From Charlotte
Hello :) I just listened to your podcast, and firstly- keep them
coming, I really enjoyed it! I think it is a really good medium to
discuss some of the issues you covered, I constantly wished I could
butt in and make a point!
I wanted to just mention one of the issues you raised in the second
podcast, specifically about female body hair.
I have not shaved my legs for the past 3 years- I remember, one day,
I just suddenly realised how I view it now- utterly monotonous and
pointless. As a result, now, I get my legs waxed about every 3
months, at the most. I actually spent about 9 months, maybe more,
where I didn’t touch them at all.
I don’t often wear skirts when I can avoid it (simply due to personal
preference), but occasionally I had to, meaning my legs were on
display. I recall many of you said that you were too scared of having
‘negative reactions’ to your legs- I in fact found that I was
relatively hassle-free. A couple of women made positive comments to
me about it in fact! I got the odd funny look from a few people, but
nothing more.
Interestingly enough, I found that the people who were most bothered
about my legs were in fact women! My boyfriend was entirely
nonplussed about it, my male friends were not that bothered, a couple
made jokes about it, but all the actively negative comments I ever got
were from female acquaintances. I found this very interesting- not
what I had expected. But my view is that this is because it is
particularly ingrained in the female psyche that there is some
‘objective beauty’, and it does not include hair- after all, it is
us, not men, who are the ones who are targeted with all the
‘anti-hair’ marketing. Gilette? Immac? You have blood on your hands.
Grr.
What are your thoughts on this?
Anyway- I just wanted to say, keep up the good work, make another
podcast, and I hope (perhaps in vain) that I have added something to
this discussion :)
From Lorna Gregory
I listened to your podcast and the discussion about women with hairy
legs and armpits.
I am a women with hairy legs and armpits, I stopped shaving when I
was 20.
In some ways for me it was a way of reclaiming my body as my own. Not
shaving my legs allowed me to rebel against what mainstream society
thought my body should be.
To this day my hairy legs and armpits are the one thing about my body
I like and I can feel are truly my own. they are the one part of my
body that doesn’t feel like a battle ground, I have claimed them and
won.
I do get nasty comments from people, mainly women (especially teenage
girls) and sometimes I am tempted to shave because of this(and for the
first year I did shave my legs from time to time), but in the last 2
years or so I have resisted the temptation and I feel happier for
this.
I do not think women who shave their legs are being ‘unfeminist’,
after all this about being able to make your own personal choice.
Feminism allows me to not shave my legs but I wouldn’t want it to
dictate what I should do with my body.
Thanks for the podcast, I enjoyed it.
From Joanna
Hi, I have just listened to your podcast, and I wanted to say how much
I enjoyed it and I hope you continue to do them. Although I love
reading feminist sites, it was even better to hear a discussion. I
look forward to joining a feminist group soon so I can get involved
too. Reading is great, but discussion is essential – there are so
many complex issues that can make more sense when you talk them
through. Keep up the good work!
From Irina
Re: Yummy-mummy or pramface?: Yes, i agree with the author, all that attention to how quickly a
celebrity looses post-pregnancy weight and becomes pert again is
ridiculous and misleading. I also think all that army of celebrity
body-keepers wraps it up as a feminist desire not to let your body
suffer as a result of pregnancy, or wish not to sacrifice your body
and youth for motherhood. In a way, a good idea, but not in the way
they do it. It is too much strain and stress for celebrities, and if
they were not always under the public beady eye, I am sure, they
wouldn’t sweat it so much.
I think thinking women should just ignore celeb mags, then it will be
less pressure. Just don’t read it. Because otherwise , yes, you will
no longer be able to live without that bag or this newest pram which
costs an amount of somebody’s holiday. Out of sight, out of mind, I’d
say.
But I also cannot agree with the author that I see other women I know
who are under pressure of perfect anything – body, childcare etc. No,
those women I know, who are mothers, don’t live as if they take each
tip from Heat magazine for guidance. These are quite middle class
educated professional women and they don’t have the dream life of
yummy mummies.
Actually, even looking at them, at people who were not poor to begin
with and who had kids, i see that i don’t want such lifestyle, not in
a million years. I definitely prefer “expensive white wine/better
holiday” variety.
I sometimes think that celeb mags make such a cult out of motherhood
in a sly propadandist way. Of course, if they wrote about grim
reality of it, who in their right mind would want to have children?
But if you portray it as if it’s an attractive lifestyle, then it is
a) pleasant to read about and b) someone may not even bother to get
that morning-after pill they initially thought of. So I see why they
do it and I see why we shouldn’t give a toss about it.
From Gayle
Re: I did it my way: I wholeheartedly identified with the author of the above article. At
33, unmarried and childless, I am continuously having to justify my
life choices to family, friends and colleagues. I have never felt
the least desire to get married or have children – I am very
independent-minded and happy to be single. Everyone around me,
however, assumes I am hiding my despair at not being part of a couple
beneath my cheery disposition, “Don’t worry, he’s out there” “You’ll
meet the right one someday”‘ they tell me. Thanks but I couldn’t
care less. I would rather focus on returning to post-grad education
to further my career which I plan to do this year. I date but I
don’t want to be in a serious relationship – why can’t people accept
this? My very worst experience was regarding the issue of not
wanting children. I returned to my local clinic to renew my
prescription for the contraceptive pill and I had some questions
about sterilisation as perhaps a future option. The (female) doctor
looked over my notes and commented that I had been on the pill for
some time and asked me my age (29 at the time). She then refused to
even discuss sterilisation (“It was ridiculous that a woman of my age
who hadn’t had children would even think about such a thing”) and
proceeded to harangue me about not wanting children. My
protestations were waved away and I was told “You must think
seriously about it now. You are not getting any younger and you may
leave it too late” and “Your partner may leave you for someone who
will have his children” etc etc. After 10 mins of this browbeating,
I left in a state of shock and actually burst into tears on the way
home. What I should have done was report the doctor for her
attitude. Why should women be practically forced into making life
decisions based on what society expects rather than what makes them
happy? Anyway, this was a great article, which I suspect will
continue to be relevant for a long time to come.
From Luna
I wish to thank you for writing such a wonderful article, which I
would like to decribe as a piece of art! Just like a creative artist
who cares only about his/her vision without succumbing to world’s
expectations, you wrote this article straight from your heart!
I faced a similar situation many times in my life as well, and I
daresay, so have many women. But what truly defines you is your
ability to prove to yourself, above all, that your life is meant to
be run by you alone, on your own values, and not on society’s norms.
It feels good to read another woman’s thoughts on this issue!
Rock on!
From Janine
thanks Emma for your thoughts on being single and living
independently. I really needed validating today for this is how I
live my live. Sometimes I can’t find role models who emulate this
single existence and I have felt like I am not normal. I am very
normal and I want to resist the pressures to be “normal,”. I love
being single and being able to do things and make my own choices in
the world. Thanks for writing this artile.
From Michelle Wright
Great article, with a really important message to get across. Women
today are still expected to get a man and settle down; it may be more
acceptable for women to delay marriage and motherhood for their
careers/independence, but it is still largely assumed that eventually
a woman will want/should settle down.
Like Emma, the idea of spending 50-odd years with the same person
fills me with dread. I don’t think that’s being selfish; in fact the
accusation that those women who shun relationships for autonomy are
selfish is just another manifestation of the feminine stereotype-
that women should be selfless and give themselves to others, never
mind what they actually want for themselves.
From Laura Woods
I just wanted to thank Emma Hadfield for her article on choosing to
remain unmarried and child-free. I am 23 and have known for many
years that I did not want children, and couldn’t see myself getting
married. No one believes me when I say this, people insist on telling
me that i’ll change my mind when I get older. Sometimes I find it
easier to just say “yeah, maybe…” and leave it at that, other times
I stand my ground. If I do stand my ground people tend to get angry.
I’ve got no idea why: I don’t really see what my choices about my
life have to do with anyone else.
The other day I was talking to my mum about a friends wedding, and I
started a sentence with “If I ever get married…”. That was as far
as I got before my mum cut in with “What do you mean “if”, of course
you’ll get married!”. I think she thought I meant it in a
self-pitying way, as in “if I ever find a man who wants to marry me”.
I explained to her that I didn’t mean that, that I’d said “if” because
I didn’t know if I ever wanted to get married, and that I didn’t think
it was really necessary. She left it at that but I’m not sure she
really understood.
Anyway, sorry for the long-winded comment! It’s so refreshing to hear
someone who doesn’t feel the need to apologise for making a choice
about her personal life.
From ingenious paradox
Just like to say that as a woman who has *always* wanted children, I
am fully in support of those women who don’t! (For one thing, it
leaves all the more room for us…)
From Irina
First, I think 28 is too early even to think, even in a sad,
“emotional” drunken state, that one will end up alone. So many things
will happen!
Second, reading the bit of the article, where the author says that a
certain stage in relationship, if you haven’t broken up by then,
requires “tolerance and sacrifice”, I just want to say: if life with
a bloke is not better, more fun, more interesting, with more
opportunities, with more learning new things, than a life on your
own, don’t live with him. The whole point of relationship, in my
view, is that it HAD to be better than living alone. If not, what’s
the bloody point?!
Especially if you are not hung up on having kids. I think not wanting
kids makes a woman freer, in that she doen’t so much depend on finding
Mr Right as the one who desperately dreams about a family. So, Emma is
in a better situation here.
I also cannot see any attraction in having a “normal family”,
although I am happily married now for 9 years. I haven’t seen all I
want to see, haven’t read all I want to read, there always be
restaraunts, conserts i want to go, so I prefer to spend my money and
time on other things, and not kids. Some couples can do a bit of
camping here and there on a cheap and then declare that they “have
seen it all” in a bit of a “tick that” mood and then proceed to
having kids as if to say: “and NOW we are havning a proper meaningful
adult life”, but I just know that it is not my style.
So, overall, not being worked up in a lather about having abloke and
children, like Emma says, is a good thing. Surely in this life there
are far too many other things that you cannot help worrying about.
From Louise Livesey
Samara – your article on the ‘Vagina Institute’ was fab. Thank-you! Just as a side question out of morbid curiosity – are you meant to
peel the banana before the banana test? If so how do you prevent it
mushing up during entry to the vagina? Surely you can only do this
if you have a large vaginal opening therefore defeating the purposed
point of the test? Inquiring minds (well alright, a feminism with a
sense of logic better than the ‘Vagina Institute’) want to know!
Samara Ginsberg, author of the article, replies
You’re definitely supposed to peel the banana first! I am assuming that the
“test” has to be conducted when one is in, um, an aroused state, otherwise
there’s no way you’d be able to shove it in, surely? They don’t, however, give
you any tips on how you’re supposed to get the bits of banana out after
you’ve successfully masticated them, which is what I was concerned about.
Surely it can’t be good for you, having fruit stuck down there? I wouldn’t
be surprised if it’s not possible anyway, unless you’re one of those
prostitutes that can fire ping pong balls out of your chuff – probably just
another thing they put in to make women feel that they’re in need of the
“services” on offer. Perhaps it’s the vaginal equivalent of the “pencil
test”, which as far as I can make out must be “failed” by anyone above an A
cup. This is bullshit, have a laugh about it, and don’t stick anything down
there that wasn’t designed for that purpose.
From Aurélien Selle
Excellent review! Thanks.
From Claire
In response to the article “Hey honey, your vagina needs a mint!” I’d
just like to say well done for the article and that while I’m
saddened about the Vagina Institute’s existence, I’m not at all
surprised.
When I first started having sex (aged 16) I never even thought about
what my vagina looked like and whether or not it was ‘attractive’ or
‘feminine’. It just worked. And I had a happy enough sex life for
many years before one of my boyfriends – when I was 22 – complained
that it was too hairy. I was shocked and appalled, and a little hurt
too. What had it ever done to him except give him pleasure? The
ungrateful sod.
That particular boyfriend, as it turned out, was quite partial to
porn. Go figure. In fact I blame the infiltration of porn imagery
into mainstream culture for the whole rise of vaginal aesthetics. For
some reason, women’s magazines seem to have suddenly decided that porn
is just so damn cool that a woman simply has to be eeny weeny and bare
down there, or she’s letting the side down. I read an article recently
advising women on how to get the charmingly-named ‘porno-perfect
pussy’. Everywhere you look it’s ‘Brazilian’ this and ‘Hollywood’
that. Sex & The City had an episode where the characters gushed about
bare fannies, and Carrie wouldn’t have sex without being waxed first.
There’s so much judgement about vaginal ‘standards’ now that there’s
no wonder anxious women log onto websites such as The Vagina
Institute.
I’ve not been immune to this growing social pressure and it makes me
angry to think that I suddenly have a problem with my own bits, to
the point where I’d feel self conscious about getting down to it with
a new lover. I long for the days when I was 16 and didn’t give a shit.
But despite this I have not succumbed to the razor, the wax strip or
any dodgy potion designed to ‘pretty up’ my lady garden. And I think
articles such as this one, highlighting the extreme stupidity of
judging your poor vagina like it was in Miss World (“and this fanny
has failed the swimsuit round for a noticeable pant moustache!”),
should be all over the mainstream media to counteract this miserable
and self-esteem bashing trend.
From Verde
It is both interesting and disappointing that this article didn’t
deconstruct the notion of ‘femininity’.
Femininity is not the quality of being biologically female, but the
quality of conforming to various socio-cultural constructs of what it
is to be female.
The author’s closing comment “Where I come from, in order to be
feminine all you need is two X chromosomes” reveals the general
ignorance about femininity. As femininity is a socio-cultural
construct, being in possession of two X chromosomes is neither here
nor there, as I suspect many feminine women who have been through the
process of gender reassignment, and who have XY chromosomes, would
attest to.
Feminism is done for if feminist writers are unable to broaden their
horizons, stretch their intellects and examine the language and
constructs which shape our society.
From Beth Speake
I agree with Laurie’s article regarding the absurdity of the ‘debate’
around size zero. Magazines suddenly deciding that they will
scrutinize women for being too thin instead of too fat have no
honourable intentions of broadening the spectrum of what is
considered attractive, only selling more copies of their magazines.
It also massively misinterprets the serious problem of eating
disorders, whilst subjecting people like my sister, anorexic for over
5 years, to the notion that she has chosen to starve herself in order
to get to a ‘size zero’ as pictured on the front cover of thousands
of magazines.
From Sarah
Good article and a topic still very much in need of discussion,
although I have to say I do disagree with many points. I think in
many ways the lines between eating disorders and extreme diets are
becoming blurred as to be virtually indistinguishable – looking at
society it now seems as if nearly all women suffer from eating
disorders in some form or other.. To consciously restrict calorie
intake when one is not overweight is surely deeply harmful to one’s
psychological well being – and yet it seems for women today, this is
considered the norm. Indeed, how does one go about labelling one
person, lets say Victoria Beckam, as just being obsessed with
dieting, and another as suffering from ‘a far more complex
psychological disorder, often stemming from deep, long-standing
self-esteem issues and triggered by specific personal trauma’? Surely
to severely restrict one’s food intake to the extent that collar bones
jut out and that one feels dizzy from eating only lettuce all day is
in itself a psychological disorder, whether it stems from sheer
obsession with one’s appearance or from personal trauma? I don’t
think that one can completely separate and disassociate a clinically
diagnosed eating disorder with what most women in our society
experience on a daily basis – that is, obsession with weight, caused
by exposure to a media that presents us with these fake ideals.
You point out that 10% of those suffering from eating disorders are
men – yet that’s still a whopping 90% that are women – why should
this be? Is it just pure coincidence that probably around 90% of
advertising campaigns use women’s bodies to sell products.. It is a
fact as far as I’m aware, that eating disorders do not really exist
in other cultures that do not hold up thinness as a physical ideal.
And the media-driven, sexist culture that we are part of affects all
women, which is why I think so many women do suffer from these
disorders. To me, the image of ‘Angela’ swanning around Harvey Nicks
and starving herself is every bit as real – and every bit as tragic
as those who are being treated for diagnosed eating disorders.
From Rachel Littlejohn
It could also be argued that by focusing on women’s bodies; the mass
media ensure that we’re sufficiently distracted not to challenge more
political inequalities.
From Connie
I was really glad to read your recent article about the ‘size-zero’
frenzy currently doing the rounds in the media. It has bothered me
for some time that I hear ignorant statements about eating disorders
during ‘debates’ about the perceived problem, all of them overlooking
the fact that eating disorders are mental illnesses. One does not
become an anorexic by looking at a few too many pictures of Nicole
Richie, although the way ‘size-zero’ has been spun this seems to be
actually believed by many. So once again the seriousness of these
illnesses is belittled constantly by the media, turning all sufferers
into silly little girls with an over-zealous interest in fashion and
celebrity.
From Anna
In response to Laurie Penny’s Size Zero article: Thank you for going
some way towards explaining that “Size Zero” is not the point.
Unfortunately the start of the article is somewhat confusing. In the
fourth paragraph the writer states that “a UK women’s dress size
four” indicates “a body-mass index typical of a severely underweight
young woman”. Rubbish! At 163cm tall I have a BMI of 19.5 (rated as
normal, although as a healthy caucasian it seems I am anomilous
according to statistics quoted in the article) and typically wear a
UK size 6 although more and more often have to opt for UK size 4 when
the 6 is too big. For shorter women (and there are a lot in the UK,
average height according to a 2004 survey by the NHS of women over 16
in the UK is 161.4 cm) wearing a UK size 4 does not indicate the
wearer is at all underweight, they are simply “small” all over. The
writer seems here to have become mixed up between actual clothes
sizing and BMI (a figure describing ratio of height to weight).
UK clothes are getting bigger! I have a collection of vintage dresses
which all fit on me and range up to a UK size 14 (Marks and Spencer
’60s). I have neither lost or gained weight in the past 8 years but
have gone from buying new clothes in a size 8 or 10 to a size 4 or 6.
Of course if I were to fit in these clothes and was tall enough to be
considered as a fashion model (most agencies state their lower cut
off point for women at 173cm) I would have to be proportionately a
lot thinner and thus probably be unhealthy, but the article does not
seem to be written about models but about the general population.
Wearing “Size Zero” is not in itself an indication of a problem with
the wearer, it is an indication of the ridiculous fact that year by
year standard clothes sizes are getting bigger in order to flatter
fatter generations.
Angela, the fictional woman who opens the article, seems to have no
problem in finding clothes to fit her little frame. I’d like to be
able to afford to shop where she does. It has become increasingly
difficult for me to find clothes which fit properly as many shops
don’t stock sizes below 8 or 10. Of course I am lucky enough to be
able to avoid VAT and buy childrens clothes in some cases, but these
are not designed to navigate a woman’s curves so items such as jeans
and dresses are out of the question and I spend a lot of time putting
darts into shirts. George at Asda and Topshop are two of the few shops
I can frequently find clothes in a size 4 and I am relieved to be able
to find them.
UK size 4 is (limitedly) available not in order to exasserbate eating
disorders but because some people are smaller than others and because
the UK market has had to make room for an expanding population.
Laurie Penny, author of the article, replies
I understand you point all to well, being myself a UK size 6-4 who has trouble finding clothes! I myself wear a ‘Size Zero’ when I can find it in the shops. I, too, am ‘simply small all over’ (at 4ft 11!), and I am more than aware that body mass index and dress size have little to do with one another. Occasional frustrated shopping trips aside, however, this has never been much of an issue for me – if anything, it stops me spending my student loan on unnecessary clothes!
My very point was that ‘Size Zero’ a hugely misleading term. Of course not everyone who is ‘size zero’ is unhealthy, in the same way that not everyone who has an eating disorder is a ‘Size Zero’, or even ‘underweight’. This article was intended to shed light on some of the dangerous and untrue stereotypes about eating disorders that have been circulating in the media in recent months.
Finally, it should be clear that ‘Angela’ is an imaginary character – the expensive shops in which she spends time and money were specifically chosen to remind readers of the fallacy of the stereotype which associates eating disorders, anorexia in particular, with frippery, fashion-consciousness and excessive self-indulgence.
From Romilly
About bloody time – someone talking sense!
As someone who used to suffer from anorexia, it was spot on. Eating
disorders are terribly destructive both physically and mentally – I
wasted so much valuable time obsessing about food and being thin –
the nation’s current obsession (i.e. more that usual) with extreme
thinness is just depressing. Women amount to more than their jean
size – that’s the message we should be hammering home to our
friends, lovers, sisters and daughters. Thanks for the great article.
From Rhiannon
Re: Why replication isn’t subversion: Louise Livesey says in her article on t-shirt slogans that she
“absolutely reserve[s] the right for feminists to contextually
subvert the patriarchal meanings of these t-shirt slogans in their
own way.” I’d like to invite her (or others) to suggest contexts in
which the slogans she discusses (e.g. “No time to fuck”) would be
read as subversive and feminist. For example, is a power-dressed
businesswoman on the Tube wearing a blouse which says ‘no time to
fuck’ feminist (because she is taking control of her own life and
holding down a respectable job, and has broken away from being a
sexual object) or is it a cruel reminder of the fact that in order to
succeed in the ‘man’s world’ of the City she must give up her
sexuality, which would not be demanded of a man in that position?
From Catherine
I completely agree with you. Nothing makes me angrier than the
so-called “ironic” embracing of offensive terms, images, themes. To
me, an “ironic” or “tongue-in-cheek” video clip featuring 50 women in
string bikinis is still offensive. unless there is an added message
to make it clear, how does it stop being offensive simply because the
creator calls it ironic?
Same goes for these t-shirts, as far as I’m concerned. And in my
experience, a hell of a lot of people dont even get/detect irony,
even when someone else might think its blindingly obvious. when a guy
sees a woman wearing a t-shirt saying NOBODY KNOWS I’M A LESBIAN, I
bet my life that he isnt thinking “wow, there’s a subversive feminist
over there”. its laughable.
I suspect that one possible reason you have had no further reply from
those posters is that their argument doesnt stand up to even the
slightest scrutiny, so the discussion has run its course.
Anyway, thanks for a good article. My only critique would be that it
isnt worded strongly enough – ha ha!
Myabe I’m just too angry???
From Helen
Re: Girls play violent games too: With regard to the post “Girls play violent video games too”, there
was recently a couple of very interesting articles about violent
video games in the 21st April edition of the New Scientist. These
indicated that scientific evidence for a link between media violence
and aggression is very strong: “Meta analysis shows that the
statistical correlation between exposure to media violence and
aggression is not quite as strong as that linking smoking to an
increased risk of lung cancer. It is, however, double the strength of
the correlation between passive smoking and lung cancer, twice as
strong as the link between condom use and reduction in risk of
catching HIV, about three times the strength of the idea that calcium
increases bone strength, and more than three times as strong as the
correlation between time spent doing homework and academic
achievement”. Worth a read.
The main article also contains this interesting snippet: “Jonathon
Roberts of Virginia Polytechnic Institute found that women, who
usually fare worse than men at spatial rotation tests, improve when
exposed to 3D video games (whereas men did not) to the point where
the sex difference disappears”. I found this interesting, since it
implies that women are less good at spatial skills because the roles
we typically perform in society mean that we are less practised at
these skills, rather than any innate difference in ability between
men and women. Presumably the same applies to men and communication
skills.
From Helen
Re: We all want an alpha-male, apparently…: I enjoyed Abby O’Reilly’s post “We all want an alpha male apparently”.
I happen to find physically powerful men attractive, but not for the
reasons that Daniel Miessler suggests. I like them because they look
fit, healthy and cuddly, and I also like the way they can be used to
loom threateningly behind me when I go into shops to complain about
things. I do however also like them to be kind, sympathetic and nice
to talk to. In short, if I am honest, I want a sexually attractive
man who will be nice to me, and if required, protect me and my
children. It is this last point I think, where men like Daniel
Miessler get confused, thinking women such as me like men who are
bastards. I might like a man who is a bastard TO OTHER MEN, but only
if he was always nice to me. If he was aggressive and nasty TO ME,
then he would be completely pointless, wholly undesirable and left
well alone. Fortunately, in my experience, lots of men do exist who
are in fact aggressive and critical of other men, but very kind to
women. They are lovely.
From Damon
Re: Things not to do if you have breasts #2: I don’t think it is necessarily wrong to request that a woman with
her breasts (cleavage) exposed either covers up or relocates to a
different area of the bus outside the vision of the male driver. I
think yelling down the aisle barking commands was the wrong way to go
about it, he should have been discreet.
What we have to take into consideration, is that men do get
distracted by breasts, thongs, mid riffs, etc. It is a biological
response. I’m not suggesting that men totally lose control, but they
do lose some control, hence their loss of ability to concentrate.
To be blunt, if this man was feeling particularly horny, then he is
much more likely to be distracted by exposed breasts. It is a
perfectly legitimate request for the man to ask (politely and
discreetly) for the woman to be considerate.
Yes, women should be able to wear whatever they want, but in some
instances a degree of modesty is necessary. The male bus driver is
responsible for the lives of his passengers. He made the right call,
but went the wrong way about it.
From Edward
The bus driver was in the right. The woman may have gotten
humiliated, but at the price of a decreased risk to the other
passengers. It is not his fault he got distracted, he is only male,
and he went about the appropriate actions to solve his distractions.
Maybe the woman will think twice before walking about with her titties
practically hanging out now.
Lynne Miles, author of the blog post, replies
Thanks for your incisive comments, Edward.
That’s a very low opinion of men you have there. And they say feminists are the man-haters?
From Anni Wilson
Re: Loose Women: In response to your comments about ITV’s Loosewomen TV show.. well
said, I totally agree! The first time I watched LW I felt embarrassed
to be female. It’s like the TV equivalent of the Jeremy Vine show –
“How would you feel if a known paedophile lived in your street?..
Ring us on…” – style of journalism.
The only person on the LW show who is anything approaching normal is
Carol McGiffin. Often mocked by the other presenters as depressing,
confrontational, extremist (?) and straight-talking because she
doesn’t fit into their perception of how a woman in her 40s should
behave (no steady man, no kids, going out socialising and enjoying
herself, god forbid). Give Carol her own grumpy old woman show, I
reckon!
The other presenters are tokens of everything people dislike about
stereotypical women, totally “not in my back yard”, closed-minded
Daily Mail readers. It’s almost a comedy, and I’m waiting for it to
be parodied on an alternative comedy show. Sadly it’s far from
entertainment as daytime fodder for the long-term unemployed.
From Rei
Regarding article on ‘Loosen Women’, a brilliant critique of one of
the most irritating programmes ever to stain our screens. Nailbombing
it too good for them (especially Carol McGiffon).
From pip lewis
Re: Lifting the veil on mothers and daughters: Lifting the veil on mother and daughters
It was so good to read this article,it is a crucial issue that is so
neglected in our lives as women.It would be amazing to see this
thinking developed into a book.
From leanne pucik
Re: A bride by any other name: i have just read eleanor taylor speaking about name changes in
marriage, i have always said i wanted to keep my own name if i were
to get married and when i have mentioned this to anyone i have had a
similar reaction, some even think it is selfish. it is the couples
choice not everyone elses
From Marie
It’s so refreshing to hear a new view on this subject. It is
something I have felt strongly about all my life.
My surname is a common one, but it is my name, one I have had all my
life, the one I have registered academic, personal and work triumphs
against. I struggle with the idea that just because I have found the
man with whom I wish to spend the rest of my life, that I should
automatically take his name.
It’s a tricky situation – take hers, take his, take both, take
neither – made worse by the fact that there is a weight of societal
expectation on all of us to do what everyone else does.
For me, the name should be a symbol of a union, which is why I would
prefer both parties to take a new double barrelled name. This would
represent both the union and the dual heritage of both children.
Whatever my children do after that is their call. As you say, my
name, my choice.
The sad thing is that I am not at all sure that this will ever come
to pass. I imagine there is a fairly small band of men in this world
who would take such an open minded approach and decide it jointly as
you and your husband did. I live in hope that their numbers
expand…
From Bob
Re: Rape – is it our fault?: It seems to me that sentiments such as ‘the woman is never to blame
for being raped’ stem from a belief that women should be able to live
their lives free from personal responsibility or are held to lower
standards of responsible behaviour than are others.
[From the article] “Does a woman drinking alcohol, maybe becoming
drunk, make a man or for that matter another woman attack her?”
Being drunk decreases her ability to defend herself and will cause
potential assailants to identify her as an easy target and be more
likely to make an attempt at attacking or raping her.
[From article] “It incenses me that women are still being told to act
appropriately in order to reduce the risks of being assaulted.”
Being told to act in a responsible manner to reduce danger to
yourself is common and accepted in almost every situation imaginable.
I can’t understand how anyone could feel incensed by this. Why is such
a suggestion unreasonable – why are women not expected to safeguard
their own personal safety? Do you have a similar reaction to
suggestions relating to other situations, such as that people avoid
injury and loss by not driving while drunk and leaving their
valuables unattended, or is it specifically because ‘rape’ is the
topic?
From article] “So are women to blame? Of course not! There is never
an excuse for violence.”
I wish to point out that I believe and understand that when someone
is raped, whether they were drunk and what they were wearing and so
on are irrelevant, it’s still rape, the rapist is the one choosing to
rape and the rapist should be prosecuted.
I also understand that this is an imperfect world – it is one in
which if you do something stupid you will probably get hurt and if
you make yourself vulnerable there will likely be someone nearby to
exploit you.
To make a statement like ‘women are never to blame’ suggests that
women have no control over which situations they put themselves in
and the risks they expose themselves to.
Women do have this control and can (and should) choose to use it – to
suggest otherwise is to infantilize them.
I think that putting the focus of anti-rape campaigns on men who
might choose to rape would be largely futile.
Those inclined to engage in any sort of criminal activities already
know that these actions are criminal and are not going to be deterred
by being reminded of this.
The only effective option is to make attempts at criminal behaviour
as difficult and costly as possible. In many cases this can only be
achieved by exercising personal responsibility.
Dwysan Edwards, author of the article, replies
The statistics speak for themselves. We all have personal responsibility including men who decide to rape. It’s not against the law to drink or wear a short skirt. It is against the law to steal and to drink whilst driving. Unfortunately your arguments in this case simply do not make any sense. However I appreciate you taking the time to respond and again stress that your response in future should be to the audience of the F Word by writing your own article and not attacking someone else’s opinion.
From want to be unknown
Re: WAG do you want to be when you grow up?: sooo wat exactly are you implying with your artical about wags babe?
yes all of that is wat has happened,but wat is your point on wags uv
just stated wat we have seen in the media about them?
From Marilyn Ramos
Re: Oh, Mr Darcy!: Mr. Darcy is not attractive in view of the fact that that he is a
patriarch, but the sole reason that he did everything in his power to
fix his past mistakes for love. When men are willing to forget
impertinence for affection, they simply become irresistible in the
eyes of the women they are endeavoring. It is that fact that makes
Mr. Darcy considered a gentleman and charming amongst women.
Jess McCabe , editor of The F-Word, replies
Yes, the perfect man is one who is willing to forgive our impertinence. During the process of endevouring us.
From Maureen Hannon
I found Sheryl Plant’s article on Mr. Darcy, whom she describes as
“brutal,” “violent,” and
domineering,” to be quite amusing. Her assessment of him as the
archetypical abusive male is much more descriptive of Wickam than
Darcy. I’m left to wonder if Ms. Plant actually ever read Pride and
Prejudice.
From her evaluation of Darcy’s underlying motives and
abusive nature toward women, it doesn’t appear so – if she did, I
can’t believe she actually understood what Austen intended in
creating this character, who broods, not because of his need to
dominate women but because of his insecurities with society in
general – his lack of ease with both men and women in conversation,
and his distrust of the women of his day, who threw their daughters
at him in the hopes of securing their own family fortunes.
Given the
example of Elizabeth’s mother, can we really blame him? A good
offense, after all, is often the best defense. As we learn at the
end of the book, however, Darcy himself recognizes his failings and
thanks Elizabeth for rightly calling him on his pride, rudeness, and
disdain for others’ feelings.
This novel is about the kind of
emotional growth that we all want in our men. I married a man very
much like Mr. Darcy, and although there were many tough years getting
through his thick walls (most of them erected in defense of women who
treated him badly), I’m so grateful I hung in there. P & P is much
more Elizabeth’s story than Darcy’s, and anyone who has actually read
the book (not just watched the films) already knows that Elizabeth
sets Mr. Darcy on a more evolved path in his dealings with both women
and men. She was, after all, the first real fictional feminist in
English literature, but happily, also a woman who is capable of
seeing – and loving – this man for who he really is; and not just a
one-dimensional caricature that serves to make the author’s point.
Darcy is a man who was never taught that gentleness, civility and good
manners are a far more successful means of attracting others to us
than pride and rudeness. There are plenty of men out there who fit
Ms. Plant’s description of brutality and violence against women.
Unfortunately for the readers of this article, Mr. Darcy isn’t one of
them. To Ms. Plan’ts readers: please don’t dismiss this classic,
brilliantly written gem of a story because Ms. Plant missed the
entire point of the book. Mr. Darcy is, in fact, a wonderful study
in how men can – and do – change. Let’s drop the hyperbole and
finally come to grips with who we are as feminist women, and start
helping men evolve into who they can be as men.
From Nisa
Re: Female commentator kicks off barrage of sexism: The point for me is that the vast majority of sporting events they
comment on is male sport!
It’s ironic that in the UK during the 1920s womens football teams
(mainly composed of workers from factories, offices, etc) were
numerous and popular and attracted great crowds. Until the Football
Association, worrying that women’s football was taking over, banned
women’s teams from all the big places. So now we have the situation
today where female tv football commentators are never commenting on a
women’s football match!
Here endeth today’s history lesson.
From Emma Owen
I want to comment on the article to breastfeeding by cathryn dagger. I
have just read your article and nearly cried! I desperetly wanted to
breastfeed my baby (now 7 months)and gave up after 4 days, having the
same problems as you. Recently after the birth of some of my friends
babies and watching them breastfeed I have been beating myself up
about the fact that I didn’t and feeling as though I missed out on a
bonding experience that I will never get back. However reading your
article has reminded me what it was like and again the contentment of
alfie once I had given him his first bottle, and the relief me and my
husband both felt. Thankyou. I feel I have been letting this build up
inside me and now feel a sense of relief xx
From steve wilson
Dear Holly,
I read,with great delight,your
review of Amy Winehouse.
Face it,after forty yrs of
feminist training,many women
just flat like the idea of a
strong,yes,strong man.
I love Amy,I love her confusion,her passion,her
honesty.
Try just letting some women think the way they naturally
do,and accept it.
It will ease your frustration
with your shrinking feminist
nation.
Best Regards,
Steve
Holly Combe, author of the article, replies
“This poet’s “great delight” leads me to suspect that
he has conveniently ignored the nuances in my piece
and, instead, would prefer to imagine the writer as an
angry red-faced ninny, shaking her fist while the rest
of the world laughs and points at her futile
“frustration.” To be honest, I’m really not sure where
he got the impression that I harbour some tyrannical
desire not to “let some women think the way they
naturally do” but the notion certainly seems to have
made him very happy. I hate to be a spoilsport but
perhaps he needs to read the review again?
As he rightly says, some women *do* “just flat like
the idea of a strong man” but what about men who like
the idea of a strong woman? Are they just going to
have to accept the demand that *they* “should be
stronger”? Would a male singer expressing his wish for
a woman to be stronger than him be praised for his
“confusion, passion and honesty”? I think not. Of
course, I hope I’m wrong but it’s not a sentiment I
often hear expressed in songs sung by men. Perhaps
readers could send me lots of heartening examples that
suggest traditional gender roles no longer hold any
real power in society anymore?
While they’re at it, they might want to tell me all
about this “shrinking feminist nation” that I have
managed to inhabit without realising. (I know it
rhymed but, really, that’s just plain silly isn’t
it?)”
From Leanne
Re: Hardcore: i have always been neutral in regards to porn but after reading about
the way ‘felicity’ was treated when she was persuing the path to
pornstardom i was appalled and discusted
From Jessica
Re: Attention seeker: I’d just like to say how much I enjoyed Rosa’s article in response to
Sara Cox’s rant on BBC radio. I am also a sixth form student and I
think more girls of this age should have similar views. It was very
funny and refreshing to read.
From Bonnie Walsh
Re: Don’t cha wish pop was more empowering?: This artical was fantastic. It is so true. At the moment in school I
am writing an assignment on how women are potrayed in the Music
industry, This artical was very useful. I 100% support what was said,
I wish there was more artists like Pink and the Spice Girls. I am also
major fans of them. I wish all the very best fighting this battle that
needs to be won.
From T. Morrin
Ok, so,thanks to the Guardian I have began readin the F word, and it
is wonderful. A breath of fresh air (Well, fresh for me anyway!)
Slight problem with “Don’t cha wish pop was more empowering?” (I
know it was written a year ago, but let me vent!) Pink, whose song
lyrics are indeed anti-conformist, sends out the exact mixed messages
that the author bemoans. Firstly, here in Ireland our Tabloids got
their chance to be Brit-like by publishing prominently the fact that
she had topless lady dancers at her concert in Dublins Point Depot,
snogging each other. “Straight-looking” (A term I hate, but please
allow it) topless women kissing each other in front of a presumebly
mostly female crowd surely is a perfect example of the mixed messages
referred to? Further, in her video for stupid girl, while decrying the
stupid girls who writhe around in bikinis and nowt much else, she
writhes around in a bikini and nowt much else in scenes that were
reminiscint of a carry on film. Just a comment!
From JK Rowling IS GOD!
Re: Paper d: searching for women within Kerrang Magazine: This article by Collette on Kerrange magazine really made my day. In
Australia, we also have Uk Kerrange, and Blunt Magazine. I had aso
noticed Kerrange’s attitude towards women in the industry. I gave up
on it a year ago, and started reading Kerrange. Recently I came
across a full page ad for Mobile King, depicting half naked women. I
emailed the editer and told him how I felt about it’s representation
of women and the message this sends to female fans. He responeded the
day after, explaining that the magazine does not choose which ads it
puts in, and that he agrees that the ad was tacky and hopes that the
magazine covers both male and female artists… well, it does more
than Kerrange, any way. Suprising it was the letter of the month next
issue. I have since never seen a biased ad yet. I am glad that there
is somebody else who sees this problem with music mags. I love female
rockers, esp Karen O, Melissa Auf der Maur, Shirly Manson, Amy Lee,
Gallhammer, and many of the others Collette mentioned. I am yet to
see them recognised by these mags, however. This article has inspired
me to write yet another letter, spewing of all the female talent sadly
neglected.
P.S. Yes, Emo is a load [at]#$!
From Snusket
Re: The farmer wants a wife, the wife wants a wife: It seems that mostly american women have this problem with men not
doing their home-duties. well, here in europe in most countries
(sepcially in the north) we have no trouble with that at all. washing
machine? big deal? vaccum cleaining- sure. dishes- well, come on.
cooking the dinner- sure thing! the thing is, maybe in the US you
have bad confidence in your guys. tell them, show them, and they will
do it. else, leave them.
Jess McCabe , editor of The F-Word, replies
Last time I looked, the UK was still in Europe. That said, good advice about leaving men who treat you like a maid!
From Rachel Littlejohn
I was appalled to realise that whilst at uni, my friends and I had
fallen into just such a trap. We’re all enlightened, intelligent
women who socialise with men who are the same; and yet when it came
to certain situations; we were replicating the same patterns that for
so many decades our mothers, and our mothers mothers have fought to
break free from. Why, when male friends come over for dinner, do we
cook and then clear the plates? Or in a mixed group, the female
guests will immediately rise to help wash dishes as soon as
everyone’s finished but the men don’t? It may seem insignificant but
it’s these tiny disparities that end up contributing to lifetimes of
thankless and expected servitude.
From Joan Holmes
Re: More than just ‘;Jam and Jerusalem’: why we should join the Women’s Institute: I;m sure that WI members would welcome folk from other ethnic groups
and creeds with open arms if they showed an interest, but why should
they stop singing Jerusalem or ending with The Queen. Surely people
come to our shores to join in, integrate, be British and don’t expect
us to change, just to be included and an effort made to get to know
them. Indeed I wonder if many would want to belong anyway. Perhaps it
is not their thing.
Jess McCabe , editor of The F-Word, replies
I think this is a bit problematic: not least because of the assumption that coming to live in the UK means abandoning all ties and assimilating. Indeed, some people come to the UK to escape torture, persecution and death, not just to “join in” with our activities. Perhaps more people would want to join the Women’s Institute, if it didn’t chose a song which takes patriotism to the rather ridiculous point of suggesting that Jesus took a quick trip to Glastonbury before ascending into heaven, just to show how brilliant England is compared to everywhere else.
From Anj Green
Re: The F Word podcast: episode one!: Just a short note to say how much I enjoyed the podcast. Lots to learn
and one or two small points that I got all happy and “See? SEE? I’ve
been saying this for ages!” about in a
glad-that-someone-else-is-saying-it-too way. Looking forward to
more.