yo yo yo search it!

Thursday, March 23, 2006

i started reading this - my head starting spinning (and i spewed green stuff out of my mouth)

and i just never finished the article. i will try in a bit. i WILL say, i have NEVER EVEN HEARD of this book, 'female chauvinist pigs' nor have i heard of the author, ariel levy. i've heard of new york magazine of course. i even had a subscription for many years, many years AGO (they effed that subscription up one year up so i opted out).

what 'feminists' is ms levy talking about?

i see women in cropped tops even at work. it turns my stomach. i certainly wouldn't consider them feminists (no, i've not really had deep conversations with most of the women i see in crop tops, but SOME i have). i'd consider most of them skanky (the ones wearing that to work. i do NOT work in a stip club by the way. that mode of dress would be perfectly acceptable there NOT where i work. if on a hot summer day you have a little crop top on and you're running some errands i wouldn't necessarily think skank if i saw you by the way - i might, but i might not) .

women have the RIGHT to exhibit their sexuality. please don't misunderstand me. i guess i'd have to know the reasons a women decided to take 'lap dancing' instruction before making my mind up about that one. i think a woman (or man) SHOULD if they want to, intice their mate, excite their mate as long as they TOO are getting something out of it. lap dance all you want as far as i'm concered but if you're ONLY doing it for your mate, well you have more than THAT issue to work on.


thongs........well, i don't understand them at all. some of my friends wear them but give me cotton french cuts ANYTIME. i do NOT care what anyone says a thong (just like those foot damaging VERY pointy pointy shoes that are ever so popular now) CANNOT be comfortable. worried about panty lines? BUY YOUR CLOTHING A BIT LOOSER (loser)!!!

Today's ultimate feminists are the chicks in crop tops

Raunch culture is not about liberation gone wrong; it's about rediscovering the joy of being loved for your body Kate TaylorThursday March 23, 2006The Guardian
Men, you can relax. You are no longer the enemy. Instead, judging by recent events in America, modern feminists have a much shapelier target in their sights - other women. Specifically, scantily clad women who use their sexuality to get ahead. I don't know if this is a PR campaign to get men to finally pay attention to the cause, but it's certainly stirring up trouble.
It all kicked off with the publication of Female Chauvinist Pigs, a rant against "raunch culture" by the New York magazine writer Ariel Levy. In the book, she argues that the recent trend for soft-porn styling in everything from music videos to popular TV is reducing female sexuality to its basest levels. In short: "A tawdry, tarty, cartoon-like version of female sexuality has become so ubiquitous, it no longer seems particular."
Which is all fair enough, until Levy starts to list the ways in which today's women are allowing their sexuality to be sold short. Thongs, for example. Crop tops. Lap-dancing classes. Maxim and FHM. Playboy T-shirts. The word "chick". Levy thinks raunch culture is a feminist movement gone terribly wrong. We are, in her eyes, doing all these things merely to show the men that we are "one of the guys" and "liberated and rebellious". Naturally, she finds this confusing. "Why is labouring to look like Pamela Anderson empowering?"...........

....Levy is not alone in raging against raunch. The f word, a British feminist website, last month launched a tirade against lads' magazines such as Loaded, Zoo and Nuts; they "relentlessly promote the message that women exist solely for the sexual gratification of men and boys", argued Rachel Bell. "By internalising this one-dimensional male construct of sexuality, both sexes are losing out; but it is girls and women who will pay the heavier price."
I've worked for GQ and the Sun, and in neither place did I see women being exploited. Does Bell have any idea how much money women make when they take their clothes off? How much freedom and independence these girls can earn in an hour? Abi Titmuss and the new breed of totty generally own the copyright to their naughtiest photos, so with each publication they rake it in. Look at lads' mags from a different perspective and you see that what's being exploited are men's sexual responses, to give money to women...........

hey katie honey, 'FREEDOM AND INDENENDENCE" by the 'GIRLS' taking their clothes off? first of all if they were GIRLS it's against the LAW for them to be taking their clothing off you ass wipe. did you mean WOMEN KATIE HONEY? women? freedom and independence by taking their clothing off? what the hell planet did you grow up on? there is nothing WRONG with taking ones clothing off and posing BUT i certainly don't consider it to be 'freeing' to do so for a publication such as jugs or hustler or the like. you are fodder for WANKING AND THAT IS ALL YOU ARE REDUCED TO. who are you trying to kid katie honey. if YOU want to ONLY be fodder for wanking that's fine by me. i want me and MY sisters to be MUCH MORE than that


any way i thought posting this article would give us (men and women) something to think about. happy trails

9 comments:

Lily@ Consider the Boot said...

Well Rose you know I'm gonna go off on that one. First what pisses me off is that every single female issue is blanketed and blamed on feminists "feminism has backfired because they all wear thongs" and shit. Yes- dress, pay, exploitation, are all certainly feminist issues. But I say this again and again till I pass out: There are some of us out there that think feminism is about FREEDOM AND AUTONOMY not "should" thinking. If you want a thong and I want a flannel shirt- its all good. You see? You want kids and I don't fine, if you want to work and I don't fine...When we debate the merits of this choice or that choice we are reducing that priority of AUTONOMY AND FREEDOM.
That is where I have the big issue with 'movements' in that they try to answer the question of what a woman SHOULD be doing. SHOULD she use "chick"? Should she be sexual? Should she pose nude? SHOULD she have babies?

In my view, a feminist should say WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TO CARE OR ASK? I am not here, living and breathing for YOUR sake. Why do you care if I wear a crop top or a think? If I make money doing what I want?

Now its a problem when it is not truly a choice- when a woman thinks that nudity is her only worth- but thats another issue.

I rant because it is not clear to me why so many so called feminists spend so much time arguing the merits of behaviors and choices.

Seems to me a real feminist would not seek to judge her sisters or her reasons, but assume that other women have intelligence to self determine.

I tend to stick with that notion.

Rex Kramer, Danger Seeker said...

Now, I've always been wary of the feminazi agenda, but if this is the 'new feminism," well sister, count me in!

a rose is a rose said...

oh booted one,

valid points all. i don't know WHY i care but i DO care when i see a woman putting it all on (granted it may be MY PERCEPTION ONLY and not really the case. i realize that)for the sake of society. it pains me to see a woman judged ONLY by her outward appearance. it happens daily it happens at work, at the grocery store, at the gas station. EVERYWHERE. we're all so politically correct but you can still hear the comments or watch those male necks snap around (i once offered my friend vincenzo a neck brace - i was so afraid for his health). i happen to lead a VERY non-conventional life style. i was never and will never be in a subservient position to men (i've had male bosses but i have never allowed myself to be talked down to by ANYONE, male or female).

sure i wear makeup and sure i own a corset or two but i do these things for ME. i don't care if women want babies or not. or work outside the home or not. i DO care if they flip their hair and giggle a lot. they are not the sort of people i want to hang with.

i never cared for the word feminist though. i used it in my posting but i usually don't.

Tamara said...

I checked out Ariel Levy's site, and she seems pretty cool. You can even read an excerpt from her book if you like.

She's basically arguing the same thing you are -- that it's not empowering for women to reduce themselves to sex objects.

I appreciate Levy's rant against raunch. I can only hope that the pendulum will swing in the other direction.

a rose is a rose said...

dearest mr danger seeker:

rest assured after the lovely MRS danger seeker gives birth to another of YOUR grrrl children, i am getting on a plane (i do NOT fly well by the way. has NOTHING to do with 9/11. i never have and i never will. oh, and you do NOT want to be in back of me going through a metal detector. i have so much metal - jewelry that is on and IN me there is no way i get through) and taking that sainted woman out on the town while YOU mr danger seeker stay at home and babysit that grrrl child!

a rose is a rose said...

tamara i've not checked her web site out but will this weekend. i don't like what she said about naked women being impowered though (yes i think SOME naked women are, i just don't think she and i are talking about the same TYPES of naked women)

Tamara said...

Rose, I read her completely differently. Levy seems critical of the whole raunch culture, naked is empowering attitude which some young women have embraced.

From the little I've read, my impression is that her views are pretty similar to your own.

Rory Shock said...

I don't like to see anyone treated as less than a "person" by themselves or by others ...

a rose is a rose said...

tamara, i'll read her this weekend i swear........

mr shock wise words