Lad Culture

Where do I start?

I’ve been meaning to write something about lad culture for a while, and, with all the recent controversy surrounding the website Unilad, I think now’s the time.

At university, I’ve come across my fair share of laddishness. I’ve been at drinking games where men who haven’t been able to consume a large enough amount of alcohol have been labelled ‘pussies’ and guys (and even girls) who have managed the feat have been awarded so-called ‘lad points.’ (n.b. lad-points can’t be sewn onto a sash or proudly displayed on a star-chart!) I’ve observed male acquaintances make comments about passing females, using the language of rape and conquest: ‘I would absolutely smash her.’ And I see women being objectified every single day around my university town: in student publications, on student union posters, even in my house.

The difficulty with lad culture, as the Unilad scandal has highlighted, is that the whole thing is infused with a certain amount of humour. Ask many a ‘lad’ whether he’s against equality for women, and the chances are that they’ll be surprised you even asked the question. Lads don’t think they’re being sexist. They’re not about to question my right to vote, or infringe on my everyday freedom (although my boyfriend once was asked why he ‘lets’ me go to an LGBT group. Yep, I admit it! I frequently go and have gang-bangs with the homosexuals behind his back! Seriously. Grow up.) They just think they’re having a fucking good laugh, enjoying their youth, not taking themselves too seriously. Life, for the lad, is all about ‘The Banter.’ And that’s what is so utterly frustrating.

‘The Banter,’ of course, is like The Force. It’s a higher power that we can use to strengthen our popularity, top up our lad-point totaliser, and summon fit girls when they get a whiff of our Lynx.

Criticise lad culture at your peril. You will be labelled ‘boring,’ ‘humourless,’ and told that you ‘just don’t get it.’ Everything you could possibly complain about can be explained away by ‘The Banter.’ Take issue with rape jokes? Oh come on, lighten up, you boring fucker. Worried about the objectification of women in Nuts or FHM? Chill out, the girls love getting their tits out. Concerned that drinking games are a bit dangerous? Stop being such a pussy.

The situation is pretty bleak for the average lad-surrounded girl at university. With the opportunities to criticise laddishness highly stunted by the fact that ‘The Banter’ will make everything you say seem fucking ridiculous, you haven’t really got much choice but to go along with it. This is why Female Chauvinist Piggery comes in. If you haven’t already, please pick up a copy of Ariel Levy’s book. It isn’t very long and it explains how girls are now colluding in their own oppression, by simultaneously acting like men (lad-points for that bitch in the office, what a boss!) and being sexy for men to further their careers and be successful in everyday life. Every wondered why you feel like you’ve got to get a Brazillian? Lad culture wants you waxed. Lad culture wants you to look like a glamour model. Lad culture wants you to titilate it. And you’re letting the whole of lad culture and humanity down if you don’t get that fucking Brazillian.

I’m with Caitlin Moran on this one. I want a grown woman’s vagina, not a child’s.

Oh lad culture, how do we get rid of you? Through ‘the banter’ you’ve become imbibed with Essence of Cockroach. I just hope I’m not alone in hating you. I appreciate a sensitive man. I appreciate a girl who doesn’t collude in her own oppression. I appreciate a bunch of fucking pussies, frankly, and as for real pussies: I like ‘em hairy.

I’m glad that Unilad has finally got the comeuppance it deserves, and I hope lads everywhere start to realise that ‘The Banter’ doesn’t really make you powerful. It just socially lubricates you around other lads, and makes your life a hell of a lot less deep and fulfilling for it. It saddened me that a girl who commented on a Guardian article by a girl at my university, was immediately told to ‘shut the fuck up, you slut’ by some arsehole who, no doubt, loves being a lad. It seems that this controversy won’t be enough to mark the beginning of the end of lad culture, and that is bad news for women, feminists and decent people everywhere.

Also posted on tumblr, from my feminist blog (which needs updating more regularly!)

Glamour Modelling

I'm long overdue a feminist post, so here we go!

This morning, because I am a sucker for a crappy BBC Three junk documentary, I decided it would be fun to watch Glamour Models, Mum and Me on iPlayer. As the title suggests, the programme follows the fourteen-year-old daughter of glamour model Alicia Douvall. Unlike other mums, this woman is addicted to plastic surgery, has eyebrows and lipstick tattooed to her face, and wants her daughter Georgia to follow in her footsteps.

"Britney had her boob job at sixteen," Alicia says without much expression (after all, her face is paralysed), "which means it's only two years till you get a boob job." Hmm. She's also full of great advice for her daughter: "A woman is very powerful," (so far, so good) "This," she says, pointing to her body, "will get you far. That's the most important lesson you can teach your daughter." Oh dear...

Apologies if the wording is not quite right. I can't be bothered to rewind the programme and write the exact quotes.

There is hope in the form of young Georgia's brain, but it's painful to watch. She's a keen student, and repeatedly tells her incredulous mother that she does not want plastic surgery. Alicia wants Georgia to be an actress or a glamour model, and tells her that her chemistry homework is a "waste of time." When Alicia's breast implant flips and the family have to spend at least three weeks in LA, Georgia gets tearful at the thought of missing so much school. "I'll buy you clothes," Alicia says as consolation. Georgia's face says it all.

I'm not trying to criticise someone's parenting. After all, I'm not a parent myself and would have no idea how to raise a child. Instead, rather than focusing on Alicia Douvall's approach to bringing up Georgia, I'm focusing on the wider infections in society which causes stuff like this to happen. What kind of messed-up world do we live in? Why is it that women feel that their body is their ticket to success?

It's not that I have a problem with women taking pride in their bodies. God knows that would sound hypocritical as I am a bit of a poser myself. I'm not going to say that it's a good thing that I care so much about my appearance, because I know it's society that's done it to me and I know it's not always healthy. But what many models, especially glamour models, have in common is the feeling that their bodies are all they can rely on. Some people are, by society's standards, beautiful. Yes, some people have plastic surgery to feel beautiful even though they really look like deformed dolls. Some people just don't care, and that's enviable I suppose. But whatever we look like and whatever our approach to how we look, the human personality is the most important thing. Whether we are male or female, and whatever we look like, we all have our own intelligence. Whether we're academic or not, we all have talents and it is our determination, practicality and belief in ourselves that should, and does, get us places.

Alicia Douvall preaches that her body is her ticket to success. But is she happy? This woman breaks down at several points in the programme, acting like a stroppy teenager, and has deformed herself to feed her constant need for plastic surgery. As Georgia astutely puts it, "Surgery is a therapy that she doesn't need." The addictions and insecurities come from a childhood of abuse. It's not as simple as "being shallow."

If society nurtured a confidence in what's on the inside, especially in girls, perhaps we wouldn't have this messed-up glamour modelling culture. Perhaps people like Alicia, who have had painful childhoods, wouldn't feel the need to seek comfort in something that only brings more unhappiness.

The programme closes with Alicia having the shocking revelation that "Nine times out of ten, signing up to glamour modelling is a really bad idea." She tells Georgia that she doesn't need to "sell out." But how many programmes will it take before young people realise that glamour modelling is not a healthy aspiration?

Oh, I love a bit of junk TV.

J xxx

Guys Suffer Too

One of the misconceptions about feminism that really pisses me off is the commonly heard "Feminists are man-haters and they want to prove that women are superior to men." Feminists who hold that view are increasingly rare, and are usually stuck in some eccentric 70s time-warp and need to get out more. Modern feminism is about empowering women and making sure that we get the education ,confidence and positivity we need to be able to make real choices in the modern world. It's not backward-looking, it's not anything scary (although it can, and does, kick ass), and it certainly does not exclude men.

Men are a central part of my personal feminist philosophy. When reading or writing about feminism, they're always in my thoughts. And I don't mean thinking about them as chauvinists or bigots, and I don't mean thinking about them in terms of my desires-- I'm far too gay for that! The reason I think about guys a lot is because I see the terrible effects tha the all-too-often failings of feminism itself, and the wider fucked-up-ness of our society's attitude to women, have had on our young men.

Guys are confused. And it's no wonder. My favourite pet-hate, that I go on and on about on this blog, is one that particularly screws up the guys as well as the girls. I speak, of course, of the Sexy/Pure Double-Standard. This is one that's particularly close to Jessica Valenti's heart and which she has written about at some length. Girls are expected to be sexy and attractive, expected to have beautiful bodies, expected to get guys. At the same time, girls are expected to be pure, virginal, chaste and innocent. My friend and I were having a conversation today, and she was telling me about how she had observed an attack on a female Facebook friend's status by a bunch of teenage boys, who were calling her "slag," "whore" and other equally charming terms of address. We observed that it's ridiculous how guys complain if they are unable to pull, but if a girl is "up for it," she is immediately no more than her willingness to fuck. For me, part of feminism is about promoting sex positive women, and sex positive young men, and a general understanding that sex is a significant part of our lives but it does not define our self worth.

Another thing that probably confuses the guys is another double-standard: girls are expected to be submissive and meek, yet they are also expected to "have everything" and be powerful. Guys, who are pressurised into watching porn from a young age (and, to be fair, they gain satisfaction from it: but that's not the point!), have this image of women who exist to satisfy male sexual needs and who represent female submission. On the other hand, you only have to turn on the News to see powerful and influential women in international affairs and the media. Women in the public eye get a lot more criticism than their male counterparts, and quite frankly there is a hell of a lot of misogyny flying around. A lot of guys I've met seem to be intimidated by a woman with opinions. And is it any wonder? A man isn't sure what a woman is supposed to be anymore.

I don't know whether there's any truth in it, but I've always thought that guys probably find feminism and strong women so rattling because, given that women bear children and have traditionally not done "male" jobs, it could be perceived to render men inferior if women are equal to them in jobs, because guys cannot bear children. In a technological world where physical strength is becoming less and less important, women can do it all. But that does NOT make men inferior, does not make them useless, and does not mean that they are not totally wonderful, just like women. Humans are humans, and we're all worth something, and we all deserve to put aside our differences. Sort out misogyny and the double-standards surrounding women, and you get happier guys and happier girls. Win-win.

Sorry to ramble... I feel very strongly about this!

With Love, J xxx

Teenage Pregnancy and Bristol Palin

Now and again a story will appear on Feministing.com that touches a nerve, and this is the latest one:

Bristol Palin: Don't Get Pregnant Unless You're Privileged

When I watched the clip, I found myself in complete agreement with Jos, who created the post, and her description of the whole thing as "generally creepy."

Firstly, aside from all feminist issues, this is extremely classist. Right, everyone, wait till you're a politician's rich daughter before you get pregnant! Nothing else could possibly do your baby any good... What's that? You're poor? Sorry, poor mothers are incapable. Forget it.

I'm not denying that, purely on a practical level, waiting until you can provide your baby with the best chance in life is the best policy. Getting educated, setting up a secure home and having a bit of life experience first is definitely a good idea. Children from poor families do, indeed, have a worst start in life than their wealthier counterparts. But who the hell is Candie's Foundation to give out the message that being privileged makes you a better mother than someone in less fortunate circumstances? This is just classist, through and through.

Secondly, why on Earth is Bristol Palin preaching abstinence? Clearly, the issue here is that she got pregnant, and doesn't actually seem to be doing too badly, given that she is supported and loved by her "famous family." Why are we confusing pregnancy with sex here?

When browsing the Candie's Foundation website, I came across a very irritating video that sees Jenny McCarthy forcing a screaming baby on a teenage girl who is just about to have sex in a car. Apart from the obvious fact that making out in a car does not equal baby in the arms (haha, quite laughable when you think about it), I think the message "Don't have sex because you could get pregnant" is extreme and misleading. I really don't understand why abstinence is somehow better for young people than being taught about good contraception and how to have fun without getting pregnant.

I'm not advocating sleeping around here, and I recognise that accidents happen, but I really don't see why a girl of Bristol Palin's age who wants to have sex sensibly should not do so.

When I did a bit more research into Candie's Foundation, I discovered they sell these hideous t-shirts. I was still unsure whether or not to write a blog-post on this topic until I discovered this link, and then I didn't have any doubt. This illustrates my pet-hate as a feminist: The sexy-pure double-standard. Eew.

As I keep preaching to my classmates--much to their irritation!--society tells us girls that we have to be sexy at the same time as being chaste. This hideous t-shirt design reinforces this double-standard in the most obvious and ridiculous way I have ever seen. I can't believe that girls feel comfortable wearing this. It's disgusting.

So, coming back to Bristol Palin... I'm not impressed. I hope lots of other girls aren't impressed too. If we want to reduce teenage pregnancy, we shouldn't be using it as an excuse to push abstinence, classism and double-standards.

J xxx

Feminist Corsetry

I've been using the last few days to work on my first corset and it's not far off the finish line! It's not perfect but for a first attempt--and I am SERIOUSLY inexperienced when it comes to dressmaking--I am quite pleased with it.

My mother, who has been teaching me how to use the sewing machine (turns out I can sew more neatly on it than her: mwahaha), has remarked several times that she is totally dismayed that she has failed to bring up a good feminist daughter. Excuse me? Several times I have tried to argue with her, and point out that a) I am a staunch feminist and b) corsets and feminism are not necessarily incompatible, but she continues to miss the point. OK, a good deal of this is friendly banter, but I do feel that Mum doesn't really understand my seemingly bizarre combination of ideals and practices.

I would never let Mum read this blog, but I think this provides me with a good opportunity to explain how corsets fit into feminism for me. After all, this is all about personal choice and what everyone is comfortable with on an individual level.

I have been fascinated with corsets for as long as I have been fascinated with women, history and feminism (most of my life, in other words). My GCSE English Creative Writing piece was entitled simply Corset and told the story of a rite of passage for a young late-Victorian girl: being laced into a corset for the first time. The girl's mother is a suffragette, while her father is a narrow-minded bastard, and the story culminates in the grateful protagonist serving her country in WWII without wearing a corset. Very safe, "nice," cutesy feminist stuff (I had only just turned fifteen) but the basic morals are there and I'm still a little bit proud of that piece.

I have a 1998 hardback Reader's Digest book, given to me by my grandmother, entitled Yesterday's Britain. For most of my childhood it has been a bible to me. It is battered, it boasts my seven-year-old handwriting inside the front cover proclaiming my full name and the address I lived at ten years ago, and it's stuffed with old bits of creative writing that were inspired by its pages. It's not exactly an intellectual history book--it's crammed full of pictures--but as a young girl it inspired me and it continues to do so. On one page is a brief article about corsets and a few entertaining pictures: an Edwardian advertisement and a picture of a tiny-waisted woman who I think might be Camille Clifford (see above pic). The page gave me the idea for my GCSE piece, and when I was twelve or thirteen I copied the picture of the corseted actress and spent ages shading the waist.

So I have always been drawn to corsets and corseted figures, yet passionately proud of my family background of strong working women, including a suffragette four generations back, and my developing feminism. I remember the scene in Titanic where Rose's character is laced into her corset by her mother, and, as an eight-year-old addicted to the only 12-rated film she could watch, that was the scene that really caught my imagination (aside from the scene where Jack draws Rose in her necklace. Ahem). I guess it's always been natural that I would make one, one day.

The conditions of making one:

1) That I would not be forced to wear it or under any pressure to wear it

2) That I would not wear it for any man (or indeed woman)

3) That it wouldn't be there to constrain me but, actually, to empower me.

This is where, predictably, Emilie Autumn comes in. When I became obsessed with EA, I marvelled at how she combines so many of my interests in one kick-ass package: history, corsets, "fighting like a girl," tea... She ticks all the boxes: she offers all of the things that I have adored since I was a little girl, which is why I am so addicted. And she's certainly helped me where corsetry is concerned. As she tells us in her Rule No. 3, "Your corset is your armour. Lace it tightly. Breathing is unimportant." OK, I would certainly argue that breathing IS fairly important, particularly if you are prone to stress (and what the Victorians might term hysteria) like yours truly, but the word I want to zoom in on here is "armour."

Corsets can be reclaimed by feminists. Instead of being a symbol of constraint and patriarchy, they can become our armour, our protection, and a bloody good way of doing what the hell we want. For me personally, a corset is a really empowering thing because it's tight, it fits me and it makes no apologies for being a woman's garment. I pull the lacing on it, no one is constraining me without my permission. It's my body, and I will do what I want with it, and it is certainly not going to be worn in clubs in which I will strip out of it for the benefit of others.

Plus, if feminists have to be exclusively un-corseted dungaree-wearers (not that there is anything wrong with this, I've worn quite a few pairs in my time!) who never put on an apron, then what has feminism achieved? I bake cakes, I have tea parties, I wear red lipstick and I am bloody well making a corset, and I am very much a feminist. Being a feminist gives me the rather wonderful feeling that there are no limits on what I can wear and who I can be... and so wearing a corset as a feminist is rather liberating. And corsets are damn beautiful too.

I understand that the symbolism and pain attached to a corset can put a lot of feminists off, yet I personally feel that feminism and corsetry do not have to be incompatible. I am very proud that I have reached a stage in my life where I no longer feel the need to agonise over trying to reconcile my taste, sexuality and feminist views.

J xxx

p.s. This is almost completely unrelated... If you want gay rights to keep on improving, please don't vote Conservative! Examples of several recent fails:

--At BBC News (concerning comments made on the B&B incident)

--Guardian article: comment on the same story

--Major David Cameron gay-rights interview Fail

All the other parties are more gay-friendly. :) Obviously there are other good reasons not to vote Tory too, I'm not pushing a single issue here! x

Sarah is Leaving Target Women!!!

As Terra just posted on her wonderful blog, SARAH HASKINS IS LEAVING INFOMANIA'S TARGET WOMEN. This is possibly one of the worst pieces of entertainment-related news I've heard in a long time.

Target Women is one of those real pleasures in life, a dependable source of media-bashing wit and fresh feminist comedy. I like nothing better than to sit down with a cup of tea and watch old episodes over and over again. Sarah combines genuine intellectual magic with pure and simple humour, and I admire her so much for her effortless style: she shows that women can be funny without being caricatures.

To say that I will miss her goes without saying. I sincerely hope that the future of Target Women remains bright, and that Sarah will go on to produce more fantastic material in the future.

J

xxx

Mobile Phone for Little Girls

While browsing the blog of epic-win that is Feministing.com, I was reminded about a toy that I first saw advertised in a home-improvement magazine of my mother's a while ago. It's a mobile-phone for little girls, with a simple design so that the child can immediately contact Mummy or Daddy by touching one of two simple buttons.

(You can see the picture at Feministing here)

In my opinion, this is a hideous product. Giving a child a mobile-phone is, in my view, rather sinister. Presumably, this phone is marketed at children of around five or six; if I was a mother, there is no way that I would be happy about letting my very young child use such a device. From a feminist perspective, the product is even more insidious. This little pink phone is inaccessible to children from single-parent families or children with same-sex parents. For children who are growing up in "normal" families, it simply encourages little girls to continue thinking that this is the norm for everybody. Not to mention its colour: it seems that every toy for girls has become a great big pink sexist stereotype.

The product also seems to market itself based upon the sad fact that parents are increasingly paranoid about their children's safety. This is, of course, a problem in our modern society. We all know about how parents "wrap their kids in cotton wool." Obviously the world has changed, and giving kids the freedom they had thirty years ago is not really possible, but this is just a step too far. I can see the following happening: Paranoid mother sees the product on the shelf, imagines her daughter lost in the supermarket or in the back of a paedophile's car, then buys the product because it would be irresponsible not to. Surely some of the paranoia will rub off on the child? It's a sad world we live in.

Fortunately, I have never seen a girl with such a phone, and hopefully won't start seeing them everywhere in the near future.

J xxx

Disney Princesses: Response to Terra!

(See Terra's article)

Here is 'Sleeping Beauty.' Observe her figure. Isn't it wonderful? Her waist is so tiny, her breasts so voluptuous, her hand so dainty. And the hair! A golden cascade of thick, smooth locks that every girl would kill for.

'Sleeping Beauty' also happens to be a cartoon character. No human being looks like that, so why does every little girl desire to be a princess? Maybe it's the fact that after sixteen years in a lowly cottage in the woods, Aurora returns to her royal roots, and doesn't every girl wish she could discover her royal ancestry unexpectedly? Or maybe it's because Aurora has an amazing team of hands-on (female) fairies as slaves.

Sleeping Beauty -- and the title says it all, a passive girl who is defined by nothing other than her looks -- is potentially harmful to girls who believe that appearances are more important than intellect, status is more important than decency, and Prince Charming is more important than discovering one's own destiny.

Having said this, Aurora and all her fellow princess-colleagues never had a harmful effect on me as a child. I visited Disney Land Paris at the age of seven -- not that I would ever return to that place! -- and had a fantastic time in the hot French summer of 1999 waving at the princesses on parade and purchasing a bright yellow, and horribly tacky, ball gown based upon the cartoon equivalent in Beauty and the Beast. I used to adore the films and the excellent artwork, and yet none of the Disney characters are inspirations or role-models in my life.

Indeed, there came a time when I was, suddenly, fed up of pink and glitter and pin-up cartoon characters. I've never been into any of the plastic pop-stars during my teenage years and I've never been particularly worried about being carried off to paradise by a rich Prince Charming; actually, the thought of royalty and Disney-like 'hunks' makes me feel slightly sick.

I recognise, however, that Disney princesses do shape the lives of girls who go on to think that they are not worthy, and that they need to be saved by a man. I agree with Terra's point about how times are a'changing over at Disney (Mulan is, incidentally, my favourite Disney film apart from 101 Dalmatians!) and I hope that eventually wider society will change. Obviously, it is no help that there stories such as my old favourite, Twilight, to present girls with the potentially-harmful fantasy of True Love.

Thank you to Terra for another wonderful article! Oh, and I love Target Women and Sarah too.

xxx

More Bits and Bobs

1) This is completely outrageous:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8352711.stm

It's bad enough that women are obsessed with changing their visible body parts! How on Earth did society get so sick that a woman now wants perfect genitalia? Excuse me? Is she really going to run around showing people what lies beneath her pants...? Maybe she is. I don't know. I just don't understand.

I really despair about where feminism went terribly, terribly wrong.

I am very sad about this.

2) Aaargh, Twilight!

I've read three out of four of the books in the series. While I admit that the books are very easy to read and hard to put down, they are sexist and badly written. Not only is the language itself less-than-sophisticated, but the themes are just a tad dodgy when you begin to think about it. Not only is Edward Cullen a predatory and over-protective vampire -- and we all know the sexual parallels attached to such a creature -- but Bella is completely unable to function without a man in her life. Bella is a rather uninteresting, two-dimensional female character, who spends most of her time doing housework when she is not obsessing over the byronic Edward or using another male, the strong and oh-so-handsome Jacob Black, to ease her pain. Obviously other girls get Twilight and I don't, so me going on about it like this has no point to it.

What is most sad, for me, is the fact that Twilight is written by a woman. I'm not going to comment on Stephenie Meyer's religious beliefs, because that would not be my place, but it saddens me that young girls could be encouraged in what they are taught from a young age: that a Prince Charming will come and rescue them, and everything will be well.

With the release of the film New Moon, the second in the series, there have been a number of interesting articles around on the more unsettling side of Twilight. This one, I think, is especially worth reading:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/nov/13/twilight-vampires-teenage-girls

Oh, and I am having a moral dilemma about whether or not I should go and see New Moon. What shall I do?

3) Earl Grey tea is delicious.

xxx

Thoughts on the Male Species!

Good evening,

Today I have been reflecting on how difficult growing into a man must be.

So much of feminism focuses on the oppression of women and the dominance of men. This is hugely significant, and matters. In a world where men still earn higher than women, our government, legal system and civil service and are mostly in the hands of men, and women are treated as commodities, this is an important issue. It must be changed.

However, often feminism seems to promote positive discrimination and an empowering of women, while leaving the men unchanged. Often men seem confused and frightened by a powerful woman, and may feel threatened. It's no good marching into an organisation and telling them that fifty percent of their workforce must be female. This is an ideal that we would hope to achieve eventually, but naturally. It is important to involve men in the debate and in the revolution.

Like it or not, men are important. Women are important. We're all important. If I had a fifty-pence coin for every time I've heard "Anything a man can do, a woman can do better," I'd be very rich. I think, while women might bring different skills to a task, the emphasis should be on equality, not superiority.

While there may be a pressure for women to be pretty, skinny and oppressed, there is also a pressure for men to be hunky, muscular and powerful. How does the scrawny, acne-covered adolescent boy feel when he sees an advertising campaign using a tight-muscled, topless "ideal" man? How does the shy, geeky boy feel when he is forced to play "macho" contact-sport and fail miserably? I have always been a huge fan of "Billy Elliot," which explores issues of masculinity.

Men are arguably powerful because it is expected of them that they must be powerful, and those who are not powerful, hunky or surrounded by attractive blondes must feel hurt by society as much as a woman who refuses to conform to feminine ideals.

What needs to change goes beyond women. Women need to be informed, liberated, empowered. But men need to understand that there is no "norm" for them, either, there is not an "ideal" man as there is not an "ideal" woman. If men were true to themselves, and women were true to themselves, would society not fall into a balance of its own accord? There would be more house-husbands, less male politicians, less housewives, more male nurses and make-up artists.

I am a feminist because I believe that women deserve equality and that they haven't got it yet. I am a feminist because so many males have already REALLY got on my nerves for their sexism and prejudice. But I am a feminist, too, because I believe that feminism is not just an ideology but an achievable goal, because men will listen if they realise that it's OK to listen.

xxxxx

Response to Terradoll's Article on "Girl Poison"

Terradoll, a good friend of mine, and a very talented writer, has commenced blogging on literature, music and life that you will find very interesting if you are interested in identity, feminism and riot-grrrl. I urge you to look her up! The blog is in its early days but hopefully it will gain a large following.

http://terradoll.blogspot.com/

In response to the intriguing article on Girl Poison, I thought I'd write some of my own thoughts on the matter of our young girls and how they have been, and are being, "poisoned."

Perhaps I was once poisoned myself, to a certain extent, and the remnants still remain. I've never been "into fashion," I abhor the fashion industry's confining influence and the skeletal models seen upon the catwalk, I have strong principles concerning individuality and self-expression. Yet I confess to worrying about my weight and general body-issues, undoubtedly a concern that will have trickled down from the media and the fashion industry. As a feminist-socialist-vegetarian-weirdo (!!!) I still bear the scars of our capitalist society and I completely concur with what Terradoll, and Angelspit, are saying.

I am, relatively-speaking, unpoisoned when you observe some of the young girls out and about today. I am only seventeen and yet I have seen it happen in my lifetime; when I was little, dressing up meant putting on a Laura Ashley children's dress and a sunhat, perhaps some jewellery if I could put up with its irritating feel against my skin. Now I go into my local shopping mall and see children no older than ten with handbags and wearing mini-skirts and make-up. It is popular knowledge now that more young girls aspire to be glamour models than doctors. I find this shocking and unacceptable and it needs to change.

Terradoll rightly argues that girls need to have fostered within them a sense of confidence and self-worth, and I have been reflecting upon where this should come from. Should it come from education, and stronger Personal and Social Education? Perhaps an awareness of the history of women's rights and the struggle that we have always been engaged in would help (I was most shocked the other day when a classmate of mine asked me, "What's a suffragette?"), as well as an assurance that each girl is beautiful no matter how thin, tall or blonde she is. But then arguably, this would be useless in a world where beautiful breasts are fake and girls' role models are cosmetically-enhanced pop stars and glamour models. Maybe the media and the fashion industry need to change? The problem with this is that fake breasts and fast-fashion sell, and the industry is worth mega-bucks. Maybe the government need to do something? But what could the government do, when it suits them to keep women oppressed (note the falling number of female MPs since the "Blair's Babes" boost and Cameron's selection of all-male team to fight the recession)?

Perhaps the only thing to do is Girls educating Girls, supporting each other, and trying to take little steps. I personally think things have, in many ways, got worse in the last fifteen years, and it's a shame that Terradoll's beloved riot-grrrl and Third Wave Feminism have gone so underground in recent years (I confess to being relatively new to the concept of riot-grrrl, as it is conveniently left out of many information books and magazines). I want to change the girls who ask "What's a suffragette?" and I think it's particularly worrying that in an all-girls' school there are still people who believe feminism is not an issue. I'm in favour of increasing the study of Women's Issues in Personal and Social Education lessons, even if it won't make a huge difference.

Perhaps this is worth writing to my MP over?

An interesting thought!

Sorry to ramble!!!

J
xxxx