Finally, a social experiment I can get behind: Australian morning news anchor Karl Stefanovic decided he was going to test viewers’ differing attitudes toward him and his female coworker, Lisa Wilkinson, after she did a segment on the negative feedback and unsolicited advice she gets about her wardrobe. He wore the same suit for a month and no one noticed, so he told Wilkinson and their producer about his idea, and decided to extend the experiment for a whole year.
The grand total of comments he’s received on his wardrobe is a whopping zero. He says he does get other feedback, though: “I’m judged on my interviews, my appalling sense of humor — on how I do my job, basically. Whereas women are quite often judged on what they’re wearing or how their hair is.” Keep reading »
Do I need to link to anything that says “[Fill in the name of a woman] is getting naked on camera for attention”? It’s been said about me. It’s being said about Kim Kardashian. It’s been said about any woman who’s ever voluntarily had a photo taken in any kind of sexualized context, and several non-sexualized contexts, for that matter.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but here’s what you do to me when you say that I take nude, sexualized photos for attention: You claim that you know my intentions. Are you a mind-reader? To my knowledge, that’s not a thing that exists. So do you know me intimately? No, you don’t, and no one who knows me intimately thinks or says that I take nudes for attention. So what you’re doing is implying that I’m a liar when I say, “No, this is not for attention,” and/or you’re assuming that attention is the only possible motivation any woman could ever have for taking a picture of herself naked, and possibly claiming that you know myself, or any woman, better than we know ourselves. That you have insight on the female character (because women are a monolith) that females don’t have if they state that they are not taking nude pictures for attention. Keep reading »
Yesterday morning, TIME Magazine’s Katy Steinmetz released a list of fifteen words from which we can chose one that most deserves to be “banned” in 2015. The poll, which includes items such as kale and #sorrynotsorry, is intended as a bit of fun, but there is one point where I want to get off the ride:
“feminist: You have nothing against feminism itself, but when did it become a thing that every celebrity had to state their position on whether this word applies to them, like some politician declaring a party? Let’s stick to the issues and quit throwing this label around like ticker tape at a Susan B. Anthony parade.”
I fail to see how one can have a problem with hearing the word feminist – and any discussion of it, including discussions participated in by celebrities — but not have a problem with feminism itself. Keep reading »
“Mommy!” Coming from anyone other than your child it can certainly sound sickeningly saccharine, diminutive, and even mocking. But at the moment, all things Mommy reign supreme. This past weekend, Heather Havrilesky (who writes the awesome advice column Dear Polly, BTW) addressed this dichotomy for the New York Times Sunday Review in her piece, “Our ‘Mommy’ Problem.” Havrilesky writes:
Motherhood is no longer viewed as simply a relationship with your children, a role you play at home and at school, or even a hallowed institution. Motherhood has been elevated — or perhaps demoted — to the realm of lifestyle, an all-encompassing identity with demands and expectations that eclipse everything else in a woman’s life.
Keep reading »
Hey losers, I know you have copied my look with the carefully groomed hipster beard and the t-shirt and manufactured rips in my jeans, but you’re not me. You don’t have the balls to be me. You also don’t have what it takes to get as much pussy as I do, so I am going to take that money you earned from your shitty job and teach you how to treat women like dogs who will come begging for some cock. You will never be as good as me, but you can become part of my inner circle for only $360 a year.
You can also attend one of our five-day boot camps for only $2995. Isn’t it worth that amount of money to get fucked by women who are out of your league? Who cares if you are ugly, stupid and boring, you can get laid with our techniques, and as a bonus, we teach you how to get back at all of those whores who rejected you by luring them in. I’m just pimping my game, and I have to take a lot of flak for that from some feminist bitches, but it’s worth it.
This is the pretty much the philosophy for a circle jerk where guys are taught that lying, insulting and abusing women is the way to get inside of their vagina. I’ve just compressed pages and pages of articles, comments and videos such as “God Is On My Side: Intense Self-Amusement Tactics That Will Let You Choke Girls For Fun” by Julien Blanc into the above two paragraphs. Keep reading »