// 18 August 2008 is like Wikipedia, except with chicks, right? Charlotte Cooper has more in this guest post

Ever feel the fire has gone out of your feminism? Tired of having to explain why something might be offensive to women? Maybe you just want to look at pouting pictures of hot chicks and then some? Whatever your wants, just check out, a great step forward into the future by Break Media, the company ‘who knows guys’ and obviously feels the need to create a ‘legitimate’ comprehensive wank bank.

The ‘ultimate user generated guide for everything you want to now about sexy famous women’ be she underwear model or TV star, stacks up the ‘chicks’ in the same format as wikipedia, providing scant information about her life and career and a sketch of a female body next to her measurements (where available). You can even choose to sort the archive by “similar chicks”. A handy resource for men who want to learn more about their favourite ‘babes’, or any babes as the endless list of chicks seems to suggest.

There is the option to request moderation, but I don’t think they accept as a valid complaint ‘offensive due to the perpetuation of women as objects and not real people’. The site is user-generated so the creators probably take little responsibility for the content, the fact that there are pictures prove the need for it, right? However the attached blog really reduces the company’s faith in men for being anything than huge throbbing penises.

Comments From You

Laurel Dearing // Posted 18 August 2008 at 5:46 pm

great… not only is it objectifying, but its referring to something thats supposed to be intelligent and knowledgeable.

Anne Onne // Posted 18 August 2008 at 7:55 pm

Right, because of course women famous for their looks or bodies don’t get to be acknowledged alongside other famous people in normal sorts of lists that acknowledge achievements, they should be grouped together as ‘similar’ based on vague looks and catalogued like some sort of toy. Yeesh.

I guess we’ll have to wait for Prickipedia, the wiki featuring lots of hot sexy objectified men, listing ALL their measurements … But I’m not gonna hold my breath for that. After all, men, even the hot ones, are people worthy of respect for more than just their physical attibutes or how they make women or gay men feel. Women, on the other hand…

Tony Moll // Posted 18 August 2008 at 8:20 pm

Surely the right for sick souls to fantacize about peoples bodies is more important that other people being offended.

And who says that seeing others in a sexual light means that were seeing them as real people?

a very public sociologist // Posted 18 August 2008 at 8:41 pm

Sounds like a charming way of wasting hours and hours and hours. I don’t think.

While we’re on the subject (sort of) of men being reduced to their penises, I’ve written something about last night’s ‘The Perfect Vagina’, which may be of interest to F Word readers. You can see it here

earlgreyrooibos // Posted 18 August 2008 at 10:42 pm

Ugh. I am not going to even VISIT that site. Don’t want to give them the traffic. Plus, just KNOWING that it exists makes me really depressed.

On the other hand, maybe I should contact the owners and have my say about it. Not that they’d listen. But it never hurts to try.

Stephanie // Posted 19 August 2008 at 8:38 am

I heard of this site before and I just looked at it there and typed in “Feminist” in the search box to see what they had to say. I didn’t see anything derogatory (apart from the whole website of course) in that but they did have links to other “chicks” who are feminists. The only one I looked at was someone named Saffron Burrows (who I’v never heard of) and one of her “assets” listed is that she is bisexual. Talk about not having ownership over your own sexuality. It’s appalling.

Virginia // Posted 19 August 2008 at 9:10 am

Anne Onne – prickipedia would be amazing! Although obviously sinking to their level. But as Chikipedia is user generated content we could spam them with male entries – if we all did it we could cause them some problems. Any one up for that?

Anna // Posted 19 August 2008 at 12:21 pm

Oh, I so am.

Genevieve // Posted 19 August 2008 at 3:51 pm

I searched for some ‘chicks’ who I’m a fan of…Kathleen Hanna, Carrie Brownstein…no entries for them. Guess talented feminist musicians really aren’t on their radar.

Leigh // Posted 20 August 2008 at 2:35 pm

No can do Virginia- in order to post material on the wiki you have to create and account, which means agreeing to the terms of service, which includes:

• Your Materials, user name and/or screen name will not disparage in any manner the Site, its owners, advertisers, products, or services and sites.

An alternative would be to login and Add to pre-existing content things that promote consideration of the subjects as people, but it would have to be carefully written as there is another condition of the terms of service not to editorialise.

Have Your say

To comment, you must be registered with The F-Word. Not a member? Register. Already a member? Use the sign in button below

Sign in to the F-Word

Further Reading

Has The F-Word whet your appetite? Check out our Resources section, for listings of feminist blogs, campaigns, feminist networks in the UK, mailing lists, international and national websites and charities of interest.

Write for us!

Got something to say? Something to review? News to discuss? Well we want to hear from you! Click here for more info

  • The F-Word on Twitter
  • The F-Word on Facebook
  • Our XML Feeds