Posts by Megan Wegan
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: Towards a Sex-Positive Utopia, in reply to Bart Janssen,
The problem is not the teenager it is the person looking with evil intent.
Word. I was going to make that point in the original point, but I had Said Enough. "but you have some bloke who’s not listening to what you’re saying, he’s just looking at your legs." Why the hell is that the girl's fault?
And yes, encouraging teenagers to understand and celebrate their bodies - of whatever type - wouldn't that go a long way to making the world a better place?
-
Up Front: Towards a Sex-Positive Utopia, in reply to Jackie Clark,
Who is Caitlin Moran? And why is she so disturbing?
She's not disturbing. She's kind of awesome. (Funny, smart, talented, etc, etc.)
She doesn't mind porn. She thinks the porn industry is problematic - as does anyone with a brain. However. She says things like this:
Brazilians (the wax jobs, not the people) are a horror. She teaches her daughters to pity the girls on MTV, and that there are consequences to dressing like them when you're too young: "Even if you're not getting raped, but you have some bloke who's not listening to what you're saying, he's just looking at your legs – you don't necessarily realise, when you're still a little kid in your head, that that's what's happening. So, you know, you have the option to put your legs away and simply engage this person in conversation by smiling instead."
Which, OK, let's ignore the shade of victim blaming there, cos that'd be a massive derail. But why are brazilians bad? who says so? Why is she the Queen of What's OK To Do With Your Pubic Hair? And what if, even as a teenager, you don't want to put your legs away? What if you like your legs. What if you think - with full knowledge of the industry and mechanisms it comes from, that looking like a Pussycat Doll is what you'd like to do, actually?
You and I have had this conversation any number of times, so I don't need to say it, but feminism shouldn't be, can't be about telling other women what to do, whether that's in the bedroom, or on screen, or between them and their waxer.
And to bring it back to the larger point, that kind of is the, um...point. The sex-pos utopia will only ever exist when we all get over the notion that what happens between two people (or three, or 15) is in some way our business. When we can say, well, that's not my particular bag, but you have fun. Katie Roiphe tells me I'm meant to be appalled by the latest BDSM novel sweeping the interwebs. I've read it. I was appalled. By the writing. (Seriously, it's awful.) But I'm not perplexed (as a feminist) by people enjoying submissive sex. I'm perplexed that anyone else cares what someone is reading on their kindle to get off.
-
Up Front: Towards a Sex-Positive Utopia, in reply to Russell Brown,
Oh god, don’t. I made the mistake on Saturday night of proposing that Caitlin Moran might not be completely right about everything in the whole world.
Yeah, don't do that. I did it once, and got hate mail.
-
Athleticism and strategy with moments of flashy entertainment. Solid work followed by showboating.
See, I still see a comparison to rugby. Or, you know, any sport. There's showboating in every sport. But does anyone consider Usain Bolt less of an athlete because he takes a victory lap?
3410, I don't think it's selling out. At some point, if you want the sport to grow - and if you love it, surely you do - you have to accept that you need funding and crowds and sponsorship. Whether or not nixing the fishnets is the way to get those things, I don't know. But as someone who briefly got onto skates, the derby girls are phenomenal athletes, and should be recognized as such, without the distraction of short skirts and face paint.
Which is not to say I don't miss the Newtown gym days. I do, but like Hadyn says, the sport is evolving.
-
Up Front: Safety Net, in reply to JoJo,
It's depressing, yes. But I take heart in the fact that people are talking about it, and outraged by it.
-
Up Front: Safety Net, in reply to Hilary Stace,
Germaine talked about a young woman surgeon she had met at a book signing. She had done all the things the second wavers had fought for. But she had walked away from that career as the the environment in the operating surgery and the comments and sexism of the male clinicians were as abusive as any other workplace where women are powerless.
Yeah. This is why I am loving A Thousand Reasons.
-
Up Front: Safety Net, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
That's really long and hard to type, though.
-
Up Front: Safety Net, in reply to Russell Brown,
You know, I think in some cases, it is a shut out. If you read some of the comments on that Feministe post I linked to, it is clear that there are any number of women who believe men just aren’t welcome.
Which if you are trying to cultivate a safe space, fine, but I don’t think that’s what it is.
I’m all for telling men they’re being patronising, for telling them to “own their privilege"*, for telling them, if necessary, to shut up and listen. But yeah, when it comes to it, while I might swear a lot, I try not to bully. Though, I suspect there are people online who would disagree.
* And “own your privilege” is, of course, exactly the kind of language you’re talking about.
-
Up Front: Safety Net, in reply to Russell Brown,
The exception? Sometimes, feminist blog discussions. That’s the only time where I can be interested in the discussion, feel I have something to contribute – and not do so.
This makes me really sad. Because you _do_ have something to contribute. It's one of my immense frustrations with any number of feminists websites that shut out men completely. What the hell is the point of just talking to women? Do these feminists think we can actually achieve true equality without the involvement of men? Yes, it has to be managed, and the recent Hugo Schwyzer debacle demonstrates why. But we need allies.
Having said that, the kind of sites where men can't speak are usually the same sites where I don't speak either.
-
Up Front: Safety Net, in reply to Bart Janssen,
So do people adjust their behaviour to a “level of risk” depending on the environment.
Completely. One of the things currently exercising the Women of Wellington is this delightful story in the Dom Post. (Deborah's excellent analysis of why it's problematic here, so we don't have to litigate it all over again.
The comments are predictably victim-blamey. I'd love to be able to go on there and say "You know what? The way the police have described that assault is very similar to something that happened to me, relatively recently. In my house. By someone I know. So, would you all like to weigh in on how "common sense" would have kept me safe? How that relates to property theft or (my favourite) walking in South Auckland covered in swastikas? Or would you like to think about the fact that your arguments are bullshit, and directly related to why most victims of such attacks don't report them?"
I've said this basic thing on Twitter, where I was slightly uncomfortable. I'm even less comfortable saying it here, cos it is way more public. But while I would love to, there's no way in hell I am leaving that comment on Stuff. It's not worth the risk to my mental health.