Question #179: So, what is it about the penis exactly?
August 25, 2013
I have to say that this is one of those conundrums for me.
In my quest to continually question the imbalance of our existence – I wanted to explore why we continue to shroud this illusive appendage in such an opposing way to women’s objectification.
I was listening to Triple J the other morning and comedian Wil Anderson was on the radio.
He was discussing the rule with men – that you never look at another man’s penis whilst at the urinal.
OK I get that. It would be an invasion of privacy.
But it just made me wonder – what’s the big hoo-ha about the penis, anyway?
Why all the mystery?
At the beach last summer, I saw quite a few three-quarter length board shorts being worn – protecting its owners from exposing even the hint of a bulge.
No more speedos anymore. No sir-ee.
Why?
Is it to hide its size?
Or protect boys and men from the gaze of other men?
Is that something that’s feared?
Surely if it were for the gaze of women, there wouldn’t be a problem…right?
I know it’s the fashion at the beach – but you can’t disagree with the juxtaposition; that men seem to be more and more covered, whilst women are more and more exposed.
And not just on the beach.
In the movies – for example – we NEVER see the penis.
Why are men afforded such privacy?
Why are women not?
We have fully naked women on the screens (the big screen as well as the smallest) and yet it doesn’t matter how much time passes – how much we ‘evolve’ – the penis remains mystically cloaked from human gaze.
It must be nice to know – if you’re male and in the movie industry – that you’ll never have to make that choice, whether to have your penis filmed or not.
Ever.
Men are not vulnerable; like women are vulnerable.
And a man’s vulnerability – it seems – is his penis.
A woman’s? Her near or complete nudity.
The second issue I have with the penis, is its massive (no un intended) irony.
As much as it is used and wielded as a weapon throughout the world and is seen as the symbol of manhood – it is also a man’s Achilles Heel, so to speak – is it not?
As Betty White says:
“Why do people say,
‘Grow some balls’?
Balls are weak and sensitive.
If you wanna be tough,
Grow a vagina.
Those things can take a pounding.”
Is this post an attack on manhood?
No – it is not.
Do I want to see penises plastered all over our screens?
No – but there shouldn’t be a Holier-than-thou style, cover-up either.
A penis is just a penis.
Or is it?
So, I ask again – what’s the big deal?
Let the battle begin.
July 15, 2013
In the UK, Kat Banyard – founder of UK Feminista – started a campaign to Lose the Lads’ Mags.
She has signatures from lawyers supporting her push to have leading businesses, like Tesco, cease to continue stocking magazines – such as ZOO – in their stores.
As it states in the linked article (whilst looking through a ZOO magazine):
Banyard points to one advertising sex line workers who are “just 18” and a bigger ad, on the facing page, promising “Asian Dolls: find your perfect Oriental escort NOW!”. She winces slightly. “I find it staggering that high street retailers sell these magazines mean, they’ve been on their shelves for years, but I still find it staggering that they expect customers and employees to be exposed to this and also that they think it’s OK to profit from them.”
I think this drive is fantastic.
I want to do it here in Australia – and this is why…
A few days ago, my 10 yr old daughter needed a few simple stationary items, so I said we’ll pop into our local newsagency – a family friendly place, right?
This is the same location where I had ‘words’ with the owner, a few months ago, about how he positioned his copies of ZOO magazine on a stand, so that you could see it from outside the shop as you walk by…or your son…or daughter…or grandparents…
He also had very provocative magazines in the same location – down the front of the store – near the newspapers.
When I challenged him about a magazine cover showing a naked lady sitting on a push bike, in plain view from where you get the newspapers, he simply told me I had good eyes. (?)
He also argued that ‘children never go there’.
He ended up removing the ZOO magazine stand – which was a positive step – but alas, it stopped there. He left the other magazines as they were.
It had been a long time since I had gone in there, so you can understand how livid I was when I saw my daughter head to the stationary section and noticed it is located directly opposite the Lads’ magazines.
The current cover of ZOO is this:
Below are the magazines ready for visual perusal, by anyone wanting to buy stationary in this newsagency – where ‘children never go’:
Bulging breasts, spread legs; titles such as ‘Six feet of Sex’ and ‘Hot Stuff’…oh and a naked woman.
Above these are the hard-core mags which have the majority of the cover shrouded in dark plastic.
If this is what’s ‘allowed’ to be shown – what the hell are on the other covers?
Where I was standing, as I took the photo below, is where they sell the newspapers and women’s gossip magazines. Stationary wall to the left and lads’ magazines just opposite.
Question #175: Does this incense you as it does me?
I spoke up.
The only person in the shop was a woman who I have regularly seen over the years and I told her I thought that it was completely inappropriate to have these magazines where children could see these pornographic photos – where anyone could see.
She shrugged, said she just worked there and it had nothing to do with her.
A fairly predictable and typical response and yet still deeply disappoints.
I always wonder if the day will ever come, when someone I’ve spoken to says, “Yeah! That’s true.” (A girl can dream).
She also offered an alternative place of business – Officeworks – to buy stationary.
I was surprised by that – proposing we spend our money elsewhere – and I said to her that sadly, for newsagents, it may just have to be the way.
At that point I directed my girls out of the shop and we did, in fact, go elsewhere.
There seems to be no thought for anyone except heterosexual boys and men to get titillated (and conditioned) everywhere they go, perpetuating this ever-invasive porn culture …and then profit from that.
Of course, we have the equally unsettling issue of the girls and women participating in this paradigm – who feel somehow empowered to be told by men they look ‘hot’ when nearly naked…and then profit from that.
It’s aaall OK, as long as someone’s getting rich – regardless of what ethical lines are being crossed.
Well, I am done.
So is my friend Lily Munroe and we’ve started research for our own campaign.
So stay tuned.
Question #176: Are you with us??
Deeeeeeep (nervous but pumped) breath.
x
Question for men – #4
November 4, 2012
More men like this, please.
This is a post by Melbourne writer, Guy Sigley – reposted by Melinda Tankard Reist – reposted by me.
One man’s plea to other men: take a stand against sexism.
Question #108: Is Guy right about men?
He doesn’t seem to be taking it personally – like a lot of men do – when issues of sexism come up.
More men like this…please.
Deep Breath
x
Guy Sigley
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
Questions for Us 