Between going back to college, planning a wedding, looking for homes and struggling with a super busy job (all wonderful things I give you that) I've had little time to blog. But there's more pressing reasons... like for instance, with all the crap out there-- where do you start?
Sounds like Jon from Jon and Kate + 8 is cheating on his wife. But it's okay because girls are lining up to screw him. You see, Kate is really a castrating bitch and her haircut sucks.
Then there was this gem Tyler found in the men's restroom when we were out to dinner.
In case you can't read the text on this ad, it says: "Everybody & Everything gets older... isn't restored more exciting?" The photo shows a rusted out, door-less bug next to an older women with gray hair and a hot car is placed next to a young, tan woman in a skimpy bikini.
**You can contact this company and let them know what you think of their advertising-- nzcustoms@integra.net
Then there's this ad that I keep seeing -- a whole new twist on the "headless fatty" thing the press loves to do. Not only are they not human, they are over-inflated beach balls. Just what I need is some self-righteous "fat is soooooo bad for you" person searching my double chin for some release valve.
Oh and don't get me started on Perez Hilton and Miss California. Could they both win America's #1 asshole and Runner-up? Seriously...
It's no secret that you should "Dress for the job you want, not the job you have." Well, Palin is dressing to look Presidential, so it's understandable that she wants to look sharp. Not only that, as a woman in the public eye, she HAS to look sharp.
Throughout this campaign season, the press has made it abundantly clear that it won't be cutting female politicians any slack. Article after article was written about Hillary's pantsuits, the 'is-it-there-or-not' cleavage and the choice of wardrobe colors (did that blue really flatter her?). And forget the clothes, was Clinton even HOT enough to be President? Believe it or not, it was a concern some pundits had.... Rush Limbaugh (professional asshole) wrote an entire article about Hillary, "Does Our Looks-Obsessed Culture Want to Stare at an Aging Woman?"
So needless to say, there's pressure to look flawless. Palin's already been subject to scrutiny for outdated hair or for simply appearing as she is!
However, as McEwan and Brown both point out, we can acknowledge the sexist double standard but still point out the hypocrisy that Ms. Small Town, "Real" America, Hockey Mom, Average Joe-loving Sarah Palin shops at stores (and with expense accounts) that in NO WAY reflect the average American experience.
Yes, woman are held to unfair standards but Palin dropped a LOT of cash ($150,000 over the course of 2 months) on clothes from top designers while Michelle Obama rocked a White House Black Market dress for less than $200.
And if they were just two women living their life, that information would be none of my concern.
However, Palin's campaign crux is that she sees America the way YOU do ('you' being, middle class, small town folk) and her actions continually speak otherwise.
Besides, if I were a donor to McCain's campaign (hahahah, perish the thought) I'd be just a lil' pissy that she couldn't have shopped a few sale racks.
Today on feministing, Jessica Valenti blogs that PlaySkool is still pushing their Rose Petal Cottage on American girls.
The pink, pastel wonder comes complete with a washer/dryer, oven, baby cradle and stuffed chair. Now there's nothing wrong with children wanting to play house or play with domestic toys. I had a tea set when I was little and I adored princess clothes and baby dolls. But sometimes my "baby" and I would be mother and daughter taking a safari through the backyard. Sometimes I'd be wearing a tiara while climbing trees and splashing in mud puddles.
I don't understand why we haven't advanced beyond this notion that kids today play a certain way based on what's between their legs.
The Rose Petal Cottage is a classic example -- it's just one female stereotype after another. A line from the sing-songie advertisement goes, "I love when my clothes get so clean, taking care of my home is a dream dream dream."
Now Playskool has put out the Sweet Lily Castle -- for $200 your daughter can be a princess complete with frog to kiss (cause every princess needs a prince). Just once I want the princess outfit to come with a throne and palm pilot to plan all your diplomatic meetings and charity events!
Again, I see nothing wrong with selling stuff like this. But when you step back (like way back) to look at the big picture. It starts to get frustrating.
Last night, I was watching TV and a ridiculous commercial came on. Sexy boyfriend and I were laughing hysterically at it, but I immediately noticed the language
It's not just that only boys are featured in the video, from the voice over, it's clear this is a boys-only toy.
"He’s steering the action" "Everything your little hero needs" -- hero apparently meaning MALE "His imagination is racing"
Keep in mind this is also a PlaySkool toy, the same folks that make Rose Petal Cottage and Sweet Lily Castle.
When toys mature, it's the same problem. Take a look at this image (I lifted it from Feministing who got it from Elle phd
Via Elle:
And while the "boy's" kit promises to boost your brain... the "girl's" kit promise to relax you and let you experiment with different fragrances. The boy's box is also covered with words like "go wild" and "erupt" and "blow your mind,"while the only thing that promises to be exciting about the girl's is the foaming and frothing of bubbles.
When you stop at feministing, check out even MORE examples of sexist packaging for young girls/boys products. And it starts at Playskool and just continues... actually, it probably starts the minute the doctor says, "It's a girl."
As soon as the "Helmet Heroes" commercial was done (and we were finished giggling at the dad "behind bars") I said to Sexy Boyfriend, "Why can't HER imagination be racing?"
He sort of snorted at me, "You WOULD notice that."
Yeah I would. And I'm kinda pissed that he doesn't. I get really sick of people brushing it off as 'no big deal' when we just went through an election that had some of the worst open displays of sexism and misogyny our country has seen in YEARS. Don't tell me that all these antiquated ideas about sex and gender and the so-called limitations thereof (what girls can't do etc) doesn't have REAL ramifications.
Luckily, I saw this video on CNN today about two high school girls who play football on their school team. Yes, they wear heels and like to shop but they are assets to the team and even wish they could tackle. That representation is much more truthful. Girls can still be girls (whatever that means) even while playing football in the mud, experimenting with chemistry and running for President!
When I hear/see/read something that I find unacceptable, I speak up about it. You should too.
You don't have to be rude, or full out boycott *(unless you're that pissed, in which case, hey go for it)* -- but mediums like newspaper, radio and TV are all about serving the consumer. They want you to read, watch, listen to THEIR stuff. And if they are doing something to turn people off, they want to know!
I communicated with local Top 40 radio station, Y94 once before about something that didn't sit right with me -- was it effective - meh, who knows. But I said my piece and they know that one listener took offense.
Recently, I got an updated comment to that entry saying:
I came across your blog because I was upset at something I heard on y94. Not sure if they created it, but they played it.
It was like a fake PSA, where this man was talking about hating this girl at work because she had "let herself go" and she now had a "muffin top." It ended with "This message paid for by the 'I want something nice to look at when I come into work Committee'"
I was so hurt and outraged. Who's this guy to say what's attractive? and to say that women are only at work to give him and other men "something nice to look at."
I emailed the studio... I'm not sure what else to do...
thanks for listening :)
I have not heard this ad but it sounds like a bucket of stupid. I want to commend the listener for voicing his/her concern to the station. Too often I think people feel like they have to just take hurtful or abusive images/messages because, "What can we do?"
You can speak up!! You might be mocked for having 'no sense of humor' but no one can accuse you of lacking courage.
And remember, sometimes if enough people speak up about something offensive, the good side wins!
PS: Thanks to the visitor who commented on my blog and who did a courageous thing by contacting the studio. I hope you got a pleasant response!
This story makes my eyeballs burn. I'd bet serious money that this "research" they are using is seriously flawed. It's a myth I have no patience for-- this idea that boys and girls have different brains are therefor learning styles. So girls should sit quietly at desks (non-competitive atmosphere) and boys should run and play in the sunshine (cause sitting in a desk is too hard for them).
It's school-sanctioned sexism and it's bogus. Of course if you interview a young girl or boy they'll think the opposite sex is 'yucky' and want to have their own space. But when you teach children that they are different because of what's between their legs, you set a dangerous precedent.
Girls may be more socialized to sit still and be quiet. Boys may be socialized to be more aggressive. This does NOT prove that our brains are all wired by gender. There are thousands of hardcore female athletes that will tell you this.
My best friend's sister is 14 and has been a competitive athlete since she could walk. I bet she'd rather be outside running and learning too but because she's a girl, she'd be sitting at her desk. Don't tell me girls aren't competitive or aggressive ... she could kick my ass and I'm 24.
More importantly, we need to expect more from our boys. Fifty years ago schools had all students in desks, facing the teacher, listening quietly to lectures. Go even further back when education was something strictly for young men, do you think professors had them outside running relays? NO. They sat quietly in a desk.
Now, I'm not knocking these educational methods that are outside the box. I think it would be great if they took the whole class outside and had them run and play in the sunshine while learning. But acting like we have to do this because they're boys and they can't sit still is insulting!
What are you setting these children up for? In adult society, they may have to:
A) Sit at a desk and work (not always but in a great many jobs)
and
B) Work with women as equals. Women have PROVEN themselves qualified to work alongside men in every field - whether quiet desk work or physical work like construction.
If we teach children differently, we put them all at a disadvantage and set them up (especially the girls) for sexism.
Ah yes-- how can it be that a woman in power isn't really puppeted by her husband?
But after reading the story, some red flags are going up:
- Palin copied her husband, Todd on hundreds of state e-mails - Todd supposeldy "has spoken to numerous government employees" regarding trooper Mike Wooten and Walt Monegan - Republican state Senate President, Lyda Green said she has a meeting with Gov Palin and was "particularly surprised that Todd was there. I had never seen a spouse stay in the room through the meeting."
So, what do we think? Questions about Todd's involvement... sexist or sound?
I am stealing this concept from a WONDERFUL blog that I love, love, LOURVEEEE, Women in Hollywood (go now! RIGHT NOW!) -- it's called "Hollywood Feminist of the Day" and today I award it to Megan Fox.
...At that time, (Megan) Fox was filming the third season of ABC’s Hope & Faith, a family-friendly sitcom......she was fed up with playing the coquettish yet chaste teen. The show was repressing her, she says, tamping down her sexuality:
“Sex is something that everyone does, so why can’t I talk about it?”
Sexual double standards make Fox angry, and when conversation turns to tabloid-flamed scandals surrounding other teen stars who’ve been photographed in various stages of nudity and semi nudity, she goes off:
“With any of the Miley Cyrus shit, or any of that Vanessa Hudgens shit—I would never issue an apology for my life and for who I am. It’s like, Oh, I’m sorry I took a naked, private picture that someone is an asshole and sold for money. I’m sorry if someone else is a dick. No. You shouldn’t have to apologize. Someone betrayed Vanessa, but no one’s angry at that person. She had to apologize. I hate Disney for making her do that. Fuck Disney.”
Can I get that on the record?
“Yeah. Fuck Disney.”
There goes your career.
“Yeah, that was probably a bad move—they own everything. But it’s not right. They take these little girls, and they put them through entertainment school and teach them to sing and dance, and make them wear belly shirts, but they won’t allow them to be their own people. It makes me sick.”
It's no secret that wrestling shows are hugely popular with men. Not just adults, but plenty of young boys watch these shows and idolize their wrestlers. It's also no secret that wrestling's "plotlines" often revolve around racism, homophobia ands staggering displays of sexism.
For a great example of this, see the documentary "Wrestling with Manhood: Boys, Bullying and Battering." Now, other than that documentary (made in 2002), I watch zero professional "wrestling" on TV but-- from the looks of this... things haven't changed much.
Who better to talk politics than a roided-out, greased-up wrestler who talks about himself in the third person?
In this clip "Santino" laughs at the idea of a woman being chosen as John McCain's running mate. As if we weren't thisclose, to having a woman President in Hillary Clinton!
He claims McCain will "regret this decision" because of all the scandals coming out about Sarah Palin (good point.) But then he says, " Santino feels like he's watching an episode of desperate housewives." (sexist asshole non-point)
He also has this gem (which we've never heard before)...
Santino does not feel a woman should have a finger on the nuclear button -- what happens when Aunt Flo arrives and she doesn't get enough chocolate? Will this woman throw a tantrum? Santino knows best, ok?.... Women do not belong in the White House, except to clean the tub maybe! So please, Sarah Palin, do the world a favor... grab a dustbuster and just accpet your role okay?
Oh and that wouldn't be complete without the photoshopped photo of Palin in the Oval Office in a skanky maid's uniform.
Note to self: No offspring of mine will watch wrestling. EVER
This "humor" didn't jive with me when I saw Superbad the first time! It's not that funny to trick a woman into unwanted sexual contact. I get that he's Jonah Hill and he's weird and awkward (and in no way in the same sphere as Britney Spears when it comes to attractiveness) but this just didn't get the yucks for me.
Also, Britney's been playing the role of sex object/fantasy figure since she was a young girl. When she "failed" to live up to that role by getting married, having kids, "gaining weight," public opinon violently turned on her. Then she had a huge mental breakdown. So yeah, where's the funny in demanding she play the willing, happy sex object again?
Sorry. Just my opinion... Also, Jordin Sparks... the woman needs a lesson in PR. I know that's she anti-choice so it follows logically that she ascribes to other morality that puts women at a disadvantage-- for example that "chastity movement" which traditionally puts pressure on young women to equate total human value with the presence of a hymen.
During the show, host Russell Brand made off-color jokes about the Jonas Brothers having purity rings. When Sparks took the stage later she took the opportunity to rebut, not by saying that "there's nothing wrong with waiting to have sex or placing a high value on sex"... no she took a much less friendly approach.
"I just wanna say, it's not bad to wear a promise ring because not every guy and girl wants to be a slut, OK?"
Way to call half of the kids your age sluts ... and suggesting that anyone NOT following your line of morality deserves the cruel, anti-female slur of "slut."
Not impressed with her. She's not America's Idol -- she's Phyllis Schlafly's.
The VMA's (which I only watched part of, by the way) seemed normal otherwise -- convoluted staging with stilted acceptance speeches mixed in... but everything else aside, PINK made the night worth it.
(I love me some Pink)
Also I finally realized... hmmm, this Parmore band is kinda sweet and it's led by a rocker chick... something to check out!
I read this in the paper this weekend and felt sick. So be forewarned... this is an article about gang rape and it is graphic and disturbing.
The entire article is here. Sign in with the following user name and password.
In the story the victim and her husband are given aliases -- Craig and Nancy Peterson. The alleged attackers are not named. The story states that Craig and Nancy were going through martial troubles and agreed that Nancy could have an affair. She went out to a street dance looking to meet someone.
...Nancy and her friends went to a street dance in town. The group visited three bars. At the Top Hat, Nancy met a guy.
“I ran up against him, and then we just started talking,” she said. “I pretty much told him my husband cheated on me, and I was planning on cheating on him.”
A random guy in earshot expressed interest.
“No. Just one person,” Nancy fired back. “I’m not going to be with more than one person.”
The man Nancy had her sights on wound up getting in a fight. He bolted from the bar with a buddy, and she followed.
“Halfway to the house, (Nancy’s guy) got arrested, so I decided to go home with the other guy.
“… I know it’s all very bad,” Nancy said, acknowledging how others might view the situation.
It shouldn't matter if it "looked bad" but, sadly, it probably does... As the rest of the story shows, it probably made a great deal of difference in the treatment she received from police.
Nancy went home with the man and started to have consensual sex. As this was happening, the man who had been arrested earlier showed up and jumped on top of her.
The two men began assaulting her at the same time, grabbing her hair and forcing her to perform sex acts.
“That’s pretty much how it went most of the night,” she said.
Nancy conceded that she was drunk. (She recalled having at least seven drinks.) But she said she was thinking clearly enough to know this was not what she wanted.
After awhile, Nancy blacked out. She said it was likely a combination of what was happening and the alcohol. When she came to, she discovered a new man assaulting her. Nancy bluntly asked him who he was.
“And then they all started laughing,” she said.
A fourth man was asked if he wanted to get involved; Nancy screamed, “No!” The other men continued to hold her down and assault her in the dark room. None of them wore condoms, she said.
“I told them to stop. I didn’t want to do this,” Nancy wrote in her statement for the police. “They all kept switching positions and throwing me around how they wanted me.”
The fourth man stood blocking the doorway, she said.
The men had taken Nancy’s cell phone and kept it from her during the incident. Several friends tried to call her. Someone reportedly answered one of the calls and told her friend, “She’s busy,” and hung up.
That night, Craig, who was in South Dakota where he was working with a harvesting crew, got a call from someone he thinks was one of the four men. The caller told him his wife was having sex with several men.
Craig initially thought it was a prank.
“I didn’t know what to believe at first,” he said. “Then, I started to think … ‘What the heck’s going on here?’ because that ain’t something my wife would do.”
Later, three of the men left, and the third man stayed behind. When Nancy got up to go to the bathroom, he followed her.
“He pushed the bathroom door open, grabbed my hair, slammed me down on the sink and started all over again,” she said.
Eventually, he gave it up and left.
“I was the last person to leave the apartment,” Nancy said.
She then escaped to a friend's house and that morning went in to the emergency room. A nurse called police to report the rape. Nancy gave a statement and her clothing as evidence. Then she had to drive to Fargo where a sexual assault kit could be collected. The Rape & Abuse Crisis Center of Fargo stated that the kit showed signs of forced, non-consensual sex including "lacerations, bruising and bleeding.”
The incident occurred early morning on July 27 but the police did not search the apartment where the attack occurred until July 30
This is an absolute joke. Let me tell you this, Mayville is not an epicenter of crime in North Dakota. You can bet your life, those officers had time to go and preserve crime scene. For whatever reason- laziness or something more sinister- -they chose not to.
The failure of police doesn't end there I'm afraid.
On July 28, Nancy wrote a seven-page statement and was recorded on video describing the incident for the police. She was able to give names of three of the four men, including one she recalled meeting briefly before.
Nancy said the police interviewed her Aug. 1. She said Chief Stan Baker asked questions that riled her.
“He kept saying to me, ‘So, when your husband made that phone call, that’s when you decided that you didn’t want to do it anymore?’ ” Nancy said.
“I had no idea who was on the phone. I didn’t answer the phone,” she said. “I didn’t hear what they were saying, and obviously, I didn’t hear what (Craig) was saying.”
Nancy said the police asked her why she didn’t attempt to get away, why she didn’t fight back against the four men larger than her.
“Sorry, but I’m 5-2, 145. What was I supposed to do?” she asked.
One question made her especially irate.
“So, they never really physically restrained you?” Baker asked, according to Nancy.
“And I flipped,” she said.
Nancy said the police told her they had questioned the four men.
“They all admit they were there with me that night,” Nancy said. But beyond that, she said, she doesn’t know what else they told police.
Since the interview, Nancy has not had contact with the authorities. Craig said any information they’ve gotten about the investigation, they’ve had to seek out themselves.
“They haven’t gone out of their way to tell us anything,” he said.
If a family member had been murdered... hell if a store had been robbed... don't you think the police would keep the victim(s) in the loop so they have a sense that SOMETHING is being done. That people care?
Apparently Nancy doesn't warrant that kind of treatment. It is still up in the air if there will be any charges filed at this point.
Navigating this ordeal has been tough, particularly, in a town of roughly 2,000 people where rumors travel at high speed, the couple said.
Nancy said that, for a while, she blamed herself for what happened.
“It was a pretty crazy night … and I did really stupid things by even going out,” she said. “I did a lot wrong, and obviously, I’m learning that doesn’t justify that I was actually raped.”
The fact that Nancy lives in such a small town works to her disadvantage. And sad to say that sometimes with small towns, comes small minds. Take this gem-- from the Grand Forks Herald story:
Nancy said she’s been spending most of her time at home lately.
“I don’t really go anywhere … unless (Craig) is right there with me,” she said.
Nancy said she can’t stand going to the grocery store for fear of, once again, overhearing people talk about the incident. Craig said he and Nancy can hardly bring themselves to drive by the apartment where the alleged assault occurred. Nancy even quit her job as a waitress because some of the men frequent the restaurant where she worked. And, Craig said, they ran into one of the men at the gas station.
“We liked the town before. Quiet town, you know, felt safe,” he said. “We don’t want to be there anymore. This has pretty much driven us out.”
The 30-something couple, along with their four kids, ages 4 months to 14 years old, said they’re planning to leave Mayville, where they’ve lived for three years, and move out of state.
After putting my paper down, I had to take long deep breaths to keep from screaming/sobbing.
We chased a family out of our state because we'd rather blame a victim than launch a REAL investigation.
We'd rather believe that some "slutty women" get what's coming to them than ensure that women in our state aren't vulnerable to gang rape.
We'd rather pretend rape doesn't exist and therefore create a culture where rape is acceptable.
I believe this woman was attacked. I believe the authorities who "interviewed" her blamed her for it, botched their investigation and now are hanging her out to dry so that the worst among us (MR. RETIRED FARMER ASSHOLE) can say she invited this brutal attack on herself.
A must read article about how single women are being hit hardest in the housing crisis. Turns out women are more likely to get subprime loanseven when they earn the exact same amount as men. African-American women were FIVE times more likely to get hit with subprime mortgages than white men- even when they earned double the area's median income!
Excerpt:
Several studies have shown that women -- and women of color, in particular -- are more likely than men to be targets of subprime and predatory lenders, and that many of the women who have lost their homes to foreclosure could have qualified for lower-cost loans. And although there are no data comparing foreclosure rates between men and women, subprime loans have a higher rate of default. So with foreclosures soaring, experts say women are at particular risk of losing their homes.
Shocking! Sexism and racism bites women in the ass!
...photographs that cut women up into body parts aren't innocent, cute fun.
When you dehumanize a woman and reduce her to parts -- just the ass for example. That is exactly what she becomes -- a piece of ass. She becomes SEX itself, not a whole, human being, a person with a name, a personality, an athlete....
This female Olympian has been cut up and 'othered' so much that she is now the acceptable icon for "sex" itself.
...there were the indigenous lovelies who came to watch the competitions. And then there were the female athletes - literally thousands of them - strutting, shimmying, sashaying and jogging around the village, clad in Lycra and exposing yard upon yard of shiny, toned, rippling and unimaginably exotic flesh. Women from all the countries of the world: muscular, virile, athletic and oozing oestrogen. I spent so much time in a state of lust that I could have passed out. Indeed, for all I knew I did pass out - in a place like that how was one to tell the difference between dreamland and reality?
and then there's this
...success does not work both ways. Gold-medal winning female athletes are not looked upon by male athletes with any more desire than those who flunked out in the first round. It is sometimes even considered a defect, as if there is something downright unfeminine about all that striving, fist pumping and incontinent sweating. Sport, in this respect, is a reflection of wider society, where male success is a universal desirable whereas female success is sexually ambiguous. I do not condone this phenomenon, merely note it.
I do not have the energy at this point in a Friday to talk about all the ways in which this article is tasteless, sexist and vile. I just want to get done with work and have a big f---ing drink.
It's great to see mainstream media tackling this subject. I like to think they got the idea from feminist blogs -- manyhave written about sexism in the gamesthis Olympic season.
I think it was wise not to focus the discussion on Michael Phelps as a "typical male" earner. He is an extreme case. He was America's star this year breaking records left and right, amazing story, 8 medals etc. But when you compare male/female Olympians with similar qualifications (good story, press coverage, similar medals won, records set etc) ... men STILL earn more. Much more. The pay disparity shocked the hell out of me. Nearly an 80 MILLION dollar difference between the top female and male athletes!
click to enlarge
You cannot tell me this is an accident.
The CNN discussion also touched on the longevity of medal winners. Of course the Olympics are about fulfilling dreams and showcasing athletic ability. But it's also a career move. Winning gold means getting Gold. Endorsements, jobs in sports commentary and speaking deals can make a career. Bruce Jenner, a former gold medal winner, can be seen on the reality show "Keeping up with the Kardashians" still doing speaking events for business in California. He was a hero in the 70s (athlete of the year, Wheaties Box etc) and he is STILL a hero to many today.
Women do not see that kind of long-term success. Hell, they don't even make the short-term success staples in sports-- take for example, a cover of Sports Illustrated.
So far in 2008, only one woman has made the SI cover: Swimsuit model Marisa Miller. What about 2007? Yup, just one woman again. Her name?: "Beyonce". 2006? Well, one winter Olympics issue had 6 athletes with three of them being women. In the year’s other multi-female issue there were 8 half-naked supermodels. So who was the last female athlete to grace an SI cover by herself? That would be softball player Jennie Finch in 2005.
And Finch was not photographed like her male peers-- in an action shot. She was wearing a miniskirt and the headline read, "SI Throws a Party: Jennie Finch Will be There."
One would have to go back nearly three full years, 10 bikinis, and one miniskirt before finding a female all by herself on the cover who was recognized for her athletic achievements (Danica Patrick in June 2005).
A photo of Sports Illustrated covers. Three whole years and these are the ONLY covers with women.
Is it any wonder we remember our male sports heroes longer than the women? Is it any wonder we don't take our female athletes as seriously or value them as much? When we acknowledge them, we tend to so for their beauty. We put them in a miniskirt and we tell them to "smile not sweat." We want it to be all about their woman-ness, not simply the fact that they're a kick ass athlete.
CNN briefly touched on the beauty double standard. It doesn't seem to matter if a male Olympian has classic good looks, but for women... well if she's gonna have to be in a bikini or miniskirt to grace a magazine cover, I'm betting it's still an issue.
IN 1972, Title IX was passed mandating that public schools provide women equal opportunities to enjoy sports just like men had been doing since --- ever.
Still 36 years later, there is no equality. --According to the Women’s Sports Foundation, U.S. men receive $133 million more in college athletic scholarships then women. --Female pro tennis players make 37 cents for every dollar their male peers earn. -- Only 16 percent of collegiate athletic directors are women -- 8 percent of media coverage of sports focuses on women. -- Some high schools schedule girls basketball games on weekday afternoons and the boys games on Friday at eight p.m.
In 2004, Sepp Blatter, president of the international soccer governing body known as FIFA (Federation Internationale de Football Association) suggested that female soccer players wear tighter uniforms to attract more television viewers. He also thought it would bring in money from fashion and beauty advertisers.
In 2002, The Ladies Professional Golf Association gave their players makeovers for similar reasons.
I'm glad CNN did this story but I'm so very, very thankful that when I started to research this post and grab links and factoids, there were so many out there. We have to report these stories, we have to speak up because it should be better and it's not just gonna "happen" one day. We're gonna have to push for it!
I wasn't crazy about him for awhile, but man does he ever hit this one out of the park. It really gets going around 1:45. Thanks for speaking up on this, Keith.
Dating shows- all of them -- make me physically ill.
They always play on the worst stereotypes about men and women and they typically feature the most shallow, cruel and sexist people EVER. Seriously, where do they find these people? Who raised them?
Maybe you think I'm overreacting. It's fun watching the idiots on Blind Date, right? Not so much for me. I really do hate those shows. How much you ask? Well, to me they signal a coming apocalypse.
And because 'reality' TV is always upping the ante, these shows are constantly getting worse. Sexy boyfriend sent me a link the other day and said, "Have fun blogging this one" ---
Yeah, you thought it sucked when we lined up women like a meat market and picked based on biggest boobs? NOW we're throwing inanimate objects into the mix!!!**
The concept is really quite offensive to both sexes. Dating shows already had me accustomed to the idea that people were exchangable-- even for cash. But gadgets and technology as a replacement for a date/girlfriend? Kinda takes objectification to another level.
But then I forget that reality shows - specifically dating shows are evil. They say nothing about love or human connection and everything about what is wrong with humanity. It's just a game and we're all the losers. However, considering what's on TV now, I don't even know why a concept like this should surprise me.
I can tell you what doesn't surprise me... the show, Gadget or the Girl, airs on the Playboy channel.
**To be fair... I have noticed that men on dating shows are held to similar sexist standards
There's a common phrase in my part of the world about people being "Minnesota nice." Essentially it means that when Midwesterns are pissed off and angry, they tend to be nice about it-- or at the least passive aggresive about it. Now, I could have been all pissy this morning. But that would just be exhausting and who has the energy for that?
Instead I wrote (what I hope) what a nice letter to Troy from Y94 and I'm pretty pleased with the dialogue we had.
My facebook message:
I was the gal who called in and jokingly referred to herself as the “token angry feminist” this morning.
Did I like today’s radio topic? No. Did that make me hate you as a person? Of course not. Just wanted to throw that out there. I worked in radio for four year and I know getting crabby callers isn't fun. Just to maybe I could explain it better....
When I hear “jokes” about “what girl’s can’t do” I always want to say SOMETHING. In this instance it was all “in good fun” but women tend to hear all too often (in serious conversations) what they aren’t equipped to do --- I was told (quite seriously) while I worked in radio that I probably wouldn't be around for much longer after they updated all the equipment because "girls can't figure out new technology." So you see, it’s not such a unique, fun topic for some of us … I realize other women may not mind, but I just wanted to voice my opinion that, “Hey, do we have to phrase it this way?” Couldn’t the same basic discussion happen differently?
I mean the way it was “Girls can’t do -----“ just leaves you open for A) tired sexist stereotypes—like the random caller who thought the “answer” was “throw a ball” or B) people like me, who just get frustrated by the question in the first place.
Furthermore, just wanted to say that you won’t pacify many feminists with the “what men can’t do” question. I’m a feminist, not a man hater, Troy! :) Please don’t confuse the two.
I don’t have a radio show, so take anything I say with a grain of salt, but I think you’d get way more interesting answers if you’d ask callers about stereotypes re: men and women. Look at common stereotypes in pop culture –like why on sitcoms is the hot wife always married to the neurotic schlubby guy?
Just wanted to say no hard feelings on my part, if you were feeling like an angry feminist was out to get you. That’s just my two cents on the matter. I’m glad you give the listeners as opportunity to contact you and let you know. It sounds like you and Megan are friends so I realize you weren’t being malicious at all --- just a message from a listener out here that I hope next time you change it up a bit. And don’t let anyone be too hard on the guys tomorrow— that’s no fun either.
He responded:
Tobes, believe me I understand your point. If you were in radio for years, I'm sorry to hear you had a bad experience with some chauvinist. Let me tell you about a lesson I learned at a radio convention once... a very wise programmer named Tom Joyner gave us a lecture that made the point "Know how to get to your listeners emotions".
In other words, make them mad and they'll call. Make them sad and they'll call. Make them happy and they'll call. We do all of that on any given day, and that's how we're able to get the phones to ring.
That was the purpose of our topic this morning. If you've been in radio then you probably know, Megan and I agreed to do this topic before we went on the show. I didn't just spring it on her. Matter of fact, we had a meeting yesterday and decided on it then. Megan understands I didn't mean anything I said this morning. We are friends.
BTW, we've done the "hot girls dating fat/ugly guys" topic before. You must have missed it.
I understand you have a probelm with our topic this morning. Making some woman mad and gettting them to call was the idea. So I guess we got you huh?
I don't know what you do for a living, but if you'd ever be interested in getting back into radio, we're always looking for interns, and we have a hard time finding ones that are opinionated like yourself.
No hard feelings here either. I just think you were taking our topic a little too seriously. You were the only one who called with a serious objection to the topic. The rest of the women who took issue, called and took a shot at me (in a fun way). Your call on the other hand was a little too serious, so we didn't air it.
Hey, not bad. Not bad at all. I feel like I've been heard and I wasn't called a psycho or a bitch. You know -- that's seriously saying something! Often times when you identify as a feminist and are critical of a man, that's what you get. I appreciate this guy's honesty. Radio is about ratings and we all know they could say far worse or shocking things. Plus, I like to think if I was censored for being too serious, they wouldn't air a caller who was too sexist.
Hopefully, we can all poke a little fun at ourselves and if someone raises a critical question, we can respond graciously.
So I'm listening to local Top 40 radio on the way to work today and the early show, "Morning Playhouse with Troy and Megan" is doing their normal shtick -- only today they're talking about how DJ, Megan tried to back up a trailer and ended up screwing up and scratching her car.
Troy decided that this situation should spur the morning's call-in question.... wait for it...
Call in and tell us what girls can't do!
NOooooooooo!
Now I am well aware that morning shows on the radio aren't typically the place for deep conversation, but why go that route? You're just gonna piss off the intelligent people and make the douchebags out there go "heh heh... girls can't be President, just look at Hillary" - or insert other jerkwad sexist comment.
I was intrigued to see what feedback they'd get so when I got to work, I logged on to streaming radio. Some of the calls went like...
Girl's can't: -- give directions (to which Megan replied, "Guys ASK for directions?") -- throw a ball -- please a gay man (to that Troy replied, "Oh yes they can they just buy 'em a Bette Midler CD and some shoes') -- *sigh*
I struggle with this stuff. I do have a sense of humor. When I'm with my close gay friend, I joke with him that he's hit the gay career jackpot because he buys shoes for a international well-known company. When guys friend want to go see some huge explosion-fest movie, I may throw out a joke like "no thanks, I prefer something intelligent vs. a testosterone carnival!" So am I a hypocrite? I don't think so and I'll tell you why. In the company of people who know me and my politics, I feel I can be self-depricating/tease a bit more. And a big part of that is me trusting that if I ever crossed the line with a friend, they'd tell me. EG: "Okay, no more shoe jokes. I like men but that doesn't mean I qualify for every gay stereotype."
Here's the big difference... if I ever had a radio show, I would not use my time to solicit tired, lame, sexist jokes. That's just me.
My fave was when a woman called in and said, "Wow you guys just pissed off half of Fargo."
Amen. Half or Fargo and probably then some... The sexy boyfriend (tm) doesn't like those conversations any more than I do because he knows inevitably it will turn into a stereotype extravaganza of what MEN can't do (for example: ask for directions).
I decided to give a call in to voice my opinion. Shocking! I got through! So I introduced myself and apologized if I sounded like the token 'angry feminist' but I simply wanted to know why they would choose to bother with that topic. It just leaves them open to sexist comments.
Troy informed me, in a slightly UNamused voice that I needed to (wait for it...) lighten up! Obviously he was just joking and kidding with Megan and girls can obviously back up a truck. OBVIOUSLY... OBVIOUSLY...
I told him, quite pleasantly, that I didn't need to lighten up, after all... this really wasn't going to ruin the rest of my day but I thought they could discuss something more interesting/funny/valid. He informed me that tomorrow they would probably discuss "What men can't do." Oh joy. Well that makes it better.
If you want to give either one a message about a topic they COULD discuss next time -- and please make no mistake, I don'twant them receiving hate mail but obviously (OBVIOUSLY) they (more specifically TROY) need some help in coming up with topics...
MTV
