Feminist Knickers In Collective Twist Over Ms. Magazine Obama Cover
Posted by: Susannah Breslin
Filed in:
news
8:00AM, Tuesday January 13th 2009
See this photoshopped image of Barack Obama ripping his clothes off like Superman to reveal a T-shirt that reads: “THIS IS WHAT A FEMINIST LOOKS LIKE”? That’s the cover of a special inaugural issue of Ms. Magazine, and it’s got some feminists upset. Ms. states the concept was born out of a meeting Feminist Majority Foundation chairwoman Peg Yorkin and Ms. had with Obama, in which the President-Elect purportedly told them: “I am a feminist.” According to Ms., Obama “ran on the strongest platform for women’s rights of any major party in American history.” Writing in the Daily Beast, Amy Siskind asserts the image is anti-feminist: “Who is looking out for the women of this country? Well, I will tell you who is not: Ms. magazine.” Feminist Law Professors say the image is a mockery: “[Is Ms.] symbolically looking to a male superhero to ‘rescue’ feminism? Very problematic imagery, in my view.” So, what do you think? Is Superobama the first feminist President, or is the idea of a guy feminist a joke?
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
Fizzy
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 08:31 am: [report]
I’m a feminist and I don’t see anything wrong with it. In fact, I think it’s kind of hot!
Wendy Atterberry
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 08:34 am: [report]
The only people making a mockery of feminism are the feminists who get their knickers in a bunch over EVERYTHING. It’s shameful and it’s embarrassing. The world is not black and white and it’s certainly not men vs. women. Women can align with (and vote for!!) men without turning their backs on their gender, and a man can stand up for women’s rights without being some superhero who’s rescuing feminism. The man was raised by two strong women, is married to a strong woman, has a strong mother-in-law, and is raising two little girls. Why WOULDN’T he be a feminist?
cwoodrow
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 08:37 am: [report]
I see the issue with that reading of the imagery, but I had read it as he is (by example) rescuing us from a world where men are afraid or unable to legitimately be feminists?
BeeGirl
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 08:54 am: [report]
I have no issue with this. Men can be feminists too, and to suggest otherwise is to make a mockery of feminism!
Rachel Kramer Bussel
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 09:07 am: [report]
I found Siskin’s piece beyond offensive. First of all, the Feminist Majority Foundation used that tagline with an image of Obama during the election. Second of all, the notion that feminism is only about women is absurd. I’m totally with Wendy. Siskin is entitled to her opinion but I found nothing I could agree with in her piece, and it seemed like she was determined to create an us against them men vs. women dichotomy that just doesn’t exist in Obama’s case.
I don’t know if he ran on the strongest platform for women’s rights ever, but while that part can be debated, it’s the level of outrage that I find so offensive, and the idea that there’s a single, simplistic reading of the photo. Maybe, um, he’s freaking rescuing us from the hell that has been the last 8 years?
Wendy Atterberry
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 09:13 am: [report]
Wasn’t the first cover of Ms. Magazine an image of Wonder Woman? So I think this Obama cover is a play on that, like the face of feminism can be a “super man” as much as a “wonder woman.”
powplz
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 09:16 am: [report]
“Maybe, um, he’s freaking rescuing us from the hell that has been the last 8 years? “
I like it!
Susannah Breslin
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 09:18 am: [report]
I would like the image better if Obama was wearing no shirt and that line was tattooed across his chest.
Erin G
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 10:12 am: [report]
I can see how someone might misunderstand the image at first blush, but really now, think for three more seconds and realize who it is we’re talking about: Obama. He’s the last person to see the world, as Wendy put, in black and white, and certainly not men v. women. What this image says to me is that anyone can stand up for injustice against women.
Lynn
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 04:33 pm: [report]
Oh my gosh. I hate it when people work so hard to be offended.
Chelle
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 09:00 pm: [report]
Wouldn’t saying a man can’t be a feminist be considered sexist? I would think so.
danzbar
wrote on January 13 2009 @ 10:34 pm: [report]
I do not find the image bothersome in the slightest. I can understand why the heroic aspect of it might bug some, though. I think the question we need to ask is this: If Obama were taking his clothes off in another way in this image, would some feminists not take issue with it? If he appeared to do it in a sexy way, would some not suggest that the image “communicates the old stereotype that women need a sexual savior” or some such critique? I think they would. If Obama were photoshopped to be taking his clothes off in a determined but less Superman-like way, would some not take it to mean “the image espouses the view that what feminism needs is a male political leader to truly get behind the cause and thereby give it strength that it could not have without men”? I think they would. And if someone were to figure out a way to photoshop the image so that his hand and face together did not suggest anything that could be taken offensively, would some feminists still not be bothered that he only had that message on underneath his suit and not proudly displayed? I think they would. And, lastly: If the magazine wanted to send this message through the use of a picture, how would it do so in a way that it would not offend at least some prominent feminists?
denny99
wrote on January 15 2009 @ 12:01 pm: [report]
Good pose, all of us need and want a hero! He will be my hero if not listening to his advisers to “dump down” his speech. We all will have a hero if Obama continues to speak in complete English language sentences. Hell, in the next four years we may even learn to read and write the English language.
Dmun
wrote on January 15 2009 @ 01:26 pm: [report]
AAhh, the old “Second Wave versus New Feminism” arguments… the women-warriors who were considered radical in the 70s can’t get the idea of the enemy out of their minds. To take a man, put him on a feminist mag and have him do the “superman” pose? Obviously anti-feminist!
Images over actions, these types. Gender over ability.
Hate to pimp myself here but if anyone’s interested, I wrote about an encounter with a young and an old feminist, with a bit about abuse that confused me.
Basically, when I wondered why anyone would stay in an abusive relationship—and considered the question logical- she lambasted me for not questioning why someone would want to control someone else through violence.
To me it seems pretty clear which is more questionable behavior, being the victim and remaining or being the benefited oppressor.
Susan
wrote on January 15 2009 @ 04:20 pm: [report]
I just wish feminists would put their big girl panties on. Honestly, I am so tired of the victimhood. All of my friends are, in truth, feminists, but none of them want to be associated with this kind of PC nonsense. Give it a rest.
http://www.HookingUpSmart.com
jazzyj
wrote on January 22 2009 @ 01:19 pm: [report]
If men can’t be feminists, then no one can support the rights of others at all. All of us must be divided into categories and stuck in them.