There aren’t many Catholics where I live, I haven’t really heard that before. I don’t think any branch of Christianity can really claim to be original.
Besides, people believing in equality and in higher powers came before we had organised movements with names, so none of those movements can claim a monopoly.
On tumblr you hear how the naked female body is not inherently sexual. This is something that I agree with: being naked does not necessarily mean that you are being sexual. It is simply the absence of clothing and nothing more. In order for nakedness to also be sexual other factors have to come into play, such as facial expression or what you are physically doing with your body. For example, a woman standing at parade rest while naked is not sexual. That same woman in the same position but for one hand touching her vagina is sexual.
So we established that nudity does not equal sexual, and reach where I begin my point: hypocrisy. I am going to talk about Blurred Lines for a minute, because I think the controversy is pertinent to my point. The music video itself gained a lot of controversy. In fact, I think that is where the controversy originated and the blatant misinterpretation of the lyrics was used to prove a thesis that was flawed to begin with. The argument boils down to “The women in the video are topless and are therefore sexualized. This contributes to the sexualization of women.”
There is a major flaw in this argument and it is not one that is particularly hard to see. Feminists are the ones who mainly argue that the naked female body is not sexual. They were also the primary group to argue that the Blurred Lines video was sexual because the women were naked. But if we are to take the first case as true, the second case does not follow at all. In fact, the case arguing that Blurred Lines is sexual because of the appearance of topless women and for no other reason blatantly contradicts the first claim. Having watched the video, I would say that is surprisingly non-sexual. While it is certainly risque, it manages to do so without crossing over into sexual territory which is a rather stunning achievement by the director.
So that moves into the big question: Why say that the naked female body is not inherently sexual if you are going to call every instance of a naked woman “sexualizing”? This is a question for which I have no answer, but I will hazard a guess. I think that a lot of feminists, despite saying the aforementioned statement, do find the nude female form inherently sexual. And I think that they have a lot of trouble separating that from their politics.
So that brings me to my request. If you are going to treat every instance of naked women as something that is sexual, can you please stop saying that the naked women are not inherently sexual? I have stated before that I personally do not see naked women as sexual all the time, but unless you are going to objectively look at every instance and really see if it is going for sexualization or if it just wanted some naked women because clothing is stupid, and would instead rather go with a gut reaction that is not a claim that you can rightly make. Naked women are not necessarily sexual women. I think it is high time feminists learned that.
One of the most consistent creative teams since the start of the new 52, writers Haden Blackman and J.H. Williams III have quit the Batwoman series. And there is no dancing around why based on a post on both Williams’ and Blackman’s web site where they note they are “heartbroken” about leaving but editorial interference including being “prohibited from ever showing Kate and Maggie actually getting married” is the cause.
Not going to happen. Read on.
- Gender Studies Programs: Increase funding to keep women out of sci/tech/med/business fields.
- Primary Education: Keep staff from teaching boys to not rape.
- Staffing General: Keep hiring more female teachers, to discourage men from teaching. We need them to take the high-paying work.
- Continue pushing “health” specifically to make fat women feel bad. This may require more double-blind clinical trials “proving” how unhealthy obesity is.
- Continue to offer phallic foods in the cafeterias of primary schools to promote internalized gastro-misogyny
- Continue to give women lighter sentences for similar offences to make them think they’re weaker.
- Keep male rape victims invisible! We need to let them keep crying about their supposed rape culture. This will keep feminists blogging instead of achieving.
- Keep replaying Trayvon stuff. Gotta keep the darkies busy with that while we figure out what rights to take away next.
- Continue to give preferential treatment to young, attractive women in front-end hospitality positions to keep them out of higher-end positions.
- The wage gap: Can we make them believe it’s even bigger? It’d be freaking hilarious.
- Sex in Advertising: Can we expand it? Alexander Cis Whiteman suggested trying to sexually sell toilet plungers. He’ll be spearheading a committee to make it happen. (Dick jokes?)
- Can we stop hiring fatties? They’re gross and make me sad to look at. (Fabricate lies about them being less efficient and motivated?)
Did I miss anything? I unfortunately was only able to make part of the meeting since I left my Patriarchy Pass at home. Finally got let in after oppressing a few folks nearby.
So today I was thinking how overlooked boys body-image issues are. Guys have standards society tries to tell them they have to reach in order to be attractive.
DEAR BOYS you don’t have to have the perfect V in your hips, washboard abs, great big biceps, or any arrangement of physical qualities to be hot. Seriously just don’t be a dick and smile a little. You’re handsome. Keep it up.