First game: Two unjust casualties.
December 8, 2013
In the play, Threepenny Opera by Bertolt Brecht, a corrupt character named Peachum starts his first stint on stage by looking directly at the audience and declaring the lines:
“Awake, you sinners, awake!”
That’s aimed at us – Society – one that ‘sins’ through its compliant silence.
Brecht was a political playwright who wanted people to watch his theatre with intellect and reason, and not be deceived by the lure and grip of emotion.
Ultimately, he wanted people to leave the theatre with a sense of recognising the ludicrous injustices (still) going on in the world and DO something – to leave the theatre:
AWAKE!
Question #193: What does it take to stir the depths of society’s moral and ethical compass?
Last night was the first game – here in Australia – of the US inspired, Lingerie Football League. This is an issue I have fiercely argued about in the past.
It is with continued disbelief that, in 2013, we actually have these poor women – desperate for ANY sort of respectful attention toward their sporting and physical prowess – play with (essentially) virtually exposed breasts.
The image below is from the US league.
I shudder to imagine the soreness and pain their breasts must feel, if that’s what they run in (no support) and smash into each other with.
Nope. Shaking my head. Gobsmacked.
AWAKE!
Women’s sport is virtually ignored.
Our screens are a deluge of men’s sport, 90% male commentary and male worship.
In David Penberthy’s article – Lingerie League an Insult to Sport and Channel 7 – he writes:
“It is pretty weird that at a time when our cricketers couldn’t buy a win, and were making headlines instead for being sent home after refusing to do their homework or decking a Pommy batsman in the small hours at an English pub, our women cricketers were quietly going about the business of becoming world champions, again.
Couldn’t name one of them.”
That’s the crux.
We don’t see women’s sport…unless they’re in their underwear?
Sexism. Pure sexism.
Last night the Lingerie Football League claimed two victims.
Victim #1: Tahina Booth (pictured above), was taken away by ambulance due to injury. One person on Twitter said she appeared in agony for a while before the ambulance arrived.
The following was Tahina’s response to a question from Andrew Webster from the Sydney Morning Herald:
There are a lot of critics of this sport. I have my own doubts. What would you say to them?
“I understand. I have a complex with the uniform. I don’t like it, and it’s not practical. But when you look at it, there are masses of people coming to watch … they realise it’s not for fun and these girls aren’t taking it lightly. A lot of feminists have told me I’m a disgrace. I tell them that I’m doing this for an opportunity. I work so hard, it’s cost me so much money. I just want to be the best I can be.” *
How sad that here in Australia, women athletes like Tahina are simply not respected. That her ‘opportunity’ can only come from a form of undress. This is sexism at its purest.
The LFL responded today about her ‘injury’, stating she was merely dehydrated.
I sincerely hope that’s all it was.
Victim #2: Randy Perret – father to one of the players – wrote the following apology to Collective Shout, when his daughter was deemed ‘too fat’ to play, ON GAME DAY:
“I wish to apologise for the comments have posted lately regarding the LFL in Australia. i have known of Mitchell Mortaza and his reputation within the States but thought that maybe with a fresh start in Australia he may change his ways. Wrong. My 18 year old daughter has been told that she has to “lean out” to wear the uniform. That’s right. So yes LFL is all about how the girls look not how well they play the game. So now I have my 18 year old daughter down in NSW, shattered emotionally because at the last minute she has been told that she is too ‘fat’ to play his game. Send me any petitions you like and will gladly sign them. Also please forward any contacts as I wish to fight this all the way. We can not have our young girls thinking that you need to be skinny to play any sport in this country.”
She had already spent money on getting the prerequisite spray tan before the game.
Spray tan. Any Australian male footballers putting on their obligatory spray tan before a game?
No – the female athletes of Australia are not being respected. In this case, they are (mundanely) being exploited for their physical appearance. The fact that the audience is predominantly there for titillation through accidental nudity (something in the girls’ clause to play), is a truly sad indictment of our current paradigm.
Awake.
Deep Breath.
x
Fashion + A small Feminist Shout Out! #3
June 22, 2012
This isn’t a new story really – when fashion meets with unsightly and disturbing images.
The following article from Jezebel click here, contains the response from the European magazine that published the contentious images, to the outrage expressed.
What do you think?
In the comments, there seems to be (what I see as) the typical, knee-jerk reaction – like ‘the dog ate my homework’ of responses:
“If it were a guy, we wouldn’t think twice…”
Uuuuummm…seeing as it’s statistically women who are victims of domestic violence from men…I’d like to see ANY images with men displaying a slit throat for a fashion shoot – furthermore – we all know that if a man were used for a violent image like a slit throat, he would have, stereotypically, gotten that way by the hands of another man…in something like a war shot. The male gender is more violent than the female.
Please understand that that last comment isn’t against all men. Not at all. I’m simply stating it factually, not personally.
Now to the women.
I need to ask.
What are the women agreeing to be shot this way, all about?
…and this question also applies to women who have their photo taken on all-fours for a t-shirt or those who play football in lingerie…just to name a few.
Why aren’t women saying, “No, I’m not doing that. It’s not good for the sisterhood”?
I understand that there is the freedom of expression.
I cherish it.
About me – I looooove fashion. The only magazine I’ve ever subscribed to (and still do), is InStyle magazine. Showing edgy and strong beauty in the women they depict, has a positive influence on us. It’s wonderful and, I believe, empowering. Surely there are some of you out there who know what I mean! It’s simply stunning images of women, showcasing the inventive and unique ways they wear their fashion. Their expression. I can’t afford any of the clothes – but I get ideas on how to play with my limited, cheapy versions! Haha!
Love, love, love!
Question #61:…so WHY does the fashion industry need to use images of women as victims of violence to sell their products, when it ultimately does more harm than good?
Is there no compassion for women who have suffered such atrocities? Especially from the women who agree to be shot this way?
Deep Breath.
x
If you had any doubt…
June 18, 2012
I’m appealing to all the good guys out there because at the end of the day, this topic – which has reared its ugly head again – is really for you.
If there were any doubt about how low Mitch Mortaza, the founder of the Lingerie Football League, can stoop – well, he has.
Paris Jackson, Michael Jackson’s daughter – aged 13, has been approached to be a spokesperson for the LFL. Article here.
In the letter that Mitch wrote to Paris, it outlined that she:
“…will be introducing youth clinics across the country to introduce the game of football to young ladies at an earlier stage in life.”
Introducing young ladies at an earlier stage in life?
How bloody early?
This is why things like the LFL need to be scrutinised and assessed – because once we become (or already have become) a society which just keeps accepting things as they come – without question – then the ‘line’ just gets moved further and further back until…what?
Question #59: When will we say, ‘enough?’ When we have Tweens playing Lingerie Football?
Will the men who may attend such a sporting event, hope the ‘nudity clause’ will stay in place? Maybe catch sight of a pre-teen hairless pubic area?
If you’re thinking that’s sick – well, YES! It is.
Paris is 13…just entering her teens and Mitch thinks it’s a good idea to have her endorse this and create a culture of acceptance – especially with our vulnerable girls.
Needless to say that Paris has declined the offer and the family is completely outraged with it all. Fantastic! These are small mercies which give some hope.
BUT there is a man out there who’s not only created the LFL and (of course) found a market, but is now after our daughters – just to make HIMSELF rich.
Question #60: Does Mitch Mortaza deserve this wealth – just because he can?
I’m pretty sure I could make a lot of money, by crossing some hideous line…and seeing as women are the main consumers on the planet, I’m actually positive I could.
But I won’t…and that’s the difference.
Shame on you, Mitch. And shame on the men and women who perpetuate it all.
…and good on you, Paris!! (seen below, smashing the opposing team, holding up her hands in victory…fully dressed).
I reckon she felt pretty awesome, pumped and confident at that moment. Don’t we want the same for our girls?
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
Just sayin’ – #4
May 30, 2012
Picture this – you have a yearning to do something – something that gives you a real fire in your belly. You’ve been told that being a woman means that there are no boundaries and that you can do anything! GO FOR IT!
Well, some of the women who are involved in the LFL feel that fire and want to feel that sporting challenge.
This week I have heard arguments in favour of the LFL – of genuinely interested women who want to play but have no other avenue to do so…unless they wear ‘the uniform.’
Question #49: What does this say about our unequal world, if the only way these women can play this sport is by looking sexually provocative?
As I’ve heard said, “Why else would anyone go watch women’s sport?” Sad.
I asked why these women don’t just start up a league and play on their own terms… and the answer is – it doesn’t make money.
When the LFL was about to launch in the US, the Chicago Tribune quoted: “For those who have long mulled what would happen if you wedded Victoria’s Secret with professional football, the Lingerie Football League debuts…” it also says, “…the league, billing itself as true fantasy football…”
It is, what it is.
Whatever positive messages this sport has, it’s lost in its packaging – or lack there-of.
Sad.
If my wonderful grandmother were still alive, I wonder what she would think of women being portrayed and SOLD in this manner?
…Just sayin’
Deep Breath.
x
It’s less than a week before the LFL plays in Brisbane and Sydney and I’m going to continue using my voice to oppose it. Go to Change.org and vote!
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.files.wordpress.com/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
Questions for Us 