Pages

Showing posts with label sex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sex. Show all posts

Friday, 17 September 2010

A one track mind, but not blinkered

I really enjoyed The F Word Interview with Zoe Margolis, she's very frank and passionate about her views and it's refreshing to see someone in the mainstream talking so clearly about the fine line between empowerment and objectification. Often people misunderstand feminist objections to sexualised images, and, from what I've read, feminists themselves can sometimes seem confused about what they're actually fighting about! Abby Lee, Margolis' persona for the Girl With a One Track Mind blog/book, was destroyed by the media's desperate need to expose her real identity, so she is well placed to make statements like this - people have heard of her, and her notoriety makes her interesting to more than the usual feminist audience.

It's also exciting to see that she takes on the female magazine market:
My experience was a microcosm of what happens to women generally in society and women in the public eye especially: being outed, threatened and blackmailed. That type of shit goes on every single day in celebrity magazines and women’s magazines. Women should be questioning that when they buy into it - they’re buying into someone else’s misfortune and a very misogynistic view of women. I wanted to show that’s the reality. Women need to stop literally buying into it and supporting it. We need to question ‘why are we always talking about what women look like, what they wear and their sex lives?’

People say, “well, women buy these magazines so it’s what women want to read”.

But that’s what women are being given, there’s no fucking alternative. You’ll find the same stories in them all: they’re all dumbed down, patronising and very similar in style. Sometimes you’ll find something really radical and intelligent, but that’s not enough when 95% of the magazine is sexist conditioning. I do think women want more - the average woman who wouldn’t call herself a feminist, likes Heat and isn’t particularly political. But with no alternative provided, you have to take what there is: it’s that, or reading nothing at all.


There really aren't any alternatives on the high street, but if you're interested in a different women's magazine that doesn't sell the commodities of sex, objectification and beauty, you won't go far wrong with Filament magazine, but be warned, it's got an 18 certificate! (I think Zoe has even written a guest article in a previous issue)

Thank you, Zoe, for continuing to question our f*cked up society and trying to take the shame out of sex. You've proven they can't take you down, you will continue to say what needs to be said and hopefully, one day, women won't be shamed for having desires.

Sunday, 16 May 2010

Sexualisation of children

Fertile Feminism hits it right on the head with this post about what is particularly wrong about 'sexualising' children: it's the standard that is set in the first place that is the problem.

The hypocrite in the room

Tuesday, 23 February 2010

Warning: I'm angry

Right, this is going to sound like an over-privileged whinge and I'm sorry for that, but as you may have previously noticed I get pretty irritated when people make assumptions.
So, this is dedicated to the person who said the following to me today:

"Present company excepted, I don't understand how these young girls can get themselves pregnant, It's just so stupid." (paraphrased)

Firstly, saying a line like 'present company excepted' (or 'Oh I don't mean you' or 'I know plenty of young mums, but...') does not detract attention from the hideous, prejudiced thing you have just said. Nor does it remove the fact that I will now always label you as a hideous prejudiced idiot.

Whilst you think that your limited knowledge of my life gives you clearance to state that I'm not 'one of those girls' you fail to see that what you have said will STILL OFFEND ME.

Not merely because you have suggested I might be thought of in such a way, and you needed to re-iterate that you didn't mean me, but because you DO MEAN IT about other women.

Yes, young women get pregnant. Sometimes they plan it, sometimes they don't. Sometimes they want it, sometimes they feel obliged to have it, sometimes they have an abortion. Sometimes, shock horror, they actually have the means to bring up a child, isn't that amazing?

What do you plan to do? Stand over them as they have sex and demand they use triple contraception? Demonise sex so they are scared of having it before marriage? Make them give up their children for adoption? Sterilise them?

Plenty of young men and women are more than capable of bringing up a child. Some are less capable. What gives you the right to decide who is able to be a 'good parent'? Have you proved yourself as a shining example? Are you qualified to dictate who should breed?

You have been unbelievably lucky in the life you have led. You have had the means to do whatever you want, and work for pleasure, rather than necessity. You need to step off the Daily Mail pedestal you live on and look around you. There are plenty of mums of all ages who make fantastic/terrible parents, why attack those who are younger purely for their age?

Finally, I'd like you to ponder over the issue of young fathers. Do they have any say in this? Do they take any blame at all? Just a thought.

Thursday, 28 January 2010

Buffy part 2

For the second part of my Buffy-thon postage I'd like to address an issue that might be triggering, so beware.

In season 6 of Buffy, our eponymous heroine survives a rape attempt in the episode 'Seeing Red'.

I think it was very important for BTVS to address the issue of rape purely because of the premise of the show: Buffy is strong. She is independent, powerful and beautiful. It demonstrates that it doesn't matter how strong or self-aware you are, you can still be a target. Additionally, the episode deals with rape by someone with whom Buffy has already had a sexual relationship: the vampire, Spike. With stories like this in the news I find a story-line such as this quite pertinent.

The scene is very difficult to watch, Buffy is injured and tells Spike to go away. He tries to 'prove' to her that she wants him by making advances, pushing her to the floor and trying to initiate sex, culminating in her kicking him off and questioning:

"Ask me again why I could never love you"

Buffy is never shown to be 'inviting it'; she is injured, trying to run a bath and he has entered her house. She constantly tells him to 'go away', and 'get off'. She says 'no', demonstrating that 'just say no' isn't always a viable option.

The episode doesn't even overtly make out that Spike is 'evil' as he tries to rape Buffy - he is not in his vampire face, he looks like a man. Thus the power of this scene emphasises that it's not a supernatural evil that causes Spike to rape Buffy, but a human evil, echoing the theme mentioned in my previous post that 'life is the big bad'

The incident inspires Spike to go on a quest to regain his soul as he cannot stand the purgatory of being 'not quite a man and not quite a monster' (my paraphrase). It is used as a development point for Spike's character, but manages to make a commentary on ideas of rape at the same time.

I have to admit, sex as a theme in Buffy isn't quite as empowering as it should be, Buffy uses it almost as a punishment during season 6, her first experience in season 2 causes Angel to become evil and she is portrayed negatively by the fraternity attitudes and reactions of Riley's friends in season 4. Nevertheless, the episode 'Seeing Red' is an important point in the series and demonstrates a strong counter-discourse to commonly held attitudes about rape.

Next up: 'Nice-guy' Warren