April 2005
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.