). But it is still an idealized one nonetheless. As soon as I saw it, it reminded me of that study about Barbie (the popular doll that millions of little girls own and play with growing up - hell, I know I did). If Barbie were a real person, her body would not be able to function properly nor would she be able to stand. Her weight and measurements would be so off kilter that she could not survive. That is what I think of when I see this Bic ad. The woman's legs are so disproportionate from the rest of her body. I find that most forms of media do something to the female figure that, outside of this context, would be considered absolutely ridiculous and brutal: dismemberment. Through the male gaze, the female body is dismembered into pieces (body parts). Dismemberment is an extremely violent act but we do this all the time to women in ads (figuratively speaking). You will see a shot of a woman's legs cut to a shot of her breasts, then to her pelvic region, etc. Women are never shown as a whole being or realistically as a whole woman (body parts are emphasized or more in focus than others) . And when she is displayed as a whole being, it is made to seem like it's an accumulation of these body parts that make up who she is. By doing this, it places such an importance on physical characteristics which, in turn, makes real women feel inadequate to the women portrayed in media. Furthermore, this isn't just an idealized image of a woman because of her physical appearance - it is also idealized because she is a stereotypical "housewife". A hypersexualized one at that. What man wouldn't want a passive, compliant, sexual woman who does their laundry, cleans the house, goes out to buy groceries and cakes with her ass in the air while he is at work? Glorifying this type of image - this type of woman - leads to men wanting and desiring this type of woman. And hey, I'm not bashing the housewives out there. If it is your choice to stay home and take care of your family then all the power to you. But don't feel like you have no choice or that your husband won't want you if you decide to do something with your life other than cleaning and cooking. And if he doesn't? Well he can fuck right off. (Just my opinion).
The mere fact the the ad mentions the word "beckon" makes it appear that women are asking for, seeking, or desiring male attention and that we enjoy it. Or that we crave it. Or that the only reason we shave our legs in the first place (other than that we are culturally conditioned to do so) is for attention and acceptance from and by men. This leads me to my next point: Why is it that the ad seems to appeal to the male eye when it is a product made for and targeted towards women? The only answer that I can think of is that Bic is trying to shame us into buying their razors (and they aren't the first company to do this and they most definitely won't be the last). They use this ad to make us feel bad about our bodies, or our hairy ass legs, so that we will run out and buy a Bic Soleil razor to rid ourselves of our ugliness. Because, of course, the only way to make us feel shitty about ourselves is to make us feel that we are not worth male attention. And the only way to warm our spirits? Men desiring us! The best cure for a crushed ego, right?
Why is this the only image of "attractive" women that we ever see? It conditions us to reject difference while maintaining a standard of what is considered beautiful and what is not. I heard a quote the other day from Kels in a book she is reading that said "The only thing shameful to expose is ugliness". No wonder we are the way we are (ads and other forms of media objectifying women which then makes men think its okay to objectify women which leads women to objectify themselves and other women).
I was able to find an online forum (The Big Orange Slide) that directly asks people to post and comment on whether they think this particular Bic ad is sexist.
Check it out. It's really interesting to read other people's opinions.
A few that I liked were:
Brook Johnston: "‘Sexist’ seems to sell when aimed at the opposite sex (see: Axe Deodorant, 90% of beer brands), but not so much when you’re mocking your own".
Muffinczar: "It is sexist to assume that men were in the captain’s chair when navigating this campaign".
Leilah Ambrose: "Would it be more patronizing if the same scene had been rendered photographically instead?".
Jenni Sager: "I am glad I’m not the only one who finds this offensive. I literally JUST finished creating a publishing a petition against this advertising campaign. Please check it out if you feel the same.
I respect that some of you disagree but I am not particularly good at arguing a point (refuting what you who don’t agree with me are saying). I simply am offended by this poster, it’s my interpretation and I don’t think I am alone in feeling that way".
So, Bic..fuck off. And take your poorly thought out advertising campaign with you. That is the last thing I want to see during my commute to work.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Katy Perry: "It's just pop!"
I discovered this and thought I would post it considering I have a track record of tearing apart Katy Perry and her work.
The New York Times' A Pop Cartoon Springs Out of the Playbook discusses Perry's upbringing as an Evangelical Christian, her celebrity "persona", and her own opinion of herself and her fame.
The part that kind of bothers me is this:
and
How the hell can you be a celebrity and not know or understand that what you do and say has an affect on people? Yeah, sure, it isn't fair that you automatically become a role model to people you don't even know - so don't become a celebrity then. You want people to listen to your music? Then you need to understand that people listen to the messages that this music sends. It is not "just pop". It is not just something to "throwaway". Little girls listen to your music, youtube your videos, watch your interviews and try to imitate you. That is not something to be taken lightly.
As for her "filling feminine roles" - isn't this just her perpetuating gender stereotypes? While I understand what Stein is saying (Perry is simply SAYING she is subversive/going against the norm but is not ACTING that way at all - she is conforming to the very way that society tells her to), the issue I have with Stein's statement is the very fact that she mentioned "feminine roles" without acknowledging that these roles are a patriarchal creation used to perpetuate gender stereotypes. Additionally, she states that Perry "hews to the model of pretty girl". To me, this just denotes that there ARE certain roles and molds for females to fill. And it also sets up the notion of what is considered pretty and beautiful (a celebrity like Katy Perry). Yes, I get that society has set these stereotypes and roles in place but shouldn't we be trying to reverse or change this instead of just accepting them because they are universal? To me, even using those terms in an argument against them is acknowledging their existence and giving them some power.
And the whole "winking while naked thing" - I think this is a big reason Perry is sometimes overlooked as being an unfeminist douchebag. She really camps it up. She's sitting there half-naked but oh look! She's winking! Ha Ha it must all be a joke because she is smiling and laughing at herself! So I'm not gonna take her and her naked unfeminist ass seriously then. Well, sorry Katy, but you didn't fool me. You ARE still naked and you ARE still promoting the wrong message to women everywhere. And to men too. About women.
She is also being compared to Lady Gaga - it says that unlike Gaga, Perry is not threatening and her obscene behaviours and sexual innuendos don't hold out. I agree that Gaga IS extremely obscene but that doesn't mean that Perry is any better simply because her behaviours and statements "aren't as bad". We can't ignore the controversy that Perry sparks just because there is someone out there worse than she. We need to question and challenge it all, in my opinion.
And for kicks, here are a list of other things noted that semi piss me off:
(About Perry's listening party for her new album "Teenage Dream"): "If she were Lady Gaga she might have required a walkway built of trellised stuffed animals or prostrate assistants; instead there were just models in bikinis, eating cotton candy and tossing a beach ball: postcard Americana."
Despite my frustrations here I do, however, semi-halfheartedly applaud the Times for even mentioning that her songs, "persona", and credibility have been questioned throughout her career.
The New York Times' A Pop Cartoon Springs Out of the Playbook discusses Perry's upbringing as an Evangelical Christian, her celebrity "persona", and her own opinion of herself and her fame.
The part that kind of bothers me is this:
"It was, after all, just pop: that was Ms. Perry’s line of defense, to call her work lightweight, fun, throwaway".
and
"Ms. Stein noted that, unlike Lady Gaga — the totem to all female pop singers these days — Ms. Perry is not very threatening, obscenities and innuendo notwithstanding. “She hews to the model of a pretty girl being pretty and filling feminine roles, really while nominally subversive,” she said. “She might be winking, but the rest of her body is pretty naked while she does it.”"
How the hell can you be a celebrity and not know or understand that what you do and say has an affect on people? Yeah, sure, it isn't fair that you automatically become a role model to people you don't even know - so don't become a celebrity then. You want people to listen to your music? Then you need to understand that people listen to the messages that this music sends. It is not "just pop". It is not just something to "throwaway". Little girls listen to your music, youtube your videos, watch your interviews and try to imitate you. That is not something to be taken lightly.
As for her "filling feminine roles" - isn't this just her perpetuating gender stereotypes? While I understand what Stein is saying (Perry is simply SAYING she is subversive/going against the norm but is not ACTING that way at all - she is conforming to the very way that society tells her to), the issue I have with Stein's statement is the very fact that she mentioned "feminine roles" without acknowledging that these roles are a patriarchal creation used to perpetuate gender stereotypes. Additionally, she states that Perry "hews to the model of pretty girl". To me, this just denotes that there ARE certain roles and molds for females to fill. And it also sets up the notion of what is considered pretty and beautiful (a celebrity like Katy Perry). Yes, I get that society has set these stereotypes and roles in place but shouldn't we be trying to reverse or change this instead of just accepting them because they are universal? To me, even using those terms in an argument against them is acknowledging their existence and giving them some power.
And the whole "winking while naked thing" - I think this is a big reason Perry is sometimes overlooked as being an unfeminist douchebag. She really camps it up. She's sitting there half-naked but oh look! She's winking! Ha Ha it must all be a joke because she is smiling and laughing at herself! So I'm not gonna take her and her naked unfeminist ass seriously then. Well, sorry Katy, but you didn't fool me. You ARE still naked and you ARE still promoting the wrong message to women everywhere. And to men too. About women.
She is also being compared to Lady Gaga - it says that unlike Gaga, Perry is not threatening and her obscene behaviours and sexual innuendos don't hold out. I agree that Gaga IS extremely obscene but that doesn't mean that Perry is any better simply because her behaviours and statements "aren't as bad". We can't ignore the controversy that Perry sparks just because there is someone out there worse than she. We need to question and challenge it all, in my opinion.
And for kicks, here are a list of other things noted that semi piss me off:
(About Perry's listening party for her new album "Teenage Dream"): "If she were Lady Gaga she might have required a walkway built of trellised stuffed animals or prostrate assistants; instead there were just models in bikinis, eating cotton candy and tossing a beach ball: postcard Americana."
"Asked if she ever regretted not finishing school, she said: “No, because spell-check exists everywhere.” "
"Mr. Thompson of EMI credited her past failures with her ability to be relatable even as she ascended to stardom."
"She values cuteness — “Ready, spaghetti,” she’ll say — but is more biting than gee-whiz."
"“California Gurls” has spent more than three months at or near the top of the Billboard Hot 100, where it was recently joined by the title track from “Teenage Dream”"
"No" means "NO"
I really like this. And appreciate it.
Bravo to the MCSR organization for creating this ad. And extra points for not just focusing on and including white hetero relationships too!
A "no" is a "no. It doesn't matter if it's said prior to or when you are already lying there naked. A "no" is still a "no". And if a person is not conscious, or coherent enough, to say "no" - 100% that's still a "no".
Respect a person's "no". Respect a person's right to say "no". Don't have expectations. Don't assume. No one owes you anything.
Bravo to the MCSR organization for creating this ad. And extra points for not just focusing on and including white hetero relationships too!
A "no" is a "no. It doesn't matter if it's said prior to or when you are already lying there naked. A "no" is still a "no". And if a person is not conscious, or coherent enough, to say "no" - 100% that's still a "no".
Respect a person's "no". Respect a person's right to say "no". Don't have expectations. Don't assume. No one owes you anything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)