My 8 year old gets it.

March 18, 2015

This morning, on my way to school with my 12 year old, I was talking to her about how frustrated I was that over the last two weeks or so, there has been constant reporting on how one man followed another man back to his place and stabbed him to death. Every night, another report about the case. I commented to my daughter that there should be more reports about the 24 women who have been murdered so far, this year (11 weeks) – two murders per week here in Australia.

As we were having dinner tonight The Project DID do a story (we both shot a look at each other), discussing that although the numbers of murders have come down in general of the years, it is a different and alarming story when looking at the increasing statistics of violence against women – with murder obviously being the worst outcome but that a very high percentage of women (87%) experience abuse at least once in their lives; whether it be verbal, physical, at home or out in the streets. The discussion also mentioned how the conversation has to be turned away from victim blaming – although nothing was said about the fact that it predominantly occurs at the hands of a male.
As a society we seem to tip-toe around that glaring fact. Why? I don’t know. Maybe it’s because the discussion generally gets sidetracked with the #NotAllMen arguments and what we should really be dissecting slips away again.

After the story wrapped up, the panelists had a discussion and one of the females said that it angers her that when she goes out into the carpark, she doesn’t feel safe. I can relate to that. Another panelist brought up victim blaming again, saying how we shouldn’t be discussing this issue with statements such as, ‘She shouldn’t have been out getting a taxi at 2am’.

At this moment, my eight year old daughter – who just caught that last sentence – said something along the lines of, ‘But she should be alright because the taxi driver is with her.’

I responded, “These sort of things can happen anywhere and by anyone. What happens if it’s the taxi driver that hurts her?”

She said, “Well then it wouldn’t matter if she got the taxi at night or in the day because that person is a bad person and would do it anyway. So people shouldn’t say that about what time it was.”

Exactly. My eight year old makes a simple deduction – bad people will do bad things regardless, so it’s not the victim’s fault. I was chuffed with her simple logic.

I started to think about what she said in terms of ‘bad people’. If, statistically, violence against women – all violence, actually –  is predominantly done by men (in the United States 90% of murders are committed by males) – how are we to curb this? I’d say that making ‘jokes’ about it, is not the solution; in fact it’s incredibly damaging.

After dinner, I opened up my laptop and lo and behold, one of the most disgusting and dangerous slogans Wicked Campers have (which I thought they had removed) is still being used (Seen in Darwin on Feb 25 2015):

Screen Shot 2015-03-18 at 7.42.46 pm

When violence against women is used as a joke, it only does two things:

1. Creates a sense of permission to feel that women are lesser beings to be violated and hurt – and for the wrong person (like my daughter mentioned) – enact on those sentiments;

2. It creates a sense of dread and fear for women to navigate through this world.

Question #226: Can we please acknowledge that none of this is a joke?

Simply, we are fearful. Our daughters are in danger because society keeps claiming Freedom of Speech, over their – our – safety.

Just last year, a Townsville woman (irrelevant) posed for this image that was for her step-mother’s car – again claiming it was a joke:

913680-8ea242c0-dae8-11e3-971d-8b7ef05f4600

How is it funny to depict a woman tied up with a shovel to bury her? How can we have no compassion for the way this image may trigger women who have endured being tied up – terrorised – trapped – powerless?

I’ll leave you with a post showcasing advice for lads – that includes the following image; amongst other ‘hilarious’ sentiments towards women.

943435_682238671792145_1575163539_n

Whilst these types of expression are continually given oxygen to forge perspectives and attitudes, I’m afraid the future is looking bleak for females. One only need look at what’s happening right now – two women a week are being murdered by men.

Question #227: Can a moral line be drawn? 

Or is it just business as usual?

Deep Breath

Today a good friend of mine ripped out the article from her local Inner West newspaper and sent it to me. It echoes an article I shared last night on social media, about the fact that Wicked Campers is seeking council approval to open a depot on Church Street in St Peters, Sydney. This will mean that, being near a primary school, children will regularly see some of the more unsavoury and insensitive slogans that Wicked Campers pride themselves on. Local parents aren’t happy; well the mums taking a stand in the picture definitely aren’t.

 

IMG_5472

Eight moths ago, when I ran the campaign asking Wicked Campers to remove misogynistic and degrading slogans, there was outrage – OUTRAGE, I say – coursing through the Internet like hot lava. It spurred a little bit of hateful debate but for the most part, a sense of solidarity prevailed from both sexes; agreeing that Wicked Campers has some pretty offensive and degrading slogans driving around our public spaces. So much so, The Senate unanimously voted to condemn them and Wicked Campers themselves promised they would remove ‘insensitive slogans’. Their word; insensitive.

So with ALL that – where are we today?
Despite having broken their promise, showing their complete contempt, Wicked Campers are business as usual; having franchises throughout the world and will (possibly) soon be getting cozy with one of the Inner West’s communities of Sydney. Many have asked me how these things are possible and it reminded me of a quote form the film V for Vendetta:

‘How did this happen? Who’s to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, but again truth be told, if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.’ V

All I can say is; The standard we walk past, is the standard we accept.

This Wicked crusade has been a fascinating, albeit depressing, social experiment in my eyes. July 2014? Fury and lividity. Fast forward six months, when I wrote of their contempt and loss of integrity – all I heard, was the sound of crickets. Few shared the update and when I contacted some of the news people who originally reported on this important ‘hot’ issue with fervour and expressed their equal indignation, I received a tepid response; with some referring it on to others, who never called me back. No stories were run. As a collective, Australia went on as a bystander again.

I don’t get it. Was all of that bravado over the exact slogan my daughter saw? Because there are terrible ones that are still out there, right now. I’ve recently updated the last post with recent sightings from around Australia – sometimes seeing the same van at different corners of the country. Appalling vans, like the following, and more:

IMG_5230

Question#224: Is this the standard we want to teach? 

And as for the absence of male voices and faces in the fight against all this; I believe that as a society – and more importantly, as a culture – we are not only teaching our youth that perspectives like these have our permission to advertise themselves, we are also teaching our youth that because males aren’t standing on an equally visible, vocal platform – it makes it doubly OK. 

When it comes to battles asking for a little more humanity, women hold the front line. Without resorting to blood-shed, women put them selves ‘out there’ none the less; feeling fear and vulnerability, and risk crossing paths with threatening and violent Internet trolls. Due to this campaign, I received two violent messages from the same person (amongst others) and had a Wanted style poster made of me – falsely identifying where I lived. Imagine if he had been right.
The irony? He published under an alias. Coward. (I know his real name, though.)
Neither Facebook nor the Police did anything. And here I was naively thinking it was against the law to threaten someone. With proof, no less.

IMG_1139

Lastly, noone – especially the women who publicly question – actually wants any of this. I put up an update because I thought people would want to be informed; you know, considering that initial reaction. But I’m tired. I’m tired of the walls and the apathy. I’m tired of feeling helpless because problems like this can’t be solved with just the ideas of a few – it needs people power to make change occur. And people power is simply doing something. Anything. Regardless of who one is or what position one holds. This includes John Webb, owner of Wicked Campers. (It’s never too late, John).

And to be clear – this is not about burning this business to the ground nor using threats or violence – it is about finding a solution to the problem, and that problem is that certain slogans need to come down.

Question #225: So what can YOU do? 

Write, call, gather, talk – whatever.
Down to earth blogger and all-round amazing human, Eden Riley, was active and did it her way; numerous people have written to me, telling me they have contacted camp sites to enquire about their policy regarding Wicked vans – some sites don’t let the vans in, if they have offensive slogans. Let backpackers know this. Others have written to their political reps.
And today I applaud the women who are going to tackle the fight at St Peters. I’m with you wholeheartedly.

[Insert own action]

Deep Breath.

Paula

A chilling experience.

May 29, 2014

Whilst discussing the need to look at the actions that are plaguing our existence, an illuminating response came from a wonderful follower and artist blogger, Godtisx.

In the big (mammoth) scheme of things, this is just one microscopic drop of an experience that happened to her.
But it’s not a small deal – because this seemingly ‘innocent’ interaction has happened to a friend; can and does happen to far too many females; it could happen to me.

Godtisx wrote:

You know the problem is entitlement, and society is now constructed in such a way that men feel we are partnering in their thoughts towards access. So many women are overtly sexualizing themselves in such a way who can have a reaction.

I.e. The other day I was in the supermarket, and this really handsome man (and well dressed too) came up to me and started chatting me up. Soon I wanted to get to shopping, so I tried to conclude the conversation with saying we’ll see one another around for sure. I was interested. But then he grabs my hand and starts saying stuff like I’m so attracted to you, are you attracted to me. *Awkward/forced.* So I even said you’re nice looking… but was already feeling uncomfortable w/ the sudden handling?

Then he says I wanna take care of you will you let me? So me being a bit of an introvert, didn’t catch it. I laugh and say, we’ll see each other around, see how it goes blah blah. Then he goes, I wanna take care of you just tell me what you want. So now I am confused. And he goes what do you want? Still not getting it.

Finally he goes I wanna f–k you. How much do you want.

I go — WHAT? You think I’m a hooker? Then I get, no no. I just wanna, and fumbling. I pull away and tell him with a different attitude now, I’ll see you around. With him, trying to apologize and me continuing to move away from him physically. But as I was leaving I thought, I better be careful. That’s the kinda guy that will wait around the corner for you or something. Every woman has to go through this kind of stuff sometime in her life. And unfortunately, it doesn’t turn out positive for some. 😦

How horrible. Seriously.
That feeling of wondering whether a person, who is so forward, is capable of more.
Can they get angry? Have I used the right tone with this complete stranger, to not trigger a negative reaction that may cause harm?

One simply never knows.
And it’s not that ‘every male is like that’, either – it’s that the statistics are stacked against us.
I think the tweet below explains perfectly:

Screen Shot 2014-05-29 at 12.17.36 am

The other important issue (and the apparent white elephant in discussions), is the one thing that truly does separate the sexes, and that is that males are stronger (in general) than females. And that strength is used against us.
When I was attempted raped at university and the sobering moment hit – that it was actually commencing – I knew that the only chance I had, was to use my wits. He had already threatened me with his strength, saying he didn’t want to ‘get violent’ – so I knew I wouldn’t succeed that way.

#NotAllMen but #YesAllWomen

Question #206: Is the argument clear?

It’s urgent that people understand it because there really is no other way to put it.

Screen Shot 2014-05-29 at 12.13.02 am

Screen Shot 2014-05-29 at 12.13.18 am

Screen Shot 2014-05-29 at 12.12.18 am

Deep Breath.

Not *all* men.

May 27, 2014

A fabulous Twitter hashtag firestorm has been born.
It’s #YesAllWomen – a powerful and indignant reaction to the murders committed in the US over the weekend and a response to the usual male cry, when crimes like this occur, of ‘Not ALL men are like that.’
This argument is the endless battle toward a sense of equilibrium. It exhaustingly halts all debate and progress, as the manner in how we tackle issues, like violence against women, becomes the focal point; predominantly how it’s Not. All. Men.
I remember discussing this with my husband because I couldn’t (and still don’t) really comprehend how that argument is deemed more important to deliberate, over the crucial issue/s at hand.

Yes, it is true. Not all men are violent; not all men are rapists.

But it must be understood that, Yes – all women live in an ever more dangerous world.
All females are at risk of male violence. 1 in 3.

The incident mentioned above, that occurred in Santa Barbara on this last Friday 23 May, has left the world in reeling shock. In case you’ve been on a media freeze over the last few days, 22 year old Elliot Rodger stabbed, shot and killed 6 people and then himself, after leaving a 141 page manifesto (with the date of his planned attack and how he was going to execute it) and various video blogs, obsessing about his virginity and loneliness.

He ultimately sought “retribution” on women in general; wanting to “punish” them for rejecting him. His manifesto outlines his desire to put all women in a concentration camp and sit in a tower to watch them all starve to death; saying, “If I can’t have them, noone will.”

My reaction was one of unsurprised horror – but not as much for the shooting and stabbing acts themselves (although my heart aches for those innocent lives – of both genders – cut short due to him) but for what he said, before following through on his hatred, in a kind of ‘suicide note’ on video.
The depth of bitterness this young man harboured and let fester, is psychopathic and his obsession over what he seems to deem is ‘owed’ to him – a woman’s body for sex – is what ultimately drives him to savagely murder and take his own life.

So now the debate begins – or does it?

Exhibit A:
There are those who defend this man and say he’s a legend. MRAs – Men’s Rights Activists.
A Facebook page was started called, ‘Elliot Rodger an American Hero’. I urged my followers on Facebook to report the page to them. It’s been taken down twice, but then the author just starts up a new page. The page creator has said he’s developing a game called ‘You can’t doge the Rodge’ and has asked for funding. (We all know who will get shot in this game).
According to him he has received $500 already. **

One responder to this page wrote:

Screen Shot 2014-05-27 at 12.46.46 pm

So we all agree this is all a tad evil, no?
One man; one crazy mind?
No. It’s much, much more. Just one person saying they may do the same as Rodger, due to females not allowing them access to their bodies, is terrifying. It could be anyone.
The sense of entitlement is crippling.

Not all men are violent; but all women live a life of risk.

As the usual method of debate is proving to be largely useless, due the heavy cloak of clichés and the status quo, I believe there are only two questions we need to be asking as a species:

Question #204: What is the action?

Question #205: Who is doing it?

Regardless of gender.

Once a problem has been identified – in this case, Violence – the only port of call is to look at who is doing it – whether male or female and punish according to the action.
Isn’t that logical?
Statistically – in this current paradigm – it’s males. Males are violent.
Is it conditioning? Absolutely.
But this is not to say that there aren’t males who suffer from violence – but again one must ask, Who is doing it? Some are females; more are males.

I leave you with the image below that I found on the Internet:

10361339_604308806332792_5132109301358569251_n

Most (all?) females would feel a sense of dread in a situation like this.

The points to ponder are 1. Why do females feel this way and 2. how can perceptions and practices be changed so that all we see in this photo, are just people?

Deep Breath.

 

** At time of publishing this post, Facebook had taken down all pages associated with Elliot Rodger. The irony is that I reported many of the statuses within the post and I’m still receiving messages from Facebook telling me the hate speech on the page is not hate speech – on a page that doesn’t exist!

But never fear – IT’S BACK and this time they want a civil suit against the Sorority girls who didn’t ‘service’ Rodger. The email contact is a female – because that’s going to give the movement credibility now.
So I repeat – what is the action and who is doing it?

Screen Shot 2014-05-27 at 10.32.01 pm

 

 

*Serious Trigger Warning*

April 13, 2014

This post contains my 200th question; an important moment.

I have been avoiding writing it, to be honest – finding justifiable reasons why I should leave it till later. This question is a big deal and a hard one to articulate; but it needs to be heard.
It must be heard.

I’ve chosen this post to lay it all down, the best way I can, and hope it resonates in some – any – way…maybe even cause an awakening in some.

My question is:

Question #200: Who is looking after females? 

The attitudes, perceptions and (worst of all) laws revolving around females have worsened worldwide. Actually worsened.
The people who make up the largest chunk of the Bell Curve, however, don’t see it – they choose to watch the sensationalist, fear-inducing ‘Big Brother’ news on the TV; news that’s especially selected for viewing conditioning.
However, on a daily basis there are countless more examples of atrocities occurring to females in developing nations, war-torn nations as well as in the so-called ‘developed’ world.

Developed.
Now there’s a word that brings with it a whopping case of irony when used to describe nations with wealth. I don’t see we’re developed at all, especially when it comes to the equality of half the human race.
Seeing as wealthy nations are only about making a buck – and is ultimately the SOLE thing that’s respected in the mainstream mindset (something in which we all participate, to varying degrees) – females in this realm of enlightened living *cough cough*, are an urgently needed commodity; who are represented as being available ‘on-tap’.

The so-called ‘Beauty Industry’ is the developed world’s teat, off which a huge bulk of consumerism suckles. Of course there’s also the destruction of the planet and the cruelty to animals, such as factory farming, to add to the mix.
We consume, destroy and discard rubbish to within an inch of oblivion; all with a mindless privilege that sickens the soul.

The environment, animals and females – the merchandise for the making of money. Check.
That’s the ‘developed’ world.
Congratulations.

But what about something that unites us all?
In what way do we link hands, as a species, in a common practice around the world?

Porn and prostitution.
(Porn –> prostitution with a camera; Prostitution –> the raping of females)

Anyone who argues that the use of female bodies for the purpose of ejaculation (yes, as it is ultimately the only purpose it serves) is a-okay, is contributing to this insidious modern-day emergency – through direct participation, indifference or both.

Our ‘humanity’ is flailing in quicksand, as the toxicity of this violent and hateful underbelly spreads.

This is a small snippet of Gail Dines on Q & A, discussing porn and counteracting the usual, exhausting and typical argument – “I haven’t seen it, so the problem doesn’t exist.”

Gonzo Porn – as Gail mentions – is violent and hateful and constitutes most of the type of porn that is made and accessed today.
In the following tumblr post titled Porn Statistics – amongst the harrowing statistics, female sex workers describe their horrific circumstances:

The first shoot I did was with a man who was probably 40 and he was as thick as a soda can. He held me down and shoved it in me with no lube tearing my vagina. When I started to tear up and cry he flipped me over and continued from behind be so they wouldn’t get me crying on film. He pulled my hair and choked me over and over again even when I told him it hurt and I could barely breathe.”

While the pornographers say this:

“My whole reason for being in this Industry is to satisfy the desire of the men in the world who basically don’t much care for women and want to see the men in my Industry getting even with the women they couldn’t have when they were growing up. I strongly believe this… so we come on a woman’s face or somewhat brutalize her sexually.”

Recently, I read the most succinct and powerful piece by Fire Womon called:

Prostitution, Pornography and the Illusion of ‘Choice’

This piece echoes my exact sentiments about Pornography and Prostitution.

“My problem – and the problem for all prostituted women – is that there are feminists who claim to be ‘pro-sex work’, which basically just means you agree to women being paid fuckholes. Some of these same feminists claim radical feminists such as myself are ‘anti-sex workers’. I hereby state emphatically that not to be the case. I am anti-sex work. There is a huge difference.”

The face of prostitution and porn has changed since the Internet graced us with its presence.
It is more violent. It is more degrading. It is hateful.
It lusts for younger and younger girls.
(My most common search engine term on this blog is ’12 year old slut’. That doesn’t include the variety of ages like 10 year old slut that I receive, as well as more horrific searches such as, ‘put your dick in my 12 year old pussy daddy video’ {word for word})

The most frightening part? The consumer is insatiable.

Males.

From Prostitution; An Abolitionist Perspective, come the following harrowing statistics:

“In prostitution the conditions that make consent genuinely possible are absent: physical safety, equal power with customers and real alternatives.”

A 2004 study of prostituted women in nine countries (Canada, Columbia, Germany, Mexico, South Africa, United States, Thailand, Turkey, and Zambia)  89% of the women surveyed reported wanting to exit prostitution but did not believe they had any real alternatives. A 2005 study of prostituted women in Vancouver found that 82% were sexually abused as a child, while 72% endured physical abuse. 54% of the participants reported entering prostitution while under the age of consent. In addition 86% were currently or previously homeless. 95% of participants wished to exit prostitution but did not feel as though they had any other viable option.

prostitute1

Choice?

There is little choice bar a small percentage of women. It’s not ‘Pretty Woman’. Those women are a microscopic minority and we simply cannot use them as an argument against the statistics of female, human misery at the hands of males and their drive to ejaculate inside them.

The following comes from an Open Letter to the UN asking for prostitution to be abolished:

You need only read or hear the testimony of women who have been bought for prostitution to find that, day in and day out, what men do when they buy women is “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.” Men pay to ejaculate and urinate on women’s faces, to hurt and humiliate them with any other kind of sexual perversion they had in mind, to not wear condoms.

As no human being should ever be treated that way, it follows then that PROSTITUTION IS A CORNERSTONE OF ALL SUBORDINATION OF WOMEN AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN WORLDWIDE. It supports sexual exploitation which is what customers buy. It is a reserve labor force that allows the economy to not have to fully employ all women seeking paid work. Prostitution structures families differentiating between wife and whore, pitting women against each other in ways that protect male dominance in the family as well as on the streets and in brothels. The list is as endless as is male domination and patriarchy. It is based on the recognition that women are a class hence what affects women in prostitution affects all women. To that end, to see that prostitution is recognized as a universal violation of human rights is to assert the right to human dignity in all of its meaning….. whether or not it is chosen or coerced, whether or not it is trafficked or pimped or is self-imposed by women themselves.

Now for the difficult part.
The following is the link to a site that publishes the opinions of male consumers (‘Punters’ slang) of prostitution in the UK. It outlines how much they paid for their female vessel and discuss their rating of the sex-worker’s performance.

** I must warn you that this may upset some people – but at the same time, I think it’s imperatively important to read the reality of this situation – straight from the horses’ mouths.

The site is called The Invisible Men – Let’s talk about his choices.
The image below is an example of what appears on this site – some are worse. Please read.

IMG_8191

That poor wife.
Porn and prostitution always affect marriages and relationships – in a multitude of varying ways – but always none-the-less.

If one puts Internet porn aside for a moment (a beast that is completely out of control),  the ‘ground-zero’ for us is the popular culture that supports this soul-destroying industry; through consumption by the pedestrian masses – lads’ mags, ads, TV shows and movies that use hyper-sexualised females to support physically, intellectually and/or monetarily heroic males and a pop culture which dictates a fashion that pushes for a look that is sculpted from porn – labiaplasty (of all things!) and plastic surgery are sadly still on the increase.
The worst part for females is the abhorrent rape culture that now exists; as the realities of porn violence seep into the minds of males and are enacted upon the bodies and minds of girls and women everywhere.

Some of these factors are fantastically explored by Gail Dines (again) and Julia Long in the article, Moral panic? We are resisting the pornification of women. It reads:

But feminists who organise against pornification are not arguing that sexualised images of women cause moral decay; rather that they perpetuate myths of women’s unconditional sexual availability and object status, and thus undermine women’s rights to sexual autonomy, physical safety and economic and social equality. The harm done to women is not a moral harm but a political one, and any analysis must be grounded in a critique of the corporate control of our visual landscape.

So I repeat – WHO is looking after females?

I don’t fight for me – I fight for a balanced and equal existence for all.
I fight for my daughters – that they not suffer – and I fight for yours.

I also fight for your sons.

Deep Breath.

I have grappled with the issue of pitting and comparing the actions and/or adversities of one gender by using the other to illustrate, for a long time – but it simply does not sit right with me.

It is like comparing apples with oranges.

For the most part, I believe the intention is generally a positive one (which is a refreshing step toward good), but when perceptions and customs related to gender are so profoundly entrenched, it falls short of accurately addressing the deep-seeded issues of gender disparity.

Exhibit A:

1912333_670251046350628_1056082580_n

This is a familiar visual representation that now seems to be common practice in highlighting gender-label ridiculousness – namely, a female’s.

There are two issues I have with this sort of juxtaposition:

1. Females have always been represented in this way – used as (sexual) ornaments. Males never have. So when we look at the females in the images, we see ‘normal’ and when we scan across to the males in similar poses, we see humour.

Steve Carell, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert recently did a photo shoot, emphasising the ludicrous poses females are encouraged to do:

1375287932320583

Its intentions are admirable but – it’s not the same. It’s just funny.
That humour can (ultimately) also work negatively for the females they’re trying to help, by making them look stupid for participating in their own exploitation; for posing that way in the first place.

I recently saw a snippet of reality TV the other day – one that does renovations on houses. There was a moment where all the contestants had an impromptu dance-off, which lead to the inevitable circle where they strut their stuff in the middle. One of the women chose to be semi-provocative by doing some fetching grinding moves against her partner.
Next was a male. He also did a bit of a provocative dance. It was funny. Everyone laughed.

2. The biggest issue, however, is vulnerability.
When a female is posing sexually, she is vulnerable – her breasts may be practically exposed; she may be bending over something with a short skirt; she may be wearing impossible-to-walk-in-heels (not easy to escape anyone in high heels btw) – you follow my drift.
The males in these representations, however, are not vulnerable.
Their only place of vulnerability is their penis and that is (as always in this current paradigm) *fully* covered.

Everywhere; every time.

How ironic that we seem to find comfort in the male gender – dipped head high in privilege – outlining the woes of the ‘lesser’ gender. Double irony? In most cases it’s statistically males pushing females to pose this way in the first place.

OK, let’s turn the tables; in format as well as gender reversal.

Let’s look at how men are represented and doing the switch.

Exhibit B:

beautygeek-380x337

The image above is from the show, Beauty and the Geek. Never before have I witnessed such a blatantly sexist prime-time show; super-gluing more gender stereotypes to an already fragile equation.
Female = sexy, hot and DUMB;
Male = be who you want to be, you can still get a ‘hot’ female.

Can you imagine a show – heck, a REALITY – where we see females who are daggy/geeky/nerds of various body shapes, together with ‘hot’ males?

I can – but know it’s a concept that is (for the most part) a flash in the pan.
I remember through ads that Glee had a moment where an overweight girl was coupled with the hot football player.

427px-Luck-Pizes

I wonder how many people were genuinely comfortable watching that visual?
I say visual because that’s all ANY of this is based on.
It’s irrelevant whether personalities gel or if people have a profound connection, because ultimately that’s not the message that wants to get taught; there’s no money to be made, if females are secure within themselves, after all.

I intensely wish for a more equal and balanced playing field for females and the bottom line is that females are more than just being the packaging for males’ sexual fantasies.

Question #199: Isn’t this world ready – YET – to unlock the wonderful array of possibilities – just by getting past that horrifically limiting idea of females?

I’ll leave you to think.

My next post is my 200th Question.
Bring your thinking caps along.

Deep Breath.

x

It has recently become more painfully apparent, that there is a common thread to what we consume when watching a screen – whether large or small.

Stories of boys and men. Males.

Please understand that I have no problem whatsoever with these kinds of stories – many of my favourite movies fall in this category – but over the last 10 years, it’s become a tad tedious.

Endless stories of boys coming of age – men fulfilling their destinies – older man taking younger man/teen/boy under his wing etc. etc. etc.

Screen shot 2011-02-14 at 10.31.15 AM

But where’s the female equivalent?

I recently asked my husband why he doesn’t watch women’s sport and he answered: 
“I only want to watch the best.”

I was dubious of this answer because I thought: ‘Women are the best of their sports too.’
 To explain, he used a sport he doesn’t watch – Boxing.
 He said that if he were to watch a boxing match, he wouldn’t watch a featherweight fight, he’d want to watch the biggest and strongest men battling it out. The best.

I actually understood. I even think most people would agree with that logic.

OK. Soooo…

Question #192: What do we worship about women on an equal level?

And it IS worship. Sportsmen with flames superimposed behind them on TV snippets, slow motion footage, both males and females equally celebrating them and what they do. Worship.

If men are physically strong and we honour that about them – what do we honour about women?

We can’t have a world where one half of our human race is continually watched, nurtured and guided to feel they can achieve ANYTHING and not have that same respect for the other half.

But that’s exactly what we have.

So what is there? 
I asked this of my husband but he had no answer or chose not to.

The only thing I can think of – is porn; there is nothing else.

Now, let’s have a squiz at what’s happening up on the movie screen.

The Bechdel Test comes from a cartoon strip by Alison Bechdel from 1985, in which ‘The Rule’ for evaluating films was explained:

In order to pass, the film or show must meet the following criteria:

  • It includes at least two women;

(Some make the addendum that the women must be named characters)

  • who have at least one conversation;

(Because of quibbles regarding what length of time makes a valid conversation, some have proposed the addendum that it last at least 60 seconds)

  • about something other than a man or men. 

(The exact interpretation of this can vary; some feel that it’s okay to mention a man or men so long as they’re not the primary subject of the conversation, while others will demand a conversation where men aren’t mentioned at all. Some make the addendum that the conversation also cannot reference marriage, babies, or romance)*

Most films – sadly – fail this test.

Have a look for yourself. TV shows too.

In her 1929 essay A Room of One’s Own, Virginia Woolf wrote what she observed in regards to the literature of her time:

‘All these relationships between women, I thought, rapidly recalling the splendid gallery of fictitious women, are too simple. So much has been left out, unattempted. And I tried to remember any case in the course of my reading where two women are represented as friends.  They are now and then mothers and daughters. But almost without exception they are shown in their relation to men. It was strange to think that all the great women of fiction were, until Jane Austen’s day, not only seen by the other sex, but seen only in relation to the other sex. And how small a part of a woman’s life is that; and how little can a man know even of that when he observes it through the black or rosy spectacles which sex puts upon his nose.’

How fascinating…and depressing.

Nothing. Changes.

So what is it with us?

Why do we find it so hard to watch women in equal (but different) representation to men and boys?

Deep Breath.

x

* http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/TheBechdelTest?from=Main.TheBechdelTest

Here in Australia we have a t-shirt company named Nena & Pasadena.

The t-shirts they sell show degrading images of women – generally with their faces cut out of the image so that their value only lies in their breasts, buttocks and the all-important pose.

Example:

nenapasadenawebsitefrontpage20162166-02-FT-XL

NP1112300WHTE-NENA-AND-PASADENA-1

You get the idea.

A few months ago, this company started an all-ages ’Casting Call’ on Instagram #npcasting – calling out for men and women (boys and girls) to post photos of themselves, to then be judged by a group of privileged lads – deeming them the ‘hottest’.

To the truly tiresome argument that men are objectifying themselves too, I reply with the obvious – it’s not the same. Men have their shirts off, flexing chest muscles. Strength. That’s it. They’re not sexually posing with their legs spread or bending over with their butts in a g-string (thong).

Simply – the males are not vulnerable. And that’s the glaring difference.

There is also the fact that there are far more females posting up their ‘selfies’.
I’m sure you don’t need to go over to the site to verify you’ll see predominantly women and teen girls in hyper-sexualised, or sexy-kitten, or innocent-young-girl-ready-to-be-deflowered etc., looks and poses.

I took the following images off the actual competition page:

IMG_6694IMG_6722

So here is my perspective on this pandemic:

Yes, women are doing it.
But WHY?

This is not empowerment.

And there’s a very simple reason for it – it’s done for validation from a vulnerable position, not one of power. Once someone seeks validation, they are in a submissive position to the person they’re awaiting judgement from.

Period.
And this obviously gives the ‘judge’ ultimate power and places them in a dominant position.

This is not what we want for our girls and we don’t want our sons to see and judge girls and women this way. And yet…

What we also seem to forget – but shouldn’t – is how these girls and women will be spoken about.
It won’t be about their sunny disposition, it will be crass, degrading, demeaning and more – calling them bitches, sluts, whores, gangas (girls who like gang rape; a term used by teens) and so on.

We know that.

Question #190: So, why do we continue to act so blind and ‘unaware’ of the effect this is having on our psyche?

  • That women are being collectively objectified and seen as submissive (by BOTH sexes), in everyday life;
  • That our youth’s perspective on gender is becoming alarmingly skewed and toxic;
  • That there is no equal modelling on what healthy and loving relationships look like.

All of this is for the male gaze – one that’s becoming insatiable.

As a tiny example, this ‘casting call’ is evidence of that.

Why does Nena & Pasadena need to incite this behaviour?
It’s a win/win for them – they get the benefit of seeing to what levels women will go to be validated in this way and get wonderful material for men everywhere (including predators) to masturbate over.

Simple truth.

Sadly the images are posted up by a large contingent of girls and women who have been brainwashed to think their value lies only in the collective sum of their body features; although the differentiation in their ‘hottness’ is miniscule – they all look the same. The fact that women’s faces are absent (like on many N & P t-shirts) just confirms this.

Why doesn’t that annoy women enough to stick two big fingers up at it all?

These t-shirts are just a cog in the machine; the machine that includes porn magazines in newsagencies and petrol stations all the way through to the infinite collection of violent and degrading porn on the Internet.

I recently featured in the article  Too much, too soon –  in the Sydney Morning Herald magazine, Sunday Life. This is a succinct and illuminating piece by Melissa Jacob, about the toxic relationship our kids are having with Internet porn.

This is an emergency.

These women are the supply; Men are the demand.

And we all know that when demand is strong – and supply is waning – extreme measures, like trafficking, are taken to keep the demand happy. That road leads to a desensitised world – one that will stoop to anything, while the rest turn a blind eye.

Are we there yet?

Deep Breath…and make a stand!!

x

PS Want to take action?
1. Nena & Pasadena is owned by AFL player Buddy Franklin (who joined the Sydney Swans in 2014). The AFL has a policy regarding respect for women that this ‘business’ does not comply with. You can write to the AFL or the Sydney Swans and let them know your thoughts – especially from you good males.

2. With some friends and the gals from Collective Shout, we’ve been posting our own memes on the competition page.
Why not do your own? It’s as easy as writing a sign, taking a photo of it and posting it on #npcasting on Instagram.

I put up the following one:

1453236_509055692524771_1575573193_n

and this one:

IMG_6681

GO FOR IT!!

There has recently been a raging debate on the Internet, since Emily Yoffe wrote an article called, College Women: Stop Getting Drunk.
Basically – Girls, if you don’t want to get raped – don’t drink around men.

A plethora of articles were written in light of this perspective – most notably Mia Freedman, who basically agreed with Yoffe and received quite the backlash from many women.

article-1267600-031354700000044D-762_468x314

So what’s my 2 cents’ worth?

First cent:
In essence, I agree that drinking impairs people’s behaviour as well as reduce one’s ability to think coherently – depending on the amount consumed and other circumstances.
This type of conversation should cover both men and women, as well as look at the many areas of life the consumption of alcohol effects. For all.

But that’s not what’s happening.

This argument is (again) about what women/girls need to do, to better their chances of not being raped…which our logical brains know – is impossible.
Have we moved on from outfits or do we just go ahead and add that to the list?
What’s next – curfew for girls and women?

It doesn’t matter how else I look at it, listing what women and girls need to do should not be the primary topic of discussion.

First we need to flood the debate with discourse about men.
Men, guys and boys:
* Why they’re participating in more crimes of this nature and
* What they (and we as a society) need to do to curb its violent trajectory.

First and FOREMOST.

But we’re doing it the other way round; looking at how women need to ‘prevent’ (the unpreventable) while the nature of men goes largely untouched and – for the most part – unpunished.

This graph was created by the Enliven Project using data from Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey and FBI reports. It appeared in the Washington Post at the start of the year.

1234057_484756804954660_817317341_n

This particular form of advice does nothing but provide a disservice to both genders:

* Men/boys because they’re being painted as barbaric animals who use the primal urge they can’t stop, to take advantage of intoxicated (and sober) women and girls, rape them, sometimes take turns and film the whole thing on their smartphones;
* Women/girls because they need to be taught to restrict their life practices, in the hope that the predatory male gender doesn’t stick their penis in them without consent.

Second cent:
This is not to say that parents – and society at large – shouldn’t stop mentoring their children and the youth of today, of the dangers of alcohol; that annihilating themselves is harmful on many levels.

So I hope it’s clear that I think the current drinking culture of all our youth is excessive, dangerous and violent.

BUT – the second problem I have with this discourse is that, as good as this advice may be for girls and women of today and beyond:

Question #189: What are we saying to the young women who have ALREADY been raped and may have been drinking when it happened?

What if they felt safe with the men/man/boys/boy they were with?

What if they were tricked? Deceived?

Then raped/gang-raped.

Then left.

What about them?

Articles like Yoffe’s only help to drive home the deep-seeded shame they already feel by ultimately saying, it wouldn’t have happened IF:
* you had stayed home
* you hadn’t drunk alcohol
* you hadn’t gone to that party
* you hadn’t…
* you hadn’t…

We make them feel guilt.

That’s victim-blaming.

While this type of conversation continues to ignore the elephant in the room – the rapist – we neglect the mental health and recovery of those countless girls and women who have experienced a life-altering violation of their rights as a human being.

All they are seeing are guys/men getting off from being charged – even with filmed evidence^ – whilst girls/women are being given an instruction manual on how to stop the behaviour of another (???) through lists of recommendations including how much they drink, where they go, who they talk to, what they wear, etc., etc., etc.

I think we owe those women a lot more.

Deep Breath.

x

^ In the case of Daisy Coleman – who was 14, given an intoxicating drink by a group of 17 year olds, gang-raped and left unconscious in the snow – saw charges against the football ‘hero’ dropped DESPITE filmed footage.
If we live in a world, where filmed footage is not enough to convict, then women are truly and royally screwed.

I really hope so.
Although, this is for women too – of course. I’m sure there are many who will disagree with me.

I apologise for my absence of late – it seems the strains of life as a full-time working mum have pockets when they take their toll. I’m sure many working mums can give me an exhausted ‘amen’ there.

This bit’s for the guys. (You can listen in, though, gals)

Last week, I escaped with Hubby and the girls to a National Park for three days, with zero phone reception and no Net. It was sublime and enormously relaxing – which was just the ticket, as I think I was heading toward a ‘system overload’ situation.
Having access to the world would have rendered the whole mini-break pointless, as the crappy things that are going on profoundly affect me.

So, my first ‘me’ activity on the first day, was to pluck the hairs off my legs.

Mmmmmm – I hear ya – exciting stuff.

Now I know that I said in my last post on this issue – A hairy moment – that my only manner of removing leg hair was through shaving, BUT I had purchased a new ‘machine’ and after recently slicing the top off a toe knuckle with a razor (infuriating and bloody painful), as I attempted to balance in the shower to shave, I thought I’d give the ‘hair yank’  another shot.
Exfoliation and cream galore will be needed to stop the usual ingrown hairs.

So as my legs started to welt – Exhibit A:

IMG_6298

– my daughters entered the room, looking quite perplexed, and asked why I was doing that. Like I was a crazy person.

At that moment, guys, what am I to say?

The truth? – that less than a hundred years ago, this became the ‘fashion’ and sealed our doomed fate to constantly undo what nature has given us?

Or our truth? – that they simply have to and will spend a truck load of money in the process?

I sat there – blinking (with the sounds of crickets) – and just looked at them.

Blank.

Question # 184: Do you see the conundrum we’re in as women?

At every turn – it’s JUST about our looks.
And that attitude permeates everything to do with women.

I want to instil in my girls – in ALL girls (and dare I dream it; boys and men) – that beauty absolutely comes in all shapes, colours…and (heaven forbid) hairiness.

But how can I teach that when I’m sitting there – intentionally – ripping the hair off my legs, leaving them in welts?

I felt a bit like a fraud.

So, I’m still a feminist who will not let my leg and armpit hair grow, because it’s entrenched in my views of beauty  – BUT can you understand the frustration?

Before some of you guys say you have an equal problem because you have to shave your faces – I’ll respond with. ‘But by beauty standards you don’t have to.’ Exhibit B:

kinopoisk.ruHugh Jackman sports a scruffy beard while greeting fans outside the 'Late Show with David Letterman' in NYC7402119_f520

We have to…and it’s a bummer.

OK gals, this part is for you AS WELL. (Don’t go anywhere yet, fellas)

No, hair removal is not the number one issue that women face – by a long shot – women have much graver and more horrifying problems to face and deal with, on a global scale.

I wrote about this because I needed to explain the simple frustration of women (with the means – like myself) choosing to shave their legs, at the expense of all our wallets – men’s and women’s – AND the environment.

Imagine the plastic (as an example) we’d have saved from being produced, if this weren’t the fashion for women?
And the resources to MAKE that plastic? It’s mind-boggling when hair removal is a billion dollar industry.

All for what? Hair?

Sadly, the logic doesn’t translate to the already converted – like me – but:

Question #185: Should we really be doing this to ourselves and imparting it onto our kids?

It’s like men can be as hairy as they want to be and are steered away from their feminine aspects (which balances them out) – being ridiculed for being a ‘girl/woman’ in any way.

Whilst women have to rid themselves (preferably) of all body hair – except for the hair on the head, of course, which has to be long and cascading locks. (Another extreme beauty expense, BTW)
Women are being steered away from their wonderful, rugged strength (which balances them out) because those masculine traits – whether they be physical (looks) or in attitude – deem them ‘unladylike’.

We’re missing out on the best of ourselves.

We’re a bunch of idiots.

Deep Breath.

x