Question #119: Have you read ’50 Shades of Grey’?
December 10, 2012
If you have – you MUST read the following article.
If you haven’t – you MUST read the following article.
It’s so well written and clear. I think it succinctly hits the nail on the head – so this one’s a bit of a Feminist Shout Out #6 to you ladies.
I would LOVE to hear from those of you who liked the novel and what it was that appealed to you (no judgement, whatsoever – just honestly curious).
Have you changed your mind, now that you read this article?
Question # 120: Is it just another step in our conditioning?
Let me know what you think.
Deep Breath.
x
A misogynist’s response.
December 8, 2012
Misogynist definition:
a person who hates, dislikes, mistrusts, or mistreats women.
This man was obviously looking for something else when he stumbled onto my post about Zoo Magazine – Go and put the kettle on – and wrote this comment:
“Hey lady its not a dick dont take it so hard now go make me a sandwich”
That’s hate. That’s dislike. That’s mistreatment.
I feel warm and fuzzy knowing there’s so many like him everywhere AND perpetuated in the media.
Question #119: Why not comment back to him?
Guys too.
Deep Breath.
x
It’s a girl!
November 15, 2012
On Monday night I joined some of the amazing ladies from Collective Shout (amongst other awesome people) to watch a documentary called, it’s a girl.
As the documentary stated, in our society those three words generally bring joy and elation – a healthy baby of either gender is a miracle and a gift. But this is most certainly not the case with unimaginable numbers of baby girls born in countries such as India and China.
These two countries were the focus of this completely disheartening look at the doomed and cursed life of being born female.
The movie kept using the term ‘Gendercide’ – but Melinda Tankard Reist, who said a few words before the screening, felt that the term ‘Femicide’ is more accurate. After all, the male gender is not at risk. At all.
The documentary first looked at India where we learn of one mother who, in her effort to bear a son, murdered eight of the baby girls she bore. Eight.
Why? Because when a girl is born, she only signifies a loss of money. Although dowries are not permitted it is still a very common practice. It is an entrenched custom, from the lowest classes to the elite.
A son = money that will come in from their daughter-in-law’s dowry.
A daughter = money lost to pay the dowry.
Greed. That is simply what it’s all about.
That realisation had a profound impact on me because in the back of my mind, I always saw greed as predominantly haunting the halls of the Capitalist realm.
But no. It’s everywhere. This chilling realisation also brought me to understand one simple truth – the main commodity used in making more money – are girls and women. Regardless of age. Regardless of location.
So if a baby girl is ‘lucky’ enough not be snuffed out at birth, she has a life of continual fear and struggle to contend with. Many face a life of neglect – no food or medical attention is afforded to them, as it’s always given to the boy. And of course, the ever-present fear of violence – such as being doused in petrol and set alight because the dowry wasn’t sufficient, for example.
After all, it’s HER fault.
‘Dowry deaths’ are illegal but justice is rarely served. Big surprise.
Then there’s China.
Their One Child Policy has created a situation that’s devastated its people. If you’re from the city, it’s only one child for you and if you’re from the country, a second child is permitted…if you’re first one was a girl.
Forced abortions are common place by the Family Planning Department. Back in June I posted Chinese abortion – which recounts the harrowing forced abortion, performed on a woman who was seven months’ pregnant.
Statistic – there are an estimated 35,000 abortions a day / 1,500 an hour. There are also approx. 500 suicide attempts by women in China a day.
That’s a lot of misery for the female gender.
Because so many girls have been ‘disposed of’ there are now 37 million MORE men than women in China. The similar, deeply rooted belief that the Chinese share with India, is that everybody wants a daughter-in-law…just no daughters.
These men, who are aimlessly dragging their feet through life without a wife, are called ‘bare branches’ – but hey, that’s just not on! Measures need to be taken to find him a wife.
How? Why not kidnap someone else’s young daughter and raise her yourself? Then she’ll be nice and ready to wed your son when they’re both a little older.
Sounds like a great plan!
Ooh, ooh! What about the men who just want to have fun? Well, how about kidnapping more young girls – really little ones too – and sell them as sex slaves? A fortune could be made! Excellent notion. Top notch.
Statistic – 70,000 girls a year are trafficked.
On my drive home I was inundated with so many conflicting emotions. Predominantly it was helplessness. I met a wonderful couple at the screening, Liz and Michael Newton-Brown, a married couple who started their own group called, The Freedom Project – Ending human trafficking and slavery – and I asked them, “What can be done? It seems hopeless.”
It’s absurd. It’s madness. What has the human race succumbed to?
What the hell is going on???
If it’s not a hatred towards women and girls, what is it?
When I got home I asked my husband rhetorically, why does ‘man’ look down on ‘woman’ so much?
I mean:
Question #111: Why aren’t we a team?
How wonderful it would be if we were. Truly were.
We wouldn’t recognise this place.
Thank goodness for all the driven, dedicated and inspiring people, like the ones mentioned above, who are tirelessly trying to raise awareness. There’s hope.
Deeep Breath
x
Go and put the kettle on…
November 10, 2012
Are you comfortable?
Because it’s time to have a chat – especially with the Aussie parents out there – about a magazine that’s tapping into the seedy and degrading underbelly of our boys and men’s minds and it’s using a firm and taloned grip.
I should warn you that there are images, with text, in this post that may offend some readers (I was offended…putting it mildly) and if they don’t – I encourage you to step away from your personal perspective and think of the fact that the rest of us (including {and especially} kids, whose minds are absorbing like sponges) can’t avoid them.
They’re everywhere. Shaping.
This Australian magazine’s simple existence, (along with its horrible brethren versions around the planet) – and the manner in which it has evolved and spread over the years – leaves me gobsmacked.
Well, no, I suppose it doesn’t. Once you dangle the proverbial carrot in front of a weak society, anything goes nowadays. Point in case? This magazine.
What does perplex me, however, is the desensitised indifference that society as a whole seems to have towards magazines like this.
Or is it that most people – especially parents – simply don’t know the dangerous and misogynistic reach these types of magazines have?
This magazine is cheap – only a few dollars – with no age restrictions for purchase at your local newsagency and it predominantly exploits women.
Finally, it calls itself Zoo. Are we animals?
In a recent post, Melinda Tankard Reist discusses Zoo Magazine and says:
28000 – That’s the number of boys aged 14-17 estimated to read Zoo magazine each week. Despite its pornographic nature Zoo magazine is classified as ‘men’s lifestyle’ and therefore unrestricted – anyone can buy it. Zoo is conveniently positioned and priced for young readers to purchase in convenience stores, service stations and Coles and Woolworths.
It also states that:
“More Australian men buy and read ZOO than any other magazine in the country – that’s a fact.” – ACP Magazines, Zoo Magazine distributor
28000 a week – of teen boys.
Any alarm bells set off yet?
Many years ago, I had my first experience with Zoo – around the time of its inception in 2007. A copy was confiscated from a 12 year old boy at school. I looked through it and was a little stunned – for so many reasons. Amongst its variety of ‘sections’ (including a baby-seal clubbing article with pictures), the standouts in this particular issue were:
1. A multi-paged ‘article’ with photography of raunchy video-clip stills – predominantly breasts and women bending over, mouths open in erotic ecstasy etc.
2. A section where regular, everyday girls (mostly teens) have sent a ‘selfie’ of themselves in underwear or bikini in ‘sexy’ poses, to be ranked by the readers.
3. An advice section, where it’s two women answering the queries in each issue and are photographed with only underpants on, topless but turned to the side.
A 12 year old had it.
So now I’m going to ask you to have a look at Zoo Magazine’s Home Page.
How are those alarm bells going now?
Now envisage the amount of young boys going to this site.
This is the downside of the Internet, I suppose – furthered by the unyielding force that is Facebook.
Zoo Magazine has a Facebook page.
{Of course it does; it’s good business, right? And that’s what’s ultimately respected, after all – making money}
This is the place where parents can see the ease of infiltration, as well as the predatory domination that is occurring. Remember that legally, a person needs to be 13 years old to open an account on Facebook – but we all know parents who open up accounts for their children, as young as their first years of Primary School.
Recently, Zoo put up the following post (question) for its readers on its Facebook page:
“Left or right? But you’ve got to tell us how you came to that decision.”
For those who can’t read the print, the first comment that appears in this image says: “Left…You have the mouth and the tits to fuck.”
Here are some more responses:
Women being discussed as ‘holes’, ‘it’ or the lovely, ‘either end there’s shit coming out’.
Misogyny. Pure misogyny.
And this platform sees them all clapping each other on the back and giving each other high-fives. Aaahh, the Brotherhood is certainly strong in these circles.
It’s grooming our boys and they’re multiplying. How can they not be?
If the way boys and men think about women is ever-changing for the worse (as evidenced by magazines like Zoo, the post above, Facebook pages on 12 year old sluts etc) then:
Question #110: Are we happy to stand back and let these businesses sabotage our youth by only perpetuating sex as disconnected, dirty and now violently dominating?
Some boys will never know the joy of what a loving relationship entails – where a woman’s wants are equal to his. How sad, but it won’t be entirely their fault because Internet porn and businesses like Zoo Magazine, taught them differently.
And learn they do; they’re KIDS.
I can see older men shaking their head as they’re reading this, thinking how you grew up with ‘Playboys stashed underneath your bed’ and that you turned out ‘alright’. Well, your experience and attitude is a cog (and continues to be) in the terrible state of affairs today.
The comments above are hateful. Nothing good comes from hate.
One may have entertained thoughts or ‘jokes’ similar to the ones posted on the Facebook page above but I probably would have never known; now it’s posted online and it’s permanent. Then it feeds, thanks to the unprecedented way sites like Facebook spread information.
Spreading hate.
How can that NOT be damaging our kids?
A task: Want to take some action? You can join us and let the battle begin against the visible stocking of lads’ mags like ZOO.
Next time you fill up at the petrol station or shop at Woolies or Coles, have a look and see where these sorts of magazines are positioned.
Knowing the damage it can do, just from its sexist cover – should it be there?
A friend confronted a petrol station owner who had all these types of magazines above the lollies that kids make a beeline for.
After that, it’s simple. If they listen and change, continue giving them your business. If not, take your business elsewhere and tell them why you’re doing so.
Remember that money talks. It’s the only way.
Deep Breath and go get ‘em!
Questions for Us 