Just sayin’ – #6
June 12, 2012
A female friend of mine, who works in a corporate-style office, told me about an interesting analogy that was made.
The group listened to a male colleague ask,
“How is the Economy like a strapless bra?
Half wonder how its being held up, while the other half wait for the collapse, so that they can take full advantage with both hands!”
AAAaaahhahahahaha…aaaahha.ha.ha…hoohoohoohahahaha…oh.oh.oh.hoo.hoo.hoohahaha…
…thigh, slappin’ stuff.
._.
Later, my friend and other female colleagues talked about the inappropriate nature of the ‘joke’ and after some discussion, one of the women said, in a resigned manner, that she had ‘gender fatigue’.
Gender Fatigue.
What a succinct phrase – when you’re just too exhausted to fight every gender-biased comment made because you’re sitting and soaking in a vat of it.
Question #56: Have you been feeling any Gender Fatigue lately, ladies?
As my friend says (and I agree), men will always be men, but can’t they just keep it to themselves?
…Just sayin’
Deep Breath.
x
PS – I don’t have Gender Fatigue…yet! *wink*
Madonna
June 11, 2012
I received a comment recently, which spoke of a person I’ve been wanting to write about for a while:
Madonna.
I was a MASSIVE Madonna fan growing up. I remember being in Year 10 in 1985 (15 Years old) and I was walking to school with my bestie, Katy. We were in deep and serious discussion about the rumours we had heard that Madonna was going to tour Australia. Wooooo Hooooo! We were planning how we were going to obtain the funds to be able to get good tickets, how we were going to sleep overnight at the ticket outlet (yes, no Internet) etc. etc.
Well, she certainly kept us hanging because she didn’t come until 1993 – but Katy and I still went together AND we got really good seats. It was simply awesome.
I’m deviating – back to the point.
When I was 14, Madonna released her song, Like a Virgin. I remember the ‘oohs & aahs’ over the word ‘virgin’ being in the title, but that was about it. The video is basically her strutting around Venice, dancing on a gondola in the Venetian waterways, being stalked by a lion and ending up with a guy with a lion’s head/mask. All very symbolic – haha!
It has ‘touches’ of raunchiness – but, please, it’s pretty tame.
Let’s jump ahead to, what I see as, one of her most empowering songs – Express Yourself. It’s now 1989 and I’m 19. On viewing this video, one can see that Madonna has gone an extra level in demonstrating her sexuality…BUT the thing that I think makes it different to what’s going on today, is her message. I (still) see her as a formidable woman saying,
“Don’t go for second best, baby; Put your love to the test; You know, you know, you’ve got to; make him express how he feels; and maybe then you’ll know your love is real.”
She basically sings that HE has to prove himself to get a girl’s heart and that girls are better off on their own than settling for second best. She sings the chorus in a suit and she raised many an eyebrow because she ‘flashes’ her bra underneath her blazer and grabs at her crotch – Michael Jackson style. Her dancing is one of strength, not one from a strip club.
Then there’s the book – Sex.
I own a copy. I was 22 and it took A LOT to part with the $70 that it cost…that was 20 years ago and a tonne of money (for me anyway). She broke all the rules with this one and in a way it was a “F#ck You” to Warner Bros. who were placing restrictions on her artistic expression. It coincided with the release of her new album, Erotica.
Difference with today? Well, it was certainly NOT advertised on TV – it was something that was more of a ‘word-of-mouth’ thing – and it was sealed in a metallic bag with Madonna’s image on it (as you can see in the picture above). To see it, you had to buy it – so there was no exposure to the wrong set of eyes. Today we are wallpapered with hyper-sexuality.
In a way, my teen years and early 20s had Madonna in my life and I think I did actually learn from her. I saw someone who confidently pushed aside the ‘weaker sex’ image and made us see that we women are sexual beings with sexual desires, but that guys had to (for want of a better word) earn their way to it.
So, the question is:
Question #55: Is Madonna the same or different to today’s female artists?
I say, DIFFERENT!
Why? Because:
1. I absolutely don’t see the message in current female pop artists’ videos, that men have to share a woman’s sexuality. Women, in these clips, are hyper-sexualised in their actions, while men are generally just sitting there, fully clothed, observing the female artist doing everything short of sexual acts themselves (Jennifer Lopez’s latest clip pops into mind). And that’s on Music Video shows – for anyone to see – sometimes in your local KFC restaurant; as I once observed.
Madonna even had the video, Justify My Love, banned by MTV in 1990. Yes, banned! (It had a quick shot of girl kissing girl/looking like a boy and some raunch). We’ve passed the point where a video’s banned in this day and age because our moral compass is off kilter.
2. I think many female artists have tried to copy Madonna and think what they’re doing in their videos (to simply pleasure ‘the man’) is empowering. It’s not. Why? Because nothing is empowering when one objectifies themselves with no equal reciprocal action.
What – exactly – is gained?
3. She was the only one of her time – unique – and she was sending her (I think) empowering message from the start. She may have gone a bit far at times, but on the whole she encapsulated strength and exuded power. Nowadays, it seems that female pop artists have the same type of video. Whatever makes money, right? No sense of being unique in this culture.
Snore.
So, what do I think of Madonna now?
I’m saddened that she’s started to deform her face with surgery and is not ageing gracefully. She could have been, again, such a front-runner for women and show how beauty, strength and power can come from within – but alas, it was not meant to be.
Deep Breath.
x
This is Freedom from Porn Culture‘s post about what happened at the LFL Sydney game last night.
All logic points to this ‘sport’ being shite – simply because of its uniform. That is all.
For those of you who didn’t get an insiders look at the LFL Promo match at Sydney last night, you missed the cause of equality for female athletes being set back, here are the updates…
Grey team player loses her pants, the mostly male crowd goes wild, they replay it ‘close up’ on the big screen and the crowd cheers. Pink team makes a touchdown, player celebrates by slapping her thighs and making hand gesture of a vagina. An athlete in the crowd says “I’m a sports person and I find this so offensive.” LFL players dance for the men, the men go wild, not unlike a strip club (sounds like strip club sport, looks like strip club sport, equals strip club sport). Three male spectators are invited on the field to chase and tackle one of the LFL players (Melinda Tankard Reist – “in no other sport would crowd be…
View original post 410 more words
A response – # 3
June 4, 2012
I invite you all to read the SIX comments an American gentleman left as a response to my last post.
I actually don’t know what he’s on about because he only keeps repeating in bold letters: they CANNOT COMPETE WITH THE NFL.
Over and over again…plus a lot of insults.
I think the springboard for his rant, was my question wondering why the women can’t wear protective gear. I meant mainly skin protection, as they’re being brutally tackled onto the ground, with literally nothing on. Fair question, isn’t it?
He also talks about his country’s superiority and how retarded we are in Australia…although I’m sure he just means me.
That’s OK…
…because at least I have a grasp of grammar and know how to clearly make my point – something this gentleman is lacking.
Superior indeed.
Deeeep Breath.
x
PS The following are some more promotional shots for the LFL.
Question #53: Don’t you think these images cross the line? (especially the second one)
There is no male equivalent. If you do have examples – I’d love to see them.
I’m pretty sure you mostly agree with me…so I ask you:
What’s the lesson – what is it teaching?
A question for men – #1
June 3, 2012
Well guys, in true faith of the fact that I’m fighting for a balanced world and perspective, I’m keen to also strike up a conversation with you.
I know that there are MANY men who agree with the fact that things are skewing out of balance in what is being portrayed about both girls and boys; women and men. But, of course, there’s always a perspective that men have, that is quite different to women’s.
Adam wrote a response to my post, Just sayin’ – #4. It reads:
I think – as a bloke – I’m not interested in mens tennis but id rather watch womens tennis (not just for the grunting either) It is also a better style of match to watch.
I wouldn’t watch women’s rugby but i would watch the lingerie ball if it was on telly – I wouldn’t go to it or go out of my way mind you
What I’m saying is that if women market themselves as aesthetically pleasing they actually have an ADVANTAGE over men in sports –
Why is this so bad when women like Lauren eagle use their good looks (unfortunately not speaking ability though) to get sponsorship and money – I dont see the same opportunities coming to a young guy with the same skill-set.
Athletes play to their strengths and good luck to them – what would these girls in the Lingerie ball be doing otherwise? checkout, home mums, glamour work or worse? Maybe some have other jobs – that would be great – but this is where i reckon they make their money – and good luck to them.
I know women like watching mens contact sports because of the guys looking “fit”
Thats what i think – Ads
My reponse to this is simple. I understand and agree that women have always been ‘the fairer sex’ and have used that to their advantage, to an extent.
However, it’s becoming the ‘poster’ for our young girls – except it’s not the ‘seductive’ or ‘sexually mysterious’ look that we used to have – in this internet and inter-connected current culture – it’s just ‘slutty.’
Can you see the difference?
Tonight on The Project (again) they had a story on the LFL because the first demonstration game was on last night, in Brisbane.
Wow! I tell you what – the footage I saw of the US girls playing, was full on. They were smashing each other. It was really impressive actually. They looked like amazing athletes. I did cringe, though, when they were being rammed into the ground – with nothing but bare skin.
So…why can’t they wear proper protective gear?
The audience was a sea of men, drinking beer. Collective Shout posted the following:
“Heaps of kids there, great family entertainment” reported Mike Goldman from last night’s Lingerie Football League event in Brisbane. He also tweeted this picture.
Would all of these men have gone to watch if the women were dressed like their male counterparts? If the answer is no, which I suspect it is (tell me if I’m wrong) – then there’s the problem and why it’s going too far. What does it say about us as a society?
One of the panelists on The Project (I can’t remember his name) said something about this being “the women’s choice to play.”
Yes, it’s their choice. But I wonder why there are so many eager candidates. Are we teaching a generation of girls that it’s OK to dress this way – even in sport? Do you think it’s OK?
If you are a parent, relative or friends with people with young girls and boys:
Question #51: Do you think the casual acceptance of the LFL is an indicator that things are heading down a dangerous road?
I see young boys, like the one in the picture above, learning about women and how this saturated look is fine tuning his tastes for ONE sexually desirable look.
I see young girls learning that men only want ONE sexual look.
Why? Because it’s everywhere – right into their smartphones, in their hands.
Question #52: Is this what we really want for our young ones? One look – no variety – just to make money?
If you’re new to my blog, I have always stated that I think men and women have had the same desires throughout time, and that’s cool – but I didn’t have this in my face when I was growing up (I’m 42).
How do we navigate and guide our youth through this? Surely saying the LFL is OK, is not the way.
Can’t wait to hear your thoughts.
Deep Breath.
x
PS If you’d like to vote against this sport coming to Australia – because these women (and in turn our daughters) are being objectified – go to Change.org and cast your vote.
http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-the-lingerie-football-league-in-australia
It’s a long way, to the top…
June 2, 2012
As I was cooking last week, I caught the tail end of the show, The Project. I have to say that one of their last stories drove home some simple truths about women in the work force. I found myself shouting, “YES!” in the kitchen…on my own, haha!
Because what they discussed so simply; so succinctly; is an issue that – I believe – hits the core of how we can possibly make change.
The story discussed the microscopic representation of women in clout positions ‘at the top’ and the glass ceiling women hit – something I’ve been discussing for a while. In a nut shell – we barely a voice in the running of this world.
Statistics they presented:
- In Australia, the percentage of women at the top (Female Chairs and CEOs of ASX 200 companies)… 2.75% less than three percent!
- Australia is equal 1st, in the world, with women’s education AND we’re better educated than men – 87/100 women enrolled in tertiary education compared to 67/100 men. Irony number one.
- Advertising man, Todd Sampson, who was on the panel, said that women represent 5% of top advertising positions, although women constitute 80% of buying power. Massively HUGE bit of irony there.
Natasha Stott Despoja even says, “What’s it going to take?”
I’ve always discussed these issues in the past, with a gargantuan sense of frustration. We’re equally as smart, we have the buying power…and yet…
They said that in Norway (if my hearing over the extractor fan was good), they put a quota on getting women in the boardroom (currently at 11% in Australia) – up to 40% – by law.
Many countries have listened and are already following suit.
It’s huge.
Here in Australia there’s discussion about putting in a temporary quota system, aiming at 40%, to inject women into more clout positions.
I think this is a fantastic idea.
Of course, there is an objection – as one woman said, she didn’t want to get a job because of a quota she wanted to get it on her own merits. There’s one colossal flaw with this…if we have the brains (and then some), why aren’t we there already? As Dr Phil likes to say, “How’s that working for ya?”
Seeing as the current system isn’t remotely representing women adequately:
Question #50: Do you think a quota is the way to go? If not, how?
The following picture is from an article from The Guardian (UK), where the following was written:
Britain’s economic recovery is being held back by a lack of women in the boardroom, David Cameron has warned.
The prime minister said there was clear evidence that ending Britain’s male-dominated business culture would improve performance.
Thoughts?
Deep Breath
x
What about the white elephant in the room?
May 25, 2012
The creator of the LFL, Mitchell Mortaza, has issued an official statement in direct response to Australia’s Federal Minister for Sport, Kate Lundy.
I am utterly perplexed because what we’re saying is simple. Either the men involved don’t get it or they just want to have things their way. I think they get it.
In the statement, the only issue Mortaza discusses about the LFL, in its defence, is the actual sport itself. I don’t think there’s a single woman out there who wouldn’t applaud any female athlete, who challenges and extends her physical boundaries.
But what about the white elephant in the room? The fact that the women are playing a tough, injury ridden game in. their. frilly. underwear! …with garter belts, bow ties and accidental nudity to boot!
Question #47: If it truly is all about the sport, why do the women have to play in unprotective, sexually provocative underwear?
THAT’s the problem. It’s sexism…and it’s exploitation. As a response to a comment left after my last post, I wrote:
This is what was written about one of the US players of the LFL:
Tampa Breeze Florida player Liz Gorman told CBC Radio earlier this year what it is like to wear uniforms designed for maximum flesh exposure: “Oh. Well … well, honestly … I don’t like it. I’d rather wear full clothing. Because when you fall, it literally rips your skin. I’d love more clothing, but at the same time like any sport, the players don’t get to choose the uniform.”
Well, she doesn’t sound like she loves it but if she says no, she’ll probably lose her job. Do you know what it reminds me of? When I worked in Uruguay and the people there had terrible workers’ rights – and if you didn’t like your situation? Well, there’s a queue of people willing and waiting to take your spot. It’s exploitation.
On the Collective Shout FB page, they wrote:
“Have just been listening to some interviews with ex LFL players. All the same story, they say they paid health insurance with the LFL, endured a serious injury and the LFL refused to pay. One woman is thousands in debt because of medical expenses.”
Wow, sounds like a dream job! The fact that all these revelations are coming out means that these women are (or will eventually) be exploited. Bottom line.
Therefore, it’s wrong and we should fight against it coming here.
According to Mortaza, the Australian fan base brought them out. Surely there’s more of us who are against it…surely…
Does anyone else like Mortaza’s suit? Nicely covered, isn’t he? One woman wrote the following on Collective Shout’s FB page:
“People with power are clothed. People without power, unclothed. Simple”
I’ll leave you ladies with something to mull over. On the issue of gender clothing coverage, have you noticed how guys’ boardshorts are getting longer? I’ve seen lengths that are mid-calf. MID-CALF! That’s a lot of coverage. What are they trying to hide? They used to wear actual shorts 25 years ago…actually guys and girls had similar lengths.
So, why don’t they wear Speedos?
What? They don’t want to show the world their ‘penis bump?’ Feel a little too exposed?
Women, on the other hand…
Deep Breath…and don’t forget to vote against this on Change.org!
x
With power comes great responsibility.
May 24, 2012
It feels like we’re entering (if not already entered) a paradigm where power is highly sought after – but the ‘responsibility’ that comes with that power, is being neglected.
This issue of the Lingerie Football League (LFL) is getting me quite fired up. I’ve been having a small ‘discussion’ with a man on my Questions for Women Facebook page. My last comment to him is at the end of this post.
His perception, like maaaany, is that we need to take a ‘chill pill’ about the whole thing.
I must admit that my first response to him had some bite because, like many comments I’ve read before, men compare something like the LFL to the uniforms worn by Beach Volleyball players (for example).
They see the difference and that alarms me deeply.
That one is a uniform adequate for the sport and the other is lingerie with garter belts?…and ‘accidental nudity?’ According to an article written by Melinda Tankard Reist:
“Players have to sign contracts agreeing to “accidental nudity”. There’s nothing accidental about it: flesh exposure is virtually guaranteed. The contract states: ” … Performances hereunder may involve accidental nudity. Player knowingly and voluntarily agrees to provide player’s service … and has no objection to providing services involving player’s accidental nudity.”
If they wear any additional items of clothing under the lingerie they will be fined $500. Apart from All Star matches, they are not paid. And they are at serious risk of injury. In fact, the league brags about all the injuries suffered by female players.
It is a mix of voyeurism and violence.”
Now – the most important point or argument put forward:
“But they’re doing it of their own free will.”
Are they? Really?
Well, yes, literally they are – but is the decision an educated one? If you think of the quote, “You can’t be what you can’s see” (Miss Representation), these women are products of what they’ve seen around them, as they’ve grown and developed, and now they’re simply making the image grow, as it tragically becomes ‘fashion’ or worse, the norm. It’s a growing emergency because the more girls and young women are ‘fed’ this image, the more they feel the necessity to join up…
…and don’t the guys just love that they do.
After all, human beings have that uncanny knack for doing things that may not be the best for them – especially it feels good. Right?
And this is where I need to state – quite emphatically – that I don’t begrudge people of their desires. But I need to ask:
Question #46: Where do we draw the line? Where’s the responsibility to our youth?
I believe these young women DO need our help – make it our responsibility, seeing as the men in power are only looking out for themselves – because these women haven’t had much else to model themselves on. They’re insecure of their worth and need validation. They’re told by men that they’re ‘hot’ – paid nothing (in most cases) – and are ultimately exploited.
I continue to be completely (and sadly) gobsmacked that this LFL was permitted to come to Australia. The presentation game is in Sydney in two and a half weeks, so please make sure you vote against this on Change.org:
I think there may even be two different petitions going. Sign them all!
Deep Breath everyone!
x
![US_SOCIE(32)[1]](https://questionsforus.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/us_socie321.jpg)
Facebook comment:
This ‘sport’ only exists to exploit women to service men’s desires.
This is a great post about The Lingerie Football League coming to Australia. Not only is this as sexist as it gets – they are enticing families to take the kiddies along. We must all stand up and say “NO” to this.
Deep Breath
x
Today’s Herald Sun featured an article by Australian women’s activist and www.collectiveshout.org co-founder Melinda Tankard Reist, reiterating all the reasons we should not let Lingerie Football League (LFL) come to Australia.
WHEN a man plays gridiron – or American football – he is dressed for maximum protection to ensure safety in a game known for its raw physicality. His body is covered, with little exposed flesh, to minimise injury.
It’s not the kind of game a man would consider playing in his underwear. That would just be dumb, right? But it seems rules are different if you are a woman playing for the Lingerie Football League (LFL). The less clothing the better. In fact, it’s a requirement of the game.
LFL is blatant sexualisation and sexism, while promoting violence towards near naked, physically unprotected women, with outrageous clauses for maximum boob and bum exposure with little or no pay and the whole…
View original post 312 more words
At the start of the week, I (and hopefully you) signed the petition against the Lingerie Football League.
Very late last night I signed the following petition:
Basically one of our high-profile AFL (Australian Football League) players, Lance ‘Buddy’ Franklin (a ‘role model’), is part owner of the ‘fashion’ brand Nena & Pasadena – that includes the porn t-shirts I’ve featured in previous posts.
Collective Shout has started this petition, calling the AFL to action on this football player. This is some of the explanation on the petition:
The Australian Football League’s Respect and Responsibility Policy represents the AFL’s commitment to addressing violence against women and to work towards creating safe, supportive and inclusive environments for women and girls across the football industry as well as the broader community. The Respect and Responsibility Policy is about shifting attitudes – ensuring that people throughout the Australian Football industry are aware, and have structures in place, that recognise that violence against women and behaviour that harms or degrades women, is never acceptable.
AFL player Lance ‘Buddy’ Franklin is an owner and model for the Nena and Pasadena fashion brand, which designs porn-themed t-shirts, fosters misogyny and encourages rape jokes.
Franklin’s management has been quick to distance their client from the brand maintaining he is “a shareholder only”. However, Franklin deliberately uses his AFL profile to promote the company on countless websites and in the media and has self-identified as ‘owner’.
We want to tell the AFL that Franklin’s continued ownership and promotion of Nena and Pasadena is not consistent with the AFL’s Respect and Responsibility policy “creating safe, supportive and inclusive environments for women and girls across the football industry as well as the broader community.”
I recently had a look at Nena and Pasadena’s Facebook Page and it asked of its followers: “How do you seal the deal? Best answer wins a t-shirt.”
I read the responses like – “I hope she can’t run faster than me down the alley way,” as well as some with references to rape and women being refered to as ‘bitches’ – and it made my stomach sink. These regular guys are out there and that’s how they feel about women. Thankfully it was reported and that comment feed has now been taken down.
Please sign! Every vote counts!
Deep Breath.
x
The following picture is of Franklin in one of his T-shirts:
Questions for Us 