Sorry I haven’t written for a while (not that you care, you’re probably perfectly happy in your little none-angry-feminist bubble full of penises and sandwiches. Mmm, sandwich…) but I’ve been lazy. This particular article/rant was inspired by a night out I had recently, where I gave some Neanderthal an earful. It was drunkenly inarticulate and mostly involved me calling him a misogynistic, homophobic asshole. FEMINIST SMASH. However, it is genuinely something that I find to be a problem in a wider context and something I feel strongly about.
Within much gay rights activism focus is upon male homosexuality - and not unduly for this is the type of homosexuality that society (read: MALE society) has a problem with to a much larger extent. Male homosexuality, after all, has been condemned by the Bible and been made unlawful under many different governments in many countries around the world. Guys just don’t like the idea. What if he, like, fancies me or something? What if I fancy HIM? Society itself would indeed crumble!
However, female homosexuality is not given a direct mention in the Bible and is not normally the focus of unlawful homosexuality. Probably because that shit isn’t real. Or because lesbians are totally hot. Besides, they only do that stuff for the benefit of men; to turn them on. Just look at the porn industry lesbians – blatantly doing it for men.
Herein lies the fundamental problem of female homosexuality – people don’t think that it exists. Either that, or lesbians are seen as embittered man-haters. Obviously neither of these things are true (not all of time, anyway. Some lesbians may very well hate men, just as some straight women might). Female homosexuality seems to be tied together with politics. When I say that I’m a feminist it is almost expected that I will be a lesbian because all that ever is, is a political statement. I understand that some women use it as such and I’d question the effectiveness of that. By being a ‘political lesbian’ one undermines the legitimacy of female sexuality even further – you’re giving them ammunition. If we want to be taken seriously we need to consider lesbianism and female bisexuality as a legitimate sexuality just as male homosexuality is.
Our patriarchal society has made sex the dominion of the male. The act of sex is seen as something to be carried out and desired by a male, whilst the female exists to be the object of this desire and subject to the sex act instead of partaking in it. The fact that women want sex too is a shocking one to men and one that it has taken them centuries to digest. At present we are moving somewhat positively towards sexual liberation for women but the prejudices are still overwhelmingly present. For a start, women should only want sex with a man and cannot possibly get sexual pleasure without the presence of a penis. I mean, lesbians can’t have sex, can they? If there’s no penis involved there’s no sex.
Sadly, I’ve heard this myth from straight women as well as men. When we talk about sex in a hetero-normative context the immediate assumption is that sex means coitus and that this is the only possible way to ‘have sex’. If your definition is so narrow then the assumption is understandable but if this logic is followed then surely gay men cannot ‘have sex’ either? And yet, the involvement of a penis seems to legitimise male gay sex. Surely this speaks volumes about whose definition of sex we are speaking about. Who else would define sex as involving a penis but our inherently patriarchal society? Women buy into this assumption and help to perpetuate it, but it originates from a male desire to dominate sexuality as a whole, the idea that women are there only to please them sexually. This idea helps them to warp female homoerotic activity into something that exists only for them to enjoy. Women have even helped to perpetuate this by using homosexual acts to attract men, effectively buying into the subjugation of other women. Way to go. You’re a credit to your sex, really.
The problem is exacerbated for bisexual females; all of the usual lesbian stereotypes with added prejudice. If we like men too then we must be doing it for attention! And we blatantly just want to have sex with anything that moves.
We are trivialised even by those we care about. In my personal experience a lot of guys upon discovering my sexuality comment that it’s ‘hot’. As though my sexuality were something I invented merely to please them and other males and not something equally as legitimate as my relationship with them. Being bisexual seems to be about having something to prove. I am often quizzed about my girl to guy ratio, which way I swing more, whether it’s ‘just a phase’, whether or not I will eventually be straight or gay.
The problem of female homosexuality and, indeed, female sexuality is something created by male society and so ingrained as to be seen by some women as the norm and thus perpetuated by them. Basically, we need to start taking ourselves more seriously. If we take ourselves seriously then men are a lot more likely to follow suit.
Wednesday, June 20
Monday, April 9
This is where it starts to get hairy...
Updates:
I have decided to attempt weekly posts on this blog. We'll see how well this goes once I start to run out of ideas. For now, it seems do-able.
Getting hairy
As a self-proclaimed ‘feminist’ my automatic stance on women shaving ought to be that we should all cease this practice immediately if we want to be enlightened, forward-thinking females. This is where it starts to get hairy. Generally, I don’t disagree with shaving if it is down to one’s own standard of beauty. I like how my legs look and feel when shaven and prefer my armpits without the little hair that actually grows there. If I didn’t, then I wouldn’t do it.
From my understanding it’s really only Western woman who shave in a unanimous way. Why this might be is baffling. No-one really seems to know, or care, why the practice of shaving one’s body hair became so prevalent. I acknowledge that in the scheme of things the answer isn’t exactly cataclysmic but I do feel that this revelation might reveal a lot about our culture.
From what I can gather the idea originated in the US and followed the emergence of new, more revealing clothing trends. This seems logical to me, as it would explain why the idea did not seem to occur previous to this – women’s bare under-arms and legs were not an issue for public concern. Expanding upon this I’d like to suggest that the emergence of further removal of body hair – i.e. the shaving of women’s pubic hair – coincided with the boom of the internet and thus the porn industry (or easy access to it) which in turn made women’s pubic hair a more public concern.
A public concern; or a man’s concern? Certainly the porn industry is male dominated (I intend to explore this further in future posts) and thus the shaving of pubic hair might be traced back to a male idea of female attractiveness. I do think that there are actually a few practical reasons for it. As a rather crude example, it aids in the delivery of oral sex. Rather than being misogynistic this seems rather liberating to me; after all, oral sex is for the pleasure of a woman primarily and not a man. Although, I do subscribe somewhat to the theory that it makes women look pre-pubescent and therefore less threatening, too. The pubic hair does not need to be entirely removed for the aforementioned practices – the idea is quite strange and it seems doubtful that women would come up with it for their own aesthetic pleasure. It’s not exactly easy or practical.
The shaving of leg and under-arm hair, however, is a rather different story. It is more a matter of fashion and vanity on women’s part. It is unlikely that the general public will see whether or not a woman’s pubic hair is shaved (unless she is a model or porn star) – it is far more likely, however, that they will see her under-arms and legs. Western fashion at this time is revealing and so it makes sense to alter ones appearance to suit these trends. Tank tops with bushy armpits are not seen as attractive and I would argue that it is not men who enforce this. Women pressure other women. The concept is pure vanity, which, whilst being somewhat distasteful to some, is not misogynistic.
Whilst I do admire the rebellion against shaving on the grounds that it subverts mainstream ideas of beauty, shaving (of under-arms and legs, at least), in principal, is not an un-feminist concept in my view. Shave or don’t shave – it’s all down to personal preference. Certainly, I resent anyone being pressured to do so against their will but on a personal level I do not feel pressured – my choice is informed, and my own. Let yours be too.
References or influences
I referenced the following article in this post. Give it a read, it’s pretty interesting.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/625/who-decided-women-should-shave-their-legs-and-underarms
Also, the opening monologue in the Vagina Monologues (Eve Ensler) served as inspiration for this post. If you haven't already, definitely check this out.
I have decided to attempt weekly posts on this blog. We'll see how well this goes once I start to run out of ideas. For now, it seems do-able.
Getting hairy
As a self-proclaimed ‘feminist’ my automatic stance on women shaving ought to be that we should all cease this practice immediately if we want to be enlightened, forward-thinking females. This is where it starts to get hairy. Generally, I don’t disagree with shaving if it is down to one’s own standard of beauty. I like how my legs look and feel when shaven and prefer my armpits without the little hair that actually grows there. If I didn’t, then I wouldn’t do it.
From my understanding it’s really only Western woman who shave in a unanimous way. Why this might be is baffling. No-one really seems to know, or care, why the practice of shaving one’s body hair became so prevalent. I acknowledge that in the scheme of things the answer isn’t exactly cataclysmic but I do feel that this revelation might reveal a lot about our culture.
From what I can gather the idea originated in the US and followed the emergence of new, more revealing clothing trends. This seems logical to me, as it would explain why the idea did not seem to occur previous to this – women’s bare under-arms and legs were not an issue for public concern. Expanding upon this I’d like to suggest that the emergence of further removal of body hair – i.e. the shaving of women’s pubic hair – coincided with the boom of the internet and thus the porn industry (or easy access to it) which in turn made women’s pubic hair a more public concern.
A public concern; or a man’s concern? Certainly the porn industry is male dominated (I intend to explore this further in future posts) and thus the shaving of pubic hair might be traced back to a male idea of female attractiveness. I do think that there are actually a few practical reasons for it. As a rather crude example, it aids in the delivery of oral sex. Rather than being misogynistic this seems rather liberating to me; after all, oral sex is for the pleasure of a woman primarily and not a man. Although, I do subscribe somewhat to the theory that it makes women look pre-pubescent and therefore less threatening, too. The pubic hair does not need to be entirely removed for the aforementioned practices – the idea is quite strange and it seems doubtful that women would come up with it for their own aesthetic pleasure. It’s not exactly easy or practical.
The shaving of leg and under-arm hair, however, is a rather different story. It is more a matter of fashion and vanity on women’s part. It is unlikely that the general public will see whether or not a woman’s pubic hair is shaved (unless she is a model or porn star) – it is far more likely, however, that they will see her under-arms and legs. Western fashion at this time is revealing and so it makes sense to alter ones appearance to suit these trends. Tank tops with bushy armpits are not seen as attractive and I would argue that it is not men who enforce this. Women pressure other women. The concept is pure vanity, which, whilst being somewhat distasteful to some, is not misogynistic.
Whilst I do admire the rebellion against shaving on the grounds that it subverts mainstream ideas of beauty, shaving (of under-arms and legs, at least), in principal, is not an un-feminist concept in my view. Shave or don’t shave – it’s all down to personal preference. Certainly, I resent anyone being pressured to do so against their will but on a personal level I do not feel pressured – my choice is informed, and my own. Let yours be too.
References or influences
I referenced the following article in this post. Give it a read, it’s pretty interesting.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/625/who-decided-women-should-shave-their-legs-and-underarms
Also, the opening monologue in the Vagina Monologues (Eve Ensler) served as inspiration for this post. If you haven't already, definitely check this out.
Sunday, April 8
Reasons to begin...
So, I begin this blog on the basis of an article I've written called Reclaiming Femininity: My admiration for Lady GaGa and Amanda Palmer (which I'll re-post below, in case you happened to miss it). I realised that I've got a lot of 'feminist rants' in me, and this blog is my forum, my arena of feminist thought. I hope to be, at times, humorous and at others passionately devoted and serious. I'm not an expert scholar nor am I completely unacademic but a balance, I feel, between the two. Not too indebted to traditional feminism but equally not entirely ignorant of it. My ideas are what my generation feels, what we struggle with because every era has its own feminist issues and that is why feminist will never be irrelevant.
My article, if you please.
Reclaiming Femininity: My admiration for Lady GaGa and Amanda Palmer
I find myself in a culture where I am blamed for something that I am pressured to do. Look at all the clothes that will make you look attractive but if you wear them you’re a slut. I don’t want to wear men’s clothes to avoid being thought of as a slut. I am a woman; I want to be feminine. But I want to be feminine on my own terms. I want to be a woman’s idea of feminine, not a man’s idea. That’s why I admire women like Lady GaGa and Amanda Palmer. They are female on their own terms, they are not objectified nor are they masculinised. Though, people have tried to masculinise them because they are very intimidated by this revolutionary idea. In breaking down the binary one can be a new version of female – a female version of female.
What Lady GaGa wears can be thought of as ‘promiscuous’ but it is not, to me, objectifying because it is not something men find specifically attractive – it is ‘weird’ to them, they don’t find her sexual because of this and the fact that her body is somewhat androgynous. When she does ‘beauty shots’ people seem surprised to find that she is ‘actually quite pretty’ in a more traditional, binary way. What is admirable about Lady GaGa and her fashion sense is that she is unafraid to be ‘unfeminine’ just as she is prepared to be ‘promiscuous’ and thus creates a non-gender-specific role for herself. The fact that she has been called a transsexual is testament to society’s confusion at such an idea. They also cannot understand how a female is able to have such a strong identity that is essentially linked to a masculine pursuit – GaGa is a fashion icon, of the female domain, but she is primarily a musician which is male dominated industry. Yes, there are thousands of female artists but their image is controlled by men, or what men want. They are sexualised or virginised, the age old juxtaposition. Artists like Rihanna (being the most overt and obvious example) are catered to a male ideal of what is sexual and feminine. Equally, artists such as Taylor Swift are seen as shining example of purity and virginity but are also merely another male idea of what it is to be feminine. GaGa, whilst being sexual, is not specifically sexual towards men. Her sexuality is also aimed at women, in a wonderfully different way. She seems to invite them to be women alongside her, rather than to challenge them with her superior sexuality. She is not afraid to be sexual but, equally, she is sexual on her own terms.
Amanda Palmer does this in a different manner; she is not nearly as self-conscious about her image as GaGa and this reclaims her femininity in almost the opposite way. Her tendency to perform wearing only her bra normalises what is ordinarily a sexual item of clothing; her casual manner making what might have been seen as a ‘promiscuous’ act something that seems hardly worth commenting upon. Her refusal to adhere to her record labels ideas about her image – namely, that she ought to lose a few pounds – again subverts society’s ideas about female beauty. Amanda Palmer is not fat but neither is she skinny – her shape is distinctly ordinary and, again, she is unperturbed by expectations put upon her by a male dominated business. I would say that Palmer’s body shape is one of a typical female and the fact that she is unashamed of it is encouraging for her contemporaries. Accepting a female form that is realistic and healthy is far more helpful than accepting one that is unhealthy (both drastically under and over-weight). Palmer further refuses this idealised image of the feminine by revealing unshaven body hair – in many photographs and videos upon her raising her arms we can see this outward sign of protest. This seems to be a more self-conscious feminist statement as shaving is obviously a part of a ‘pornified’ view of what a woman ought to look like.
My admiration for these two women stems from the fact that they are unashamed of their sex and thus embolden one in the struggle between wanting to be feminine and not wanting to be objectified. The two ought not to be mutually exclusive at all but, sadly, it is the general feeling that they are. In order to be taken seriously one ought to dress like a man. If a woman wishes to express her sexuality through the way that she dresses then she must expect to be taken advantage of; after all, by dressing in this way she is openly inviting all men. Her preference is of no consequence. I feel that this injustice is awful and thus I will fight, like Lady GaGa and Amanda Palmer, to reclaim my femininity.
My article, if you please.
Reclaiming Femininity: My admiration for Lady GaGa and Amanda Palmer
I find myself in a culture where I am blamed for something that I am pressured to do. Look at all the clothes that will make you look attractive but if you wear them you’re a slut. I don’t want to wear men’s clothes to avoid being thought of as a slut. I am a woman; I want to be feminine. But I want to be feminine on my own terms. I want to be a woman’s idea of feminine, not a man’s idea. That’s why I admire women like Lady GaGa and Amanda Palmer. They are female on their own terms, they are not objectified nor are they masculinised. Though, people have tried to masculinise them because they are very intimidated by this revolutionary idea. In breaking down the binary one can be a new version of female – a female version of female.
What Lady GaGa wears can be thought of as ‘promiscuous’ but it is not, to me, objectifying because it is not something men find specifically attractive – it is ‘weird’ to them, they don’t find her sexual because of this and the fact that her body is somewhat androgynous. When she does ‘beauty shots’ people seem surprised to find that she is ‘actually quite pretty’ in a more traditional, binary way. What is admirable about Lady GaGa and her fashion sense is that she is unafraid to be ‘unfeminine’ just as she is prepared to be ‘promiscuous’ and thus creates a non-gender-specific role for herself. The fact that she has been called a transsexual is testament to society’s confusion at such an idea. They also cannot understand how a female is able to have such a strong identity that is essentially linked to a masculine pursuit – GaGa is a fashion icon, of the female domain, but she is primarily a musician which is male dominated industry. Yes, there are thousands of female artists but their image is controlled by men, or what men want. They are sexualised or virginised, the age old juxtaposition. Artists like Rihanna (being the most overt and obvious example) are catered to a male ideal of what is sexual and feminine. Equally, artists such as Taylor Swift are seen as shining example of purity and virginity but are also merely another male idea of what it is to be feminine. GaGa, whilst being sexual, is not specifically sexual towards men. Her sexuality is also aimed at women, in a wonderfully different way. She seems to invite them to be women alongside her, rather than to challenge them with her superior sexuality. She is not afraid to be sexual but, equally, she is sexual on her own terms.
Amanda Palmer does this in a different manner; she is not nearly as self-conscious about her image as GaGa and this reclaims her femininity in almost the opposite way. Her tendency to perform wearing only her bra normalises what is ordinarily a sexual item of clothing; her casual manner making what might have been seen as a ‘promiscuous’ act something that seems hardly worth commenting upon. Her refusal to adhere to her record labels ideas about her image – namely, that she ought to lose a few pounds – again subverts society’s ideas about female beauty. Amanda Palmer is not fat but neither is she skinny – her shape is distinctly ordinary and, again, she is unperturbed by expectations put upon her by a male dominated business. I would say that Palmer’s body shape is one of a typical female and the fact that she is unashamed of it is encouraging for her contemporaries. Accepting a female form that is realistic and healthy is far more helpful than accepting one that is unhealthy (both drastically under and over-weight). Palmer further refuses this idealised image of the feminine by revealing unshaven body hair – in many photographs and videos upon her raising her arms we can see this outward sign of protest. This seems to be a more self-conscious feminist statement as shaving is obviously a part of a ‘pornified’ view of what a woman ought to look like.
My admiration for these two women stems from the fact that they are unashamed of their sex and thus embolden one in the struggle between wanting to be feminine and not wanting to be objectified. The two ought not to be mutually exclusive at all but, sadly, it is the general feeling that they are. In order to be taken seriously one ought to dress like a man. If a woman wishes to express her sexuality through the way that she dresses then she must expect to be taken advantage of; after all, by dressing in this way she is openly inviting all men. Her preference is of no consequence. I feel that this injustice is awful and thus I will fight, like Lady GaGa and Amanda Palmer, to reclaim my femininity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)