Sunday, December 14, 2008

The F Word

Are you a feminist? Yes? No? Maybe? Not sure?
Take this facebook quiz to find out:

The “original” idea of feminists and feminism has developed a bad rep in my opinion. No, feminists in general, do not burn their bras people. I think many women (correct me if I’m wrong, and I don’t truly mean to generalize) would agree that although obnoxious and expensive, bras are relatively helpful (think stairs). No, feminists in general, do not NOT shave their shaving specific body parts (whatever those are). No, feminists in general, do not hate (all) men, are not all lesbians, feminazis, vegetarians/vegans/eco-whiners, do not always have short hair, do not want to be a man, etc. I could go on and on but unfortunately the carpal tunnel will prevent me from doing so today, lucky you. These are..say it with me…stereotypes. However, are there feminists that encapsulate some or all of the above? Of course, think militant PCU Womynists.



Funny, but again, intentional satire. “Those aren't women, Tom, those are Womynists" says Droz of PCU (Politically Correct University). Clearly they are the most “P.C.” group on campus right? Don’t mess with these ladies; they play a mean game of frisbee. Oh, they also detest all things man, very selectively choose a finger to wave at male oppression, sport military gear, restrain from shaving, and remove the "men" from their language. Thus, we have Womynists. Case and point, the ideas and lack thereofs of feminism have infiltrated our films, our music, our television shows, our literature, our jokes and absolutely every medium that employs them. Take a look at this awesome “inspirational” poster:



Big sigh, however, this is what we resort to because we are uncomfortable with the equality of women because for some damned reason that threatens men. Oh, in case you didn’t know, if you’re deemed as attractive in society, you are clearly not a feminist. Those “rights” are reserved for the “unattractive.” I heart civil liberties. Try to ignore the moron in the back that clearly doesn’t realize the irony in his need for what he deems as a woman’s “place” because he’s not intelligent enough to iron his own damn shirt.

Feminism, plainly and simply folks, is the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. Even though dictionaries, the internet, and one would hope-common sense, are generally readily available (well maybe not common sense), there is STILL a ridiculous amount of confusion when it comes to what it means to be a feminist. Hey! Did you know that you don’t even have to be of the female sex, nonetheless feminine, to be a feminist? To be female is strictly only a matter of biology Watson, and even that can be sketchy nowadays. Femininity is also solely a culturally defined set of gendered characteristics. The previous have more to do with the price of tea in China than they do with the feminist stance.

Are you rolling your eyes yet? Hey, it’s a valid question. There is a butt load (through years of thorough research I’ve come to the conclusion that a butt load is A LOT) of drama revolving around the feminist movement, and it tends to irritate and nauseate plenty of people. Su, an Australian woman interviewed for the 1996 anthology DIY Feminism says, "[Feminists are] just women who don't want to be treated like shit." Ummm… What? See, now here’s a perfect example of someone whom is clearly suffering from feminist burnout and has turned slightly bitter. This doesn’t even make any damn sense. I might be generalizing again, but isn’t it relatively safe to say that most, if not all, women don’t want to be treated like shit? I would say that that simply makes her human, not necessarily feminist. But this is exactly my point, people have tossed the actual definition and intention of feminism aside, and replaced it with assumptions and stereotypes. We all know what happens when one assumes right? Something about asses (not donkeys) I think. Clearly this is why this woman needs a DIY book on feminism. Idiot.

One young lady by the name of Rebecca West has it right; “People call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that distinguish me from a doormat.” Damn, how dare she. If I changed her name to Dick and told you she was a he would you call him a feminist? No puns or phalluses intended (ha). No, you’d probably call him gay right? I use the royal “you.” My favorite quote from Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler, yet very simple and above all, right on: “feminism is the radical notion that woman are people.” How fucking radical. Really.

Feminism has found its way into many artists’ lyrics and personal and professional stances. Take Ani Difranco as a medium for example: “my idea of feminism is self-determination, and it’s very open ended: every woman has the right to become herself, and do whatever she needs to do.” Ani and her righteous babeness (ah hem, Rosey the Riveter) has become a poster child for feminists all over the world. In an interview by Kim Ruehl, Ani says this of her role as an artist faced with a sometimes political agenda: “I think the feminine perspective, which sees the world as a network of relationships, not as a hierarchy of individuals, is also an essential understanding. An emphasis on relationship and connection is sorely needed, in our governments and our cultures, to strike that kind of balance and shift the dynamic. So, I mean, it’s at this time, when I do many interviews and I’m faced with the is feminism really relevant anymore question … I’m sort of trying to put [it] out there more than ever now [that] our idea of feminism has stagnated and almost been abandoned by many, many people at a time when we should have evolved it. It should be embraced by men and women. I mean why don’t we call ourselves feminists? Young women don’t even [call themselves feminists] anymore, let alone women and men; and instead of feminism as equal pay for equal work – okay, we got that – but try to understand it as a consciousness shift. We have to use feminism all together as a tool to dismantle patriarchies so that all of us together can rise…Feminism – not just for babes anymore.” There’s a T-Shirt for ya. Well listen to you, you adamant Eve.

She simply highlights the power and musings of women in her music. Hey at least I’m not going all Lilith Fair and Indigo Girls on your ass. People, it’s not anti-man, it’s pro-woman. There’s a huge difference and the latter does not negate the previous. Get over it. Take a listen. Disclaimer: This song contains a different F-word. To all those apposed...earmuffs.




Ani sings about a one-night stand with an unavailable person. She sings "I see you and i'm so perplexed/ what was i thinking/ what will i think of next/ where can i hide". She apparently condemns herself for what she sees as an unavailing undertaking, and the opposing party supposedly won't even recognize her if they were to meet again. Ani sings "who am i/ that i should be vying for your touch.” Great example of female patriarchal advocacy: she continues to seek out that relationship perfection that clearly doesn’t occur in our coercive system. She blames herself, turning a blind eye to the standardized treatment of women as objects, and the routine docile reaction to objectification. So when it comes down to it, what do we say? "So fuck you/ and your untouchable face/ and fuck you/ for existing in the first place.” Clearly how we rationally and effectively solve our problems. Right? Umm..no. But it makes us feel better right? She states nothing about revamping her adherence to patriarchal norms. When push comes to shove, she is stating societal struggles that emerge are far beyond female power, so we may as well wish the patriarchy welcome.

To further illustrate my patriarchal and sexist point, check out this very real billboard advertising the extremely beautiful and sensual Fiat (hahaha):



The very reason we should all appreciate and embrace graffiti.

I found a clip from radio host Jim Quinn’s November 6th broadcast of Clear Channel's The War Room with Quinn & Rose. Brace yourself, this one is downright ridiculous. Jim Quinn read an article about a Georgia teacher whom allegedly informed the school principal and campus police that one of her students drew a picture of a vampire, which may have contained gang symbols. First of all…seriously? Vampires? Gangs? Clearly members of the elite, totally frightening and specific body part violent intercontinental Bloodsuckers gang. Quinn cites this as evidence of "the chickification of schools, the feminization of society, and the war on masculinity." Quinn adds, "The goal of the public school system -- the feminists in the public school system -- is to make male behavior illegal, a crime."

Have a listen.



Quinn claims that only females “run” our schools and thus, they have turned into “thoroughly feminized institutions where everyone has gelatinized spines and all turn to a fear-wracked lump of quivery flesh at the slightest evidence of anything rambunctious, gross, tough, loud, or -- ahem -- male.” Oh, by the way, the drawing of vampires is strictly a male sport just like anything else “rambunctious, gross, tough, loud.” Yes, clearly anything “rambunctious, gross, tough, [and] loud” does not define elementary students as a whole, but only the male counterpart, and we as females cannot handle such things as we will shriek out in help for our male teachers’ help..oh wait…there are no men in education right? First of all, you have to be another breed altogether to handle elementary students, not just male my friend. I know first hand. I’d love to see some of my male friends handle the playground situation when a kid comes up to you with God knows what on their hands and you have to ask “is it spit or throw up?” No offense. Conservative blogger Warner Todd Huston claims “If this is not further evidence we need more men in our schools (and not the Birkenstock wearing, ponytailed, softhanded, bike riding kind either), then what is?” Not only has he emasculated men whom have long hair, are eco-friendly, and prefer cork foot beds in their shoes, but he also claims there is a lack of men in education, but affirms we need more of them so schools will function “as they should.” Well then asshole, why don’t you pack up your chauvinism and take on a new career so that the field of education will be better suited. No pun intended. Pretty sure I’d change the radio station, that kind of ignorance offends my delicate female ears.

The following is a brilliant 1970s clip of Anne Bancroft and Jack Cassidy in a sensual yet comedic embrace by the fireside, in which she explains that men are all alike with their “guaranteed vertical mobility in this male dominated, socioeconomic structure.” Cassidy fires back with “women have the same constitutional rights as men, and consequently the same advantages.” Bancroft states “we’re second class citizens” and then asks him to rub her back, he complies. A second-class citizen with the ability to make a man do anything she pleases while he thinks he preys on her female “softness and vulnerability.” She claims it’s a result of “suffering the inequities and humiliations of discriminations in business, industry, federal employment and society in general.” However, throughout the clip it becomes very clear that she is playing this foolish man whom adores everything “feminine” about her (whether it applies to her or not) as she spouts statistics about the lack of women in the Cabinet, and needs him for nothing, except a good laugh. He clearly is too much for even himself to handle. Evidently it’s satirical, and pretty damn funny, but of course, where would they have come up with such material? Funny, but true.



What’s a feminist? This woman did a little hands-on research with men on the streets of New York. She was “behind the scenes” and had a man do the interviewing in hopes of getting real, honest answers from men as to what a feminist is, as opposed to the obvious BS they’d give her as a female interviewer. She claims she cannot bring up feminism on a date, if she wants another that is. Probably true, woman are scary. The first guy interviewed probably had one of the best answers when asked what a feminist is; he replies, “I think I’m ignorant.” Three cheers for honesty! The second guy clearly doesn’t associate with people, or have any friends, or only has men as friends (possibly internet chat room, online gaming, comic book reading, or Magic card playing types). That was mean. ☺ My apologies. Lets look at the backwards cap wearing, hopefully college bound boys (yes boys): What are feminists? LESBIANS! See I told you. Feminist=lesbian. We got “our” amendment passed in 1920, why are we still bitching- he wants to know? Our amendment? So all the others are for men, is that what you are saying? The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights is gender specific? See why I hoped they were college bound? Well shit, clearly if we had more men in education this type of ignorance would happen, right? By the way, “our” amendment passed, only gave us the right to vote idiot, nothing else. The 19th amendment (our amendment) states the United States Constitution prohibits each of the states and the federal government from denying any citizen the right to vote because of that citizen's sex. It actually says nothing about women specifically.



Quick tangent: “opposed by a well-organized and well-funded anti-suffrage movement which argued that most women really didn't want the vote, and they were probably not qualified to exercise it anyway, women also used humor as a tactic. In 1915, writer Alice Duer Miller wrote:

Why We Don't Want Men to Vote
• Because man's place is in the army.
• Because no really manly man wants to settle any question otherwise than by fighting about it.
• Because if men should adopt peaceable methods women will no longer look up to them.
• Because men will lose their charm if they step out of their natural sphere and interest themselves in other matters than feats of arms, uniforms, and drums.
• Because men are too emotional to vote. Their conduct at baseball games and political conventions shows this, while their innate tendency to appeal to force renders them unfit for government.”

And we’re back.

Second kid in the hat: I’m sorry..is that even English? “Most, there are a lot of high top uhh officials and everything there (yes, he said “there”) are women now so,” yeah…well said. I thought high tops were shoes? Air Jordans anyone? I’m a high top uhh official, that’s what it says on my resume. He later recants and sums up his definition with..can you guess…lesbians. Next guy whom clearly voted for McCain: they’re “militant, angry women trying to get their way in the world.” Clearly he’s been watching PCU. Yeah right, one could only wish. We then get the opinion of a woman whom clearly understands the proper definition of as well as the common stereotypes of feminists. An older, probably less musical Mary Poppins, whom also gets the actual definition of feminists follows this, she should have left it at that however. She then states that she is not a feminist. Reminder, feminism: the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. Then we see a man whom may be intoxicated (?) that sheds a little religious light on us: the bible states that men are the head of the household. Where? Where does it say that, and what the hell does it have to do with feminism? Then there’s Anthony…yeah I support women..wanna go on a date? Priceless. Thank you New York City.

I just wanted to quickly add this; feminism does not emasculate men! It actually has nothing to do with being female or male! Not convinced? Check this out: This is what a feminist looks like:



Did you notice something? There were men... This is not a “if you give a mouse a cookie” (he’ll probably ask for a glass of milk) kind of situation people. We women are not going to “take” everything from you. We simply want to be equal. It’s actually very simple. Why the hell is it then so complicated?? Damn, I’m tired.

Okay, okay. Now that you all clearly think I’m a man-hating lesbian (I don’t hate men), let’s get the female perspective on feminism.




See, even women get it wrong. Half of these women clearly do not understand what it means to be a feminist. We’ve got women saying they’re not a “hardcore” feminist because they don’t go to rallies, they don’t listen to a certain type of music, or because they choose to shave. Seriously? I’m embarrassed that you equate these things. Then there’s a woman whom clearly thinks she cannot be a feminist because she is a socialist. What? What? I don’t see how they are mutually exclusive. To the “I walk like a feminist, I talk like a feminist, and I act like a feminist, but I’m not a feminist” girl: how does a feminist walk? Clearly in Birkenstocks. How does a feminist talk? I don’t know; she’s probably too busy choking on the smoke coming from her burning bra. Besides, I thought it was if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, etc? Feminism=not ladylike? Listen to the lady with the beer! Always listen to the lady with the beer! If all else fails, grab a damn dictionary and read it while drinking a beer!

My point is this: people, men and women alike, are completely confused about what it means to be a feminist. Feminism is generally falsely defined by stereotypes (never a good thing), and the media is running rampant with this. Some good has come of this, but most of it is terrible. We are a multimodal world. Many people rely on the media for their information. When what is covered by media is false or incorrect, even in part, it is hard for society to recover from this. If we don't start changing our ideas, our stances, if we don't begin to do our homework before we speak or think out loud, we will in return allow ourselves to be ill defined, categorized, and labeled. Not that one should be defined, categorized, or labeled at all. However, let's be honest: "You're going to be labeled no matter what, so you may as well pick one that you like."

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Sweet My Ass

Excellent. Just what an opinionated, confidant, and “no holds barred” kind of woman wants; the opportunity to analyze some of the most tasteless, tactless, and unimaginative advertising I have ever seen. Eat your heart out ladies and gentlemen; it’s disgusting, infuriating and I have no intention of holding my tongue-like I ever do.

Our contender is an advertisement taken from Esquire magazine. Now Esquire is considered the “magazine for the man’s man.” What the hell does that mean? Seriously. Man’s man. I can think of some terrible euphemisms here but no…clearly it’s meant to be more tasteful than that, right? It would be terrible for some men to be confused for man’s best friend, rather than a man’s man. Although, depending on how you look at it, either way might be laugh-worthy. Sorry. Moving on.

Apparently Esquire as a whole is also what defines a man at his best, in case you didn’t already know or were ill defined before. Those of you whom were in the latter category-run to your nearest newsstand, buy Esquire, and refuse to be wrongfully defined or heaven forbid-not defined by anything at all! How terrible!

First of all, I want to help properly define the word esquire. Yes, yes I know..esquire does the defining here, not me. But humor me will you? Esquire is a noun dated from the 15th century, derived from late Middle English. Other than the obviously slightly more current definition as a title appended to a lawyer’s surname, it is also a polite, did you get that..POLITE title appended to a man’s name when no other title is used-typically in the address of a letter. Here’s the best part…a little history for ya’ll: historically speaking an esquire is a young nobleman who, in training for knighthood, acted as an attendant to a knight, or an officer in the service of a king or nobleman. There.

Keeping the previous things in mind-take a look at this:




Oh shit, I totally forgot the part about it being a DOLCE & GABBANA ad too! My mistake. And direct from Dolce & Gabbana my friends, “Dolce & Gabbana is the Dream: a luxury brand of unapproachable desirability distinguished by its high sartorial content and original styling of the apparel.” Are you kidding?? Does this not simply reek of irony, hypocrisy? A luxury brand? Brand of what? Surely they’re not advertising prostitution? No. They’re selling clothes, right? WHAT CLOTHES?? WHERE ARE THE CLOTHES? And why are all of these people so oily?? Take a shower.

Unapproachable desirability?? No. That was Paul Newman. You’re damn right this is unapproachable. The National Organization for Women (Now) calls this particular ad a “scene evoking a gang rape and reeking of violence against women.” End of story really. Gang rape and violence is not desirable to any women I know, nor is it any kind of dream, with the exception of a damn nightmare! “Distinguished by” bla bla bla doesn’t even matter and I don’t buy it anyhow. And all of this in a magazine for noble men.

With that said, clearly the intended audience is men; the ad is in a men’s magazine, and clearly the ad is supposed to appeal to them as well (disgusting). NOW Foundation President Kim Gandy said, "It's in Esquire, so they probably don't think a stylized gang rape will sell clothes to women, but what is more likely is that they think it will get them publicity. It's a provocative ad but it is provoking things that really are not what we want to have provoked. We don't need any more violence." Seriously? It’s okay to completely degrade women, and depict such raw violence against them-so long as it gets us noticed. Buy this shirt!

I can’t even tell what they are “trying” to represent with an image like this. Truly. Clearly they have taken “sex sells” to an entirely different level and it’s disturbing. We see this more than half naked woman, pinned down by sargeant slick, with his heinously dressed troop behind him. The expression on her face is ambiguous, hard to read…maybe she was drugged? And the troop? They look like vultures.

Esquire and Dolce & Gabbana have it all wrong.

Thirsty? Check this one out.

The next advertisement I looked at was for beer. Of course it's for beer. It's for St. Pauli Girl. At least it's a decent beer. I would be even more appalled if this were an ad for say Bud Light or something equally terrible. Well seriously people, look at it. Look Mom, I’m a beer! Really? A beerwoman? Lady McBooze. When I grow up I want to be a light German beer (ha)? Look at my gorgeous foam hair. How is this attractive? Again, clearly not aimed at women. I’m sorry, is she wearing a beer mini dress? Brrrr. This takes “beer girl” to another level.




A woman showcased as a human beer bottle. Yes, for men indeed. “Drop Dead Refreshing,” says the ad. First of all, beer…really isn’t the drink if you are going for refreshing. All those damn bubbles and whatnot. Second of all, what is this..a step up from being seen as a piece of meat or property? Now I’m a beer? I should ask whether or not I’ll be recycled after you’re done consuming me but clearly that has other implications-as much as one’s consumption of another. The representation of women as consumable and discardable is more nauseating than it is refreshing. Truly people, are we this uncreative? Or is it desperation? Either way, it looks like you’re drinkin’. May I recommend a Guinness?