-
“A dream you dream alone is only a dream; a dream you dream together is reality.” — Yoko Ono
“In my heart, I think a woman has two choices: either she’s a feminist or a masochist.” –Gloria Steinem
May
19
A Quick Note on Misogynistic Body Standards
Filed Under assholes, beauty myths, fat-shaming, media, misogyny, objectification, patriarchy, pop culture | 12 Comments
I know way, way, way better than to waste my time analyzing tabloid magazines. Which is why I pretty much never do it, and I’m not going to bother saying much very now. Because of course, we pretty much see the same shit above every fucking year around this time.
But I saw this magazine in the checkout line in the grocery store, and masochist that I am I had to see who was cruelly and ridiculously shamed on the cover this year with a “worst” label. And upon seeing Uma Thurman there with the phrase “Saggy Boobs” emblazoned underneath her, it just hit me in the gut like nobody’s business. Because I’m at least used to butts similar to mine getting sneered at.
I’d say “way to go telling women that the way their bodies naturally look is repulsive,” but of course I know that’s the point of virtually everything in this magazine. But. There is a little fucking thing in this world called gravity, and strangely enough, boobs are subject to it. Especially big ones. (You know, the same kind women are supposed to feel bad about not having.)
It’s incredibly past the point of bad enough when we’re mocking the “lumpy butt” of a woman who is already thinner than most (while simultaneously mocking a woman for being too thin), as if bodies exist for judging and ones that carry an ounce of fat are hideous and shouldn’t be let out the house. Can it get any worse when we’re mocking a body “flaw” that is not only shared by huge portions of the population, but that we also can’t even pretend can be “fixed” by spending every waking hour of your life in the gym?
Finally, they’re at least acknowledging the truth that it’s not about getting women to “take pride” in their bodies or “work harder” at them. It’s just about reminding us that close to all women’s bodies, no matter how much “pride” you take or how hard you “work,” will ever be considered good enough.
Popularity: 13% [?]
May
15
Abstinence Counselor Charged With Sexual Assault of Student
Filed Under education and schools, misogyny, objectification, paternalism, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, reproductive justice, sex and sexuality, violence against women and girls | 6 Comments
A man who counsels teens on how to remain sexually abstinent has been arrested and charged with sexual assault (from further descriptions, seemingly rape) of one of his “students”:
The girl told officers that Hoheb sexually assaulted her in his car in the parking lot of a Trumbull gym where he had stopped while driving her home in March.
In an interview with police detectives, Hoheb allegedly said he had been counseling teenage girls, including the victim, on how to say “no” to sexual advances from adults.
“I wanted the girls to understand that no matter who it may be; the pastor, another adviser or myself, they should not be afraid to use the word no,” police said Hoheb told them.
Hoheb also allegedly told police the girl had expressed interest in him, but he was determined to “nip it in the bud.” Although Hoheb initially denied having sexual contact with the girl, police said he later admitted having sexual relations with her in his car.
I learned of this story through Thomas, who argues that the rape in this case is consistent with the teachings of the abstinence counselor, as both abstinence-only teachings and sexual assault work off of a model where sex is seen as a commodity and female bodies are treated as sexual property. I don’t disagree with him.
I want to take it a step further though and more closely discuss the counselor’s rather transparent excuse that he was attempting to teach the girl how to say “no.” Yes, it’s an excuse, quite clearly, for how he was not really responsible for his actions because he was role playing, and she just misunderstood. It is, in many ways, a variation on an old standard.
But in other ways, I think, it points to another aspect of rape culture that goes beyond just the apologism of “rape is often a misunderstanding.” It points to the aspect where it is seen as the responsibility of women to say “no.”
Popularity: 17% [?]
Apr
9
Missing the Point on Teen “Sexting” Cases
Filed Under assholes, legislation, misogyny, objectification, paternalism, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, sex and sexuality, sexism, sexual exploitation and harassment, slut-shaming, violence against women and girls | 45 Comments
You’ve probably seen a lot of media coverage lately around the phenomenon of teenagers sending nude or otherwise sexual pictures of themselves to each other, and the fact that a lot of parents, and more notably law enforcement officials, are really freaking out about it.
It wasn’t so long ago that I wrote about an outrageous case where a 15-year-old was arrested on child pornography charges for taking nude photographs of herself. But these types of stories have since really taken off; and they’re even calling it “sexting” now, because what would a story about teenagers and sex be without more ways to make it inappropriately tantalizing?
Of course, the media seems to be taking notice not to talk about how girls are being exploited by law enforcement, and often the (usually) boys who they sent the photos to, but about how girls are Teh Slutty for taking pictures of themselves, and how poor boys are being punished for getting caught up in Teh Slutty themselves. Like here at CNN, and in Thomas’ response to the article at the Yes Means Yes blog:
This article is not perfect, but it makes two really good points: First, that this is wildly and willfully excessive.
Should Phillip be punished? Yes. Should the six teens in Pennsylvania face consequences? Yes. But let’s kick them off cheerleading squads and sports teams. Make them do community service and take classes on sex crimes. Educate other teens on the dangers of sexting. Pay a price, yes, but these young people shouldn’t pay for this for the rest of their lives.
Second, that this ought to be a wake-up call that teen sexuality will develop, and that parents have a responsibility to shape it, which they cannot do by ignoring it
Now, what Thomas does here, again, is not new. In the original article I wrote about, this issue also came up — the case of a girl taking photos of herself was compared with a case of a boy spreading photos of an ex-girlfriend without her consent. And, in fact, he’s only agreeing with someone else presenting the problem. So I could be accused of picking on Thomas here, but this upsets me precisely because I like Thomas, and because he wrote a really intelligent, much longer post on this topic recently.
This most recent post, on the other hand, totally misses the mark. As Elizabeth says about a different but similar article: “it treats teens sending revealing pictures of themselves and teens sending revealing pictures of others without permission as if they were equivalent acts.” And they’re fucking not.
Popularity: 74% [?]
Mar
24
Rolling Stone Subscription = Cancelled
Filed Under assholes, media, misogyny, objectification, pop culture | 36 Comments
I said a few weeks ago that I was planning to cancel my subscription to Rolling Stone magazine, due to their repeated misogyny and other prejudice.
Well, I hadn’t yet gotten around to it. But then, this issue just landed in my mailbox:
The subscription to “random misogyny mag,” as my husband just called it, is officially cancelled. They also got this email, along with my cancellation:
Dear Editors,
As a loyal subscriber to your magazine for many years, I have written you many letters, with increasing frequency, about the repeated misogyny and other prejudice displayed in your magazine’s pages. From allowing Matt Taibbi to use misogynistic and homophobic slurs like “cocksucker,” to calling a transgender woman a “tranny,” to wondering not how to end intimate partner violence but how oh how Chris Brown will rebound his sales figures, you’ve ignored each and every email, both actually and in spirit. Opening up my mailbox and seeing two women simultaneously fellating an ice cream cone was the absolute final straw. I just cancelled my subscription, and I won’t be coming back.
Not that your liberal publication wants feminist female readers like me anyway. Treating women like human beings is so the antithesis of sex, drugs, and rock and roll! Wouldn’t want to water yourselves down, right? Next thing you know, you’d be publishing cover stories about a show like Gossip Girl!
Oh, wait.
Good luck to you in the dwindling print media sector, Rolling Stone. When your readers are so disposable, you’re going to need it.
So, dear readers, any suggestions on how I should replace said music magazine subscription? Spin sucks, Blender is just as misogynistic to the best of my knowledge, and I found Paste to be downright pompous. I’ve seen Mojo in stores and it looks alright, but I’ll be damned if their international subscriptions aren’t outrageous. So . . . thoughts?
Popularity: 18% [?]
Mar
23
Observing and Reporting Rape Culture at Work
Filed Under assholes, marketing, media, misogyny, objectification, paternalism, patriarchy, pop culture, rape and sexual assault, violence against women and girls | 20 Comments
Watching random music videos on TV last night, this commercial for the new Seth Rogen film Observe and Report kept playing over and over again. The basis of the film seems to be that Seth Rogen plays a quirky (according to IMDB, bi-polar — so yay, we can likely expect lots of “jokes” mocking disability and mental illness, too!) mall cop, who has to solve the case of a man who keeps flashing women at the mall.
Well I think we can all agree that this is a totally awesome and highly amusing premise for a movie. So we should probably be unsurprised to see that just a few seconds in, there is a rape joke:
I imagine that the “joke” within the context of the film might possibly be that the line “everyone thinks they’re fine until someone puts in ‘em something they don’t want in ‘em” is referring to something other than a penis. If that’s not the “joke,” then the joke is clearly just “Ha! A penis in a woman that she doesn’t want in her! Whew, rape is hilarious!”
But even if it is the case, the “joke” is still “Oh, hey, that sounds like he’s talking about a penis! In her, when she doesn’t want it in her! Oh man, saying things to women that makes it sound like you’re talking about someone raping them is hilarious!”
And regardless of the context within the movie? The joke in the trailer is clearly the first interpretation anyway.
Actually, this isn’t the exact same trailer that I kept seeing on TV last night. In the preview I saw, we also get a scene were Seth Rogen’s character grabs the female lead and starts making out with her right after she demonstrates how completely drunk she is by throwing up all over the sidewalk. Get it! It’s a joke! Drunk chicks are awesome because you get to take advantage of them!
You can also rest assured knowing that when I was searching for this particular trailer on YouTube, I came across another clip from the movie that portrays women who are the victims of sexual harassment or assault as hysterical, helpless, over-reacting, obnoxious — and yet funny! — bimbos.
Aren’t we so happy that the Apatow clan is constantly purported by the mainstream media to be taking over and reimaging the entire comedy world? God knows that we weren’t going to find a whole movie based on rape jokes before they came along!
Popularity: 22% [?]
Mar
13
Target Women: Barbie
Filed Under feminism, fun, media, objectification, pop culture, sexism | 6 Comments
The latest from Sarah Haskins:
(If you can’t view the embedded video, click here.)
And for those of you who missed it, she also had a pretty awesome Op-Ed in the Washington Post on Barbie’s 50th birthday. (Yeah, I’ll admit it; that’s how I played with my Barbie, too.)
I so cannot wait to see Sarah at WAM!
Popularity: 18% [?]
Mar
3
Because What’s the Point of a Woman You Can’t Fuck?
Filed Under misogyny, objectification, sex and sexuality, sex work, sexism | 10 Comments
From contributing editor Mark Binelli’s otherwise decent Rolling Stone article Motor City Breakdown, about the dying automobile industry in Detroit:
At the show, the traditional rituals are still taking place. If you’ve never been to an auto show, the main ritual involves adults climbing in and out of vehicles they will not be allowed to drive, which always seems deeply unsatisfying. (For related reasons, I’ve never liked strip clubs.)
Well then.
What is with those women being so rude and short-sighted as to not allow Mark Binelli to fuck them? I mean, they’re on display — like cars, so . . .
Just about every two issues, I find myself writing a letter, which always goes unpublished, castigating Rolling Stone for claiming to be so incredibly progressive while failing to reflect said values when it comes to many marginalized and oppressed groups. Usually these letters are about the magazine’s regular unabashed sexism — though I’ve also written in letters about Matt Taibbi’s favorite insult “cocksucker,” and most recently I wrote in with regards to the decision to use the slur “tranny” to refer to transgender Real World cast member Katelynn.
This time, I’m not even sure what to say. But considering the fact that in the same issue, the entirety of what they had to print on Chris Brown assaulting Rihanna was 200 words about how Brown can revive his career (seriously), it’s pretty damn much “fuck you guys, you can take that $11 40 year subscription I’ve been going off of forever and shove it up your asses, because I can surely find less insulting ways than this to read the latest tiny piece of Beatles-related news and see random photographs of Sir Paul.”
If you’ve got something better, send it to letters@rollingstone.com.
Popularity: 22% [?]
Feb
26
Jim Beam Ad Remakes Even Worse Than Originals
Filed Under Australia, International, marketing, media, misogyny, objectification, patriarchy, pop culture, sexism | 12 Comments
You might have seen the extremely offensive and sexist Australian Jim Beam ad series last year at Hoyden About Town.
The Neighbours shows naked women sunbathing outside in their backyard, with men peeping on them. The Girlfriend shows a doormat of a woman explaining how she likes when men neglect her. The Tragedy shows a very attractive woman explaining how she’s sexually attracted to other women.
In all of these, the title of the ad is stated with the word “the” highly emphasized in order to indicate that a phrase like “the girlfriend” means “the ultimate, world’s best girlfriend.” And of course, what could be a bigger tragedy than a woman whose sexuality doesn’t revolve around men?
Now, Jim Beam is holding a video remake contest, where they encourage their “fans” to make their own versions of the commercials. Obviously, with the ads so offensive in the first place, this was always going to be a disaster. But one particular remake of the Girlfriend is especially appalling.
The original ad:
Get it? Because what’s better than a woman who doesn’t have any desires or feelings of her own, but only exists for men’s sexual pleasure without pesky little nuisances like consent getting in the way?
Thank fucking god I don’t drink bourbon. Though, interestingly, I certainly could use a drink. Perhaps this was their real marketing strategy all along?
Thanks to Jenny for the link.
Popularity: 18% [?]
Feb
16
Science Says Men Are Sexist Pigs! Except . . . Not.
Filed Under assholes, media, misogyny, objectification, patriarchy, sex and sexuality, sexism | 8 Comments
When I came across a headline this morning that read “Men really do see half-naked women as sex objects, scientists claim,” I felt that this had to be inherently untrue.
Though I certainly do not doubt the findings in the study that some men react to images of scantily clad women the same way that they would react to an object (rather than a human), I didn’t believe that this was something that could possibly be true of “men” in general. I also felt that rather than being used to point out how sexist images of women and sexist attitudes towards women do actually end up hurting men and women alike, as feminists have claimed for some time, that it would be used instead to make some argument about how men naturally behave and how we can’t change it.
I was right on both counts.
Actually, what the study says but the headline neglects, is that this reaction was seen in men who were determined to be in other ways sexist. That’s right, “men” don’t see half-naked women as objects; sexist men see half-naked women as objects.
Which is something that, again, feminists already knew.
But while the Telegraph article does manage to point study author Susan Fiske’s analysis, which states that this reaction may indeed have something to do with how women are portrayed in the media, guess how the Telegraph also chose to illustrate their article? That’s right, with a picture of a woman who just so happens to not be wearing any pants.
The article by the Guardian, a news source that we would generally believe to be a lot more reliable, also ran with a headline that says “Sex Objects: Pictures shift men’s view of women,” as though it’s some kind of universal response. They don’t mention the whole aspect of how this response is predominantly seen among sexist men until the very last paragraph of the article.
Funny how what this study seems to say — and I say “seems” because of course no one bothered to include the title of the study so that I might be able to find a copy of it or even an abstract (help, anyone?) — is, “shockingly, sexist assholes are sexist assholes.” But yet again, the media has decided to turn it into “sorry ladies, guys are scum who don’t see you as human and you’re just going to have to learn to live with it.”
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Yup, us feminists are the ones who hate men, all right.
Popularity: 18% [?]
Feb
3
Shocking: Playboy Playmates Represent Increasingly Impossible Sexual Ideals
Filed Under beauty myths, media, objectification, pop culture, pornography, sexism | 13 Comments
In what comes as a surprise to absolutely no one who pays attention to media representations of women and sexiness, it looks like the overall BMI of women featured as Playboy Playmates has dropped dramatically over time. Indeed, according to Wired Magazine (who did the analysis), “While real American women have steadily eaten their way up the BMI slope — just like American men — Playmates have gone from a sylphlike 19.4 to an anime-ideal 17.6.”Of course, as previously covered, BMI is on many levels bullshit. But I think that these numbers do still tell us something, when the graph shows such a steadily increasing disparity between the playmates and average American women. Further, the stats go beyond mere BMI. Wired explains:
Playboy’s Playmate data sheets (you know, where they claim to enjoy cupcakes and The Deer Hunter) provide height and weight, among other stats. Our analysis shows that models are shedding pounds and gaining altitude at an alarming rate. To be fair, Playmates provide their own measurements, so they could be exaggerating. Plus, we wouldn’t put it past the editors to stretch the truth (i.e., Miss March 2008 may not actually want to write “comedic short stories” — or have a 21-inch waist). But who cares? What’s interesting isn’t the veracity of the numbers, it’s what the magazine thinks its readers will find ideal.
They further touch on the delicate issue of breast size (while acknowledging that whether or not there is an increase in breast implant rates among playmates is unknown). While overall bust-size, or the measure of the chest circumference at its fullest point, has fallen dramatically, the cup size remained the same. What this means is that the breasts of women featured in Playboy are not necessarily getting larger overall, but they are getting dramatically larger relative to the size of the woman who has them.
What does this tell us? Nothing particularly shocking. Only that standards for women’s sexual attractiveness are getting more and more unrealistic as time passes, and steadily so.
However, Playboy does have a unique and firm place in our society as both pornography and pop culture, and that makes these trends particularly dangerous. And I do have to smile a bit when a non-feminist and fairly mainstream magazine like Wired calls out this kind of bullshit for what it is — even when they include problematic statements such as those which suggest that women with similar measurements to the playmates aren’t “real,” and that the playmates likely don’t have interesting hobbies.
They’ve also put together a pretty nice graph — complete with (censored but still possibly NSFW) pictures which illustrate from older issues of Playboy that sexiness really is relative with the standards of the time. If still almost always white, thin and existing solely for the male gaze.
Perhaps someday, we’ll look at today’s issues of Playboy and also marvel that their pages helped to set the ideal for female sexual attractiveness, only with much more positive implications. Here’s to hoping.
Thanks to Ian for the link.
Popularity: 21% [?]
Jan
26
Berlusconi: Women Are Raped Because They’re Just So Good Looking
Filed Under Europe, International, assholes, beauty myths, misogyny, objectification, paternalism, patriarchy, politics, rape and sexual assault, sexism, sexual exploitation and harassment, violence against women and girls | 20 Comments
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, known for putting his foot in his mouth in really offensive ways, has done it yet again. This time, it’s one hot mess of rape myths and rape apologism, and a revival of the “women are raped because they’re pretty (and therefore rape is a compliment)” meme, once more with feeling:
THE Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, has dropped yet another clanger, infuriating women with the suggestion that a recent spate of rapes will not stop until there “are as many soldiers on the streets as there are pretty girls”.
The comment, made after a decision to deploy more military to combat an epidemic of violent sex crimes, was described immediately by the Opposition Democratic Party leader, Walter Veltroni,as the umpteenth gaffe “by a leader lacking in responsibility and sensitivity for the human beings who have suffered such a crime”.
Mr Berlusconi, who has pledged to mobilise 30,000 soldiers to combat sex crimes after a series of rapes in the capital, Rome, described Mr Veltroni’s comments as obscene and said he believed rape to be “a crime of incivility, execrable and shameful, full stop”.
You know, on second thought, I’m really not sure whether I feel more offended that Berlusconi thinks us women are raped because there are “pretty girls” (not women) who don’t have the sense to stay home, or that his highest condemnation of rape amounts to stating that it’s uncivil.
Popularity: 27% [?]
Dec
18
Men’s Magazine Desires World Without Meaningful Consent
Filed Under marketing, media, misogyny, objectification, patriarchy, pop culture, rape and sexual assault, sex and sexuality, sexism, violence against women and girls | 30 Comments
This image, of a scantily clad woman attached to a video game controller with the caption “Keep on dreaming of a better world,” was posted without comment at Sociological Images.
First of all, it seems pretty obvious to me what the man targeted in this ad (by a men’s magazine) is supposed to use the controller for, and I don’t think it’s making the woman in question do the Chicken Dance for a giggle. The question I keep coming back to is whether this is supposed to be a “real” woman who has somehow been modified and turned into an all submissive sex toy (read: rape victim), or if it’s supposed to be a highly realistic fembot that looks like a real woman for a man’s sexually assaulting pleasure.
Clearly, the former is the worse option, but I’m not sure how much better I would feel about the latter still being upheld as a part of a “better world.”
Of course, I realize that this image is supposed to be lighthearted. It’s a “joke.” But that doesn’t make it funny.
I think that images and “jokes” like this really do point out the deeply destructive and misogynistic rape culture we live under, when “sex” is so regularly portrayed in this way. Few, I imagine, would consider this image to be promoting rape. But personally, it’s all I can see. After all, if the woman was willing and truly consenting, a remote control would not be necessary for her to perform the desired acts. The idea of a completely sexually controlled woman, however tongue-in-cheek, is still promoting as a false-ideal a woman who cannot say no. And a woman who quite literally cannot say no due to control from outside forces is in fact a woman who cannot give a meaningful yes.
Funny, my idea of a “better world” is one where women are sexually empowered and respected, not enslaved.
cross-posted at Yes Means YesPopularity: 29% [?]
Subscribe to The Curvature
“Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less.” — Susan B. Anthony
