More Hell, Fewer Dahlias: The Musings of a Radical Feminist.

Archive for the ‘Media!’ Category


is all I can say.

Head over to Jezebel for more info:

http://jezebel.com/5673680/what-was-marie-claire-thinking-with-this-fatties-piece?skyline=true&s=i

I don’t actually think I buy anything from their advertisers, but I’m double checking and I urge you all to do the same, and if so, change products.

One unintended consequence of the article I’ve felt? Feeling really sorry for the author.

I didn’t expect to! I didn’t intend to!

But someone who holds that much contempt for other people, to the point of being physically sick over their appearance and likening them to heroin addicts (which everyone knows means Bad Person, yeesh), must have a lot of self hatred.

It hurts to see a woman hate her body so much.

And it hurts to know that thousands of women feel the same way.

Advertisements

This has made the rounds in all of my feminist circles and news sources: starting at Feministing, winding its way over all the forums, and finally ending up being posted seven times by different friends on my facebook feed! Reactions range from “Yay!” to “Too late, cute though.”

http://www.feministing.com/archives/021171.html
(I suggest not reading the comments on the Feministing article though, unless you want to see a man be condescending to women in a feminist space and people speak really harshly to each other for no good reason. 😦 Moving on,)

Props to Laura Bush for finally sharing her opinion. Boo for it happening far, far too late and only after her husband had managed to erode rights for both women and the GLBTQ community. I mean, why is she saying this now? If she backed these words up with some work with the HRC or a well placed donation, I’d be a little less suspicious, but I just don’t see why she’s speaking up now.

This also brings up some interesting ideas about the roles of first ladies. People were upset when Hillary Clinton worked on health reform during Bill Clinton’s presidency, people have criticized Michelle Obama for working on her childhood obesity program, etc. What do we expect from these women who are uniquely exposed to the highest level of political office in the United States? Do we want involved, active First Ladies?  When we criticize these women for their role in government, are we promoting the idea that politics are a men’s world? Are we stripping these women of their predefined social place (working on “social” issues, like poverty, nutrition, etc) like many First Ladies have done, in order to get women into a political position with more power? Or are we working for the patriarchy in that we’re trying to silence women who have a position where they can be heard, by saying that they weren’t elected? (Of course they weren’t: NO WOMAN HAS BEEN.) How will this change when a woman is elected, and will our views on what a First Gentleman should do be different, and if so, how?

Today is a question day! If I had answers I’d give ’em to ya.


FYI: If you google “sex worker photos” or “indian sex worker photo” you can get here. Hm. Also “rape schedule.” I like the third search term the most but oh well, can’t win ’em all. I’m calming myself by thinking that maybe these people were looking for photos of sex workers as they really are: people with families, work, bills to pay, etc and not for any sort of porn purposes. Don’t disabuse me of this notion plz! It is possibly valid.

PSA: So I’ve been fighting the sexist language battle for sometime, with various people and places. Saying “she’s got balls,” “be a man,” and using slang terms for vagina (“cunt” “pussy”) as insults is supporting a sexist culture. Recognizing where these terms come from, why we use them as such, and the systems we are supporting while using them is important.

I’m sure someone much better verses in linguistics and language/culture relation can elaborate/disprove/whatevs this little PSA, but there you have it. It is 2:35 in the morning and I am done with finals, people!


Danny Dyer (British actor) wrote in an advice column in a men’s magazine,

You’ve got nothing to worry about, son. I’d suggest going out on a rampage with the boys, getting on the booze and smashing anything that moves. Then, when some bird falls for you, you can turn the tables and break her heart. Of course, the other option is to cut your ex’s face, and then no one will want her.

An ap0logy has been issued. The apology is half assed.

Due to an extremely regrettable production error, an inappropriate and indefensible response to a letter has appeared in this week’s issue. Zoo editor, Tom Etherington, apologises unreservedly for any offence the response may have caused and has launched an internal enquiry to ensure lessons are learnt.

Let me rewrite that for them.

Due to a culture of mysogyny and lack of understanding of the sexist culture we live in, an inappropriate and indefensible response to a letter has appeared in this week’s issue. Zoo editor, Tom Etherington, apologises unreservedly for blatantly furthering the culture of violence against women and making light of the plight of the millions of women who are physically, emotionally and otherwised abused each day. We have launched an internal enquiry to ensure lessons are learnt.


Okay, does everyone know MTV’s television show 16 and Pregnant? I’ve gone back and forth on what aspect of this show to talk about, both positive and negative.  So here’s my handy dandy chart!

Positive

-Sex education ads, encouraging teens to seek information and giving then handy websites

-Fairly realistic portrayals of problems: a child with some sort of heart or lung problem, some difficult labors, and multiple complicated living situations.

Negative

-Exploitive

-Dr. Drew

-Possible glamourizing of situation?

Dr. Drew? He’s a negative? Uhm, yeah. Have you seen the Season wrap up?

Maci and Ryan have had problems all along: Maci is a star mother. She’s in college, she works hard to ensure her son Bentley has food, birthday parties and toys and a stable living situation.

Ryan: can’t hold down a job, shows no interest in his child, doesn’t come home for nights on end, and won’t change his son so Maci can take a shower or study.  He’s called her a bitch, called her lazy, and said they wouldn’t be together if it wasn’t for Bentley, and that he’d never speak to her again if it wasn’t for the baby, that he doesn’t care about Maci.

Well, guess what: you officially suck as a father and a boyfriend.

So there’s Ryan!suck. But where does Drew suck come in?

Right around when, on the season finale, he says that he believes Maci and Ryan can work it out.

Work what out, exactly? Ryan’s immaturity, his lack of care towards his son? Maci doesn’t have shit to work out, she’s got it worked out, except for this deadbeat boy who stays around, calling her a lazy bitch.  But instead of condemning him for his immature, irresponsible behavior, they can “work it out.”

Way to pass the buck, Dr. Drew. This isn’t a relationship problem. It’s a “boy is too fucking immature to be a dad or a husband” problem. It isn’t like they’re not communicating over their budget or how to cook hamburgers, HE’S CALLED HER A BITCH AND STAYED OUT FOR NIGHTS ON END.

If you really supported a strong mother raising a strong child, you’d say “forget him. you can raise your child in a healthy environment where he won’t see his mother mistreated, even if it means no father figure for a while.”

But its so much easier to blame “the couple” (which we all know secretly means the woman) and encourage a heterosexual, nuclear family centered “ideal,” even if it is far from ideal.

So, Dr. Drew, thanks for showing the thousands of young women who watched that it really is their fault. Or at the very least, it isnt HIS fault. Oh god, no. Why won’t that lazy bitch just cooperate?

Over and out,

Radfemles (who is swearing off mainsteam media again.)


I’m gonna rehash an oldie but a goodie:

RAPE IS NEVER A WOMAN’S FAULT.

Regardless of what she’s wearing, doing, saying, drinking, or where she is doing any of these things or with whom she is doing them.

IT IS NEVER HER FAULT.

Keshia Cantor was handed a pamphlet explaining to her that her immodest dress may cause her to raped and was responsible for men sinning. Here’s where the news article fails: it goes on to describe Cantor’s dress, asserting she’s a “good girl” who was all covered up while working at her mother’s fast food restaurant. Uhm, hold on.

“Bad girls” don’t deserve to get raped either, and they aren’t responsible for men “sinning.”

So good job,  Clare Golfordo of the Herald Courier press, for covering these sexist, fingerpointing, inaccurate pamphlets, even though you didn’t quittte follow through.

Bad job, society, for needing to know exactly what the girl handed this pamphlet was wearing. I mean, after all,we have to know… what if she deserved it?

Bristol Harold Courier: “Blame the victim: Religious leaflet claims ‘ungodly’ dressed women provoke rape”


A question some faithful readers asked recently. I was shocked! Horrified! I was not doing my job as the Local Radical Feminist if you hadn’t seen the IBTC in my presence!

Anna, an all American teenager who just happens to be a lesbian in an accepting, open family, is working at a surgery that provides boob jobs after being rejected from her top choice college. A chance meeting with Sadie, a member of a radical feminist group turns Anna’s life upside down as she finds an outlet to express her unhappiness with the society she lives in and how she is treated by her family, friends, lovers and society as a whole.

Content Warnings: If you don’t like lesbians, transgender issues, blowing shit up, or slightly corny feminist theory, I’d skip this. And probably this blog, too! : )