Category Archives: On the Net

On the (Rest of the) Net.

By Posted in On the (Rest of the) Net, On the Net 1 Comment

“Gaslighting”: have you ever experienced it? I have. When people ask if I’ve got a boyfriend and I tell them “no, I’m still single” they say “you’re just too picky.” When I kick up a stink over sexist, racist or unjust attitudes and behaviours, I’m told “women get so offended by everything. They’re just too sensitive.” [The Good Men Project]

Co-ed or same sex schools? Personally, I choose co-ed all the way, as I want my children to be able to interact with people of the opposite sex like they will have to outside of schooling, and because, as the article points out, same-sex schools in Australia are mostly private, and I am 100% against private schooling. [MamaMia]

The gender divide between women’s and men’s magazines: is there one? Women tend to be presented in pretty much the same way in both. [Gender Across Borders]

Following the grand final weekend, is football akin to religion in Melbourne?:

“I could never follow a religion that deems homosexuality a sin or refuses equal rights in the form of marriage; that calls abortion murder; that tells the poor to have more children; that aids and abets paedophiles. And as such, I can’t devote myself to an institution that covers up scandals, that promotes a pack mentality of win at all costs, that is sponsored by a betting company in a country where problem gambling is endemic.” [MamaMia]

The myths about allowing women on the frontlines of war zones. [The Punch]

We don’t need less porn, just better porn. [MamaMia]

The GASP shitstorm that was heard across the nation. What are your thoughts on the matter? I’m not surprised, really, as my sister had a similar experience when she was shopping for her Year 10 formal dress a few years ago. This was during her fake-tan, exercising-during-the-flu, applying-foundation-over-her-lips-so-they-matched-the-colour-of-her-face phase, which occurred just after her emo and rap phases, but before her hipster phase, which she is still embroiled in. Anyways, after trying on a dress she really liked, we decided to have a look at a few other shops before committing to the purchase. My sister left her number so the sales assistant (not a “retail superstar”) could call her if someone else expressed an interest in the dress. A couple of hours later, after my sister settled on a dress she found in Myer, the assistant called her. When my sister informed her of the alternative purchase, the assistant rudely dismissed and hung up the phone on her! Must be a GASP thing… [MamaMia]

“Make love, not porn”. While I don’t agree with most of the assertions in this article—that Playboy shows “graphic” close-ups of female genitalia and therefore should be considered porn—it is a though-provoking read. In actuality, while Playboy would fit under the dictionary definition of “porn”—depictions of erotic behaviour designed to incite sexual arousal—by no means does it feature “graphic” displays of female genitalia. If anything, it’s shows the gross photoshopping of genitalia, stretchmarks, sagging skin and whatever else is deemed “unsexy” on a woman. Playboy’s not porn, it’s pure fantasy. [ABC Religion & Ethics]

“What’s a Girl Worth?” [We Mixed Our Drinks]

The “feminazi” and Hollywood’s reluctance to call feminism and feminists by its/their name. [Feminist Frequency]

Rachel Hills with the third instalment of her “Guide to Feminist Wedding Planning”, focusing on the white, religious and heteronormative traditions of giving away, bridal parties and hens nights, to name a few. [Musings of an Inappropriate Woman]

Hollywood’s damsels in distress as gothic literature icons:

“One reason for the enduring appeal of the gothic genre is that while it tends to trot out the same old images and literary devices, it takes care to cloak these devices in a contemporary guise. Victorian gothic, for instance, was haunted by the theories of evolution and the unconscious; the changing roles of women in society; and rapid advances in science and technology…

“If 2007 seemed like the year in which real-life celebrity gossip turned gothic, it’s probably because new-media outlets that stormed the industry—outlets like TMZ and PerezHilton.com—had by then ditched the business of worshiping celebrities for the more lucrative business of persecuting them. Suddenly, we found ourselves transfixed by tales of young women moving unprotected (or legally emancipated) from the relatively sheltered condition of parent-managed child stardom (because who, nowadays, is more cut off from the world than a child star?) into a corrupt and dangerous world where they exist in a constant state of uncertainty and peril. And they were often placed in this peril by the very outlets that then shaped their resultant antics into thrilling, chilling tales of suspense.” [New York Times]

This brilliant article on domestic violence earned Trent Dalton the Journalist of the Year award in Queensland. [Courier Mail]

The struggle of an overweight woman to obtain an abortion. [First, Do No Harm via Jezebel]

Jon Hamm, rape and “the lack of positive male role models”. [Jezebel]

Halloween: fast becoming the most expensive holiday. [Time]

Is the clitoris biologically needed, or will it be phased out with evolution? [San Francisco Weekly]

Chick flick tropes. [The New Yorker]

Writing for women’s lifestyle magazines doesn’t have to be an exercise in anti-feminism. [Musings of an Inappropriate Woman]

Sex and the superheroine. [Comics Alliance]

Just because you haven’t been raped doesn’t mean you’re not qualified to comment on “rape culture”. [The Good Men Project]

Female sexuality, weakness, power, and reclaiming in the c-word. [Raili Simojoki]

Amanda Knox and slut-shaming:

“… If Knox had been a little less pretty, a little less sexual, and a little less American, she’d never have spent a day in prison for her roommate’s murder.” [The Good Men Project]

My idol, Mia Freedman, interviews my former co-worker, comedienne, writer and disability activist, Stella Young. Jealousy ensues! [MamaMia]

Images via YouTube, The Hollywood Gossip, Comics Alliance.

In Response to Questions About “Erotic Capital”.

By Posted in Beauty, Body Image, On the Net Tagged , , , , 3 Comments

A few weeks ago, Rachel Hills blogged at Musings of an Inappropriate Woman about “beauty positivity” and “erotic capital”. At the end of the post, she asked these questions of the blogosphere:

“Am I on the right track with the idea that it’s not valuing beauty that’s the problem, but the fact that we’re socialised to believe that we’re never beautiful enough? Is this experience of ‘lack’ just a ‘neurotic Rachel’ thing, or an ‘other people’ thing as well?

“Moreover, is it just a female thing, or do men experience it as well?

“Have you managed to develop a positive approach to the way you look? What did it look like and how did you get there?

“How do we stop beauty positivity from turning into beauty privilege?”

So, here I will attempt to give my opinions on “erotic capital.”

Firstly, I have to start by saying that, miraculously, I feel I have come away from my media-influenced adolescence relatively unscathed. I love my body and the way I look, and enjoy dressing to reflect this. Sure, every now and then I have my “fat”, “ugly” and “bad hair” days, but on the whole, I am happy with how I look.

But, I have to agree with Hills’ summation that liking beautiful things and people isn’t the problem, as everyone has their own unique perception of beauty (the way the media tries to influence this to make it a “one-size-fits-all” lens is another problem—and blog post—entirely), but that, as women especially, we’re never good enough.

Again, I have high self-esteem and I will never let anyone or anything make me think I’m not “good enough” or deserving of the things I want. But often I will go out of my way to “prove” these things. When I go out dancing or to parties, I make an effort to wear the tightest, sluttiest thing I own. If I’ve been a bit lax on the work out regimen, I’ll double up on the control underwear, or wear something a bit more flowing.

My most insecure point is probably when I’m seeing someone new. I’ll have thoughts of, “I can’t get naked with this person until I’ve eradicated all my love handles and cellulite,” which is something that I’ve never been able to do nor am interested in doing since they appeared when I was about 13 or 14. I enjoy having a curvier figure, but I guess that’s the influence of “pornification of culture”, and all the pretty young things we see getting their kit off on TV manifesting.

But, in my experience, this isn’t exclusively a “female thing”. Two of the most in-touch men I’ve ever met are two of my closest friends, and the fact that they aren’t afraid to voice their body image concerns or the pressure put on men to look and be a certain way is a refreshing change to the stereotype of either “ripped football bogan” or “beer-bellied goofy bogan”. While it can certainly be an either/or representation of ripped men (NRL players and the True Blood stars come to mind) versus the incompetent, pudgy father seen most commonly in advertisements for nappies and spray and wipe, at the end of the day that’s nothing compared to what women have to deal with in the media. As Mia Freedman put it in her book, Mia Cupla:

“Pretend the world was full of pictures of naked men. On billboards and the sides of buses, in magazines and ads for beer, cars and deodorant. Imagine there were penises everywhere you turned and you couldn’t escape seeing them every day.

“And all the images of nude men were fake. Every male model and celebrity had had penile enlargement surgery, and afterwards, his penis had been extensively photoshopped to make it look even bigger. So now, all the penises you saw in the media every day were knee-length and as thick as an arm.

“One day, next to a magazine article about a celebrity with a foot-long penis, you read the headline: ‘This is what a 43-year-old penis looks like’. The caption underneath read: ‘Asked for the secret to his long schlong, former male model Markus Schenkenberg insists he was just born that way. “I wear cotton boxer shorts and I exfoliate in the shower,” he shrugs. “That’s all I do.”’

“After reading a hundred stories like that and being bombarded by 10,000 images of men with surgically altered and digitally enhanced penises, do you think you might look down at your natural, un-photoshopped trouser snake and feel a little… deflated? Inadequate? Insecure? Angry?”

As I said before, it is amazing that I managed to emerge from adolescence without a lingering negative thought about my body. Sure, I don’t like my legs or my stomach, but I dress to reflect this, and try not to get too paranoid about it. I prefer not to lounge by the pool in a bikini all day, and won’t wear a miniskirt without stockings or pantyhose to hold everything in place, but I won’t let these insecurities stop me from having fun.

My mum was very insecure about the way she looked, and this was projected onto my sister who, I believe, suffered the beginnings of an eating disorder a few years ago. Considering I was the one who was very into movies, TV, magazines and pop culture in general, it would be more likely—at least in the eyes of body image scaremongers—that I would be the one with the eating disorder.

One thing I did inherit from my mum, though, was her bad skin. She’s had skin conditions like dermatitis, allergies and surface veins all her life, and I was (un)lucky enough to get these, too. However, while she’s had relatively clear skin, pimple-wise, I suffered for several years with huge, painful zits which left scars, some of which I still have today. After years of trying to find products to prevent and get rid of these pimples, I finally realised that simple is best when it comes to skincare. I still get a large pimple every now and then (unfortunately, it’s large or it’s not there at all), but I’ve learned how to manage them. But the scars on my face are my biggest insecurity, and the humiliation was exacerbated by both the media, where the aforementioned pretty young things would frolic “make-up free” at the beach or when they woke up, and by people I encountered in my everyday life, who wouldn’t look me in the eye, but rather in the eye of my pimple.

Sometimes I look back on my younger years and I want to kick myself for being so typically self-conscious. I would apply a mask of makeup every day when I didn’t need it at all. I think age and wisdom are the only ways to really appreciate what you’ve currently got.

Finally, I have no idea “how to stop beauty positivity from turning into beauty privilege”. Personally, I don’t think the media plays the most important part in this. I think it starts at home: if parents, teachers and close family and friends can encourage “critical thought” about representations of not just beauty, but stereotypes of women and men, in the media, then young people have a better chance of understanding that what we see on TV, in magazines and advertisements isn’t real. This can be found elsewhere, in books, on blogs and using resources such as the Body Image Advisory Group, chaired by Freedman.

Of course “beauty privilege” is something we see more of in the media than in real life, as beauty campaigns and the lead role in movies like She’s Out of My League depend on the calibre of physical beauty a person woman possesses, whereas friendships, romantic relationships, business partnerships etc. involve other aspects.

So, I will now pass on Hills’ original questions to you, reader: what are your thoughts on “erotic capital” and beauty privilege?

Related: Mia Culpa: Confessions from the Watercooler of Life by Mia Freedman Review.

Is There Really a Beauty Myth?

Will Boys Be Boys When it Comes to Objectifying Women?

Elsewhere: [Musings of an Inappropriate Woman] Some Questions I Have About “Erotic Capital” & Beauty Positivity.

On the (Rest of the) Net.

By Posted in On the (Rest of the) Net, On the Net 1 Comment

 

Do these sex trafficking awareness ads do more harm than good? [Copyranter]

On Zooey Deschanel and “girlishness”. [HuffPo]

And from a link featured in the above article, Julia Klausner laments said girlishness:

“I’m begging age-appropriate females: Read something written before you were born. Stand up straight. Make sure you own one piece of jewelry that you did not purchase on Etsy. Use capital letters in an email to the guy you want to date. Let him take you out on a date, maybe not on a walk or an Xbox session, even if you are, God help you, addicted to LA Noire. Meet your friend for wine instead of fro-yo one night. Watch a movie with no early-’90s nostalgic appeal. Bitch, you already know Clueless by heart.” [Jezebel]

2 Broke Girls is not as bad as Jezebel thought. Nor is New Girl, for that matter.

Who is the Falling Man? [Esquire]

Mia Freedman on the dangers of teen sexting. [MamaMia]

In a similar vein, Erica Bartle tackles the online activity of teens. [Girl with a Satchel]

Dating while beautiful. [The Beheld]

The “power and politics” of being a tall girl:

“It’s funny—height, like physical strength, is one of those things we don’t really care much for in women because we say it upsets the ‘natural order of things,’ which is that men are the Protectors and women the Protected.  It’s all well and good to be the Protected, as long as you don’t consider the fact that the only way to perform your role well is to be physically vulnerable.  After all, if you are not vulnerable, what’s the point of having a Protector?…

“Yet it’s difficult not to notice that my height has given me very real advantages… like not having to deal with cowardly men harassing me as I walk down the street, or being able to push my way past predatory fraternity boys who tried to corner me in college, or standing my ground in large crowds, or taking up space in public, or a whole mess of other things that I take for granted that other women don’t get to experience.

“This is why I will always encourage women to develop their physical and mental strength.  There is no reason why physical power should be meted out simply by luck of birth.  A woman who is 5’2″ has just as much right to be here in this world as I do.  She has as much right to take up space and to walk down streets as I do.  It’s a damn shame that we live in a world that demands we fight for such basic human experiences, and I hope that someday in the future it’s no longer necessary, but until then, let’s not make it easy for those who want to take these rights away from us.” [Fit & Feminist]

The Detestable Self: what are your worst qualities? Mine are that I’m selfish, stubborn, unforgiving and self-righteous. But these are what make me, me, and at the end of the day, I like the way I am and I do enjoy being a bit selfish, set in my ways, grudge-holding and judgmental every now and then. [Girl with a Satchel]

The apocalypse is nigh: Mississippi wants to pass a bill that gives unimplanted, fertilised eggs personhood rights. [Ms. Magazine]

What’s a feminist voter to do?:

“Maybe, as with any other long-term relationship, feminism and liberalism simply grew to take each other for granted. Maybe we feminists got lulled into a false sense of security that liberals are our natural, stalwart and obvious allies, and wouldn’t display misogyny or old boys’ tendencies. It’s understandable, but a gravely simplifying loyalty and trust, if so, because misogyny is something that all of us can struggle with or exhibit—whether male or female (women engage in women-hating, self-loathing, and sexuality-hating behaviors, too), and whether liberal or conservative.” [HuffPo]

The conservative Gardasil debate between Republican presidential hopefuls Rick Perry and (God save us all) Michele Bachman. [The New Yorker]

Why I Love & Hate Pretty Woman. [Tits & Sass]

The problem with porn from a male point of view. [Good Men Project]

Why the advent of smart phones, Facebook and Twitter wouldn’t have been productive for 9/11 families. [Good]

“Weddings as Work.” Very interesting. Caitlin Moran touches on this in How to Be a Woman, which I will be reviewing in the coming weeks. [Kay Steiger]

How the banning of the burqa is “making things worse” in France. [Jezebel]

The dangers of seeking out an abortion at a “crisis pregnancy centre”. [Jezebel]

This takes the cake when it comes to tasteless and totally offensive Halloween costumes: sexy “Anna Rexia”. [Jezebel]

“How to Talk About Religion Without Starting a Fight.” Handy. [Jezebel]

How to tone down the sexy in the workplace. [MamaMia]

“The Seven Types of Book Lover.” I’m definitely—much to my fellow book lovers’ dismay—“the dog-earer” and “the underliner”. However, my weapon of choice is the highlighter. Which type are you? [MamaMia]

Ahh, yet more mansplaining. [Feminaust]

Camilla Peffer gives some advice on how to get work experience/internships. [Girls Are Made From Pepsi]

MTV, please stop supporting misogynistic artists such as Chris Brown and Tyler, the Creator. [Be Closer]

The last taboo: female masturbation? [The New Republican]

Rape analogy. Funny ’cause it’s true. [Downlo]

The “vegetarian line”. [MamaMia]

“The Cult of Muscularity.” [Bitch Magazine]

On Thylane Blondeau and the sexualisation of girls:

“Yes, that’s right. She’s wearing lipstick and heels. She’s wearing things that adult women wear and adult women are sexy. What else are those poor, poor men supposed to do? Here’s a thought: nothing. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. There was never a man in history who dressed his son up like him and was accused of pimping him out. If this girl’s mother dressed this way, she’d be considered classy, fashionable, and beautiful. So what’s the difference? They’re clothes, not sex, so why is it okay for an adult woman to wear these things in public, but not a child? Because clothes like this are considered to be no less than full consent to sexual advances. That’s what the problem is. It’s not the clothes, it’s not that she looks good, it’s not even that she looks sexy, it’s that people consider skirts, lipstick, and earrings consent to sex.” [Blogging When the Baby Isn’t Looking]

Images via Copyranter, Jezebel, Be Closer, Downlo, Style Bungalow.

Guest Post: Feminism Respects Women More Than Anything, Including the Catholic Church!

By Posted in Feminism, Guest Post, On the Net Tagged , , , , , , 6 Comments

Just over a week ago I was reading this here blog when I came across an article that shocked me. It was a response to a feminist blog that stated that the Catholic Church disrespects women. The response was supposed to demonstrate that “[the Catholic Church is] one of the few places in the modern world where women can find true acceptance and respect.” I almost choked when I read those words. Surely a Solidarity Salon or feminist society would be a more accepting place.

The Catholic Church has systematically stripped away women’s rights from the outset. Before people go asking for evidence, permit me to quote the Bible:

“That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discrete, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” Titus 2:4, 5 (emphasis mine).

According to this, women are subservient to men, must marry, have children and behave in a particular way—chaste, pure, with loving eyes only for him. The most important point here, however, is that wives must be obedient to their husbands. This indicates that women are viewed as being unequal to men. I cannot see how we can possibly feel respected if we do not feel equal.

Women in the Bible, and therefore in the eyes of the Catholic Church, are always presented in one of two ways: the Madonna or the whore. The Virgin Mary (mother of Christ and most famous of all biblical “vessels”), Priscilla (devoted wife of Aquila who extended her hospitality to St. Paul when he was in need), Ruth (loyally took care of her sick mother-in-law) and Elizabeth (who bore a son, John the Baptist, despite being well past child-bearing age) are all examples of the Madonna; the virtuous woman in the Bible.

So some of the examples are a little stretched for goodness—I’ll gladly look after my mother-in-law but I doubt that alone makes me a good person. That is because women are painted as sinners and whores far more frequently in the good old pages of the Bible. A small list of examples include: Eve (duh, she started it all by defying God and eating some fruit), Jezebel (worshipped false gods and murdered her husband and sons), Delilah (betrayed Samson, lured him with her sexuality and maimed him by cutting off his hair in which his strength lay, effectively leading to his death), Salome (flirted and danced seductively for her step-father to persuade him to execute John the Baptist—at the age of thirteen! [Scarlett Woman note: so the sexualisation of children isn’t just a raunch culture, Internet-age thing!]), Mary Magdalene (one of Jesus’ most reliable disciples, however she was painted as a prostitute until 1969 when the Pope recognised her as a true disciple). I could go on. Is it just me, or are the stories about the “evil” women just so much more fun? Now that we’ve had a who’s who of female biblical figures, I’d like to address some of the points that were made in the article.

The first point, predictably, is abortion. Apparently, because a high percentage of women having abortions reported using contraception and it failing “there is a huge problem with contraception—something the Church has said all along.” The Catholic Church is against contraception because they believe that every union between sperm and egg is a life and that only God has the right to give or take away life. Jennifer Fulwiler’s argument seems to be more centred on the science of contraception, an aspect of the argument that the Catholic Church has never really looked into being clouded with the morality angle. There were a few comments written in response asserting that if feminists want to be environmentalists as well, they shouldn’t pump their bodies and waterways with chemicals that inhibit pregnancy. Aaah, psedo-science!  As both a feminist and an environmentalist, I endorse the use of the Pill. All medication carries a risk, even aspirin. I received a very competent education on the menstrual cycle and how the pill works to inhibit the release of an egg by adding more oestrogen and progesterone, hormones that are naturally produced in the body, at a particular time in the cycle. If you are educated on how it works, you won’t be afraid of it. I would like to ask a question about sperm, though. If the church posits that the union between egg and sperm is a human being, do they believe that individual sperm and unfertilised eggs are also people? If this is the case, how can they condone the reproduction process, considering how many poor innocent sperm die in the hostile environment of the womb? [Scarlett Woman note: Or in “masturbatory emissions”, as Elle Woods would say?! Oh, that’s right: masturbation is evil.]

The article goes on to say that—shock, horror!—women are having sex for pleasure, not procreation. Really? In 2011? I had no idea! This is blamed on being “bombarded with about a zillion messages a day that portray sex as… pleasure and fun” and that you only have to “turn on the E! Network or flip through an issue of Cosmo” to see this message being touted and lauded as positive. I must admit, I always go to Cosmo for the best sex tips! The hyper-sexualisation of society is something that religion in general often uses as a way of renouncing feminism.  In a Google search of feminism, the third option is a website called Feminism is Evil. Not only is the sheer ridiculousness of the “argument” against feminism laughable, the only evidence appears to be quotes from the Bible. Feminism is Evil also blames the media for the unfeminine behaviour of women:

“The television is about as false and misleading as can be nowadays… People are being indoctrinated, especially our youth, to have a false view of reality. Television nowadays is being used as a weapon to promote agendas that go 100% contrary to the Word of God; such agendas as homosexuality, feminism and abortion.” (Original emphasis removed.)

At one point, the site makes the argument that men are more pure than women because “not one man has ever had an abortion”! I still believe that the mainstream media presents a patriarchal, homophobic lifestyle as the norm. Whilst there may be more divorced characters on television, they still promote impeccable family values. In CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, I would argue that Catherine works extra hard on her relationship with her daughter, Lyndsay, insisting on things like eating dinner together at the table and having movie nights. If anything, she is the most family-oriented character on the show. Similarly, Glee deals with a gay character, Kurt, by placing him in a highly supportive family. He has a great relationship with his father and becomes integrated into a full family unit with the marriage of his dad to fellow Glee clubber Finn’s mum.

Whilst I am the first to discuss the objectification of women in advertising that portrays them as sexual objects, it’s strange how we actually agree on something but think that it’s wrong for completely different reasons. I still maintain that most adverts place women in domestic spheres. This is completely compliant with the church, according to Feminism is Evil, as “biblically a woman’s place is in the home.” If I have to see one more advertisement for cleaning or cooking products in which only women appear, or in which they are exasperated at the incompetence of their husbands (and they are always husbands), I feel I might scream! The media systematically proliferates society with these wholesome messages of propaganda for “traditional” gender roles as a response to the increasing feminist and homosexual rights movements. People just don’t see it, as the message is more subtle than the ads of the ’50s and ’60s.

Back to the article at hand, and Fulwiler falsely states that “secular feminists are not willing to stand up for all women.” This is a sweeping generalisation. She cannot speak for everyone, and neither can I, however I was offended by this statement. I, personally, am willing to stand up for all women, even ones who, like her, are victims of the patriarchy. I actually feel that women who have been indoctrinated into a repressive and unequal culture need to be represented more, as they have lost their own voices.

As the article goes on, however, I realise that I don’t represent all women, if Fulwiler is to be believed:

“Pro-choice feminism only respects women once they’ve reached a certain age, usually about 36 weeks; the ones who are younger than that are not considered worthy of consideration as human beings, let alone worthy of respect. The Catholic Church respects all women, no matter how small and voiceless.”

Oh, right, I see what she means. I could not disagree more. This issue is, undoubtedly, highly subjective based on when one considers a foetus becomes a person.

I am not speaking for any other secular feminist at this point but I don’t consider an aborted foetus a woman that I have failed to represent. This is not about neglecting women here; this is about terminating a pregnancy, not a life.  I believe that the person to focus on is the woman who should be given the choice as to whether she wants to continue the pregnancy and eventually give birth to a fully-fledged human, or terminate that pregnancy and not bring an extra child into the world. Each case is individual and should be treated that way, however, at the end of the day, the choice should only ever be that of the woman’s.

Once again, there is a misconstrued notion that the Catholic Church educates women on abortion better than pro-choice organisations or abortion clinics. I disagree, and I went on quite a few websites to discover what they say the procedure consists of. According to Better Health Victoria, two types of abortion are currently available:

  • Surgical abortion: a low-risk procedure most commonly used for first trimester (7–12 weeks) abortion in Australia. Known as suction aspiration or suction curette, it involves removing the lining and contents of the uterus (womb). A range of other surgical techniques are used for abortion later in pregnancy.
  • Medical abortion: a low-risk alternative to surgery used for terminating pregnancies earlier than 7–9 weeks (depending on the clinic). RU486 (mifepristone), also known as “the abortion pill/drug”, is the most widely known medication used for this procedure. It’s available in some clinics in Australia and is up to 98 per cent effective when used in the first nine weeks of pregnancy.

This seems to be the general consensus on most abortion websites I visited. I did come across several problems, though, as most of the sites had been hijacked by religious pro-life propaganda. One website, called Pro-Choice.com, was full of pictures of foetuses and religious messages. If you can’t go to a site labelled “pro-choice” without it being corrupted by religion, where can you go?  I find it quite insulting to read that apparently the Catholic Church provides more accurate information on abortion. Women undergoing the procedure are given accurate and thorough information regarding the process just like any other medical procedure. The Church’s scare mongering and twisting of the facts are not scientifically- or medically-based enough to be considered “information.”

Now, Ms Fulwiler is not saying that “secular feminists intend to disrespect women”; she thinks we “mean well but are simply misguided.” How nice of her to be concerned!  She says she knows how we feel because she used to be the same until she found God was brainwashed. She then says that she started “questioning assumptions.” For someone who questions assumptions, she sure makes a few herself. the first being that the Catholic Church has moved into a modern world in which Eve and Jezebel are not real but allegorical so that women are really seen as respectable in the eyes of the Church. According to Feminism is Evil, even female ministers are going against the word of God and should get back to the kitchen!

The second assumption she makes is that women are being blindly led to the abortion clinic the second they get pregnant. As I stated earlier, every case is different and I feel that there is a tendency to sweep over that and assume that pro-choice women relish in the devilry of their abortive practices.

The third and final assumption is that God exists. I understand that this is a faith-based claim, as there hasn’t been an awful lot of concrete evidence that He has spoken to anyone of late, yet the whole church system relies on the fact that he’s real. If the assumption is wrong, as I believe, then the reasoning behind the oppression of women and the pro-life argument go completely out the window.

Oh, and one final assumption: that secular feminists care what you think.

—Laura Money.

Related: On Stalking.

On Stripping.

Elsewhere: [National Catholic Register] Feminists Don’t Respect Women; the Catholic Church Does.

[YouTube] Legally Blonde Part 5.

[Feminism is Evil] Homepage.

[Better Health Victoria] Abortion.

[ProChoice] Homepage.

Megan Fox Transforms From “Android Ice Queen” to Relatable Person.

By Posted in Movies, On the Net Tagged , 5 Comments

 

From an interview with Megan Fox on Moviefone:

“[Interviewer] This role seems to…

“[Fox] Make me seem human?…

“I just think the idea is that because most of the way that people have seen me, it’s the glorified pin-up girl with motorcycle boots who is also fighting to save the world. It’s not necessarily someone who you connect with because they’re not real people necessarily who exist like that—the glossy lips in the middle of the desert… You don’t necessarily see the human side of whoever is playing that person. And I just think [in] the media, in general, I just don’t really get portrayed as someone who has feelings or who is sympathetic. Or I sort of am portrayed as this—I feel—like a self-absorbed ice queen.

“I feel people think I’m almost like a robot—like an android. And that I’m all about me and my thoughts are all about me. That I want to be famous.”

I can relate to these feelings expressed by Fox, albeit on a much smaller scale. I’m often accused of being a bitchy ice queen with no feelings because I choose not to express them in public. I feel like I’m also torn between citing my opinions and ideas and being attention-seeking or, at least, I think this is how people perceive my actions. I try not to let these things get the best of me, and it seems Fox subscribes to a similar school of thought. I can’t imagine how hard it would be for her to be dragged through the mud in the tabloids and the blogs when, to me, she seems like a genuine, relatable person, especially in this interview.

What do you think?

Related: Megan Fox Too “Spicy” for Transformers?

“She Just Wants Attention.”

The Beautiful, Bigmouthed Backlash Against Katherine Heigl & Megan Fox.

Elsewhere: [Moviefone] Megan Fox on Shia LaBeouf, Her Public Image & Starting Over with Friends with Kids.

Image via Broad Recognition.

On the (Rest of the) Net.

By Posted in On the (Rest of the) Net, On the Net Tagged , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

 

Street harassment in pictures. [Sociological Images]

There may be a link between professional athletes and domestic violence. [Jezebel]

Gay men have body angst, too. [MamaMia]

Naked children: pornography or art?:

“It would be more dangerous and damaging to tell this child that it’s not okay for her mum to photograph her naked, that she should be afraid [of] a loving parent who finds her body beautiful and artistic and that she should avoid being naked with any audience because of the potential to arouse someone predatory.” [Feminaust]

On girl love:

“Don’t be a hater. Try girl-love for a change.  It doesn’t mean you have to hug women with your legs, but try dedicating less of your energy to shit feelings of self-hatred and jealousy, and more towards being supportive of your fellow sistahs.” [Girls Are Made From Pepsi]

Yet another reason not to become a teacher! Parental disrespect. [MamaMia]

Julia Gillard on women’s rights. [MamaMia]

Also at MamaMia, “how women bond by bitching about their looks.”

Erotic capital. Very thought provoking, and something I might return to on this here blog at a later date. [Musings of an Inappropriate Woman]

The aftermath of 9/11 for an Australian kid aged 10 when the World Trade Centre came down. [The Punch]

Some more 9/11 “perspective” from The Punch.

Lady Gaga justifies her love of Madonna, YSL’s “Mondrian” dress, and Salvador Dali, amongst others, in her “Born This Way” video. [V Magazine]

“The Time I Became Hated on the Internet” for being a feminist. [Air or Fire or Pizza]

To trust or not to trust when it comes to birth control. [HuffPo]

Image via YouTube, Sociological Images.

Manic Pixie Dream Bitch.

By Posted in Feminism, Movies, On the Net Tagged , , , , 4 Comments

 

From “The Pinup of Williamsburg” by Jada Yuan in New York Magazine, via Jezebel:

“(500) Days Of Summer… told almost entirely through Tom’s perspective, was ‘actually very misunderstood,’ [Deschanel] says. ‘I can’t tell you how many guys, and girls, are like, “You did him wrong!” What, she’s a bitch because she didn’t want to date that guy? So? Are we bitches because we have our own opinions? If that makes me a bitch, or that makes women bitches, then maybe we’re all bitches.’”

Elsewhere: [New York Magazine] The Pinup of Williamsburg.

[Jezebel] Zooey Deschanel: “Maybe We’re All Biches”.

[Musings of an Inappropriate Woman] Elizabethtown, Garden State & the Alternative Flat Fantasy Female.

Image via Robray Burn.

On the (Rest of the) Net.

By Posted in On the (Rest of the) Net, On the Net Leave a comment

 

Crystal Renn explains the whole eye-taping scandal. [Jezebel]

Sex & the City, post 9/11. [New York Magazine]

And what has changed about New York since that fateful day just over ten years ago? [New York Magazine]

Reminiscing about 9/11, Mia Freedman writes about “grief porn”. [MamaMia]

The problem with Jezebel. [Slate]

Charing Ball on the hullabaloo surrounding Beyonce’s pregnancy announcement and how she’s “doing it the right way”:

“Many of the same folks, who once chastised Beyonce for waiting for motherhood, are rushing to sing the praises of how the couple, but more specifically Beyonce, ‘did it the right way.’ You know, the correct order of things: dating, marriage and then the kid. Never mind that her better half is a 41-year-old man, who still grabs his crotch out in public and wears his hat turned backwards. But more to the point, this whole ‘look at the positive role Bey is setting for young women’ conversation, which is now happening around the blogosphere, reeks of slut-shaming.

“Beneath the celebratory ‘she did it the right way’ discussion is an underlining message, which seeks to shame and stigmatise women, who for whatever reason, go in on motherhood alone. Some bloggers see Beyonce’s pregnancy as some sort of triumph over single women, who have gotten pregnant before or outside of marriage. And as such, Beyonce’s baby bump and wedding ring have now become kindling to further flame the existence of these unwed women, who by virtue of their singledom, are obviously failures at motherhood and are incapable of rearing a child with morals and values worthy of society.” [Atlanta Post]

“Cartoon Characters & Their Teenage Alter Egos.” [Rookie]

Also from Rookie, Tavi Gevinson on girl hate:

“She walks a certain way, answers questions in class a certain way, wears stuff no one else could pull off? Look: confidence is not a crime. It does not mean a girl is a bitch or a slut, or thinks she’s better than you. It just means that she likes herself. And personally, I don’t wanna live in a world where any girl with healthy self-esteem is labeled a whore, or where you have to dislike yourself to be considered a nice person.”

“The Help Isn’t Racist. Its Critics Are.” [The New Republic]

Should pedophiles be granted the right to redefine their “mental illness” to “minor-attracted persons”? [Salon]

I commented on Aimless Panther’s post on Feminaust from a couple of weeks ago, on whether fat is a “feminist issue”, asking what her views on control underwear were. Ask and you shall receive.

Panther also laments the “fall back on[to] gender stereotypes. It may give me great material to mock, but in the end it makes all our efforts harder”:

“You can take your real men, [Bryony] Gordon, your philandering, fat dickheads, and just bugger right off. Give me the men who struggle against gender roles and straighten their hair, worry about their health and have the art of conversation. I reckon they’ll be more interesting.” [Feminaust, The Age]

Getting to know the Prime Minister a year (when it was published) on from her ousting of K. Rudd. Interesting stuff. [The Monthly]

Discussing male body image. [Bitch]

Also on masculinity, exploring it in televisions best shows. [The Good Men Project, via Jezebel]

“How Much Alcohol to Drink So You Never Die.” Spoiler alert: you will die. [Jezebel]

In the vein of sexual harassment and stalking on The Scarlett Woman in the last week or so, Jezebel’s Jenna Sauers gets masturbated to on the subway and the cops did nothing.

Also with street subway harassment, Chloe at Feministing lets us know the “things you should not say to a stranger on the subway”, in case we didn’t already.

Plus-sized Nancy Upton gives the plus-sized American Apparel model competition a run for its money. [Jezebel, MamaMia]

Thank Your Wank. Hmm… A website that allows wankers, in every sense of the word, to thank their fantasy subjects. There’s even a “to-do” list. Vile, or just a bit of fun? [Jezebel, MamaMia]

Erica Bartle on the work/life balance. [Girl with a Satchel]

Still with GWAS, Erica explores the role of the media in the wake of the News of the World phone hacking scandal, the Nine News-Daniel Morcombe “live” cross, the “burden v. benefit” of airing our opinions online, and the anonymous comment.

The case for anti-discrimination laws and welfare benefits for the “ugly”, whatever that means. [The New York Times]

Dirty Dancing as feminist text. [The Guardian]

This post, about what happened with Maureen Shaw went off the pill, made me rethink doing so myself! [Jezebel]

The transphobic, ignorant and just plain vile response to Chaz Bono being featured on U.S. Dancing with the Stars makes me think freedom of speech may be a bad thing. -Phobic and -ist speech, anyway. [Jezebel]

Images via The Guardian, Jezebel, Rookie.

On the (Rest of the) Net.

By Posted in On the (Rest of the) Net, On the Net Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

 

Attack of the cupcakes!:

“… Badassery and toughness aren’t mutually exclusive with cupcakes. A woman can go home from her power-suit-wearing corporate job and unwind in front of Cute Overload. A ‘supermom’ can enjoy a vintage cocktail—and even wear a vintage apron, if she wants to—without becoming squishy and ineffective…” [Feministe, HuffPo]

Gloria Steinem’s not the feminist hero we think she is, according to Suzanne Venker. [National Review Online]

The Catholic Church respects women more than feminism? Laughable. [National Catholic Register]

Erica Bartle writes on the perils of being a Christian in a sometimes-misunderstanding world. I don’t think what she’s experiencing is a uniquely “Christian” thing. (More on that next week.) I abhor organised religion, but I still feel “hyper-sensitive”, as she puts it, to the small-minded bigots around me. I think it comes down to what kind of person you are, regardless of religion and faith, which aren’t mutually exclusive.

I think you can still keep your “awesomeness”, “pride” and “talents” and fight like Mike Tyson (minus the ear-biting and sexual assault). Those are the things that make us good people, in my opinion. [Girl with a Satchel]

Gala Darling on how “to be the person in the photo, instead of the person looking at it.”

The Help from a porcupine and bumblebee’s point of view. You’ll get it from mine next week. [Jezebel]

In the wake of recent assertions that Hillary Clinton might have made a better president than Barack Obama, I came across this 2008 article pitting the “Madonna” against the “whore”; “the hard-ass” against “the lightweight”; “the battle-ax” against “the bubblehead”; “the serious, pursed-lipped shrew” against “the silly, ineffectual girl”; “the bitch” against  “the ditz”, and why the Clinton/Sarah Palin debate was a futile one. [New York Magazine, The New York Times]

It’s all about the discontent of young Asian women, and how they want to look more Western. [Gender Across Borders, Sydney Morning Herald, SBS Insight]

To the inconsiderate douches who use the word “rape” as a joke. Brilliant. [Lipstick Feminists]

“The Deficient Single Woman.” [Zero at the Bone]

Discrepancies in the way college men and women dress are lauded as anti-feminist by Lisa Belkin, while Amanda Marcotte contends the sight of a woman dancing in her underwear on Halloween doesn’t mean she’s a) not a feminist, b) going to insight yearnings of violent assault in all men who lay eyes on her, and c) dumb:

“Men are perfectly capable of being turned on by a woman dancing in her underwear while never forgetting that said woman has a family that loves her, a mind of her own, and ambitions that are equal to his.  We don’t allow men’s sexuality to dehumanise them in our eyes.  If a young man spends his weekends partying and flirting with women, and spends his time in the classroom pulling down As, we don’t see that as a contradiction. The belief that female sexual expression is uniquely dehumanising is a double standard, no matter how much you dress it up in feminist language.” [The New York Times, Slate]

Somewhat in response to Caitlin Moran’s How to Be a Woman (I’m eagerly awaiting my copy in the mail), Jason Sperber tells us “How to Be a Man”. [The Good Men Project]

Baby Beyonce is inciting debate about motherhood, race, and “doing it the right way”. [Jezebel]

Gay marriage is a human rights violation of children to be brought up by a female mother and a male father. Hmm… [The Australian]

“Professor Feminism” and the “Chronicles of Mansplaining”:

“I’m pretty confident that Professor Feminism is not Professor Understands Sarcasm, either, so I’ll spell it out: The point of listening to women and feminists is to listen to women and feminists. Because if you listen to them, you might start to understand certain basic points, such as: Women do not automatically have to accept you as an expert, particularly not when the subject under discussion (sexism!) is something you’ve never experienced first-hand. Women do not have to make you ‘comfortable’ and ‘welcome’ in every single conversation. Women do not automatically have to grant you a space in their discussions, on their blogs, or in their lives. Women do not have to permit you to enter their political movements, their self-created spaces, their personal space, their bodies, or anything else that belongs to them; you, as a man, are not entitled to women’s attention, praise, affection, respect, or company, just because you want it. And when a woman says ‘no,’ you respect that this particular woman said ‘no,’ and you stop. You don’t make excuses, you don’t explain why you should be able to get what you want, you don’t throw a tantrum, you don’t call that woman names: You just stop what you are doing. Because she said ‘no.’” [Tiger Beatdown]

See here for another example.

What Adele… and Lil Wayne… can teach us about love. [This Single Life]

“I Thought Success Meant Wearing a Suit.” So did I. I used to fantasise about working on Southbank, wearing suits (I had a penchant for an imaginary hot pink one!) and carrying my files in a suitcase-on-wheels. My how the tables have turned. In my day job, I wear a uniform that I try to spice up every now and then with biker boots and studded flats, and for my unpaid blogging duties, it’s usually trackies or pyjamas. This morning it’s raining, so I’ve invested in some extra insulation with my dressing gown. What do you were that indicates “success”. (In no way am I equating my mundane daily grind with success. I loath my paid job. Just doing it to pay the bills.) [MamaMia]

The facts and fictions of television’s crime dramas. [Jezebel]

Apparently, “Confronting Men About Sexism Makes Them Nicer,” and from my experience, I believe it. [Jezebel]

Sarah Wilson contemplates stopping for optimism. What am I optimistic about when I have to stop? The last two bouts of gastro I had I used to lie in bed and catch up on box sets between running to the bathroom. I don’t have an excuse for doing this every other day!

Images via YouTube, Jezebel, BuzzFeed. Bump Shack.

Heather Morris Glee-ful About Domestic Violence?

By Posted in On the Net Tagged , , , , 1 Comment

 

Now, I love me some Brittany S. Pierce, but perhaps her decision to pose for photographer Tyler Shields wasn’t the wisest.

Since the images went public to much fanfare, Shields has announced all proceeds from the sale of one of the images, starting at $100,000, will go to a domestic violence charity.

Well, I suppose that’s one good thing about the pictures.

What do you think? Glorifying domestic violence or blown out of proportion?

Related: The Underlying Message in Glee‘s “Britney/Brittany” Episode.

Elsewhere: [Jezebel] Controversial Photos of Glee Star With a Black Eye to Benefit Domestic Abuse Charity.

Images via MamaMia.