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

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?

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:

https://www.change.org/petitions/afl-tell-buddy-franklin-that-porn-tees-are-not-respect-and-responsibility

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!

https://www.change.org/petitions/afl-tell-buddy-franklin-that-porn-tees-are-not-respect-and-responsibility

Deep Breath.

x

The following picture is of Franklin in one of his T-shirts:

PS…

May 6, 2012

Thank you for the supportive comments that I’ve received so far about my sometimes ‘hostile’ environment at home. I take some comfort in knowing that it’s normal for siblings to go at each other, over everything – especially when they’re in the mood for it…but there’s one important thing I forgot to add to the last post – which I think I alluded to, but didn’t quite spell out.

And that is that I hate the person I become when they finally tip me over – and that it’s the ‘mother’ they see more often. I worry that with the frequency in which I find myself refereeing, setting boundaries and/or disciplining, will create (is creating) a negative experience for all three of us.

Them – because they’ll see me as continually being unhappy with them and in a bad mood;

Me – finding myself not wanting to be around them. I hate having that feeling…but I shamefully feel it.

My youngest now mirrors the way I act when I lose control – she shouts and screams so loudly, you’d think she was being attacked. But as head-strong as she is, she learned it from me.

I know it has to start with me…but after days of me doing things in the ‘right way’ with them – I get angry when I don’t (think I) see an effort being made by them.

That’s when I feel like a fraud – because my intellectual mind knows what needs to be done, I do it…and then it doesn’t work. My head then spins into…

WHHAAAAATT????…What did you just say to me??…You did WHAT??…

…but then, they’re only kids – so young. I know.

Question #41: Would mothers really sign up for this, if we actually knew what it would be like?

I know the answer to this is ‘YES’…because we would always think that it would be different with our kids.

I talk to my mother often about this and after a few responses of, “I know” from her – I asked her why she had never told me what it was really like to raise kids. Well, the simple truth is, I wouldn’t have listened because my girls are my one and only lifelong dream – come true. Having kids was all I EVER wanted.

Time to take a deep breath…again.

x

The other night, they showed The Truman Show on TV. I love that movie and as it had been a while since I last watched it – I settled in for another viewing.

I used to teach it as part of the HSC, years ago when I had Senior English classes – around 2005/2006 – so I know it very well.

As I’m watching it, this time around, I realise that I really am seeing this film, all these years later, through new eyes. In the film we see everybody glued to their sets, even attending The Truman Bar, to watch this one man who was not performing, but was simply himself.

Was it through this movie that the idea was hatched for reality TV?

The Truman Show came out in 1998. The first two BIG reality shows to hit our TVs were Big Brother and Survivor and they both started a year and two years (respectively) after this movie was released.

So here we are now and look at how our TV viewing has drastically changed – especially the shows that appeal to our younger people.

I have to admit that when Big Brother first started, I did find it compelling – well, the concept anyway. To get an actual mix of people and put them together to see what happens – fascinating. Of course, the fundamental flaw (which doesn’t occur in The Truman Show) is that everyone knows they’re being watched. But still, who needs scriptwriters when you have real life, right?

But, unfortunately, this digital, reality obsessed (and apparently sex-starved) population needed more. So the producers started just putting in young, attractive (?), single people – with a sprinkling of ‘older’ here and there – to create a new type of Big Brother: “Let’s see who hooks up.” It got so bad, here in Australia, that it got axed a few years ago. It was no longer a family show – although it was being shown in the early evening – it just became one that was ‘on heat.’

And what notoriety did some of the female contestants, in the latter shows, end up getting? Oooh, they got to pose for men’s magazines. How classy. Validation? – check. Fade into obscurity with the gazillion girls who would do the same? – check.

Funnily enough, a new network has picked up Big Brother here in Oz and they’re currently asking people to register to be in the house…I wonder if they need a feminist…No, just kidding!

Let’s jump to a fairly recent reality show that’s (I’m assuming), still popular among the young ones – Jersey Shore. I watched my second episode ever today…for research. *wink*

For those of you who don’t know about this show – they’re a bunch of 20 somethings put into a house together and cameras follow them around. This is a photo of them:

Well, what can I say. This episode had Snooki (girl in orange) recovering from being punched in the face, when partying in a bar, in the previous episode. Later, we see another punch up between JWoww (this is the girl in white with the very large chest – which is out on show every time she goes out) and another girl in the bar…because the girl called her ‘fat’ – and it was ON for young and old. Snooki’s response to seeing the fight was: “I just thought, how can I get in there?” There were a few hook-ups…

….and that was it.

For the next episode, they previewed  two punch-ups – one between Snooki and another girl she called a ‘Rhino who attacked me’ and another between one of the male housemates and some other guy, on the Boardwalk…and some more hook-ups.

Well, titillating stuff, I tell you. Morons who eat, hook-up and fight – who are being watched and worst of all revered – well, maybe not revered, but they’re famous, making more money than people who do good and for what? Just entertainment?

It’s such gutter behaviour and it scares me to think that these people can be a benchmark – in any way – to normal behaviour. I appreciate that, of course, there are people who think and behave this way, but:

Question #39: Where are the shows to counter balance this perception of youth?

I’ll leave you with the wise words of Snooki, who said on today’s show, “I can’t eat that – it’s alive when they kill it.” (insert cricket noise)

Hmmmm…I think there’s something in that for all of us…

Deep Breath

x

It’s been three months since this blog was born – yaaaay! *chuffed*

I know three months isn’t a long time, but I held it as a time of testing the waters, I suppose. So here I am and I love it *big smile*

…although it does play with your mind, a bit! The wanting to reach as many women as possible and start them thinking about doing something different, however small, in their everyday lives – to start change – is so strong! But…this blogging business obviously takes time and is slow at the start.

Until this gets a louder voice, however, I’m honoured to be able to talk to those of you who have joined me so far. x

SO – now that this momentous three-month mark has been reached; I just passed 3000 hits; have 31 followers and am about to ask my 30th question, in my 33rd post – (me sees a lot of threes *hmmm*) – let’s make it a question that’s ‘in our face’!

I’ve been wanting to talk about our lack of ‘sisterhood’, for quite a while.

Yes, sisterhood. (I would have loved to have been able to crawl in your heads; to see what you all felt and visualised when you saw the word).

Men are ALWAYS depicted in simple, no-nonsense, “I got your back” Brotherhoods. In fact, it’s respected by both men and women = positive image.

But mention a Sisterhood – and it’s sniffed at and at times mocked…by both men and women = negative image.

We are our own worst enemies.

When I hear that a boy/man has done something ‘slack’ to someone, it’s generally, although not always, to a woman…or girl. But if it’s something slack that was done by a girl/woman – then more often than not, it’s done to one of their own.

Think about it – it’s true – it’s always been true. Remember school? I do – on both sides.

So, can we get out of this please? Stop passing on these bad habits?

Now, of course there are millions of us who DO care and DO feel a strong connection with being a woman.

Where are you? ….Where are WE?

Why aren’t we visible?

All I see are men and their growing army of ‘young’ women (another blog topic – coming soon), ready and eager to please.

My friend Jacquie just wrote a comment that talks about how much we DO have as women – we do have more liberties than the women in the past. So why aren’t we using them for the better?

A motivational speaker who came to talk to my students at school, said that we all know our rights – even kids know their rights – but we don’t always take on the responsibility that comes with having those rights.

With those two wonderful observations, we come to the crunch:

Question #30: Why aren’t women making and teaching the better choices, for our girls, considering the freedoms we’ve attained over the decades?

I’ll leave you with that. Remember girls, it’s got nothing to do with how you look, how many guys AND girls think you’re ‘hot’ or how much money you have.

These are all shallow characteristics and we are much better than that, my lovelies!

My sisters. *group hug*

x

This is a painting called, “Sisterhood” by Maria Greene.

Love it.

Sorry. It feels like it’s been a while. Getting to the end of this term (in three more days – wooo hoooo!), seemed to take on a snail’s pace. Last week was full of marking assessment tasks and then this last Friday, Saturday and Sunday I attended an HSC Drama conference – a fully practical conference. I’m buggered.

That’s not to say that I haven’t had a thousand observations and questions wizz through my mind – that I want to chat to you about. I just wish I could get it to you all more often. But – as I wrote in a previous post, The strong, but stretched women around me – the lives of working mothers with young children, are full to the brim. Not many pockets of time to balance the work and the play. At this stage, I am no exception.

So I write to you tonight with a clip and a question.

I saw this a few months ago. The following – entire clip – was a commercial for Glee on TV. It was on at about 7pm and we were all in the kitchen, tidying up after dinner.

These girls are singing about ruling the world

…HOW? Pole dancing?

There’s even a moment where they’re all the floor quickly thrusting on their backs, just before they leap up and show all the boys the strong ‘army’ they are.

All ready to rule…

What? By showing us high school girls in suspender belts – SUSPENDER BELTS – and grinding moves? Look at the faces of the boys as the girls ‘perform’ in front of them – like strippers. *shaking head*

How is this empowering? I simply don’t get it.

Question #28: Is this the only way to show girls and young women true empowerment?

Of course the answer is ‘No’ – yet there it is – for all ages to see, in full colour and sound.

These images don’t paint a thousand words – just six – a mantra: We. Are. Ready. To. Sexually. Please.

If the clip didn’t convince you, what about the following image?

Lea Michele

At the end of the day, this is a woman – who is representing a high school student – for a men’s magazine. *Insert above mantra*

When will these talented and successful women stop and say, “No, I’m not going to sit in underpants with my legs spread. I don’t need to do this.

This is Glee. It makes me shudder to think how many children watch this show and the reach that that message had. Worse still, they put the entire clip as a commercial. Makes it hard to escape.

I changed the channel.

x

PS The holidays will bring more chats…I hope!

A week or so ago, on the show The Project, they were discussing Pink Ghettos – places in the workforce where there are predominantly women (like Public Relations).

Firstly it addressed how it’s not good to have either sex feature predominantly in the workforce and secondly, it was looking at how it’s necessary for women to have good Maternity Leave – as it can mean the death of their careers, having to leave their job to care for the children. The irony was that the discussion was between a Joe Hockey (male politician) and Natasha Stott Despoja (former leader of the Democrats; and an awesome woman) – where HE was actually arguing that he knew what women wanted, more than the female, former leader of a party, with children sitting before him. I thought that was incredibly patronising. However, it generally seems that way; hardly the bat of an eyelid at the fact that a man is making the calls on what’s good for women.

The part that really had me gobsmacked, was that when Natasha was asked whether she had ever heard of Pink Ghettos, she said, “No, but Canberra is a pretty much a Blue Ghetto, with the amount of men that are there,” to which Joe Hockey replied, “I wish it were all blue.”

Yep. I bet you do, Joe.

Around the world, the average of women in parliament in 2007 was 18.3%* (couldn’t find anything more current – would love to know the figures today) and although the stats were a little better in Australia, it got me wondering WHY women are simply not up there at the top; in equal numbers to men – after all there’s a teeny bit more women than men worldwide.

Could it be that our girls have few aspirations to go for leadership roles (in many different areas) because it’s simply not modelled for them?

So, I thought I’d ask girls at my school, of different ages, who they look up to; who is an inspirational role model in their lives.

The first reaction was always the same – a long silence, looking up; trying to conjure up the faces of all the women out there who have impacted their lives.

One of the questions I was asked was, “Does it have to be a woman?” I gave her a cheeky ‘did-you-just-ask-me-that?’ look, as I didn’t know whether she was pulling my leg. She wasn’t. At the same time, what a telling question it was.

Even after I nudged them along with possibilities like singers, writers or personalities on TV…. a big portion of them said their mothers.

How wonderful. Or is it?
Hear me out.

I am a mother. I have ALWAYS wanted to be a mum, since I can remember. I was quite young when I kept asking my mum questions about marriage and whether she minded if I got married a little bit earlier than she did. She was 24. I was Suzie Home Maker. My best friend and I used to actually talk about the days where we’d be in our own home, married and ironing our husband’s shirts. PALEEASE!

Now, although I went to uni and ticked all the boxes – my ultimate goal was to get married and have kids. And I did.

I was blessed with two, very strong, daughters who drive me insane – you know what I mean – but whom I believe I was destined to have.
As much as I know they will ultimately respect me as a mother – is it all I want for them?

Question #24: Is motherhood the only way we can model strong women?

I asked the students if they felt there were any unfair things their mothers might go through, because they’re women and there was a strong chorus of, “YEAH!”

Through our following discussion, it seemed clear that, besides their mothers, there really wasn’t much out there to inspire girls – and if there are great women out there (which of course there are) – why aren’t we seeing them as much as the plastic, doll-like versions of our sex?

Why is there such a dim spotlight being shone on intelligent and inspirational women?

All is not lost, though. One of my older students said Gail Simone was an inspiration to her. I don’t know about you, but I said, “Who?” When I looked her up, I saw that she is great – a graphic novel writer. Amongst other suggestions, a popular choice was the singer Adele. When I asked how Adele inspired them, they just LOVED that she truly is all about the music – not about making a caricature of herself.

A gorgeous, gifted woman – what. a. voice!

We HAVE to get more of a spectrum of strong, intelligent women to be visible.

 

*http://www.humanrightsconsultation.gov.au/www/nhrcc/submissions.nsf/list/2AD5C6EC448A8B84CA25761500232FA5/$file/Stevie%20Martin_AGWW-7SHV8P.pdf

Growing up…’80s style.

February 3, 2012

In 1985, I was 15 years old. A pure ’80s teen.

I can’t help but smile at the tragic elements that made the ’80s so unique…and how I love them so. For all the Aussie readers, I was watching Rage the other night and they’re going through a retro stage, by playing countless episodes of Countdown – from the mid ’80s. MOST excellent! As I watched, I couldn’t help but cack at what the audience looked like. Classic!

There were lots of girls wearing baggy jeans, that came in a bit at the ankle (mmMMmm), with bunched up white socks, lace up shoes (think Duran Duran….my idols!), baggy shirts and big bows in their hair. Noice.

From memory, there were also the shoulder pads, tube skirts, odd hair-cuts (long on one side, short on the other – as well as the classic massive, teased fringe or spiky numbers), big shirts with a belt over the top, fingerless gloves, flouros, pastels, paisley, tartan, bubble dresses….aaaahh, good times. I can literally see the younger readers flinching…and you’d be right to…because on the whole, it was a baggy look…and we looked like dags. *still grinning*

Fortunately for us – it was the fashion. It was ‘in’.

Please cast your eyes on the wonderful specimen I was in 1984, at the Year 9 dance – my first ever dance with boys:

There is a white TIE at the front of this fabulous outfit….that I wore to attract a male of the spiecies (no luck, though – Ha!). Please also note the girls in the background with their full, long skirts. Imagine a Yr 9 dance todaywhat would the girls be wearing? Mmmm….exactly.

So, on this Countdown episode, Howard Jones is up and starts to lip-sync (as they all did back then) to his song:

“I’d like to get to know you well…I’d like to get to know you well…I’d like to get to know you well, so we can one, we can be one, to-gether.” (Remember that one?)

So as I’m watching him, with his long shirt, teased hair and excellent lip-syncing skills, surrounded by all those daggy audience members, I start to smile because they really do seem like more innocent times.

But not on the inside – it was the same hormones, same wants – just not so transparent and ‘in your face’.

I suppose the realisation I had, was that the music lyrics and videos of the 80’s were endearing because it was ‘tongue-in-cheek’. We all knew, like a ‘secret club’, what the lyrics were really about. Younger kids would be oblivious, because the video clips didn’t match what was being sung. I remember Cindy Lauper had a song called, “She Bop”. Now at the time, the word around the school yard was that the song was about masturbation (oooOOooo – so naughty *wink*) – but the video clip featured her in a suit, with a top hat and tails. It kind of felt a bit grown up to be part of the secret club – my younger sister certainly had NO idea what the song was about.

So what do we have today?

Well, about five years ago, I remember there was a VERY popular song on the radio that had a lot of the words beeped out (Eminem *gag* was one of the singers). I did remember the line, “I wanna girl who will do whatever the *beep*  I say, every day she’ll be giving it up.”

Nice. Classy. So I looked the lyrics up and this is a sample of it:

[Eminem]
Get buzzed, get drunk, get crunked, get fuuucked up
Hit the strip club, don’t forget ones, get your dick rubbed
Get fucked, get sucked, get wasted, shit faceded, pasted
Plastered, puke drink up get a new drink
Leave the bathroom sink [puke], wipe your shoe clean got a routine goin’
Still got a few chunks on them shoe strings shoin’
I was dehydrated till the beat vibrated
I was revived as soon as this bitch giyrated
Them hips and lickin’ lips and that was it
I had to get Nate Dogg here to sing some shit
[Nate Dogg]
Were gonna have a party, turn the music up
Let’s get it started, go ahead shake ya butt
I’m lookin for a girl with a body and sexy strip
Wanna get it poppin’ baby step right up
Some girls they act retarded, some girls about it bout it
I’m lookin for a girl that will do whatever the fuck
I say everyday she be givin’ it up
[Eminem]
I’m a menace, a dentist, an oral hygienist
Open your mouth for about four or five minutes
Take a little bit of this fluoride rinse
Swish but don’t spit it, swallow and now finish, Yeahhh!
Me and Nate D-O-Double G lookin for a couple Bitches
With some Double D’s pop a little chapagne and a couple E’s
Slip it in her bubbly, wheee fittin ta have a party                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               [Nate Dogg]
Were gonna have a party, turn the music up
Let’s get it started, go ahead shake ya butt
I’m lookin for a girl I can fuck in my Hummer truck
Apple bottom jeans and a big ol suck
Some girls they act retarded, some girls are bout it bout it
I want a bitch that sit at the crib with no panties on
Knows that she can but she won’t say no
Now look at this lady all in front of me, sexy as can be
Tonight I want a SLUT, would you be mine?
I Heard you was freaky from a friend of mine

I mean seriously.  They’re singing about drugging girls in one line, amongst the rest of its hideousness. Could young men hear this and think that’s the way it is – or worse still, the way it should be? Surely, the answer to that must be YES. They’re singing it in a song on the radio, aren’t they?

Now we have the women joining in, singing songs that sound like soft porn (how else are they going to make money, if it’s not to sell themselves short?) Why would a guy want to call a 0055 number, when he can turn on a popular radio station or go into any shop that plays the music and hear a girl moaning and singing, “I like it when you lick me there”? (I heard this one recently).

So couple this sort of music, with their corresponding video clips and hyper-sexualised women and surely you start to mould a generation.

Where’s the ‘secret club’ gone?

Question #10: How can we combat the influence of the current paradigm of music and their videos?

If there is a group of women who have been wrapped up in plastic packaging, sold to the world and subsequently gained unfathomable wealth – it’s the Kardashians.

I find it infuriating and a complete enigma, that these women are given a pedestal in our society for being ‘savvy business women’, but who are in fact being rewarded for their uselessness.

On a recent report, when Kim and one of the other coat-tail sisters came to Sydney, it claimed that the Kardashians made 70 million dollars the previous year. 70.million.dollars.

How is this possible? What is it they contribute to society to justify such wealth?
Let’s see…

# 1: Kim became ‘famous’ from a sex tape, which was conveniently leaked just before the start of their first season of ‘Keeping up with the Kardashians.’

#2: As the family demonstrate nothing but their insatiable appetite for money and fame – we respond by giving it to them.

#3: Now they slap a label on and sell everything, including themselves. The same report claimed Kim asks for $150,000 an hour to make an appearance at an event.

With all that money, they can only swim laps in their greed  – a greed on such a grand scale, that we seem (as a society) to admire it and reward it.

Isn’t Greed one of the Seven Deadly Sins?

The worst part is that rather than have some substantially significant impact on the world with that wealth, they just spend it all on their gross vanity – clothes, cars, a nip and a tuck –  only further pushing young girls to revere a falsehood.

Here’s a picture of Kim crying…

In my Drama class yesterday, we were talking about how hard it is to laugh and cry convincingly when acting. When we were dissecting what makes a good cry, we agreed that there’s one common denominator – you look ugly….really ugly. That’s what a cry is. The image above shows a frozen face. Cover the mouth – she could be expressing ANY other emotion – because that top part ain’t moving.

What are these women, predominantly Kim, teaching to our girls?

This is where I’m stumped.

When the two sisters came to Sydney, the news reports showed gaggles, flocks, SCORES of young women and girls, going to shriek greet them. It was like the Beatles were in town.
Seriously.

On two separate news reports, hysterical (I kid you not) girls were asked what they loved about Kim. They both responded with equally breathless, squeals of, “She’s…SO BEAUTIFUL!!” When asked what else they liked, the reporters should have run the audio of the crickets chirping in the background because they had no other answer. None. One girl kept looking around, trying to think of something inspirational to say – probably hoping someone would feed her the answer…any answer.

Zip.

So there you have it – she’s beautiful. Fake beautiful. 70 million dollars.

Now we can feel relieved to know that our girls will now know exactly what they need to do – what to aspire to – to make money. And it all starts with selling themselves; selling themselves short.

Forget educating our girls – giving them a mind to make change – it’s all for nothing if all that’s important (regardless of what she’s achieved) is how she looks; sexy, hot and fake.

And that’s the message saturating our children’s world.

Boys used to have to sneak a magazine (that would have possibly been a little difficult to get), to see a bit of boob – now both boys and girls can simply to go to the shops because now we’re selling jeans like this:

Thanks girls. You look hot. I hope you got the validation you were looking for.

Question #9: Have these sorts of women become our girls’ new role models?