*Serious Trigger Warning*

April 13, 2014

This post contains my 200th question; an important moment.

I have been avoiding writing it, to be honest – finding justifiable reasons why I should leave it till later. This question is a big deal and a hard one to articulate; but it needs to be heard.
It must be heard.

I’ve chosen this post to lay it all down, the best way I can, and hope it resonates in some – any – way…maybe even cause an awakening in some.

My question is:

Question #200: Who is looking after females? 

The attitudes, perceptions and (worst of all) laws revolving around females have worsened worldwide. Actually worsened.
The people who make up the largest chunk of the Bell Curve, however, don’t see it – they choose to watch the sensationalist, fear-inducing ‘Big Brother’ news on the TV; news that’s especially selected for viewing conditioning.
However, on a daily basis there are countless more examples of atrocities occurring to females in developing nations, war-torn nations as well as in the so-called ‘developed’ world.

Now there’s a word that brings with it a whopping case of irony when used to describe nations with wealth. I don’t see we’re developed at all, especially when it comes to the equality of half the human race.
Seeing as wealthy nations are only about making a buck – and is ultimately the SOLE thing that’s respected in the mainstream mindset (something in which we all participate, to varying degrees) – females in this realm of enlightened living *cough cough*, are an urgently needed commodity; who are represented as being available ‘on-tap’.

The so-called ‘Beauty Industry’ is the developed world’s teat, off which a huge bulk of consumerism suckles. Of course there’s also the destruction of the planet and the cruelty to animals, such as factory farming, to add to the mix.
We consume, destroy and discard rubbish to within an inch of oblivion; all with a mindless privilege that sickens the soul.

The environment, animals and females – the merchandise for the making of money. Check.
That’s the ‘developed’ world.

But what about something that unites us all?
In what way do we link hands, as a species, in a common practice around the world?

Porn and prostitution.
(Porn –> prostitution with a camera; Prostitution –> the raping of females)

Anyone who argues that the use of female bodies for the purpose of ejaculation (yes, as it is ultimately the only purpose it serves) is a-okay, is contributing to this insidious modern-day emergency – through direct participation, indifference or both.

Our ‘humanity’ is flailing in quicksand, as the toxicity of this violent and hateful underbelly spreads.

This is a small snippet of Gail Dines on Q & A, discussing porn and counteracting the usual, exhausting and typical argument – “I haven’t seen it, so the problem doesn’t exist.”

Gonzo Porn – as Gail mentions – is violent and hateful and constitutes most of the type of porn that is made and accessed today.
In the following tumblr post titled Porn Statistics – amongst the harrowing statistics, female sex workers describe their horrific circumstances:

The first shoot I did was with a man who was probably 40 and he was as thick as a soda can. He held me down and shoved it in me with no lube tearing my vagina. When I started to tear up and cry he flipped me over and continued from behind be so they wouldn’t get me crying on film. He pulled my hair and choked me over and over again even when I told him it hurt and I could barely breathe.”

While the pornographers say this:

“My whole reason for being in this Industry is to satisfy the desire of the men in the world who basically don’t much care for women and want to see the men in my Industry getting even with the women they couldn’t have when they were growing up. I strongly believe this… so we come on a woman’s face or somewhat brutalize her sexually.”

Recently, I read the most succinct and powerful piece by Fire Womon called:

Prostitution, Pornography and the Illusion of ‘Choice’

This piece echoes my exact sentiments about Pornography and Prostitution.

“My problem – and the problem for all prostituted women – is that there are feminists who claim to be ‘pro-sex work’, which basically just means you agree to women being paid fuckholes. Some of these same feminists claim radical feminists such as myself are ‘anti-sex workers’. I hereby state emphatically that not to be the case. I am anti-sex work. There is a huge difference.”

The face of prostitution and porn has changed since the Internet graced us with its presence.
It is more violent. It is more degrading. It is hateful.
It lusts for younger and younger girls.
(My most common search engine term on this blog is ’12 year old slut’. That doesn’t include the variety of ages like 10 year old slut that I receive, as well as more horrific searches such as, ‘put your dick in my 12 year old pussy daddy video’ {word for word})

The most frightening part? The consumer is insatiable.


From Prostitution; An Abolitionist Perspective, come the following harrowing statistics:

“In prostitution the conditions that make consent genuinely possible are absent: physical safety, equal power with customers and real alternatives.”

A 2004 study of prostituted women in nine countries (Canada, Columbia, Germany, Mexico, South Africa, United States, Thailand, Turkey, and Zambia)  89% of the women surveyed reported wanting to exit prostitution but did not believe they had any real alternatives. A 2005 study of prostituted women in Vancouver found that 82% were sexually abused as a child, while 72% endured physical abuse. 54% of the participants reported entering prostitution while under the age of consent. In addition 86% were currently or previously homeless. 95% of participants wished to exit prostitution but did not feel as though they had any other viable option.



There is little choice bar a small percentage of women. It’s not ‘Pretty Woman’. Those women are a microscopic minority and we simply cannot use them as an argument against the statistics of female, human misery at the hands of males and their drive to ejaculate inside them.

The following comes from an Open Letter to the UN asking for prostitution to be abolished:

You need only read or hear the testimony of women who have been bought for prostitution to find that, day in and day out, what men do when they buy women is “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.” Men pay to ejaculate and urinate on women’s faces, to hurt and humiliate them with any other kind of sexual perversion they had in mind, to not wear condoms.

As no human being should ever be treated that way, it follows then that PROSTITUTION IS A CORNERSTONE OF ALL SUBORDINATION OF WOMEN AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN WORLDWIDE. It supports sexual exploitation which is what customers buy. It is a reserve labor force that allows the economy to not have to fully employ all women seeking paid work. Prostitution structures families differentiating between wife and whore, pitting women against each other in ways that protect male dominance in the family as well as on the streets and in brothels. The list is as endless as is male domination and patriarchy. It is based on the recognition that women are a class hence what affects women in prostitution affects all women. To that end, to see that prostitution is recognized as a universal violation of human rights is to assert the right to human dignity in all of its meaning….. whether or not it is chosen or coerced, whether or not it is trafficked or pimped or is self-imposed by women themselves.

Now for the difficult part.
The following is the link to a site that publishes the opinions of male consumers (‘Punters’ slang) of prostitution in the UK. It outlines how much they paid for their female vessel and discuss their rating of the sex-worker’s performance.

** I must warn you that this may upset some people – but at the same time, I think it’s imperatively important to read the reality of this situation – straight from the horses’ mouths.

The site is called The Invisible Men – Let’s talk about his choices.
The image below is an example of what appears on this site – some are worse. Please read.


That poor wife.
Porn and prostitution always affect marriages and relationships – in a multitude of varying ways – but always none-the-less.

If one puts Internet porn aside for a moment (a beast that is completely out of control),  the ‘ground-zero’ for us is the popular culture that supports this soul-destroying industry; through consumption by the pedestrian masses – lads’ mags, ads, TV shows and movies that use hyper-sexualised females to support physically, intellectually and/or monetarily heroic males and a pop culture which dictates a fashion that pushes for a look that is sculpted from porn – labiaplasty (of all things!) and plastic surgery are sadly still on the increase.
The worst part for females is the abhorrent rape culture that now exists; as the realities of porn violence seep into the minds of males and are enacted upon the bodies and minds of girls and women everywhere.

Some of these factors are fantastically explored by Gail Dines (again) and Julia Long in the article, Moral panic? We are resisting the pornification of women. It reads:

But feminists who organise against pornification are not arguing that sexualised images of women cause moral decay; rather that they perpetuate myths of women’s unconditional sexual availability and object status, and thus undermine women’s rights to sexual autonomy, physical safety and economic and social equality. The harm done to women is not a moral harm but a political one, and any analysis must be grounded in a critique of the corporate control of our visual landscape.

So I repeat – WHO is looking after females?

I don’t fight for me – I fight for a balanced and equal existence for all.
I fight for my daughters – that they not suffer – and I fight for yours.

I also fight for your sons.

Deep Breath.

I have grappled with the issue of pitting and comparing the actions and/or adversities of one gender by using the other to illustrate, for a long time – but it simply does not sit right with me.

It is like comparing apples with oranges.

For the most part, I believe the intention is generally a positive one (which is a refreshing step toward good), but when perceptions and customs related to gender are so profoundly entrenched, it falls short of accurately addressing the deep-seeded issues of gender disparity.

Exhibit A:


This is a familiar visual representation that now seems to be common practice in highlighting gender-label ridiculousness – namely, a female’s.

There are two issues I have with this sort of juxtaposition:

1. Females have always been represented in this way – used as (sexual) ornaments. Males never have. So when we look at the females in the images, we see ‘normal’ and when we scan across to the males in similar poses, we see humour.

Steve Carell, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert recently did a photo shoot, emphasising the ludicrous poses females are encouraged to do:


Its intentions are admirable but – it’s not the same. It’s just funny.
That humour can (ultimately) also work negatively for the females they’re trying to help, by making them look stupid for participating in their own exploitation; for posing that way in the first place.

I recently saw a snippet of reality TV the other day – one that does renovations on houses. There was a moment where all the contestants had an impromptu dance-off, which lead to the inevitable circle where they strut their stuff in the middle. One of the women chose to be semi-provocative by doing some fetching grinding moves against her partner.
Next was a male. He also did a bit of a provocative dance. It was funny. Everyone laughed.

2. The biggest issue, however, is vulnerability.
When a female is posing sexually, she is vulnerable – her breasts may be practically exposed; she may be bending over something with a short skirt; she may be wearing impossible-to-walk-in-heels (not easy to escape anyone in high heels btw) – you follow my drift.
The males in these representations, however, are not vulnerable.
Their only place of vulnerability is their penis and that is (as always in this current paradigm) *fully* covered.

Everywhere; every time.

How ironic that we seem to find comfort in the male gender – dipped head high in privilege – outlining the woes of the ‘lesser’ gender. Double irony? In most cases it’s statistically males pushing females to pose this way in the first place.

OK, let’s turn the tables; in format as well as gender reversal.

Let’s look at how men are represented and doing the switch.

Exhibit B:


The image above is from the show, Beauty and the Geek. Never before have I witnessed such a blatantly sexist prime-time show; super-gluing more gender stereotypes to an already fragile equation.
Female = sexy, hot and DUMB;
Male = be who you want to be, you can still get a ‘hot’ female.

Can you imagine a show – heck, a REALITY – where we see females who are daggy/geeky/nerds of various body shapes, together with ‘hot’ males?

I can – but know it’s a concept that is (for the most part) a flash in the pan.
I remember through ads that Glee had a moment where an overweight girl was coupled with the hot football player.


I wonder how many people were genuinely comfortable watching that visual?
I say visual because that’s all ANY of this is based on.
It’s irrelevant whether personalities gel or if people have a profound connection, because ultimately that’s not the message that wants to get taught; there’s no money to be made, if females are secure within themselves, after all.

I intensely wish for a more equal and balanced playing field for females and the bottom line is that females are more than just being the packaging for males’ sexual fantasies.

Question #199: Isn’t this world ready – YET – to unlock the wonderful array of possibilities – just by getting past that horrifically limiting idea of females?

I’ll leave you to think.

My next post is my 200th Question.
Bring your thinking caps along.

Deep Breath.


The moment after Christmas dinners and lunches were fully consumed, my Facebook page got littered with images like the following:


…from women.

No men indulged me with feelings of having to diet or comment on the weight they had gained over Christmas. Just women.
Then there was the plethora of women friends commenting on said images, also participating in the merry-go-round of the standard, “Oh, I KNOW! I’m exactly the same.” rigmarole – like it’s the secret password for entering an exclusive club.

And it is exclusive – only women seem to want to wholeheartedly enter.
Just listen,  especially around the ‘festive’ season (particularly when they’re around other women) and see how long it takes before kilos / stomach size etc. is mentioned – even for a moment.

It consumes females’ lives. C’mon…we’re smarter than that, aren’t we?
What does one gain from having the ‘perfect’ figure?
My real question is:

Is it all just for a compliment? 

Don’t get me wrong, I like to look unique to me and do my best with what I have and if that receives a compliment – that’s nice! – but it’s not the reason why I dress and groom myself.

There have been moments in my life when my weight has blown out a bit (74 kg being my heaviest) but as I am tall, I have always looked pretty good. This is because I have thin legs and any weight gain went on from my stomach and up – the legs and thighs never changed. To the outsider, my legs camouflaged what was going on up top to a degree. Funnily enough, all I could see was my rounded face when I was at my heaviest – which ironically is what I really notice about people; their faces, not bodies.

How do I know I looked good? Because I was complimented as such – even as so far as being called lucky; lucky for having thin legs.
On an intellectual level – isn’t that ridiculous?
I just want to state for the record that the only luck my legs have given me is their ability to take me from place to place – just like every other able-bodied person on the planet.
That’s it.

Furthermore, ever since being at peace with all my bits – which has been quite a few years now – I’ve noticed that if I ever mention anything about my body (not complaining), I am quickly interjected and shot down with phrases such as, “You have nothing to worry about” or “I WISH I had your figure.”
I have to say that it’s bloody frustrating not really being able to simply discuss changes one notices (and we know that it’s always happening with our complicated but wondrous bodies, ladies) without the obligatory “You’re fine” commentary.
There are parts of me that sag, bulge and roll; I have wrinkles and skin pigmentation on my face; I have dark leg hair which is the bane of my existence to remove (see? not so perfect legs) and I have no butt. Side on, my stomach is about the same size as my bottom – very ‘attractive’…
Etcetera and so on.

We’re women.
We all know our flaws (we’re good at believing what we’re told – that it’s how we think of ourselves) – and we all (yes, ALL) have them, because it’s personal and it’s entrenched.
But this is where I want to say that it is exactly our ‘flaws’ that make us unique and beautiful.

My body has not given me a free pass to anything – I have a mortgage (a 70s house in the western suburbs that I got aged 39; you’d think my body would have let me own a house sooner than that); I have a full-time job, two daughters to raise – who can both be very demanding; and the usual ups and downs of life. I can emphatically claim that my body afforded me no special privilege. Nothing.

The things I have gained in life have come from the person within (who is also flawed, by the way).

So if we are just looking for some verbal validation (from as many people as possible):

Question #196: Is it truly worth all this anxiety and self-hate?

Why not try something different when thinking of New Year’s Resolutions?
Please don’t let it have to do with altering yourself. So you over-indulged over Christmas and New Year; you know what to do to balance it out.

Walk tall, don’t negatively talk about your body and see the beauty in every female body you see – especially yours. Imagine the change, if our daughters saw the beauty on all sorts of shapes and sizes the way YOU do. Don’t judge other women or compare yourself, just cultivate your own temple.
How about we women, collectively, make the New Year’s Resolution to blow these soul-destroying and self-hating beauty standards out the window.


I have been using a new word to compliment women and it’s not beautiful – it’s radiant.

Happy New Year, radiant ones!
Go forth and SHINE! x

Deep Breath.

PS I’ll leave you with a clip of Aussie ‘plus-sized’ model (which is ridiculous – she’s a goddess), Robyn Lawley. Forget what she looks like and just listen to her words. Soak them in.

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:


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.




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.


Deep Breath.


* Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/shane-watson-knows-tons-talk-as-hostilities-resume-20131205-2ytyv.html#ixzz2mrtjMou9

Here in Australia we have a t-shirt company named Nena & Pasadena.

The t-shirts they sell show degrading images of women – generally with their faces cut out of the image so that their value only lies in their breasts, buttocks and the all-important pose.




You get the idea.

A few months ago, this company started an all-ages ’Casting Call’ on Instagram #npcasting – calling out for men and women (boys and girls) to post photos of themselves, to then be judged by a group of privileged lads – deeming them the ‘hottest’.

To the truly tiresome argument that men are objectifying themselves too, I reply with the obvious – it’s not the same. Men have their shirts off, flexing chest muscles. Strength. That’s it. They’re not sexually posing with their legs spread or bending over with their butts in a g-string (thong).

Simply – the males are not vulnerable. And that’s the glaring difference.

There is also the fact that there are far more females posting up their ‘selfies’.
I’m sure you don’t need to go over to the site to verify you’ll see predominantly women and teen girls in hyper-sexualised, or sexy-kitten, or innocent-young-girl-ready-to-be-deflowered etc., looks and poses.

I took the following images off the actual competition page:


So here is my perspective on this pandemic:

Yes, women are doing it.
But WHY?

This is not empowerment.

And there’s a very simple reason for it – it’s done for validation from a vulnerable position, not one of power. Once someone seeks validation, they are in a submissive position to the person they’re awaiting judgement from.

And this obviously gives the ‘judge’ ultimate power and places them in a dominant position.

This is not what we want for our girls and we don’t want our sons to see and judge girls and women this way. And yet…

What we also seem to forget – but shouldn’t – is how these girls and women will be spoken about.
It won’t be about their sunny disposition, it will be crass, degrading, demeaning and more – calling them bitches, sluts, whores, gangas (girls who like gang rape; a term used by teens) and so on.

We know that.

Question #190: So, why do we continue to act so blind and ‘unaware’ of the effect this is having on our psyche?

  • That women are being collectively objectified and seen as submissive (by BOTH sexes), in everyday life;
  • That our youth’s perspective on gender is becoming alarmingly skewed and toxic;
  • That there is no equal modelling on what healthy and loving relationships look like.

All of this is for the male gaze – one that’s becoming insatiable.

As a tiny example, this ‘casting call’ is evidence of that.

Why does Nena & Pasadena need to incite this behaviour?
It’s a win/win for them – they get the benefit of seeing to what levels women will go to be validated in this way and get wonderful material for men everywhere (including predators) to masturbate over.

Simple truth.

Sadly the images are posted up by a large contingent of girls and women who have been brainwashed to think their value lies only in the collective sum of their body features; although the differentiation in their ‘hottness’ is miniscule – they all look the same. The fact that women’s faces are absent (like on many N & P t-shirts) just confirms this.

Why doesn’t that annoy women enough to stick two big fingers up at it all?

These t-shirts are just a cog in the machine; the machine that includes porn magazines in newsagencies and petrol stations all the way through to the infinite collection of violent and degrading porn on the Internet.

I recently featured in the article  Too much, too soon –  in the Sydney Morning Herald magazine, Sunday Life. This is a succinct and illuminating piece by Melissa Jacob, about the toxic relationship our kids are having with Internet porn.

This is an emergency.

These women are the supply; Men are the demand.

And we all know that when demand is strong – and supply is waning – extreme measures, like trafficking, are taken to keep the demand happy. That road leads to a desensitised world – one that will stoop to anything, while the rest turn a blind eye.

Are we there yet?

Deep Breath…and make a stand!!


PS Want to take action?
1. Nena & Pasadena is owned by AFL player Buddy Franklin (who joined the Sydney Swans in 2014). The AFL has a policy regarding respect for women that this ‘business’ does not comply with. You can write to the AFL or the Sydney Swans and let them know your thoughts – especially from you good males.

2. With some friends and the gals from Collective Shout, we’ve been posting our own memes on the competition page.
Why not do your own? It’s as easy as writing a sign, taking a photo of it and posting it on #npcasting on Instagram.

I put up the following one:


and this one:



There has recently been a raging debate on the Internet, since Emily Yoffe wrote an article called, College Women: Stop Getting Drunk.
Basically – Girls, if you don’t want to get raped – don’t drink around men.

A plethora of articles were written in light of this perspective – most notably Mia Freedman, who basically agreed with Yoffe and received quite the backlash from many women.


So what’s my 2 cents’ worth?

First cent:
In essence, I agree that drinking impairs people’s behaviour as well as reduce one’s ability to think coherently – depending on the amount consumed and other circumstances.
This type of conversation should cover both men and women, as well as look at the many areas of life the consumption of alcohol effects. For all.

But that’s not what’s happening.

This argument is (again) about what women/girls need to do, to better their chances of not being raped…which our logical brains know – is impossible.
Have we moved on from outfits or do we just go ahead and add that to the list?
What’s next – curfew for girls and women?

It doesn’t matter how else I look at it, listing what women and girls need to do should not be the primary topic of discussion.

First we need to flood the debate with discourse about men.
Men, guys and boys:
* Why they’re participating in more crimes of this nature and
* What they (and we as a society) need to do to curb its violent trajectory.

First and FOREMOST.

But we’re doing it the other way round; looking at how women need to ‘prevent’ (the unpreventable) while the nature of men goes largely untouched and – for the most part – unpunished.

This graph was created by the Enliven Project using data from Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey and FBI reports. It appeared in the Washington Post at the start of the year.


This particular form of advice does nothing but provide a disservice to both genders:

* Men/boys because they’re being painted as barbaric animals who use the primal urge they can’t stop, to take advantage of intoxicated (and sober) women and girls, rape them, sometimes take turns and film the whole thing on their smartphones;
* Women/girls because they need to be taught to restrict their life practices, in the hope that the predatory male gender doesn’t stick their penis in them without consent.

Second cent:
This is not to say that parents – and society at large – shouldn’t stop mentoring their children and the youth of today, of the dangers of alcohol; that annihilating themselves is harmful on many levels.

So I hope it’s clear that I think the current drinking culture of all our youth is excessive, dangerous and violent.

BUT – the second problem I have with this discourse is that, as good as this advice may be for girls and women of today and beyond:

Question #189: What are we saying to the young women who have ALREADY been raped and may have been drinking when it happened?

What if they felt safe with the men/man/boys/boy they were with?

What if they were tricked? Deceived?

Then raped/gang-raped.

Then left.

What about them?

Articles like Yoffe’s only help to drive home the deep-seeded shame they already feel by ultimately saying, it wouldn’t have happened IF:
* you had stayed home
* you hadn’t drunk alcohol
* you hadn’t gone to that party
* you hadn’t…
* you hadn’t…

We make them feel guilt.

That’s victim-blaming.

While this type of conversation continues to ignore the elephant in the room – the rapist – we neglect the mental health and recovery of those countless girls and women who have experienced a life-altering violation of their rights as a human being.

All they are seeing are guys/men getting off from being charged – even with filmed evidence^ – whilst girls/women are being given an instruction manual on how to stop the behaviour of another (???) through lists of recommendations including how much they drink, where they go, who they talk to, what they wear, etc., etc., etc.

I think we owe those women a lot more.

Deep Breath.


^ In the case of Daisy Coleman – who was 14, given an intoxicating drink by a group of 17 year olds, gang-raped and left unconscious in the snow – saw charges against the football ‘hero’ dropped DESPITE filmed footage.
If we live in a world, where filmed footage is not enough to convict, then women are truly and royally screwed.

A weighty issue.

October 19, 2013


Women’s weight.

Girls’ weight.

Your weight.

Her weight.

An entrenched obsession – incessantly being discussed in all forms – being passed on from adult woman to intently watching and learning girl.

Chelsea, a fan who follows my Facebook page, sent me an email due to the following meme that I found and put up on my page:


I LOVE the message of it but I also questioned whether the body in the image was the most realistic for the message. Chelsea wrote:

I’m a naturally slender and tall woman. I can gladly say I am proud of my body just the way it is but I’m sometimes made to feel guilty about this. It’s becoming increasingly common for people like me to be called unnatural or unrealistic. I know that what is portrayed in the media is often not a healthy image but I think we should be starting a movement of acceptance that we are all different in so many ways and that it’s important to be healthy and happy rather than still trying to paint a picture of what ‘real’ women look like.

This is part of what I responded to her:

I want – with all my soul – to live in a world where women’s bodies are not even an issue; that it’s just a vessel which houses an amazing human being.
I may sometimes focus on the larger figured women on this page, to help those who feel shame about their size and to hopefully help them start having more positive thoughts about themselves.
I am a naturally slender and tall woman too and lost 10 kilos (2 and a half years after giving birth to my second child). Many said I’d lost too much weight – although for my height I was well within the healthy weight range. But people still passed judgement.
I didn’t really do much to lose that weight – it’s like my body became that way with a few minor changes to diet but a
major change to my attitude toward my body. I loved it.
That’s what really worked.

I know many healthy women who are both overweight AND underweight – it’s just the body they have.
I similarly know women who do no exercise and eat poorly but are ‘slim’ . However, they may have issues down the track with their health.
A lot of the time – weight has little to do with health.


Beauty is a state of mind.

I agree with Chelsea that the term, ‘Real Woman’, can be damaging because we are ALL real women – even slender ones.

The following is from a wonderful series of cartoons from Colleen Clark’s Body Image Comic. This first one hits the nail on the head:



I have to admit that it was only recently that I had a moment of clarity with my own daughters’ figures, purely due to how different their bodies are. Polar opposites.

My eldest has always been an eager eater…from birth.
I (and my husband) have always looked out for her – purely from a health perspective; an intake of too much food (or too much of the wrong foods) would cause imbalance in the body.

She is nearly 11. She is tall for her age; a muscly, solid, amazonian girl.

My 7 year old is another matter entirely. Some may describe her as skeletal.
Her weight is fine for her age, but her height is quite a bit taller – hence her slim shape.

Both my girls are unique. Their bodies are unique. As each woman’s body is unique.
They eat well and are always on the move – yet they look completely different.
I’m sure, however, that both – especially my eldest, will be judged.

They will see, as a gender, women (and girls) being miserable with the way they look – endlessly comparing themselves to the few who fall into the ‘beautiful’ category.

But it is simply a category – one that’s designed to instil insecurity for the pure purpose of making billions of dollars – forever making us doubt our worth.

Question #188: Why do women believe so heavily in all this and participate in its perpetuation?

Well, I will not do it to my daughters.
Their figures are what they are and I will simply guide them toward their bodies being nurtured as healthily as possible.

I want this to be the lesson:


Deep Breath.

Now exhale.
You’re radiant just as you are.

Now go be a great role model.


How I see Malala.

October 13, 2013

I’m finding my mind swimming – literally swimming – with thoughts and perceptions that I want to articulate in a coherent and succinct manner. But there are so many and sometimes it just doesn’t help that I want to shout and use a shit-load of profanity.

I’m getting so weary and disappointed at our microscopically slow pace of change, that I have this to say:

One important lesson to gain from Malala (not the obvious one).

Yesterday I read an article that had a great impact on me.

Malala Yousafzai and the White Saviour Complex

It says:

This is a story of a native girl being saved by the white man. Flown to the UK, the Western world can feel good about itself as they save the native woman from the savage men of her home nation. It is a historic racist narrative that has been institutionalised. Journalists and politicians were falling over themselves to report and comment on the case. The story of an innocent brown child that was shot by savages for demanding an education and along comes the knight in shining armour to save her.

The actions of the West, the bombings, the occupations the wars all seem justified now, “see, we told you, this is why we intervene to save the natives.”

I agree. It practically looks like a PR stunt and I don’t like that Malala looks like she’s being used as a pawn in this seemingly deceptive agenda.

I also agree that there are A LOT more Malalas out there.

But this is the point where I want to deflect and add something important.

It’s not just that these girls need urgent saving – and they absolutely do – the motivation that has to power the movement of change, is the realisation that:

This world NEEDS girls and women like Malala.

It’s the missing ingredient for things to improve.

Girls and women.

NOT to take over. Equal representation.

If women – according to the Patriarchy – are supposedly the nurturers and carers, then the question shouldn’t be, ‘What have we got to lose?’ (because the only answer is money) but:

Question #187: What have we got to gain?

Simply, I think a great, great deal of good.

When are we going to evolve?
Don’t we want a happy planet for all, instead of this realm of greed, despair, rage and destruction?

I just want to finish by saying, that I think Malala is astonishing. A true hero. An inspiration.

I don’t care in the foggiest that the western world has made a big fuss about her – she absolutely deserves our full attention.
What a wonder she is.

Now let’s WAKE UP and channel that toward educating our children – in schools and at home – by teaching them to be the cogs of change.

Our youth is the answer – with our guidance.

If you’re thinking that you’ll give it a try (which would be awesome) – I would also like to respond with the famous words of Yoda in The Empire Strikes Back:

“Do or do not; there is no try.”

What are you going to do?


Anything. However small.

We must start to act as a collective.

Deep Breath.



To shave or not to shave… #2

September 27, 2013

As a follow-up to my previous post on this issue, I just quickly wanted to add some photos.

This is an American comedian and actress – Mo’Nique – who has appeared on red carpets like this:



In the same way we became conditioned to (predominantly) find hairless legs beautiful –

Question #186: Is it possible to be attracted to hairy women’s legs?

If not – why not?

I really hope so.
Although, this is for women too – of course. I’m sure there are many who will disagree with me.

I apologise for my absence of late – it seems the strains of life as a full-time working mum have pockets when they take their toll. I’m sure many working mums can give me an exhausted ‘amen’ there.

This bit’s for the guys. (You can listen in, though, gals)

Last week, I escaped with Hubby and the girls to a National Park for three days, with zero phone reception and no Net. It was sublime and enormously relaxing – which was just the ticket, as I think I was heading toward a ‘system overload’ situation.
Having access to the world would have rendered the whole mini-break pointless, as the crappy things that are going on profoundly affect me.

So, my first ‘me’ activity on the first day, was to pluck the hairs off my legs.

Mmmmmm – I hear ya – exciting stuff.

Now I know that I said in my last post on this issue – A hairy moment – that my only manner of removing leg hair was through shaving, BUT I had purchased a new ‘machine’ and after recently slicing the top off a toe knuckle with a razor (infuriating and bloody painful), as I attempted to balance in the shower to shave, I thought I’d give the ‘hair yank’  another shot.
Exfoliation and cream galore will be needed to stop the usual ingrown hairs.

So as my legs started to welt – Exhibit A:


– my daughters entered the room, looking quite perplexed, and asked why I was doing that. Like I was a crazy person.

At that moment, guys, what am I to say?

The truth? – that less than a hundred years ago, this became the ‘fashion’ and sealed our doomed fate to constantly undo what nature has given us?

Or our truth? – that they simply have to and will spend a truck load of money in the process?

I sat there – blinking (with the sounds of crickets) – and just looked at them.


Question # 184: Do you see the conundrum we’re in as women?

At every turn – it’s JUST about our looks.
And that attitude permeates everything to do with women.

I want to instil in my girls – in ALL girls (and dare I dream it; boys and men) – that beauty absolutely comes in all shapes, colours…and (heaven forbid) hairiness.

But how can I teach that when I’m sitting there – intentionally – ripping the hair off my legs, leaving them in welts?

I felt a bit like a fraud.

So, I’m still a feminist who will not let my leg and armpit hair grow, because it’s entrenched in my views of beauty  – BUT can you understand the frustration?

Before some of you guys say you have an equal problem because you have to shave your faces – I’ll respond with. ‘But by beauty standards you don’t have to.’ Exhibit B:

kinopoisk.ruHugh Jackman sports a scruffy beard while greeting fans outside the 'Late Show with David Letterman' in NYC7402119_f520

We have to…and it’s a bummer.

OK gals, this part is for you AS WELL. (Don’t go anywhere yet, fellas)

No, hair removal is not the number one issue that women face – by a long shot – women have much graver and more horrifying problems to face and deal with, on a global scale.

I wrote about this because I needed to explain the simple frustration of women (with the means – like myself) choosing to shave their legs, at the expense of all our wallets – men’s and women’s – AND the environment.

Imagine the plastic (as an example) we’d have saved from being produced, if this weren’t the fashion for women?
And the resources to MAKE that plastic? It’s mind-boggling when hair removal is a billion dollar industry.

All for what? Hair?

Sadly, the logic doesn’t translate to the already converted – like me – but:

Question #185: Should we really be doing this to ourselves and imparting it onto our kids?

It’s like men can be as hairy as they want to be and are steered away from their feminine aspects (which balances them out) – being ridiculed for being a ‘girl/woman’ in any way.

Whilst women have to rid themselves (preferably) of all body hair – except for the hair on the head, of course, which has to be long and cascading locks. (Another extreme beauty expense, BTW)
Women are being steered away from their wonderful, rugged strength (which balances them out) because those masculine traits – whether they be physical (looks) or in attitude – deem them ‘unladylike’.

We’re missing out on the best of ourselves.

We’re a bunch of idiots.

Deep Breath.