I’m reblogging this in support of the women at JPLNASA who object to the casual sexism (the most pernicious kind) displayed in the ‘cool’, dudely video. As usual, their voices are not being heard.

To Assange supporters, Galloway, Akin, rape apologists everywhere:

“…no matter the cause, the progressive left cannot deny, downplay or ridicule the seriousness of rape and sexual assault to treat women’s bodies as collateral in some wider battle. Women’s rights are not secondary to liberal or class politics, they are, and should be, placed at the their heart.”

~ Women from Compass, a group for the betterment of society, in a letter in Thursday’s Guardian.

To ‘feminist’ right-on male and female supporters of Pussy Riot: READ THIS:
http://radicalhub.com/2012/08/20/pussy-riot-whose-freedom-whose-riot/  


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From Lyn Gardener’s review of Shakespeare’s The Rape of Lucrece at the Royal Lyceum, Edinburgh:

“It’s a reminder that, in the powerplays of men, women’s bodies are often the battlefield”.

So it goes.

_____________________________________________________________

Excellent article by Tanya Gold on the current vogue for ‘rape jokes’ at the Edinburgh Fringe:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/17/heard-one-about-rape-funny-now?CMP=twt_gu

Exiled Stardust

Today on Spot the Misogyny: the viral video “We’re NASA, and We Know It”

This video was all over Twitter today and even @MarsCuriosity thinks it’s OMG THE BEST VIDEO EVAR!!1!

Youtube user who posted this video: “Satire”

Am I the only person wondering why such a spirited celebration of geekery just HAD to include a headless dancing chick in an American flag bikini?  While every male in the video remained fully clothed with his dignity intact?

View original post 245 more words

Getting ’em out for The Lads: Lee Horyon

(Thursday Rant.)

Lee’s work separates the vague relationship between image and desire.”

“Vague”?
Since when has the relationship between image and desire been ‘vague’? A vast porn industry is predicated precisely on the fact that  the relationship between image and sexual desire is very clear-cut indeed. How else would pornography ‘work’?

Take a look at Horyon’s work.

Am I the only one to find them offensive?

I am reminded of the old sexist ‘joke’:
“You don’t look at the mantlepiece when you’re poking the fire”.
Dress it up in meaningless, high-sounding sophistry as much as you like; the fact remains that images of headless/faceless women in poses ranging from the titillating to ‘softly’ (ha!) pornographic are, in my opinion, offensive to at least half the human race.

The last one, with her ass in your face, is veiled, for crying out loud.
This in a world where women the world over are struggling to throw off ‘the veil’, both literally and metaphorically.

Subjecting women in this fashion, reducing them, not to ‘objects’ (all art objectifies, as I’ve argued before) but to detached, depersonalised commodities purveyed to the male gaze is, in my opinion, not something to be tolerated in the name of ‘art’. There’s no denying Horyon’s technical excellence, but art is not just about how you make it; it’s also about what you choose to make. I’m all for freedom of expression – which is why I’m having my say here – but retrograde representations like these contribute nothing; they merely perpetuate the millenia-old view of women as little more than the means to male sexual gratification.
Strip-tease, burlesque, pornography, these works: they’re all the same in their rejection of an equal relationship between ‘viewer’ and ‘viewed’, and therefore equally deleterious.

Compare if you will Rembrandt’s magnificent Hendrickje Bathing:

The National Gallery, London

This is a woman, Rembrandt’s common-law wife, who was both desired and deeply loved. She has a name and a face; she is a person, not an idealised/air-brushed cipher, and is presented to us with all the tenderness and respect that Rembrandt’s matchless painterly skill allowed.
In her complete trust and lack of self-consciousness, she is very much an equal partner in this work.

That’s what it’s all about.