Comments from February 2007

From Rosie

I just wanted to drop a quick e-mail in response to Claire McGowan’s article, Fear Factor. Thank you. Thank you for articulating what I have been struggling to find the words to say in the face of constant media barrages about rape and drunk consent, and the overbearing attitudes of people whose answer to violence against women and the risk of attack is to stay in and be afraid. I think all your articles are excellent, but I found this one particularly empowering and inspiring. I do sometimes wonder if I am just being bloody-minded in maintaining that I have the right to expect to be able to walk home in the dark as I do during the day, but your article reaffirmed to me that this is not the case – it is society’s attitudes that need to change, not mine.

From Helen Watters

Re: Sex and the Music Video: I absolutely agree! This has been something which confronts me every time I go to the gym. I switch on my own mp3 player to try and drown out the garish music associated with these videos and am then treated to what is essentially soft pornography adorning every screen.

If a woman didn’t feel bad when she walked into the gym, she certainly would after half an hour of watching /those/ videos. I joked with an instructor after seeing the Eric Prydz one.. “is that how you conduct your aerobics classes here?” =)

From Helen

Sex and the Music Video: How I agree with Fay Bound Alberti regarding the overly sexual nature of music videos. I recently took my daughter and her friends bowling for her birthday, and above every lane there were large TV screens showing such videos. This was on a Sunday morning and the bowling alley was full of kids, yet the staff thought that such semi-pornographic material was appropriate. Of course we do have a means to object – we can and should complain. I hated doing it, and yes, the staff did look at me as if I was odd, but perhaps now when the next person complains, they are more likely to listen, and if a few more people do then they might actually switch the awful stuff off.

From John

I’m not going to make any complex arguments, but in response to Fay Bound Alberti’s article ‘Sex and the Music Video‘ I will say only this. Please don’t make the mistake of supporting the anti-pornographgy movement. If you do, you will be playing right into the hands of the moral conservatives, even if you think your objections to pornography are very different from theirs.

From Janet Davidson

Sex and the Music Video: Thank you for your article. Music videos have been upsetting me for quite some time as they become more about porn and less about voices and personalities.

I am 43 and have a two and a half year old son who loves music and loves to dance. I have been tempted to turn on music channels for him so he can dance along to the music but am petrified of the kind of videos he will witness and what they will teach him, from such an early age, about what the world thinks of women. Most other people think I’m mad.

I always end up putting on Indian music channels as at least I know the images may be romantic but won’t be pornographic and, funny enough, 70s and 80s nostalgia channels because women were so much more covered up then and the videos were actually more imaginative and creative, albeit with poorer production qualities.

I so wish that my son could grow up and see images of strong interesting women instead of these pathetic puppets.

From Ailish

Sex and the Music Video: I agree with this article. I find uncomfortable watching that kind of content with friends or my brother as it is so sexualised and so one-dimensional and one-sided. Not that I want to see a load of gyrating puppet men or such a limited view of sexual/sensual expression. I’m not airbrushed and perma-tanned and waxed, therefore I’m not sexy? Pthfrth!

From Nicola Griffiths

Sex and the Music Video: Whilst I agree whole-heartedly with the contents of this article, and would pause to congratulate the author on her use of language and presentation of argument, I believe the fundamental issue is one of education. The music industry responds to supply and demand, as do most commercial ventures. In this case I would assume that adolescents make up the higher percentage of consumers. So, are we failing to educate our adolescent sons in respect for the opposite sex, or our adolescent daughters in being able to distinguish between media hyped role models and real life, deserving, role models? Much as the term “celebrity” used to be applicable to persons of achievement it now seems to be applied to persons of notoriety. If the consumer (of ALL age groups) was more discerning then the industry would regulate itself, in the abscence of good parenting/education and falling moral standards what is to be done? The adage of “For evil to triumph it is merely necessary for good men to do nothing” springs to mind. Sadly the fall-out to this generations younger siblings will only be apparent at a much later date and whilst being thankful that my own daughter is of an age to be beyond the peer pressure inducing media grasp, I fear for my grandchildren.

From UltraBeans

Yo wazzup y’all crazy-ass feminizt laydeez! In regards to your recent article title “The Pursuit of Happiness”, you say that you had much trouble empathising with the central character’s struggle as it is all too reminiscent of the struggle that countless women face in their day-to-day lives.

What’s your point exactly? Are you suggesting that men are somehow less than human and therefore are not worthy of sympathy when they encounter hardship? Why do you feminists always have to turn everything into a war of the sexes? Do you honestly think that all men are the enemy and are out to get you in one way or another? From the undercurrent of seething rage that I detect in your writing, it certainly seems that way to me. If I were you, I would try and come to terms with the fact that feminism is nothing but a hate-fueled anti-male philosophy that’s only going to serve to make you angrier and more miserable as the years go by.

Ditch it before it destroys you, else be prepared to die unloved and alone.

From Emma

Just a quick reponse to the review of The Observer’s ‘Woman monthly’ supplement. I 100% agree with all that is discussed in the review, and am glad that somebody else feels the same way about this mag – a magazine

that had the opportunity to bring a refreshing change to the culture of the woman’s magaizne, but failed to do so. I too, was looking forward to the launch of the supplement, being an avid reader of both The Guardian and The Observer, I expected a magazine that echoed the standard of the papers and would be perhaps a little less clothes/relationship/make-up orientated than the ‘off the shelf glossies’. But this was not to be… alas, even The Observer thinks that all women think about/want to read about is clothes, relationships and make up. A missed opportunity, me thinks.

From feminazi

Why Men Suck: And the Women Who Have To: Honey, you are naive as all hell. Just what exactly do you think men have been doing for the last 6000 years? Oh sure I understand it’s hard to cope with reality and most people in general find it easier to pretend men aren’t as bad as the facts would indicate, but girl, come on.

For most of recorded history women have had the legal status of cattle. Didn’t the Council of Nicea hold a vote on whether or not women had souls? And it ended up they DO have souls! By one vote!

What does this tell you? It tells me men suck, they always have sucked, and they always will suck. In the UK, men are 24 times more likely than women to kill or assault another person and 263 times more likely to commit a sexual offence.

Male chimps beat females to keep them from having sex with other males. These are your ancestors, honey. None of this is ever going to stop until women take the blinders off and hold men accountable. Until you’re willing to do that, enjoy your fantasy wherein women are not merely pieces of meat.

Jess McCabe, editor of The F-Word, replies

Both women and men are conditioned by the weight of thousands of years of human history, mostly made up of unremitting subjugation of women by men. But that does not mean that men are innately “bad”, or innately violent.

Feminism seeks to fight such essentialist ideas about women and men.

I suspect that “feminazi” is a troll – otherwise why would s/he use such a ridiculous term to describe themselves? A term coined by right wingers and the uneducated to belittle and willfully misinterpret feminism as being anti-men.

From ND

This is one of the most depressing sites I have ever seen.

From Maggie Wright

How wonderful, really fantastic, to read the article about the New Feminist groups springing up in Universities (Guardian G2, ‘University Challenge’, 9/2/07, which mentions your site). I am a recently-retired sixth-form teacher of 57, and grew dispirited and disillusioned from years of anging on about equality, sexism and general feminist principles to sets of young women and men who would goggle at me as if I was Methuselah. The general attitude was that all had een ‘done and won’ – feminism was something that odd people in the 70s did. Many young omen did not even know when women had got the vote, much less that they’d had to fight for it. ‘Empowerment’ was being able to flash your boobs across the desk at the male student opposite.

I wish I was back in the classroom, if these young women are representative of those coming up now. All power to them! Could they arrange to spread their message into schools and FE olleges? Feminism could even be cool again!

From Josepine Middleton

In response to ‘the new breastfeeding taboo’: I really felt for Cathryn reading this article. She has clearly had an awful breastfeeding experience coupled with conflicting, misinformed or non-existent support and advice from health professionals. As a mum of two I would like however to offer a glimmer of hope. My first daughter was breastfed for just 6 weeks. I found it very painful, exhausting and had little help or support. However, I kept an open mind. This is the thing that sadden’s me about Cathy’s article.

I can appreciate that things did not work out for her this time but that does not mean furture babies need to ‘be on the bottle from day one’. When my second daughter was born I kept an open mind. I did not heap pressure on myself but neither did I assume that breastfeeding would

be a no-go. To start with it DID hurt, it wasn’t especially enjoyable, but I took things one day at a time. I sought specialist help and support from a nearby breastfeeding group and gradually

built up a network of very close and supportive friends. I went on to breastfeed my second daughter for two years. I am not an ‘earth mother’ (although I do have a mooncup!) but I do believe that breastfeeding to be an important feminist issue, for many reasons.

Breastfeeding is something we should be proud of – our body’s ability to completely provide for our babies for at least the first six months of their lives. Formula manufacturers are constantly working to unndermine our capabilities – convincing women that formula milks are just as good as breastmilk – breastfeeding challenges the stereotype of women as consumers and as victims of relentless marketing. Breastfeeding also challenges the notion of breasts as primarily sexual objects – so many women choose not to breastfeed because they are embarrassed by the idea of feeding in public – but why should they be?

Breastfeeding is an important part of our productive and reproductive abilities as women and therefore something which should be celebrated and supported.

From Samara

Re: Marianne Cupit’s excellent article appearance discrimination [Your Face is Your Fortune], the euphemism employers use in job ads is “well-presented”. For “well-presented”, read “young, attractive and perfectly coiffed”. I’m an attractive 24-year-old, but when I was looking for jobs I absolutely refused to apply for anything that required me to be “well-presented”. This was partly because I refuse to allow my suitability to a role and the quality of my work thereafter to be judged on how long I spent straightening my hair in the morning, but mostly because all a man has to do in order to be considered “well-presented” is to wear a nice suit. Standards for women are

absolutely ridiculous and I refuse to be a part of that. Unless one is applying for a job as a model, one’s attractiveness should be irrelevant.

From Sian Nielsen

Your Face is Your Fortune: While I agree with the premise that the trend of workign women being more valued for their looks than their ability is deeply worrying, I wish your writer would do her research. Bathsheba is a farm owner who

persistantly fights to retain control over her own property, marrying first a penniless soldier and then a shephard, a man of a lower class than herself and rejects Boldwood, the landed farmer. Extravagant praise of an idealised beloved is a poetic trope, not one that is particularly common in Keats nor in the Romantic movement, and one specifically criticised by Shakespeare in the sonnets. These are quibbling errors to the broader argument, yet it makes the piece look sloppy and is offputting to someone who knows literature, especially as these errors are in the opening paragraph.

From Mr X

Re: GrrlActivistas: I think what you are saying in here is fairly important, what interested me the most is the Hollyoaks segment, as i am a fan of the show. But i must protest that you seem to think their portrayal of sexual abuse storylines is not acceptable because they have dealt with the crimes as they would be dealt with in reality. The fact that one rapist got away is natural in the world, it’s unfortunate but it happens, you can’t always expect happy endings in soap dramas because

then that would defy the conventions of a drama wouldn’t it? I enjoy watching because of all the general issues it deals with in the country today.

From Tom Payne

Questions about Catherine Redfern’s article “Feminists are sexist”. Hi, I was hoping I could ask you a couple of questions about your article “Feminists are sexist”. I realise you wrote it quite a while ago and are probably sick of talking about it, but there were a couple of

things in the article that I really wanted to ask you about.

I don’t think it is in anyway sexist to complain about adverts that portray women in a demeaning way, but I do think that your article suggests a very scary and far too common view of men who are clearly made very insecure by mainstream gender roles.

The general gist of the piece seems to be that the men who complained to you about ‘hypocritical feminists’ did not really care about sexist portrayals of men in advertising but instead wanted to ‘stop feminist action and thought in its tracks’. From the couple of quotes you supplied I think that is very unlikely – both appeared to feel genuinely threatened by gender roles but were trying to conceal that fact by pretending the issue was only of rhetorical interest to them by starting with the word ‘interestingly’, or claiming they didn’t care about the issue they were writing about. You seemed to buy their cover stories hook line and sinker, which is a

little weird given how obviously transparent they were – surely they wouldn’t have written the email if they didn’t care about the issue!

Neither of the emails you quote actually call for feminist action to be stopped. In fact the impression I got from reading the brief extracts in the article was that both were implicitly suggesting that it be expanded.

Obviously I don’t really know enough about the emails to be sure, but I was more unnerved by your reaction to them, which didn’t seem to seriously consider why men might be frustrated by visible signs of feminist action that has a very narrow focus.

Because mainstream models of masculinity are so limiting any man who feels put under pressure by them can’t say anything because any such complaint would be a sign of weakness – which would be unmasculine! As a result if you ask a man whether he feels put under pressure by the wildly unrealistic body images banded about in advertising that feature men he will say no, even if he does. Here at Sussex Uni we set up an anonymous message board for male gym users as part of a research project. Over 250 students post, and when asked over 90% said they had joined the gym to improve their body image, but of that 90%, 95% said they lied about their goals to their personal trainer when they signed up because they didn’t want to admit that was why they were joined. There were dozens of additions posts by members who mentioned the need to “look like men on TV” and impress women.

If you doubt whether that’s actually anything to worry about you should also know that of those members who said they stuck to their program and went to the gym regularly, 60% said they took steroids or other unapproved performance enhancers.

While you suggest that ‘feminists are not biological determinists’ you appear to be arguing that while women should be liberated from socially and culturally constructed roles, the male equivalent of these roles only let men off the hook for behaving badly and aren’t really doing them much harm. Social and cultural roles are created and perpetuated by women as well as men, and they do a lot more than just make fools of their male victims while simultaneously making excuses for them.

I think that the reason why you received so many ‘feminists are sexist’ emails also explains why your colleague found that people clapped when somebody stood up at her street harassment meeting and said that men suffer street harassment as well as women. It was not because before hand it was an “embarrassing women’s issue” it was because men feel incredibly frustrated that they cannot voice their fears about these issues without being seen as weak, and consequently unmasculine. Focusing solely on women at a meeting about street violence implies that such thing don’t happen to men, or if they do it doesn’t matter, because they are tough enough to take it which only plays along with gender stereotypes of both men and women.

You finish up by saying that the men who find the courage to make these complaints (even if they are done semi-anonymously via email and with a disingenuous disclaimer) are simply ‘too lazy’ to do anything about it themselves. This blatantly sexist comment, which seems to be deliberately perpetuating the gender stereotype that men are idle, is the most worrying part of the article, because it seems to demonstrate that you haven’t even considered the possibility that modern gender roles don’t simply make men look foolish, but actually place massive demands on them concerning how they both behave and look. Again, it seems you haven’t considered that the current cultural climate doesn’t give men any space to voice their concerns about them pressures put of them without humiliating themselves when you suggest that, “If it’s that important to these men, then they should take action themselves”

All of this seems incredibly counterproductive to me. Surely breaking down male gender models would lead to a great improvement of women’s lives everywhere, so why behave as if men have a good deal when it comes to gender stereotyping, or fail to acknowledge just how difficult our culture makes it for men to speak out about these issues? I really find this sort of thing hard to understand because it doesn’t seem to help anybody. Anyway, thank you for reading my email!

Catherine replies

Thanks for your email. I absolutely agree that breaking down male gender models would lead to improvements, and I do not believe that I stated that “men have a good deal when it comes to gender stereotyping”. I stated throughout and at the end of the article that this is a feminist issue (in my view), and linked to feminist sites and mentioned feminist books that have looked at the issue of how sexism affects men. I have also written about how feminism can benefit men (and men need to embrace feminism) in my review of John Stoltenberg’s book “Refusing to be a man“.

To clear up some misconceptions in your comment: I do not believe I said anything “blatantly sexist” or “deliberately perpetuated the gender stereotype that men are idle.” I did not say that all men as a gender are lazy or idle. I was talking about men who attack feminists rather than take action about the issue they claim to be concerned about. In fact I can’t find the statement in my article that you are referring to when you say I was blatantly sexist. I did not even use the word lazy.

You have described a incident involving “focusing solely on women at a meeting about street violence” at which someone stood up and spoke out about men. This is not actually the incident that the article describes. I did not write about such an incident in the article.

At the end of the day, I applaud any man who can see that feminism’s challenging of gender roles is beneficial for everyone (which you appear to do). My argument was that men who claim to be concerned about this issue should not attack feminists but should actually do something about it by joining with feminists and supporting feminism, and taking forward its insights to break down male stereotypes and develop a wider viewpoint on what constitutes “maleness”. The fact these men do attacking feminists proves, in my view, what their intentions really are.

From RG

Every Girl Wants a Stalker: Like the article, im going through the sme thing, pursuing the woman, we had like 15 dates though, then she declares she feels the same for me as i feel for her. 12 hours later she dumps me by text! now im feeling shit and its all i can do not to be the clingy unable to deal with rejection fool that you mentioned. truth is, there are no cleanly defined rules, just a load of make it up as you go along coping mechanisms. i wont stalk her tho, i promise!! Keep up the cool writing.

From Margaretha W

Are You Married? If Not, Why Not? Hi, I really enjoyed this article as my boyfriend and I have also decided that we will never get married, realizing that we don’t believe in marriage. Strength to all the women that get asked 100 million times ‘so when are you two getting married?’

From D.Zaman

Thank you to Isy for the advice on women’s self-defence. Thanks for taking the time to put that info together so selflessly to help other women. It’s much appreciated.

From Edward M. Kelly

Taboo For Who?: Good article about Cunt, but it could and should have gone deeper. Its origin is in Latin – cunnus -, where it was the proper word to use (did you know that ‘vagina’ was Roman soldiers’ slang?); and back to Sanskrit and

Sumerian. It’s from the same root that gives us gynaecology, cuneiform, cow, coney, Welsh cwm (comes full circle back to ‘quim’), and finally gives us ‘Queen’. Spoken lovingly, I think Cunt is the best compliment a man can give a woman.

From M

Recently,in the secret family courts, fathers have been considered as more important than the ordinary,good mothers and dads have been getting custody even of the tiniest of children leaving the moms devastated, on anti-depressants…Child bereavement for a woman who bears those children is the most dreadful thing that can happen to her and women are not given the

right to know, before they get married, what can happen to them. I think that this is the most extreme form of chauvinism (many child experts…are instructed to follow certain “fashion” of “mom or dad more important phase” in court) and women are tricked into surrogacy.

From Nicola Dobiecka

Body Language Speaks Volumes: I found this article very interesting and thought provoking. I have noticed this sense of what is acceptable physical behaviour and felt this both consciously and unconsciously.

I have also received comments of ‘Cheer up love’ and ‘Woah, it might never happen’ when I’ve been walking through a city centre unhappy – both from men (the guy who told me ‘it might never happen’ was not at all grateful to learn that it already had).

I think it’s an important thing to be aware of, something which is so deeply ingrained and unnoticable – most of the time – can very easily not be considered.

Out of interest I noticed the way I sit as I sing in a classical choir and the seating arrangements are such that my section (soprano) is directly opposite the alto section. I get to see how the ladies on the front row all sit. There are some who sit comfortably, with their feet planted solidly on the floor, quite far apart (regardless of whether they are wearing trousers or a skirt) and I’ve often thought, hmm, I should do that (since it’s not advisable to sing whilst sitting with your legs crossed and arms folded). It was something I found incredibly difficult to do.

However, thinking about how I walk and sit with my partner I walk on the side of his non-dominant hand, sit to whichever side is empty. I sleep on my the right side of the bed but then it is my bed (and he is a lovely man and he asked which was my side and slept on the other).

I’m definitely going to try out some ‘stance’ experiments now….

From Nicola Dobiecka

Mind Your Language: I thought that ‘mind your language’ was a great article. I have given my title as Ms for a years. I do it because I don’t like being forced to reveal whether I’m married or single. I think it’s important. I’m surprised I get so many people asking me why I do this and what it actually means.

I’ve always thought language to be incredibly important in many ways and especially with respect to sexism. I’m really glad I’m not alone.

From Sam

Last month, Sam wrote in with a comment about Jessica Bateman’s article on Suicide Girls and “hip” porn. Catherine Redfern responded to Sam’s comment, but Sam wrote back in to complain.

Thanks for publishing my email regarding the “I read Suicide Girls for the articles” essay. However, on the subject of what’s “very unfair”, you wrote:

“To stereotype the piece as a simplistic “yay, all pornography is great!” piece is very unfair.”

I never said it was her conclusion that “all” pornography was great, but your rebuttal only works by distorting what I actually did write, which was summarizing the article as “people like sex, sex is good, nudity is sexy, therefore SUICIDE GIRLS is sexy goodness.”

Changing that to “yay, ALL PORNOGRAPHY is great!” really stinks, Catherine. I was very clear in singling out Suicide Girls.

Catherine Redfern, publisher of The F-Word, replies

You are right, in that sentence you did summarise the article as being overly positive about suicide girls, not all pornography. However, you also went on to discuss attitudes to pornography generally, which I thought gave the impression that the author had stated that all porn is fabaroo. If I distorted your argument I apologise, this was not

intentional. I was annoyed because I did feel that you had also distorted the piece in a rather sarcastic way by saying, I felt rather dismissively, “I was hoping for more insightful feminist analysis from The F Word than the trite “people like sex, sex is good, nudity is sexy, therefore Suicide Girls is sexy goodness.”” I didn’t think that it was fair to belittle the piece by summarising it in just a dismissive way by calling it “trite” and suggesting that it was all about “sexy goodness” (whatever that is!).

From Sam

The conclusion was that Suicide Girls is pornography that’s making a pro-woman step forward, and that’s a conclusion I reject.

Catherine Redfern, publisher of The F-Word, replies

I don’t have a problem with your view at all. As I explained, I did feel you were unfairly dismissive of the piece overall which is why I respond in the way I did.

From Sam

You wrote of redefining the word pornography: “With regards to the last point, if you interpret the statement as “depictions of sexual activity will always exist” then I think that might be more of what the author was meaning.”

Again the disingenuous comparing of cave drawings “depicting sexual activity” with pornography “depicting sexual activity.” Pornography has colonized the definition of sexual depictions to the point all nudity is conceived of as pornography. If the Venus de Milo was anything remotely like Suicide Girls in porny content and male response there would be a lot more classical Greek and Roman art in pornography stores and Playboy would have cross-marketed its brand in museums instead of at the SG site.

Catherine Redfern, publisher of The F-Word, replies

No problemo. I don’t think I said anything to dispute this point of view.

From Sam

The conclusion was that Suicide Girls is ultimately a pornography business good for feminism and womenkind generally that will usher in better things, the same line sex poz feminists have built a sexy reputation on and the same feministing of Suicide Girls every feminist magazine of the past five years (sans off our backs) has done. I still believe the article drawing the same pro-woman pornography business conclusion those magazines did covered nothing that hasn’t been covered many times before in exactly the same way.

Catherine Redfern, publisher of The F-Word, replies

On the point about the article not being innovative enough, well the publications you mentioned, such as off our backs, and presumably Bust and Bitch, which I know have covered the issue, are not widely available in the UK. So, the issues discussed were not necessarily just repeated old arguments that UK feminist readers had heard loads of times before.

Not all our readers are familiar with the latest feminist thinking coming from the US. Many don’t read feminist magazines. So sometimes we may not be totally innovative about certain issues as some of the issues we discuss may have already been covered in US publications.

Also, being run from our bedrooms in our spare time, we are reliant upon what people submit and to a certain extent this will mean that some articles are not 100% innovative or new arguments or discussions. However, personally I feel it is important to nurture and encourage new feminist voices rather than reject their contributions because they

don’t come up with some new kind of feminist theory that has never been discussed before. In fact a lot of our pieces (including the anti-porn / rad fem ones) rely on arguments that have been made by others in the past, and therefore could also be argued to be “not innovative”. However, for the reasons above I still feel it is important to publish them.

From Fanny Blood

Wimbledon introduces equal prize money for women and men – finally: Wimbledon have finally rewarded women with equal prize winnings and the menz are up in arms!!!

From what I have read before on this subject (as Venus Williams has been campaigning for years I think) the women would’ve been happy to play 5 sets but they weren’t allowed. Could this have been because, if they did, it would’ve meant that they deserved MORE prize money than the men for putting their ‘weaker’ bodies through a gruelling 2 more sets?! Oh no, that probably could NEVER have happened could it?!

I’m so happy this disgusting sexism in this tournament has finally been eradicated as Wimbledon is a very respected and famous tournament and thus this is something extremely symbolic within British history.

From Tony Lawless

Hair Today, Gone Tomorrow…: I like Britney more by the day. Now all she has to do is sit in a Montreal hotel room with a bunch of like-minded souls in order to to re-record “Give Peace A Chance”, and I’ll know she’s one of us.

From Rachel Littlejohn

Your Face is Your Fortune: In recent years there has been a marked increase in pressure for men in certain business sectors to maintain high levels of grooming also; perhaps not bridging the gap but reflecting the ways in which everything is subject to commodification in a capitalist economy. I agree that women may face greater disadvantages; especially with regard to age in a world obsessed by youth but there are positive signs too. Take Ségolène Royal’s bid for the French presidential race, or Hilary Clinton’s increasing prominence ahead of her husbands.

From Angela

I read the article on Don’t cha wish pop was more empowering. I found it really powerful. I agree that messages are getting mixed in the media about the female image. I really hope that in the future that things start to change for the better.