from here
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Battleship! http://sage21801.blogspot.com
Monday, May 18, 2009
Sexist Vintage ads
15 Sexist Vintage Ads
Published on Today 5/18/2009 under AdvertisingWe've come a long way since advertising was so offensively sexist. Right?
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Sex-starved Kenyan sues over boycott
From CNN:
NAIROBI, Kenya (CNN) -- A Kenyan man has sued activists who called on women to boycott sex to protest the growing divide in the nation's coalition government.
James Kimondo said the seven-day sex ban, which ended this week, resulted in stress, mental anguish, backaches and lack of sleep, his lawyer told the state-run Kenya Broadcasting Corp.
The lawsuit filed Friday claims lack of conjugal rights affected Kimondo's marriage and seeks undisclosed damages from the G-10, an umbrella group for women's activists, KBC said.
The women's caucus caused a national debate when it urged women to withhold sex to protest increasingly frosty relations between President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga.
Citizens of the east African nation are frustrated by a shaky coalition government, which was formed after post-election violence killed more than 1,000 people in 2008. The wrangling between Kibaki and Odinga has sparked fears of more violence.
Gender activists say they are not worried about the lawsuit.
"I have not been served with the papers, but I was told they are coming and I am eagerly waiting," said Ann Njogu, executive, director of Centers for Rights Education and Awareness. "It will be interesting to see the face of a man who is not willing to abstain for the sake of his country."
Despite the lawsuit, Njogu said, the boycott was successful.
"The principal leaders met as a result of the boycott, and I understand that they are setting up reforms to look into the country's internal security," she said.
Plans are under way for women activists to meet with Kibaki and Odinga, according to Njogu.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Blog of Champions perspective
This is a blog entry from http://blogofchampions.livejournal.com/168029.html
Just an interesting take. Everybody, keep reading!
" From Shakespeare to Stumble Upon, the male gaze is everywhere
I think one of the most subtle but significant ways that male privilege plays out is the male-as-default/woman-as-other attitude. When you draw a stick figure without any specific characteristics, it's assumed to be a male; you need to add a bow or a skirt to make it into the subgenre of human/male known as female. Items of equal use to both sexes - cars, food, etc., etc., etc., - are sold using half-dressed women in order to appeal to men.
I was thinking about this recently when I was reading Stephen Orgel's book Impersonations for my Shakespeare class (I actually took a different Shakespeare class from Orgel two years ago and it remains one of my favorite classes ever, but I digress). The book is about gender and Elizabethan/Jacobean theater with its central question being basically, "Why did England develop a transvestite theater, when other European countries either let women act or banned acting altogether?"
In it, he discusses common Puritan anti-theatrical tracts of the time, and how one of their biggest arguments was that when you stage a play, women can just go and see it! They can stand in the audience with men! The men might be aroused by them! There might be flirtation or even...you know. Fornication.
I was really struck by the relatively coherent concept of the male gaze (though it obviously wasn't termed as such) hundreds of years before Laura Mulvey started writing about it. Even back in the day, people thought women shouldn't leave the house lest they provoke lust by being looked at. The idea of a woman looking at a man and becoming aroused didn't seem to enter the Puritans' minds, let alone the idea of a woman wanting to go see a play for her own entertainment without factoring men into the equation. The women were not really humans with desires or agency; they were just a sort of lesser version of real humans (i.e., men) whose worth could only be determined by how it affected those real humans.
Modern advertising's use of women's bodies to sell products seems to me like much the same thing, only we're encouraging male arousal instead of discouraging it (a very slight step forward, I suppose). The imbalance between sexy, half-naked women and sexy, half-naked men in ads is obvious, as is the complete disconnect between sex and most of the products it is used to sell (really, I can think of very few things less sexy than a Carl's Jr. hamburger, I don't care how nudely Paris Hilton thrashes while eating one). And that's because, unless a product is specifically aimed toward women, advertisers don't think of women as real full humans that react to ads and buy things. People in general react to ads and buy things, and "people in general" means men. There's a reason it's the "everyman," not the "everyperson," or, heaven forfend!, the "everylady," even though women make up a bit more than half the world's population.
The cultural saturation of advertising-inspired male gaze really hit home to me when I Stumbled Upon this gallery of photos of kids in fanciful costumes doing fanciful things underwater. Most of the Stumble Upon comments thought it was real nifty, but a few said it "made me feel like a pedo," which was a bit odd seeing as how the little girls are not scantily clad or in any sexually suggestive positions. As a SU friend of mine pointed out, "The mere fact that some of you are feeling like pedos for looking at these means that you really need to realize that women≠sex. Seriously. You can look at pictures with little girls in them WITHOUT it being sexual. If this makes you feel like a pedo then maybe you might be :O"
How sad is it that some people can look at pictures of girls and just can't get past the idea that anything female exists only for the male gaze? These dudes look at pictures of girls and can't think of going swimming or having fun. Their minds jump directly to "women/girls are sexual objects rather than human beings."
It's not like I think it's a great injustice in and of itself that I don't get to see more good-looking men in ads. It's the underlying message that men are the ones who matter and women are the ones who accessorize men's thoughts and actions. I'm tired of seeing bodies like mine always used as bait and never as agents or characters. Women exist for ourselves, not for men. Men are not the only real people. "
I think one of the most subtle but significant ways that male privilege plays out is the male-as-default/woman-as-other attitude. When you draw a stick figure without any specific characteristics, it's assumed to be a male; you need to add a bow or a skirt to make it into the subgenre of human/male known as female. Items of equal use to both sexes - cars, food, etc., etc., etc., - are sold using half-dressed women in order to appeal to men.
I was thinking about this recently when I was reading Stephen Orgel's book Impersonations for my Shakespeare class (I actually took a different Shakespeare class from Orgel two years ago and it remains one of my favorite classes ever, but I digress). The book is about gender and Elizabethan/Jacobean theater with its central question being basically, "Why did England develop a transvestite theater, when other European countries either let women act or banned acting altogether?"
In it, he discusses common Puritan anti-theatrical tracts of the time, and how one of their biggest arguments was that when you stage a play, women can just go and see it! They can stand in the audience with men! The men might be aroused by them! There might be flirtation or even...you know. Fornication.
I was really struck by the relatively coherent concept of the male gaze (though it obviously wasn't termed as such) hundreds of years before Laura Mulvey started writing about it. Even back in the day, people thought women shouldn't leave the house lest they provoke lust by being looked at. The idea of a woman looking at a man and becoming aroused didn't seem to enter the Puritans' minds, let alone the idea of a woman wanting to go see a play for her own entertainment without factoring men into the equation. The women were not really humans with desires or agency; they were just a sort of lesser version of real humans (i.e., men) whose worth could only be determined by how it affected those real humans.
Modern advertising's use of women's bodies to sell products seems to me like much the same thing, only we're encouraging male arousal instead of discouraging it (a very slight step forward, I suppose). The imbalance between sexy, half-naked women and sexy, half-naked men in ads is obvious, as is the complete disconnect between sex and most of the products it is used to sell (really, I can think of very few things less sexy than a Carl's Jr. hamburger, I don't care how nudely Paris Hilton thrashes while eating one). And that's because, unless a product is specifically aimed toward women, advertisers don't think of women as real full humans that react to ads and buy things. People in general react to ads and buy things, and "people in general" means men. There's a reason it's the "everyman," not the "everyperson," or, heaven forfend!, the "everylady," even though women make up a bit more than half the world's population.
The cultural saturation of advertising-inspired male gaze really hit home to me when I Stumbled Upon this gallery of photos of kids in fanciful costumes doing fanciful things underwater. Most of the Stumble Upon comments thought it was real nifty, but a few said it "made me feel like a pedo," which was a bit odd seeing as how the little girls are not scantily clad or in any sexually suggestive positions. As a SU friend of mine pointed out, "The mere fact that some of you are feeling like pedos for looking at these means that you really need to realize that women≠sex. Seriously. You can look at pictures with little girls in them WITHOUT it being sexual. If this makes you feel like a pedo then maybe you might be :O"
How sad is it that some people can look at pictures of girls and just can't get past the idea that anything female exists only for the male gaze? These dudes look at pictures of girls and can't think of going swimming or having fun. Their minds jump directly to "women/girls are sexual objects rather than human beings."
It's not like I think it's a great injustice in and of itself that I don't get to see more good-looking men in ads. It's the underlying message that men are the ones who matter and women are the ones who accessorize men's thoughts and actions. I'm tired of seeing bodies like mine always used as bait and never as agents or characters. Women exist for ourselves, not for men. Men are not the only real people. "
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Meeting tonight
SAGE meeting tonight @ 8pm in TETC 219. Let's conclude this year's wondrous activities!
Friday, April 3, 2009
Afghanistan, Israel
Check out this article describing appalling behavior. This is why women need to speak up and demand that change happen.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
***1st SAGE MEETING OF APRIL!***
Buenas a tod@s,
SAGERS we came. we conquered. Women's History Month was an amazing success thanks in large part to YOU! We WILL meet tomorrow evening (this Wednesday) at 8:00pm in TETC 219 as always!
Plan to:
-Spruce up tees! So we can sell 'em!
-Write a thank you email to our WHM Presenters/Lecturers/Speakers
-Talk about KOREN ZAILCKAS COMING ON APRIL 8TH!
Nos vemos,
Jeff
Friday, March 27, 2009
Koren Zailckas, author of Smashed, coming to campus!
Everyone, and I mean everyone, keep April 8th open because Koren Zailckas is coming to speak at Salisbury University in Holloway Hall!
More info to come later. Look for a link to download a poster for you to put up around campus and/or in your place of residence.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Tonight's event
Presentation by Dr. Diane Illig
Tue Mar 24 7pm – Tue Mar 24 8pm
Nanticoke A in the GUC
about: Coming Full Circle- The Goddess, Mother Earth, Going Green and the Search for the Sacred Feminine.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Tonight, Wednesday's event
Wednesday March 11th -7:30pm- TETC 179
"The Education of a Queen...Consort? The French Education of Mary, Queen of Scots."
by Dr. Walton
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Event tonight
Screening of XXY
WhenThu, March 5, 7pm – 10pm
WhereHenson 103
DescriptionThis Argentine/Argentinean film is about a 15 year-old hermaphrodite who finds her identity after a young man comes to visit her small Uruguayan fishing village.
Check out the event tonight! Vagina Monologues start tonight as well and continue until Saturday Night. 6 dollar donation as an entrance fee and it starts at 7pm as well. Look for SAGE there on Friday night!
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Tonight 3/4
Events! Tonight be sure to come out to Dr. Detwiler's presentation!
WhenWed, March 4, 7:00pm
WhereNanticoke A Rm 236 (map)
DescriptionThe mythical figure of mother in "Blue Moon." Expect to listen to the amazing Native American folk music of Terri Rivera Platt!
Screening of XXY
WhenThu, March 5, 7pm – 10pm
WhereHenson 103 (map)
DescriptionThis Argentine/Argentinean film is about a 15 year-old hermaphrodite who finds her identity after a young man comes to visit her small Uruguayan fishing village.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
