“THE MORE FAMOUS AND POWERFUL I GET THE MORE POWER I HAVE TO HURT MEN.”

Sharon Stone.

Thanks for that, Ms Stone...

 

Hey, I know; as if I wasn’t unpopular enough already, I’ve decided to tackle the subject of feminism. By extension, I’ll be talking A LOT about sexism. 

I realise these are serious issues, and ones that most people feel strongly about (whatever side of the debate they support), so this is bound to be my most divisive topic yet.  Unlike my posts on the Gulf War and politics, for which I tried to remain a neutral party, I WILL be expressing my own opinions this time round. They won’t all be appreciated, but I’ve skirted around this issue more times than I can recall and it’s time to just have done with it. If my beliefs do run contrary to your beliefs, hopefully this is not to the extent that we can’t still get-along…

The acerbic use of humour, sarcasm, seemingly flippant quips and general tone many will, I’m certain, find offensive- but that’s not an acceptable reason for silence. My little girl is growing up too fast and that's led me into considering many things that I'd never given much thought to. This blog is the result.

“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."

Stephen Fry.

I guess (redundant as it may be) I should at least go through the motions and state that I am neither; sexist, racist or homophobic, and I won’t stoop to trying to prove so with comments like “my best friend is this” and “I married a such-and-such”. It’s pointless and means sweet FA. I’ve never treated anybody differently, for better or worse, because of their sex, sexuality or the colour of their skin, and never will. Anyone I have ever upset in the past (and there have been many) I expect would reluctantly agree. Everyone’s on an equal footing when it comes to first impressions, it’s how people conduct themselves from that point onwards that dictates my response, and that’s surely how this World should work…   

And one final thing. The comments in this blog refer only to the feminist movement of THE WEST (most of Europe, the UK and USA). I appreciate the issues facing feminists in some reaches of Europe, and countries such as Asia and Africa are VERY different to the issues I raise here.

That’s that bit over with.

Feminist overview

The following is a brief overview of the Feminist ideology, in their own words;

    Women are oppressed by patriarchy economically, politically, socially, and psychologically; patriarchal ideology is the primary means by which they are kept so.

    In every domain where patriarchy reigns, woman is other: she is marginalized, defined only by her difference from male norms and values.

    All of western (Anglo-European) civilization is deeply rooted in patriarchal ideology, for example, in the biblical portrayal of Eve as the origin of sin and death in the world.

    While biology determines our sex (male or female), culture determines our gender (masculine or feminine).

    All feminist activity, including feminist theory and literary criticism, has as its ultimate goal to change the world by prompting gender equality.

    Gender issues play a part in every aspect of human production and experience, including the production and experience of literature, whether we are consciously aware of these issues or not.

Generally speaking, the new waves of “modern feminists” concern themselves primarily with the following five issues; the division of domestic labour, the media, the glass ceiling, social inequality and violence against women.  

Feminism as a hate group?

A heroic stand for equality.

They’d argue otherwise, but it seems to me that most feminists are no longer after equality; they’re after superiority. And revenge, against men for all the years of suffering their fairer sex has endured through the ages- and make no mistake, women have suffered under men throughout history (I’m not denying that). But, is it fair to “blame the son for the sins of the father”? Surely doing so causes division, not harmony, and should that not be the long-term goal for ALL of humanity?

With that sentiment in mind, here are some quotes made by famous feminists. See if you can spot a pattern?

    “I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.”

Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor

    “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.”

Valerie Solanas

    “I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.”

Andrea Dworkin

    “Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear”

Susan Brownmiller

    “In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.”

Catherine MacKinnon

    “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.”

Sally Miller Gearhart

    “Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.”

Catherine Comins

    “All men are rapists and that’s all they are”

Marilyn French

Not particularly man-friendly views, are they? MacKinnon and Comins' view I find particularly troubling, on so many levels. I mean, "(women) are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." What. The . Fuck? I mean, I'm not sure who that comment hates most, men or women? A far cry from 'All feminist activity, including feminist theory and literary criticism, has as its ultimate goal to change the world by prompting gender equality.'

 Now, I’m not saying for a second these quotes represent the view of every feminist, but as a movement comments like these are all too common, and not enough is done by that movement to distance themselves from these remarks...

And why? Because modern feminism is (by and large) a hate group; a bigoted movement that claims to support gender equality and fight against sexism, yet uses phrases like “no uterus, no opinion”, which is supposed to silence the entire opposite gender and encourage others to deprive all men of their reproductive rights, merely because of an anatomical difference. It negatively distorts people’s perception of reality by telling them that “The patriarchy is turning its ugly head here, and that if you don’t see that you are a slave to it”, which is ironic because this ideology tells people that there is a problem there and if you question that then you to are an enemy. It's quite the contradiction to want to overthrow the patriarchy but to also believe that, even now, the patriarchy is so omnipotent that women are incapable of making empowered decisions when they make choices that don't toe the feminist party line. I would have hoped that feminism (in addition to helping women overcome oppression in all forms, across the World) would allow for women to make choices – even choices with which other feminists would disagree, but sadly that is not the case.
And if I'm mistaken on all that, if you're a feminist reading this thinking to yourself "those people DO NOT represent my beliefs" then I'd suggest these extremists tend to be the more vocal of the feminist movement, and so long as they are allowed to go on tainting your cause and undermining your goals, then they will continue to represent 'modern feminism', and how all of you are increasingly portrayed.

I believe that feminism first developed to tackle very real problems, and in some aspects of life we still haven't reached a complete balance. However, I believe that years of fighting has taken it's toll on the feminist agenda, and when all you've had for so long is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail...

Roleplaying, Boardgames & Conventions

Every storm announces itself with a simple breeze, and this blog was no different. Running with that analogy, I’d been getting a little ‘chilly’ over the last few years but the gales had been mostly fleeting. It’s only recently that the clouds overhead have grown dark, and the subjects of feminism and sexism have really become concerns in my everyday life. Having a daughter will do that to a man.

I don’t want to embarrass anyone with names, but the final straw leading to this blog was a fairly petty gripe (compared to many), and concerned a group of feminists discussing an image used to promote a family-orientated board game, which they had seen at a convention. Below is the image. It represents one of the Queen of Icini’s daughters. 

Not historically accurate.

The Queen of Icini, before you ask, also known as Boadicea, was a British warrior Queen who opposed and led a rebellion against the Romans after they attacked and raped her daughters (long story short, this isn’t a history lesson). In the end, she was defeated- but took her own life so that the Roman’s couldn’t take her captive. For more on the subject, click here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudica

Also at this convention was an attractive model dressed as the character from the image, there to promote the game.

The feminists had two objections to this image. 

Firstly, that it was overtly sexual for a family-friendly game. 

Secondly, that it was in poor taste to sexualise a character from history who was brutally raped. Fair, I suppose, but considering what normally passes in the media I felt this was a tame example to be up-in-arms about. 

I responded (unwisely, I was to find out) to their discussion with 3 points; 

Firstly, is she really any more sexualised than Princess Jasmine from Aladin, or Cheetara from Thundercats (shit, even Tinkerbell)? All of which are ‘family-orientated’. At least she’s realistically proportioned, unlike a lot of fantasy art (especially the impossibly bendy porn-faced posturing sen in most mainstream comics- that IS problematic). 

Secondly, if you were historically sensitive you could argue her sexualisation is in poor taste, but importantly she’s not displayed here as  a victim, or weak. Rather, she’s confidently propped up beside a spear, a defeated Roman’s helmet by her feet- she’s clearly just kicked an ass or two.  Is this any more problematic than seeing children dressed as cowboys or Vikings- given the atrocities both of these are responsible for? Genocide and slavery of the Native American population, or “good ol” rape, murder and pillaging… 

My last point was the one that seemed to cause the most agitation. I suggested that they probably had better things to be complaining about, and that if ‘historical sensitivity’ was such a problem for them, then maybe they should turn their attention to the new Wolfenstein consul game, and their “sexy Nazis”. After all, many who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich are still alive today, their evil still within living memory… The end result, after 4 hours of 'debate', was this;

“Thanks for your mansplaining... It's really frustrating for women to be lectured by men on what sexist things we should and shouldn't be offended by... Look, at this point I'm getting really annoyed with you, and since you're nobody that I know or give a fuck about, I'm not seeing any good reason to continue the conversation.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this a little sexist? She’s assuming (use of the word 'mansplaining') that I’m ‘talking down to her’ because she’s a woman, and that I'm clearly unable to think critically because I'm just a bloke- that my opinions are somehow worth less than her's because I couldn't possibly understand what equality and sexism means ("women to be lectured by men"). What the fuck does my sex have to do with anything, would it have been any more or less valid if I'd had a vagina? That's certainly how I was made to feel. I think by this point she'd given up on any logical debate; if she's falling back on that old "you're just a bloke" excuse she'd probably already exhausted every other line of defense... And let’s face it, at the risk of sounding sexist (and validating her argument) have you ever known a woman to give up on an argument she was winning? 

Time for an aside. Was that last comment an ironic joke? No. Is it a sexist? You know what, if that offends you, just stop reading now. Fuck off and read something else. Men and Women are different, and it shouldn't be sexist to point that out- differences should be understood, celebrated and discussed to the point where we take them and accept them as common place. Despite every one of us being a unique individual, the sexes are not the same- that's not to say they can't be treated as equals.Women, generally speaking, are more tenacious, and believe me- that's a perk. It can be a pain in the ass for everyone around you, but that drive will get you through more than a few scrapes. 

I'd also like to point out that when the posters were left out featuring the above image, come morning it had been defaced. Draw your own conclusions.

So, was it sexist to have a model dressed up provocatively to advertise the game? That leads me nicely onto...




Cosplay, Modeling & Pornography

If all Disney characters looked like this I'd watch more Disney...

So, when you go tho these comic conventions and car shows etc, you can't help but notice most of the products are advertised by stands that feature bucket-loads of scantly clad females. A lot of females cite this as sexist, and while it's hard to argue against this (I don't notice so many semi naked men), does it really fucking matter?

I should explain. I'm not being flippant about your 'cause', but rather than say "oh, women shouldn't be used this way" I'm all for the use of attractive male models used in the same way. See, I don't think the 'offensive bit' is the model being half naked to attract men, I think the 'offensive bit' is seeing it less with men.
Let me ask you; is there really very much different between the model at the convention and ALL the women who dress that way FOR FUN? Yes, now I'm talking about Cosplay. Some feminists moan because you can't get away from scantly clad models, even at the family-orientated conventions, but seriously, is it very different to being pool side or by the beach? Fuck, even walking round the town in summer you can't help but notice all the skimpy outfits. And yes, swim suits and skimpy outfits are designed in most instances to be sexualised. And what about the music videos you see on mainstream TV before the watershed? These are much more in-your-face and subversive than the bloody models at these conventions- at least they arn't thrusting their hips, pole dancing and pulling 'porn-face'...

Recently, our nearest city's Abercrombie & Fitch outlet hired 2 guys to stand on the doors, semi naked (I think they were intended to be life guards). It succeeded in drawing the women-folk in their droves- so don't go pretending your sex is any fucking different to us guys, because sex sells whatever your gender. Sure, some of you will make a stand and think "I won't be a slave to my baser instincts" but plenty of guys feel the same way to. Was I offended by seeing  2 young guys, semi naked, in much better shape than myself and with much better hair? I won't lie and say "I didn't give a single fuck", but the amount of "fuck" that I did give couldn't fill an ant's arse hole.

Oh, incidentally; why is that when feminists (and some who aren't) see a "larger" woman dressed in a skimpy outfit they adopt the "you go girl" attitude, but the moment a beautiful, shapely woman dressed identically comes along, like Jessica Nigri, they usually respond with comments like "whore" and  "attention seeker"?
This was said by one pissed-off cosplayer:

"Nigri's recent Link genderbend, there's nothing wrong with the nature of it, but anyone who had played a Zelda game would know that even if Link is a female, she wouldn't wear something that reveals her cleavage". 

Well, you know what, on the subject of respecting the source material, maybe Westerners should stop pretending they're FUCKING JAPANESE then!

OK. Let's talk Porn. The following is lifted from that trusted harbinger-of-truth, Wikipedia.

Feminist opponents of pornography—such as Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, Robin Morgan, Diana Russell, Alice Schwarzer, Gail Dines, and Robert Jensen—argue that pornography is harmful to women, and constitutes strong causality or facilitation of violence against women.

Catherine MacKinnon believes that the production of pornography entails physical, psychological, and/or economic coercion of the women who perform and model in it. Anti-pornography feminists also hold the view that pornography contributes to sexism, arguing that in pornographic performances the actresses are reduced to mere receptacles—objects—for sexual use and abuse by men. They argue that the narrative is usually formed around men's pleasure as the only goal of sexual activity, and that the women are shown in a subordinate role. 
These Feminists also argue that the "habitual" consumption of pornography by men can lead to the intentional viewing of child porn within just 6 months. Robin Morgan is often-quoted as stating "Pornography is the theory, and rape is the practice."

Pro-Sex Feminists  believe that sexual liberation and sexual freedom are key components of women's liberation.  Ellen Willis (who coined the term "pro-sex feminism") states "As we saw it, the claim that 'pornography is violence against women' was code for the neo-Victorian idea that men want sex and women endure it." 
They defend women's decision to perform in pornography as freely chosen, and argue that much of what these women do on camera is an expression of their sexuality. It has also been pointed out that in pornography, women generally earn more than their male counterparts.

I find myself (obviously) in favour of the Pro-Sex Feminists. Surely porn is a natural act, and so long as both parties are willing and up-for-it (even if they occasionally are pretending otherwise), then where's the harm? Not sure if the feminists have realised this yet, but the guys are fucking naked as well? And if you think silicone implants and full lips are a damagingly unrealistic image for women who, let's face it, should really learn to be less impressionable- how do you think I feel seeing a muscle bound hunk with a 12 inch cock who's ejaculation could fill a pint glass from 5 meters away?


Kind of off-topic, I realise, but I'm all for banning female genital mutilation; it's barbaric and cruel, but isn't it just a little hypocritical to then go out and get you newborn son circumcised because you think it "looks better"?


In Computer Games

Tekken's flagship character, Jin Kazama

 
The latest stats (however these are complied) show that women make up approx 50% of comic readers and console players- and I have to admit that the material and media on offer doesn't reflect this. Yes, it's still all largely aimed at males, and males tend to command the story view-point. This needs rectifying, although I feel things are steadily improving, but a male view-point is not the same thing as a sexist view-point...

Dismissing comics for the moment, there has been a lot said on sexism in gaming recently, not least by the feminist Anita Sarkeesian, who used Kickstarter to raise more than $150,000* to research her project. While her videos are well argued (I urge you to watch them, they to encourage reflection), I do have a few disagreements. I feel Anita's been more than a little selective with her evidence. 
To be honest, Anita Sarkeesian is probably worth a blog post on her own, but I must say she does have a tendency to cite sexism in games which are well over 15 years old, and overlooks a lot of major new releases that feature strong females as the main protagonist; Mass Effect 1-3, Bayonetta 1-2, Mirror’s Edge, Beyond Good & Evil, Super Princess Peach, Bullet Witch, Heavy Rain, Halo: Reach and Tomb Raider to name just a few.

Despite a number of videos, Anita tends to have 3 major reoccurring issues with the way women are portrayed in the games industry. These are:

1. Women are 'objects', damsels-in-distress awaiting rescue, there to simply galvanise the heroic lead character into action.

Ignoring the troubling games from over a decade ago (some of them are inexcusable- we've moved on more than a little since then), this isn't so different to the film industry's present situation- and that is this; most stories are told from a male's point of view. That's not necessarily a 'sexism' issue, so much a story telling issue.
I'd argue that, if the hero's girlfriend IS snatched, taken away by an evil gang or held up in a castle somewhere surrounded by monsters, then how is it offensive to then come to her rescue? Should our hero put his feet up and say "fuck it, she can take care of herself"? Yes, it's a lazy plot device, but it's also a very easy one to set up quickly- this is a computer game at the end of the day, not high art, and most games want to cut to the action as soon as possible. Love is a very simple, strong, relatable and immediate motivation for a character. The heroes themselves arn't thinking "hey, that's my woman- and I need her back in the kitchen or who else is going to be cooking my food", they're thinking "oh no, I love her and care about her and want to keep her safe". 

If, for example, a game had the bottle to feature 2 gay men, and one of these gay men was abducted by 'the enemy', and the remaining gay man vowed to save his "one true love"- would that somehow also be offensive? Surely the motivation is 'love', not 'ownership'? Same if it were 2 women in love. Love is the motivation, not control or possession. I would have NOTHING against a game that featured a female character attempting to save a male, nothing at all: every story needs a view-point character, and it makes no difference to me which way round the genders are played. 

Incidentally, it tends to be female characters which are 'kidnapped' because (and you'll hate me for saying this), when it comes to a fight women do tend to be the weaker sex. Sure, you see female bouncers now, females in the police force, bodybuilders and soldiers (nowhere near the 50% mark I might add), but the general rule is that physically women are weaker than men: therefore is it any wonder that in action-orientated games the playing character is generally male? 

It's also worth mentioning at this point that, when female characters DO crop up in games (especially the 'beat-em-up' variety) they tend to be programmed much tougher to beat than their male counterparts- Tekken, Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat being prime examples of this conceit. 

Oh, and if you're a woman reading this and you find the idea of a man saving a woman somehow sexist, be sure to let your local fire department know that, in the event of a fire, you're happy to save yourself.

2. Women characters in games tend to be portrayed as "men with breasts" or "fuck toys".

Yeah, I can concede that most lead females in games have a tendency to flash-the-flesh. It's always refreshing to see women in practical clothing, but despite that it's only natural that most characters in games (and films, TV and comics) are beautiful people. Most of us would rather look at a beautiful person than a plain or ugly one, whatever their sex or sexuality- it's 'easier on the eye'. The truth hurts, but it's a flaw with society and not the fault of the ever-present underlying Patriarchy... And it's not just the female characters that are unrealistically attractive or proportioned. For every ridiculously long-legged bimbo there's an equally unrealistic behemoth of a bloke with a giant gun. Look no further than Gears of War, or the Tekken series for some real athletic beauties (and some of those male characters have quite the female fan base, don't ya know?)... 

It's like that old Barbie argument. "Barbie is an unrealistic and unhealthy role-model for little girls, let's make her shorter and fatter". Never once have I seen anybody protest that He-Man should have receding hair and a beer-belly.

3. Lack of character development in female leads.

Correct again, but you're also overlooking the fact that most of the male characters are also poorly written. That's a fault of games in general, not just a problem surrounding the female characters. Still, most games look like fucking Shakespeare compared to the writing on display in mainstream comics...

*Really, check Google: $150, 000 to play video games. Most people do that for fun, they don't get paid for it. I mean, really, what the FUCK are you going to spend that much money on? Even after the initial cost of buying a new PC, PS3, PS4, X360, and a whole bunch of games etc, where's the money going? And honestly, you can research games without having to buy them- you can watch someone else play them on 'long-play' via YouTube for FREE, usually within 24 hours of a game being released (after all, you're researching the content, not testing the playability)! And if money really is that tight, sell the fucking games after you play them...


Business World & Domestic Duties

Man in drag does housework, hilarious.

I can only really talk from my own experiences here.

Recently, me and my partner switched roles; she now works full-time for the NHS, and I now "work from home", treating my writing as a full-time job. We now share housework and child duties, but if I wasn't putting so much effort into my writing (with my wife's support) then I'd obviously be doing the 'lion's share' of the housework. See, I'm a 'modern man'...
I'm not of the opinion that house work is a woman's place, but it should be the role taken on by the person in a relationship who stays at home. If both work, then house roles should be distributed to reflect the working hours (not the pay). If they both work full-time, then house duties should be divided equally. No-brainer, right? Sex shouldn't come into it.
Do you know what group of people give me the toughest time about being JUST a 'house husband', who look at me like a free-loader or some sort of waster? Women.

I agree that men and women should definitely be paid equally for the same work, but I've never been in a job where they haven't. I can't actually think of any jobs off the top of my head that don't pay equally in this country, outside of the Open Market (like sports), but then I've only ever had lower class jobs...
On that subject (and I can only go on what I've read online), but have you heard the equal-pay scandal concerning Tennis players? Female players now get the same pay as males, which on the face of it sounds fine, till you realise it's for playing less games, less sets and attracting smaller crowds. Is that equality? Admittedly, many women now want the opportunities to play more games and more sets to balance things out, but as it stands, is this fair?
When my father was a truck driver (I'm going back about 30 years now), the women drivers were given the same pay. However, the women drivers weren't expected to help load or unload the trucks, they would be given a tea break while the men did the heavy lifting. When my father was a bus driver (about 20 years ago), women were paid the same wage as men, but weren't expected to take the 'riskier' routes (the routes which had a higher risk of attacks and muggings, etc). I'm sorry, but that's unfair: it should be a case of  'same pay for the same jobs', and if someone is unable or unwilling to do all the same job then they shouldn't receive the same pay. If you're a policewoman or a soldier, you earn the same pay for the same job, why should driving a fucking bus or driving a truck be any different? Hopefully things are a little different now- but back then this was called "equality". Not by the definition that I understand it...

I've probably worked close to 10 years in the care industry now; a predominantly female industry, and in my time there I've suffered (very mild) sexual harassment and bullying, as well as uncountable sexist digs (not jokes, but proper digs). Both times I've complained I've essentially been told (by a female superior on both accounts) to "get over it". I've let all these instances slide because, truthfully, the harassment was only ever mild, and the bullying, well, in the first instance I was very young (and was made to feel like I was over-reacting) and in the second I gave as good as I got, but I can't help but wonder what would have happened if the gender roles were switched? I believe so. I've seen and heard of other males who've had a much rougher time of it than myself.

Alright, so imagine you're the head of a large buisness.

Loads of people apply for the same job and you finally whittle down to the last 2 people, both males. You need to make the right decsion, because on hiring the applicant will undrgo 2 weeks of training, costing thousands of pounds- and you want the biggest return possible on your money. The first man interviews well. Next you interview second man. During the interview he lets slip that next year he may be taking 12 months from work to travel through Asia with his girlfriend, although he feels he will be returning to the position afterwards. Who do you hire? Without gender, the first man seems like the obvious choice, right?

Is this next scenario particularly different?

Loads of people apply for the same job and you finally whittle down to the last 2 people, one male, one female. The man interviews well. Next you interview the woman. During the interview she lets slip that her and her partner may start trying for a family next year, although she feels she will be returning to work after maternity leave. Who do you hire? Some of you may feel that hiring the man over the woman is perhaps sexist, but is the situation really very different to the traveling man? You have no guarantees that either will return to work, and on top of that you'd end up paying maternity leave for the woman.

Moving on...

Consider this scenario:

Loads of people apply for the same job and you finally whittle down to the last 2 people (again). The first person interviews well. Next you interview second person, a woman. During the interview she lets slip that her and her partner may start trying for a family next year, although she feels she will be returning to work after maternity leave. Who do you hire? Would it make a difference if I told you the first person is a woman in her mid 40's? She's already had children and is now returning to work- with no plans for further children. Does that make the decision any easier?

Incidentally, while we are on the topic- let's take a look at the 'glass ceiling'. Two things really...

1. Is it any wonder why the business world is presently predominantly dominated by men? Think of Richard Branson and Lord Sugar's generation, how many women were working back then? These men worked their way up to the top in a time where there were very few women to compete with, and it's taken them years and years to do reach where they are today. Women have only recently (relatively speaking) come into the race- why SHOULD there be as many women in charge of businesses at this point??? Give it another 50 years and if there aren't as many women in charge by then I'll concede there's still a problem.

2. While you're at it feminists, maybe you could try breaking the 'glass floor'? The glass floor exists in the fact that men vastly outnumber women among the ranks of prisoners, the homeless, and the mentally institutionalized...


Advertising & Hunkvertising

Let's all of us just get over the fact that sex sells- really, really well.

OK women, get over it. There's now just as much advertising playing-up the sexualisation of men as there is about women, only we have the added bonus of putting up with tongue-in-cheek sexism while we're at it. There's even a name for it, "Hunkvertising".

Honestly, I'm not bothered, but take the following example: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7ssGEIXRlg

Now reverse the gender roles. Two middle-aged security guards (both blokes) stop Maria Sharapova and insist they need to carry out a strip search. Just a little creepy, no? 

 

Again, and I'm not bothered (I only point this out to highlight inequality), but you wouldn't get an advert where a woman is compared to a creamy yoghurt by the comment "rich, delicious and thick", would you? Do I think these adverts should be pulled? No, they're actually pretty funny and I laughed at both- I just think feminists should lighten up and learn to take a joke at their own expense once in a while... And on the subject of jokes...

Comedy

Man-hater or crowd-pleaser?

This from Giles Coren, of the Daily Mail. Yes, I'm aware that's a far-right-hate-rag, but I actually happen to agree with the 'theory' behind this intentionally inflammatory sentiment:

"Sexism is alive and well in this country and applauded in all quarters — as long as it is practiced by women. And they are allowed to say the most terrible, terrible things. Only last week, for example, Jo Brand, the newly crowned Best Female TV Comic at the British Comedy Awards, was on Have I Got News For You and replied to the question ‘What’s your favourite kind of man, Jo?’ by saying: ‘A dead one.’ Oh, how the audience fell about. And the other contestants, all male, chortled away too.
I’m not saying it wasn’t funny. I’m just saying we live in a world where the thorough-going awfulness, uselessness and superfluity of the male sex is such a given, that a frontline television comic can get big laughs by saying she’d prefer it if we were all dead. And I’m trying to imagine a world in which I am on that show and they say, ‘What kind of women do you like, Giles?’ and I reply: ‘Dead ones.’ I just don’t think it would get the same laughs, do you?"

Another Jo Brand joke to make the day time cut (I think I overheard it on Loose Women) was "the best way to a man's heart? Through the hanky pocket with a bread knife". That's just sinister if I say the same thing about women, isn't it...

So why is it these jokes work one way and not the other? I think a lot of it is context (there seems to be very little malice involved), but a lot of the humor lays in noticing the difference between the sexes and accepting we are NOT the same. Do I think in the interest of equality Brand's jokes should be taken off the air? No, I just wish you women weren't so sensitive when men joke (that's the key word, 'joke') about how badly you park the car or that none of you understand the off-side rule...


Violence against Women.

40% of all domestic violence is targeted at men.

A deadly serious topic. I'm of the belief that when a man beats, rapes or otherwise abuses a woman, it has nothing to do with a lack of understanding- a general ignorance that can be overcome with feminism. By now, in the Western World at least, it's accepted by approx 98% of people that women are of equal standing to men, and I suspect that even women beaters and rapists know this. They do it, not because they lack education, but because, simply put, they are cunts. They don't care for equality in any form, and the odds are, given the opportunity, they'd be just as much of a cunt to men as well- and often they are. Rapists and attackers of women usually do so in hiding, keeping their deeds hidden from the world at large, because they ALREADY KNOW what they're doing is wrong. They do it anyway. Feminism will not change these people, no more than it will change the kind of religious fanaticism responsible for so-called 'honor killings' and public stoning- all of which is prevalent in the news right now.
Also worth mentioning are the women who remain with abusive and violent partners, and I suspect (although I obviously can't prove this) they do so, not because they think "women are worthless", but because they don't consider themselves "worth enough", and that's an important distinction to make.

And what of those people you hear about (but never seem to meet) who think women "deserve to be raped" when they wear the wrong outfits? Not saying that's not an issue, but I'd guess they're at least in the overwhelming minority, wouldn't you? That straggling 2% who will die-out, given the time. What about the huge number of men women who don't believe or won't accept that a woman is more than capable of raping a man? Slightly higher than 2% I'd guess... Men are raped, attacked and murdered also. It is not an isolated 'feminist-only' issue.

Again, this from Wikipedia.

"Determining how many instances of domestic violence actually involve male victims is difficult. Male domestic violence victims may be reluctant to get help for a number of reasons. Some studies have shown that women who assaulted their male partners were more likely to avoid arrest even when the male victim contacts police. Another study examined the differences in how male and female batterers were treated by the criminal justice system. The study concluded that female intimate violence perpetrators are frequently viewed by law enforcement and the criminal justice system as victims rather than the actual offenders of violence against men. Other studies have also demonstrated a high degree of general acceptance of aggression against men by women."

Let's just try and stamp out ALL violence, not just the violence targeting a single sex.


I do NOT want my daughter to become a feminist because;  

Soft-core pornography = bad. Topless protests in front of children = fine.

I want her to understand the difference between 'chivalrous' and 'sexist'. 

I want her to seek equality with the opposite sex, not servitude. 

I want her to take responsibility for herself and her own actions. 

I want her to define herself by her own standards, not those of other people. 

I don't want her to live her life with a 'victim complex', believing it to be empowering. 

I want her to realise as a woman in the Western World she is not an 'oppressed minority'. 

I want her to realise that sex is a natural and healthy act, not politics or a power game. 

I don't want her to feel like being a woman is a disadvantage. 

I want her to realise that rape and violence are not sorely 'women's issues'. 

I want her to understand that being faithful is not oppression by the 'patriarchy'. 

I want her to be capable of her own critical thinking. 

I want her to be happy, not actively searching for things to feel offended by.

In Closing:

Fortunately, no woman in Britain has recently been stoned to death...

While I feel the need for Feminism is largely over with in Western countries, many other regions of the world are in desperate need of equality. Whether Feminism as a movement is capable of winning hearts and minds in these poorer and more religious-led parts of the world remains to be seen; sadly I suspect not but it's the right thing to try. If feminists could just unite, stop squabbling about the smaller inconsistency of life between the sexes, accept equality rather than pursuing appeasement, and put their collected time into cases such as the "stoning to death of a pregnant Pakistani woman" outside a court, or that of Meriam Ibrahim (presently in jail because her faith forbids her to marry a Christian), then they wouldn't have the reputation they do now and would still be seen as a force for good- not a collective of “embittered, lonely, selfish hags with nothing better to moan about aside from the issues that affect only themselves” *.

* quoted from Paul Michael Carlisle. 


Want to know more?  http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/



Coming soon: Feminism & Films