It’s a pleasure to be of service.
From Gill Court
Thanks you Cazz for your series on the UK
riot girl scene. I was only 8 when Riot Grrl arrived here, and have since
found it through the punk scene in my late teens/early twenties. Your articles
have exploded this world for me and given me the chance to dig deeper and
further into the past and present of riot grrl and feminism – for which I am
truly happy.
From Rebecca
im only 16! i came across this article [Subvert the Dominant Pimpiarchy] while writing an essay
about media influences and effects on todays society! this article has reached
out to me in a way icannot describe. it is so true and yet it seems no1 has
realised. thankyou!x
From Anna Moore
Reading Rachel Bell’s article ‘Subvert the Dominant Pimpiarchy‘ I was stuck how refreshing
it was. In the countless broadsheet articles I’ve read on similar issues, the
journalist usually take a distanced tone, reporting rather than reacting to
the often highly disturbing subject they are writing about. Rachel Bell’s
piece is opinionated, angry and demands the reader thinks about what is
happening to these women and children. Her incensed, articulate female voice
is something the mainstream media has managed to suffocate in the last couple
of decades. Hopefully journalists like Rachel will help that change.
From Emma
i read the pimp article and was glad that someone has the same view
points as me. i am only 14 but still feel angry at the fact women are treated
like some sort of toy 2 use and abuse.
From B Smith
Having read the article ‘Rebranding Feminism‘ I was very interested in the idea that
young women today are unaware of what feminism is. While I feel it to be true
that young women, up until a few years ago myself included, are unaware of the
goals of feminism, they are very much aware of the stereotype. I am
17-years-old in my final year of sixth form and, last year, voted the student
most likely to burn their bra. Now, I have nothing against those women who
feel that they have a statement to make by doing such a thing, but I
personally feel disgusted to be stereotyped in such a manner. Why should they
assume that being a feminist makes me desire to burn my underwear?
I have never hidden my feminist opinions (handed down to me by word of
mouth from a much more advanced American friend) and I am not ashamed of them.
However, I found myself being pressured during last year when studying
feminist poetry by Carol Ann Duffy and professing to agree with her on
numerous accounts (mainly that women were entitled to have sex drives – a
shocking opinion as I’m sure you can understand). My entire class – both
female and male – immediatly turned upon me and treated me as though I was the
stereotype that they believed all feminists to be. I was called a man-hater, a
lesbian, a bra-burner and all sorts of things. As it happens, I am a bisexual
woman who is in a very happy relationship with a man and is grateful to her
bra for its support. Although I do not find being termed a lesbian offensive
in itself, I found being stereotyped to be incredibly sickening.
It is my belief, therefore, that women need to be educated that the
stereotype is wrong before they can come to understand the goals of feminism.
This is being slowly achieved through word-of-mouth but more must be done. I
am eternally grateful to websites such as this for providing a wealth of
information to use as a way of introducing my fellow women to feminism. I owe
a lot to the two women who introduced me to feminism and they will forever
hold a special place in my heart for doing so – I hope to do the same for
other people as you are with this site. Thank you.
From Scott Woebcke
I reluctantly watched The Incredibles with young related children. I was
anticipating mindless entertainment and I thought your article was right on
the money. What crap the film is.
From Peter
Re: The
Incredibles: I just saw this movie last night with my six year-old
daughter. This article is an astonishing mischaracterization of the film.
Apparently, the movie you saw isn’t the one I saw. For example, in the part of
the movie where Violet appears with a bow in her hair (the “different is good”
scene”) what your reviewer fails to mention is that in the scene, it is Violet
who takes the initiative, basically asks the boy out, offers to pay, and walks
away while he stands there stuttering. It’s a nice display of female strength
and confidence. Which, by the way, she develps after using her powers and
beating the living shit out of a lot of bad guys.
From Daniel Nava
I would say that your review for The Incredibles is
very close to point. As an American male feminist myself I understand and
agree with most of your points. I just saw the DVD with my 3 year old nephew
the other day.
Perhaps the only thing that is somewhat blown out of proportion is the
woman beating section of the review. He thought Mirage aided in the violent
murder of 75 f his family. Regardless of gender you could probably expect an
emotional physical reaction. (And she should could have told him the family
was alive before letting him out of his restraints especially since her life
was threatened in a previous scene when she was within arms reach). Also you
did omit the fact that Elasti-Girl did witness them imbracing and that was
what inspired the punch in the face. That was a comfirmation that Mirage was
The-Other-Woman.
Good review otherwise. Cheers!
From Merry
I am so glad to read a review of The Incredibles, I couldn’t believe how overtly sexist it
was and that people loved it. To me, the most obvious and irritating point in
the film – The son escapes the guards on the island by actively using his
great speed in an exciting and thrilling chase sequence around the island. And
Violet, the older, smarter (?) teenage girl, escapes danger by…disappearing.
Considering the epidemic of anorexia in the US, isn’t it a bit much to have a
teenage girl superpower be the ability to disappear? Thanks for the review.
From Nobody
Dude you’re really really really really really messed up try watching the
movie a couple more times. Maybe because you’re just one of those wierd people
from uk or something, I dunno I’m from the United States of America. The Incredibles was
a great movie and is entertaining for all ages. I’ve watched it 4 times and
know most of it by heart. Try watching it some more.
From Denise
I don’t know why Holly Combe bothers to write such reams of ponderous
analysis about what is, after all, just another money making venture. “Scarlet” doesn’t
appeal to me any more than “Good Housekeeping” would. Apart from the
pretentious language, even the contributors names sound like something out of
some perma-tan eighties soap. I’m afraid I can’t take it all as seriously as
Holly does.
The fact remains that men’s mags are still all about having fun (or their
idea of it) whereas those directed at women – including the cutting edge (they
wish) Scarlet, remain predictably serious and even more seriously irritating.
I won’t be buying it, she said unnecessarily!
Catherine Redfern, editor of The F-Word, replies
I’ve seen copies of Scarlet, and I honestly don’t think the magazine is
serious; the tone of the magazine is very much about promoting women’s
enjoyment and having fun with sex (whether people think this is feminist or
not is another debate – see the comment from Thalia below, for example).
Holly analysed the mag because, well, I asked her to! Spending time
seriously analysing supposedly “superficial” things, whether they be women’s
magazines, children’s cartoons, tv shows or whatever, is something this site
is committed to doing. By the way, your comment about the contributors’ names
made me chuckle. At least they don’t have names like “Pussy Galore” or “Ben
Dover”! – Editor
From Sarah
Hi Holly, Great article [Scarlet review]. I take it all on board. And sorry about
the Boy Toy pics – we were limited with choice and budget, but will try to get
some teen talent in their for you pronto.
Best wishes, Sarah J Hedley, Scarlet’s Editor-at-Large
From Thalia
Holly Combe perhaps hopes stating the obvious commericalization of female
sexuality may deflect criticisms of Scarlet Mag, but
seriously, why the hell is the pay differences of various prostitutes featured
in a magazine professing to sexual liberation on women’s terms? Women aren’t
the main users of prostitutes and women don’t choose prostitution nearly so
much as poverty, education, sex abusive childhoods and race choose it for
them. I don’t see where Scarlet Mag offers anything this feminist hasn’t seen
in Playboy and Penthouse columns by “feminists” Susie and Tristan already.
Rah rah reviews of prostitution films (porn) aren’t feminist, and frankly
reading them comes off to me like a boxing announcer calling the blows of a
domestic violence scene (“Wasn’t that an effective uppercut…Oh, now he’s
moved onto pulling her hair, nice segue and great form he’s displaying
too”).
To those of us who work with the sex workers not photogenically sexee
enough to make Scarlet’s masturbation photo sets, seeing once again the
commodification of female sexuality, the uncritical near-worship of
prostitution films, and the sheepish lip service to real feminism by a group
of women blatantly seeking a money-making victory by selling lots of magazines
harms the people we’re trying to help. Scarlet Mag may help some women orgasm,
but what does it do for women who want genuine gender equality more than they
want occassional vaginal sneezes? I’m beginning to doubt modern “pro-sex”
feminists will ever get their heads out of their crotches (and in Scarlet’s
case purses) long enough to honestly appraise the situation of women’s global
sex exploitation and their own complicitness in the widespread sexual torture
of others in order for them to get their feminist rocks off.
Holly Combe, editor of The F-Word, replies
Thanks for your comments. I’m glad you at least describe me as a feminist
rather than a “feminist”!
Deflecting criticism of Scarlet was certainly never my intention. I
discussed a number of articles and would say my review did more than simply
state the obvious or pay lip service to feminist concerns about the
commercialisation of female sexuality.
I disagree that the issue of pay differences between prostitutes is
unsuitable for a magazine professing to advocate “sexual liberation on women’s
terms.” Obviously I don’t have your definition of liberation to hand but I’d
guess that (like myself) you see the breaking down of the traditional idea of
sex as something men automatically need and women do as a favour as an
important part of it. However, I would also say that refusing to validate
sex-work is not the best way of addressing this particular challenge. Yes,
prostitution plays a logical role in the traditional set-up but I don’t
believe this oppressive dichotomy is the only reason prostitution exists.
After all, just about anything can be bought or sold and the rights and wrongs
of this are, for me, part of the ongoing debate about capitalism in
general.
In any case, I’m sure you’d agree that people who work in the sex industry
deserve fair treatment and, as far as I’m concerned, open discussion about pay
is one way of securing that.
I find your comparison of porn reviews to the idea of a boxing announcer
“calling the blows of a domestic violence scene” rather baffling. It seems to
suggest that any sex-act performed for a camera and marketed to get people off
immediately becomes an act of violence, regardless of the conditions in which
it took place. One of the problems I have with this particular stance is that
it alienates sex workers (some of whom are happy in their jobs and just want
to be afforded the same rights and respect as any other worker). If we view a
whole industry as abusive by definition, we deny ourselves the opportunity to
examine its problems and push for better ethics within it. It’s vitally
important that magazines like Scarlet get involved in the push for sex
workers’ rights rather than simply cover pornography from the point of view of
the consumer. This is another reason why the look at pay differences seems to
me like a potential step in the right direction.
I’d also like to add that I wouldn’t define myself as “pro-sex.” For me,
this label implies sex is a rigid system you either embrace completely or
reject outright. What happened to trying to change things?
From Lorraine Smith
I was impressed with Holly Combe’s honest and comprehensive review of Scarlet Magazine.
I agree that, although not perfect, the mag is well-meaning and doing well in
a difficult market. I’d rather read Scarlet than some vacuous fashion mag any
day, even if it can’t quite work out whether its feminist or not.
From Rachael Platt
i laughed so much at your article ‘25 burning
questions‘ i have been asked some of those questions by an ex, maybe thats
why he’s an ex! I really wish they had put that on there site, and i would of
loved to see there faces when they recieved that! I AM LOVING THIS SITE!!
From Steve Davies
Re: the essay responding to Nigel
Planer‘s article in the Radio Times, the author says: “But when I read
Nigel’s article I can’t help being reminded of a little boy crying and
stamping his feet because his sister has taken away his little toy. He just
can’t understand his sister’s reasoning, that he’s been playing with it for
ages now and it’s her turn”. Wouldn’t it be nice if brother and sister could
try to share the toy rather than only one of them having it and the other one
getting annoyed?
Kind regards, and let me say your website has made me think a great deal
about “the f word”.
From Christina Sheppard
I noticed your web page while looking for age restrictions on mens magazines
as a local newsagent allowed my 12 year old son to buy Zoo. For the last 6
years I have worked in the community and for the local Uni, delivering courses
to women to help raise confidence and self esteem. One undeniable fact through
my own experience of teaching 100’s of women is that these images and the
pressure to live up to them is a contributing factor to low self esteem and a
lack of positive body image.
From Helen B
Re: Kate Allen’s article “page three-ban it“. I have been searching for somewhere to
vent my frustration about newspapers and magazines on public display
containing images of women posing in a sexually explicit way, so far without
luck. Turning over these offensive publications that are now so “in your face”
in every shop, garage, supermarket etc. is not enough! I am fed up with
feeling that many feminists (pro-pornography) have encouraged women to be
viewed once again as sexual playthings of men in the belief that they are in
control of thier own sexuality! What rot! These women are posing in a way that
men have dictated- men decide who is “worthy” and they are still the pay
masters- rather like pimps.
I thoroughly support the abolition of page three, along with far greater
controls on what is on public display on our supermarket shelves. I don’t want
my ten year old son browsing the shelves for his comic between issues of
Loaded and FHM etc, displaying naked women modestly covering each other’s
nipples. How are children suposed to regard men and women equally when
constantly bombarded with images dipicting women posing in this way for men’s
pleasure? I am pretty sure that if men were to be shown in similar poses, they
would be considered unsuitable for public display. I realise there are many
other important areas of equality that may seem more pressing, but surely the
root cause of inequality lies within our society and is absorbed from very
early ages by our children as normal behaviour. I know it would be termed a
breach of human rights to deny people the right to participate in pornography,
however “soft”, but surely it breaches my human rights to have it in my face
whenever I have to go into a shop that stocks newspapers and magazines when I
don’t want to see it? If there are any organisations which I could join that
support this theory, I would be pleased to hear from them.
The campaigning group Object may be of interest. – Editor
From Pauline Mulligan
As a consequence of the unreal expectations of motherhood, the child
is usually very disappointed in their mother..why isn’t she like the mothers
on the telly, why is she living her own life and not taking care of me(even
though the ‘child’ is now 22 yrs old and unemployed) So lets educate the
children out there..you are responsible for yourself. Mothers stop being so
accommodating..there is a generation of needy whingers out there. Leave home
before its too late.
From Diana J
I read the article on not
getting married and I was impressed. I was married for a year and a half
and it was a huge mistake. I was weak and dependent at the time and now I am a
different person. My boyfriend now has never wanted to get married and people
think there is something wrong with him because he hasn’t been. It is totally
a societal thing to do… and why refrain to society? The only thing I wish I
could redo in my life is to not have gotten married. Thank you for the
article.. it was great!!
From Mel
Your article on The Ethics of Sex Toys was awesome – so educational – alot
to learn from. Thanks. Glad we found it.
From Katie
Re: The Beauty
Myth. that was a really cool article, right now i have to do a 10page
report on the dynamics of media v.s. self worth! i really enjoyed reading this
page… thank you
From Steve Murphy
Well done Lindsay, I totally agree with you that “normal women” were not
fully represented in the programme `hairy Women`. I am a man who loves natural women, I couldnt
think of anything worse than making love to a pubescent like female…its not
natural!!!..give me hair hair and more hair…yipeeee!!!..Hairy women do not
smell and are definately nor dirty I wish more women would give up this silly
idea that smooth is beautiful..its not, its ugly.
From Emily
I really enjoyed Ms Razorblade’s Clearly intelligent and thoughtful
article, ‘Growing Up or Giving In?‘ and completely agree with her
sentiments. I would love to read more unfashionable articles like this one.
From Kathryn (of Sh!)
Re: The Ethics of Sex Toys Hi, the info bout credit card
reciepts from Sh! being emblazened with ‘Women’s Erotic Emporium’ is now out
of date …we’ve been onto our cc people and have got them to change it to
just “Sh! Ltd” … as we believe in both pride AND privacy!!! All the best
From John
Why do you people always assume that because a person objects to being
refered to as a cunt [Taboo For Who?] that they are therefore afraid of it.are
you as a female afraid of cunts because you object to being refered to as
one.People are refered to as arseholes but how many are afraid of them.What i
suggest people are afraid of is being ascibed a fear of something that they
just plainly dislike.I mean they are bascically an ugly smelly drain pipe.Who
would’nt object to that kind of analogy of their person.Please stop telling
people that men are afraid of this and that because it is irritating and it
alienates men from your arguement.
Catherine Redfern, editor of The F-Word, replies
Ugly, smelly drain pipe, huh? Gosh, when you put it like that, it makes you
wonder what on earth our problem was. Who could object to such a healthy,
reasonable perspective as that? – Editor
From Sharon
This is just a comment on sexism in general. I am autistic so i am stupid
but when i can’t do something because of my autism men say it is because i am
female. Even my male teachers have made comments like this. Sexism is not a
joke and autistic people are very sensitive about things like this and i
missed a year off school because i had a nervous breakdown. These people
should get it into their heads that i am autistic because i am autistic-not
because i am female! I would like to see things from the sexist point of view
but i can’t get my head that far up my arse.
Catherine Redfern, editor of The F-Word, replies
Sharon, you don’t sound so stupid to me. – Editor
From Mekanie
hey in response about the richard kern article [Under Your Skin]
I’m a model of him and work with him since 6 years(i began i was 19).Richard
trust in his models like models trust in him.Also,he never try to make you
beautiful(like fashion fotograpfers)ans show to everybody that a woman can be
erotic in every situation.Since i work for him,i feel more confortable,he
gaves me a look on me i never had before because he loves womens,and every
kind of womens.Of course he lives with money from porn,but some womens do the
same,and it’s a fabulous right for a woman to do what she wants with her
body(i make money with my pictures,i don’t need porn to make money so…),i
considere that being a model for richard is feminism.He use us like we use him
to get more self estime.Considere that Roy Stuart and eric kroll are really
using womens like dolls and make bad money with bad pictures,BUT not Richard
Kern,who is a lesbian in a male body. Every people who say the contrary has to
meet him and try….
From dl
Re: Rankin and Bailey: I do giggle at the thought of the
expression on Rankin’s face when he sat down and saw his rather banal and
redundant images juxtaposed with Bailey’s thoughtful and somewhow searching
contributions. I did in fact follow the link to their website, eager to see
some of the images that were so beautifully described by the writer. I can
only say that I think she was excessively kind to Rankin whose lazy and
depthless works lack even the eroticism of Razzle. What better example of just
how dull the western construction of perfection can be.
From Claire
A breath of fresh unadulterated air! I was searching the web trying to find
some answers in regards to my constantly rebounding insecurities about my
‘looks’. And I found this site. Ive never had a problem with stating that Im a
feminist but I now understand that I just lost my way for a while and have
been truly energised by the words and articles on this site. One to be
bookmarked!!!….Thank you
From Emma V
In response to Rachel Bell’s Bridget Jones article… Just to be pedantic, in the books
Bridget isn’t actually ” a bit fat” – whenever she weighs herself she’s around
9 1/2 stone or something, probably the same, or less, than what Renee
Zellwegger weighs in the film. The point is that she THINKS she’s fat, when
she isn’t.
From Jacinta
Re: Bridget Jones: I actually don’t think Bridget Jones is a
“bit fat” I think she’s just a bit anorexic. Because fielding never mentions
her height – is she tall or short? Surely she is not short, otherwise she
would obsess over that too? And her weight is fully in the normal range for a
normal-sized woman, about 9 stone or so. I mean, who isn’t 9 stone? Apart from
Angelina & Halle & co, I mean!
From kk
In response to Rachel Bell’s article on Bridget Jones, who sums the character up beautifully, yes
it is disappointing that Zellweger hasn’t been inspired to go on a crusade to
advocate “normal” sizes amongst the other nipped, tucked and laminated women
of Hollywood, but it isn’t really a cheek-slapping surprise. I find it
somewhat more depressing that such a popular and celebrated notion of
‘everywoman’ is depicted as having flirted her way into a career which she is
of no interest to her (as she is basically an idiot), and who desperately
needs both to settle down with a man and possess a socially acceptable figure
to feel content! It is a shame that these seem to be the celebrated priorities
of “liberated” modern women. As for the comfy knickers her humiliation was
entirely justified! Imagine not wearing a thong and suspenders as daily
attire, a lady must be reminded of her primary function as sex object at all
times! Let us burn down Marks and Spencer’s now, those filthy purveyors of
functional underwear!
From Andrew Bober
It is in the wake of Four Weddings and Notting Hill that Bridget Jones exists. Little more than the sugary edifice
of an Anglo-American product for a semi-core global market who enjoy “art” as
long as it stays close to mainstream. Being “English”, or “British”, is
treated in the same fairytale context which Mary Poppins did for audiences
back in the 60s – failing even to lampoon or remain ironic about this. When
one assumes this as a premise it is extremely easy to ignore the wealth of
other twaddle it wishes to add, afterall the premise is the first port to
despise.
I am sure that it can be argue this film was entertaining to some, and I
would not pretend to bother arguing otherwise. However, it is either a film
which entertains my sensibilities – oddly a marked difference to the first
film in its original intentions – and one which I would not recommend.
Regardless, it is perhaps for this reason we should not necessarily be
overly critical of mainstream form – at least fiercely (which I am not
suggesting Rachel has) – but instead concerning ourselves with art forms which
educate people. Much harder to point the way.
From Jenny Kam
Re: A perfect
delusion. Great article, just goes to show that as with things such as
moral panics etc, social trends concerning men have a way of turning and
twisting to end up being imposed/refected onto women. Again.
From Emily
Thanks for your article on “Make me the
perfect wife“. The writer echoed exactly what I had been thinking. I
couldn’t even sit through a whole epidsode, it upset me so much.
From Vicky
Re: Feminists Are Sexist: i kinda agree with the guys who said
that you should have commented on 1 or 2 of the male sexist ads BUT at the
same time if a man had written that article I’m sure he would have left out
the bits that are sexist towards women.
From Susan
I stumbled across your site about a month ago and I just wanted to write
and say cheers, nice one! At the risk of sounding dramatic, I long seem to
have inhabited an underworld of subervsive, shock horror feminist views which
seem to set me on a totally different planet to most of my friends and family.
Until I found your site I was beginning to not only think I was alone but also
that any hope of a communal ‘third wave’ was long gone.
The piece about getting active in 2005 is perfect and other features are
really spot on – especially the Incredibles one. It really is a lifesaver to know that my
views are shared and that some-one is acting as a coordinator. So thanks for
editing such a cracking website and you may just have inspired me to stop
writing about council tax rises in Surrey and do something more useful
instead! Best Wishes,
From Matt
have you got any copies of zoo issue 6th january please
Catherine Redfern, editor of The F-Word, replies
Hmm…. now let me see….. did I put them with the issues of Ms or with
the Dworkin books? Hm. I’d better have a look and get back to you. – Editor
From Gary
Re: Nuts /
Zoo Weekly Get a life treacle its called light humor lets face it im sure
who ever wrote this artical hasnt got the face to appear in it so stick to
whinging ,,,, two sugars treacle xx
Catherine Redfern, editor of The F-Word, replies
Nuts and Zoo readers really are proving what level they’re on with these
emails, aren’t they? – Editor
From Sarah
Hardcore – I watched
a docu-film last nite on Annabel Chong who took part in a gang-bang with 251
men. It was deeply disturbing, not least to see how little self-love and
respect this young woman had for herself. I realise that this event was dated,
but the issues are not. Yes, it seems to me that the porn industry is
inhabited by the worst scum, who talk about girls as pieces of meat to be
nailed, each one as indispensible as the next. Annabel Chong was trying so
hard to be strong in her life and deal with her earlier rape issues head-on in
what were the most shocking of circumstances and life-choices. She had
attempted naively to promote the view that women were not victims and that our
sex drive is as voracious as mens, by showing us the viewer, her active
involvement in her own victimhood. It turned out that she wasn’t even paid the
$10,000 she was promised for this live gang-bang session, and did not fight
for it, saying she was living life to the full and did not want paying. She
was also quoted as saying that she thought that sex was worth dying for. I
pity her, and for a seemingly intelligent, if very confused, young woman I
hope that she discovers the empowerment she needs on her own terms and finds
out that wanting to prove a point is not nearly as empowering as calm
self-possession.
From Rachael Platt
I have just read the article by kadie armstrong Stand Up For
Equality and i was laughing in agreement with her. I also find myself
cringeing when i see a ‘new’ female stand up comedian, i also are hoping she
doesnt let the side down so to speak, i am willing her to do well and show the
blokes that we are funny too! i have a goofish funny side to my personality
and when i do have one of these episodes in the presence of males i can see
them thinking, ‘ooh a funny bird!’ i believe that this intimidates men, at
first i think they are attracted to it but when the reality hits that i might
be funnier than them they are off, talk about bruised egos!!Anyway i really
enjoyed your article, and will be doing a assignment on ‘Women in… comedy’
for my college coursework and will be sure to mention your name.
From Derek O’Brien
I read your article on female comics [Stand Up For
Equality] with great interest, as it has touched on much of what I’ve
thought as well. My best friend is a comic who does stand up on our local
circuit, albeit as a hobby. She had wanted to do it for years, and has
received much praise for her wit, her charm and stage presence, and her brassy
attitude, and she deserves every bit of that praise. But she’s also facing a
laddish element among many of her fellow comics (and one or two promoters),
most of them twentyish single white males who are less than welcoming. Maybe
not openly condemning her, but in other ways: forgetting to inform her of gig
dates or openings with sketch groups and discussions, ignoring her posts,
being conveniently preoccupied and unavailable to provide support whenever
she’s onstage.
To them, she has much going against her: her sex, age, lack of
availability, non-skinniness, non-blondeness, and her choice to avoid gags
insulting audience members, touching politics or hack subjects like periods
and ex-boyfriends. It seems like comedy has taken steps backward since the 80s
Alternative Renaissance, and ironically many successful comediennes who first
came to prominence then wouldn’t get a second look from these guys. With
further irony, some female comics wishing to remain good with the Clique play
by their rules, too, becoming ladettes and ignoring their fellow
comediennes.
I’ve sat close by for almost a year, her Number One Fan, and have seen
others, men and women with less talent and stage presence doing hack material,
and receiving more praise from this clique than she ever has. I don’t think my
devotion blinkers me, either. She’s not spitting out streams of tired old
one-liners like a soulless machine. But she’s funny. And talented. And
receives applause. And she deserves better from her peers, none of whom she
particularly respects, but, being human, she still desires their approval. It
gets to her at times, leaves her despairing, but tries to shrug it off. I know
there’s nothing I can do but keep encouraging her. But sometimes it doesn’t
seem enough.
From V Parkinson
Re review on King
Arthur film – enjoyed review, but one major error. Lancelot was played by
Ioann Gruffudd, not Orlando Bloom…
Catherine Redfern, editor of The F-Word, replies
Oops! Apologies for the error. – Ed
From John Burridge
As a Kylie fan
myself, I agree with most of what Anna Fioravanti says in her article about
Kylie Minogue. However, Ms Fioravanti does fall into the trap of (possibly
unintentionally) promoting the traditionalist (and arguably partriarchal)
notion of good-woman-versus-bad-woman.
She writes that ‘Newspapers present a very demeaning image of women. They
are painted, more or less, as sluts’. She goes on to say that ‘Kylie is not
presented this way’. ‘Slut’ is a derogatory word (though some feminists have
reclaimed it) used to describe a promiscuous woman. What’s wrong with a woman
being promiscuous? Anna also writes that ‘Kylie’s image is never of an
“object”. Nor of an easy girl. Never offensive’. Again she seems to be
implying that there’s something wrong with a woman readily having sex without
emotional committment. I hope she will reflect on this.
From Mike
Re: Not For Girls, Do you not feel that it is merely an
advertising campaign and designed solely for sales through humour. Being a
male who rarely eats chocolate anyway, i’m not one to make sure that i pick a
“MACHO”, as you put it, chocolate bar. just like i dont pour a can of diet
coke into a glass and add sugar to it so as to avoid bein seen as a cissy. I
do think you need to lighten up a bit. The women have Diamond motor insurance,
with cheaper premiums. Even though an actual test of 15 couples at the
Prodrive test track in Warwickshire in a variety of conditions in the same
vehicle showed a 56 dvantage to the men who took part in the experiment. Let
us have Yorkies. Either that or wait until “Diamond Geezer” motor insurance
starts up and have a nag about that. Thanks for your time.
From Emily Baeza
I think the article on Margaret Thatcher was good, but missed a few points.
Perhaps Thatcher was wrong not to advance the cause of feminism, but she
herself gained little from it personally or professionally, and given her
treatment by her fellow female students at Oxford, one could start to
appreciate why she might have gone it alone.
The more pressing issue might be why women in power only reach such success
following particularly masculine paths and holding rightwing views. Would, one
wonder, Mrs Thatcher have become prime minister following a socialist scheme?
Why is it the Condolezza Rice`s of the world are making it on the back of a
anti-feminist regime? Where are the female socialists of this world? Look at
Mrs Clinton, arguably a woman more than capable of a senior whitehouse
position, (as her election in New York proved) spent years pandering to the
philander Bill, instead of making progress in this world.
In her analysis, Elizabeth Wurtzel does down Maggie in comparison to Hilary
on the fact that Mrs T was of only “average intelligence” I would just like to
point out that someone who graduates with a double first in Chemistry from
Oxford, would not in my opinion be considered such.
It would be wrong to criticize Thatcher`s success for failing to advance
women. We shoot ourselves in the foot if we fail to recognize our own
responsibility for our own success. If anything the problem with the women in
power is that we expect them to be above and beyond what we would of men. It
is another thing for women to feel guilty about, for the failure to aid their
fellow women into power.
From Gemma
I dont think you are right in saying that wearing makeup is the same as
getting breast enlargements. First of all make up can be removed, it is simply
a cover up to enhance an individuals look for that particular day, it can be
changed and more importantly taken off. The same as a hairstyle, this can be
cut, dyed curled etc but it can always be fixed. However, a breast enlargement
carries so many more risks than applying lipstick for example. I agree with
you in the fact that it is used to change how a person looks and to make them
feel happier, and i dont actually think there is anything wrong with that as
it is up to the individual, but it is definatly not the same as applying
lipstick. Surely if this was the case wouldn’t every woman have had an
enlargement by now. We are all aware of the risks of breast enlargements and
how you cant actually go back once you have had it done. Or if that is decided
one would quite clearly be left with scars. I think it is people like yourself
who are making this sort of thing seem normal and acceptable and making more
and more peolpe more self-conscious about there bodies rather than actually
accepting them as they are. We all no that every woman is different and no
woman is ever happy with their bodies, but this is never ending, as you said
its simply a part of who we are. So when these women have had their breasts
enlarged they will then look to the next bad thing thats wrong with them, its
a viscious circle, and its people like yourself who are creating and
encouraing this feeling.
I think this comment may be in response to the article Teenagers and Cosmetic Surgery – Ed
From Phillippa
Hi, discovered your website today, WoW! I’m really impressed. It is
inspiring and enlightening to know there are woman out there putting my
thoughts in to words.
From Roley Stein
Responding to Anne Sandfield’s article on the character of Trinity in the Matrix Reloaded.
I very much enjoyed the article – very thought-provoking. I’ve argued with
(male) friends about these movies because one claimed that the female
characters “might as well be men” because they did not conform to “feminine”
stereotypes of behaviour – he was referring in particular to Switch in the
first movie. The fact that he couldn’t establish whether or not she was
sleeping with the other character played by the Maori actor (sorry, name
escapes me – he was also killed by the traitor) meant, in his view, that her
character might as well be male. Since humans are male unless required for sex
and reproduction, I suppose. I found the character of Switch fascinating
because although marginal she was ambiguous – she wasn’t immediately defined
as someone’s love-interest or partner (as was a bit annoying in the 2nd film
which introduced a number of additional female characters as stay-at-home
girlfriends). I told my male friend that Switch looked perfectly feminine to
me – there she was, being female, contributing to the resistance instead of
being someone’s fucktoy – which seemed to be the only way a woman could
register on this (gay) man’s consciousness. I applauded the first film for
showing women as active, risk-taking human beings; it felt very normal for me
though it seemed to make him uncomfortable to have women portrayed as doing
anything other than having sex and looking after children.
One other point about representations of heterosexual sex in film/tv and
the usual positioning of the woman underneath the man – there was a great
scene in Babylon 5, sci-fi tv series, which showed two characters with a long
standing attraction finally getting together for sex. The scene was short and
necessary, since the sexual connexion between the two powerful telepathic
characters created a sort of psychic shockwave that had implications for the
plot. But what made it memorable for me was that the brief image of the two of
them together showed the female character on top and upright. I don’t know why
the director chose to film it this way (don’t know who directed this episode)
but I really appeciated the fact that she/he did not automatically assign a
submissive, passive position to the powerful female character – and equally,
did not present her as a perverted dominatrix indulging in aberrant sexual
practices which a “normal” (powerless) female would of course refuse. It was
framed as a loving, emotional encounter in which she just happened to be on
top. It really struck me at the time, and has stuck in my memory, because you
just don’t SEE this sort of positioning in mainstream television (unless you
are trying to make a negative point about the sluttish/domineering female
character involved). B5 had some very interesting female characters in it too.
Sci-fi seems, as a genre, much better at pushing the boundaries of
representations of women than practically any other.
From Elena Rowe
I found Nicky Raynor’s article “Sick Of
Celebrity” really warming and reassuring to read. It’s great to get hold
of something you really agree with. As a 16 year old living in a world
surrounded by these hideously glossy magazines, it can be quite stressfull
just looking at them. All the air-brushed models, looking stunning in their
expensive clothes, doused in expensive make-up. It suggests to me perhaps
there should be a sign above the magazine stand flashing *only beautiful
people need apply*, a little extreme I know, but it may prevent a little of
the stress these magazines often seem to cause.