femtique

Updates from femtique RSS

• 11:58:40 am on January 23, 2008 | 9 | # |
  
  

  This entry is under construction. A lot of my fellow rad. fems. are pist at me for the entries I posed up for this Carnival. I waited a long time to get entries from Heart @ Women’s Space, and most of the entries I got were not radical feminist material. And now, I am going to have to re-work everything. Be on the look-out. Within the next week I will be posting up the Carnival of the Radical Feminists from scratch.

  A word to the wise — it takes a community of radical feminists to make a good feminist carnival. I waited a month and a half for entries to come in, and they were sparse… perhaps because of the holidays. I will go online and look for some good rad. fem. material. If you think your material is good, then by all means, send it to femtique [at] gmail [dot] com.

   

• 10:43:06 pm on January 14, 2008 | 2 | # |
  
  

  

  Like Alicia Keys, Colbie Caillat was not expected to sexually objectify herself in order to sell this single. Through out the music video, Caillat described the feeling one gets when one is around their partner. Caillat expressed the lyrics in a lucid fashion.

  It starts in my toes
  And I crinkle my nose
  Where ever it goes
  I always know
  That you make me smile
  Please stay for a while now
  Just take your time
  Where ever you go

  The line that reads “please stay for a while now… just take your time now” indicates that the partner in the relationship is not expected to “give it up” or force any feelings. Quite the opposite, the phrase “take your time” conveys a message of equality and mutual respect.

  Part of what makes this song to egalitarian in nature is the use of phrases that express the vulnerability of a person in a relationship without emotional exploitation or “emotional abuse”.

  The phrase “I lose all control when you kiss my nose, the feeling shows” is indicative of emotional vulnerability. If one combines the lyrics “take your time” and “I lose all control”, then one can see how the main character feels comfortable in expressing feelings without forcing their partner to respond in the exact same way. Other ways the partner could express their emotions could be non-verbal.

  These lyrics reinforce the idea that there is nothing wrong with being emotionally vulnerable. Emotional vulnerability is not the problem in society. The issue is emotional abuse. An example of emotional abuse is described in the song “Apologize” by OneRepublic from a man’s perspective.

   

• 09:38:29 pm on January 7, 2008 | 4 | # |
  
  

  

  According to AdRants, Target targeted a woman’s vagina. There is no question that Target provocatively displayed a woman laying down with her vagina at the center of the ad.

  Adrants writer Steve Hall said:

  Yup. we’re ready for it. Ready for everyone to tell us we’re reading way, way too much into this Target billboard that places a certain area of a woman’s body highly targeted by men right in the middle of its signature target logo. But you can’t tell us not a single soul at Target or its agency looked at this and didn’t see a certain interpretation that could be construed as objectifying to women. There’s just no way.

  Would it have been that hard to place the image of the woman so her upper body was in the middle of the target rather than her…um…crotch? Seriously.

  How could this advertisement be feminist friendly and still maintain it’s pop appeal?

  1. Focusing a woman’s vagina in the center of the “target” is physically and sexually objectifying women. As Steve said, “Would it have been that hard to place the image of the woman so her upper body was in the middle of the target rather than her…um…crotch? Seriously.” If the focus would have been different, then it would not have been objectifying. Target does not have to objectify women to sell their products. They choose to.

  2. This ad is discriminatory towards women in general. The targeting of this woman’s vagina is an act of gender discrimination. If there were a man and woman being sexually targeted, the power imbalance would have been rectified. Target does not have to discriminate women to sell their products.

   

• 03:10:18 am on December 30, 2007 | 6 | # |
  
  

  

  In the original Alien vs. Predator, Alexa Woods (Sanaa Lathan) outlasts her male co-stars and ends up as the heroine of the film. In Alien vs. Predator Requiem (AVP-R), Kelly (Reiko Aylesworth) was written as a heroine, but she was not nearly the heroine Lathan was. This is the result of different writers. Two groups of writers created two different stories. The writers of Alien vs. Predator created a dynamic and fierce heroine. The original Alien vs. Predator was feminist friendly. The writers of AVP-R created one woman who was a heroine and another who was “eye candy”, i.e. physically objectified.

  The physically objectified character, Jesse (Kristen Hager), was introduced at the beginning of the film as the disgruntled girlfriend of the large and in charge violent boyfriend. After all, every woman wants a man who is in control, right? Jesse was powerless next to her boyfriend. Her boyfriend was violent, and even though she said she would “fire him”, at no point did she verbally disagree with his brutality to his face. After watching her male friend get beat up by her boyfriend, her boyfriend commanded her to follow him back into her house … and lo and behold, she did exactly what he told her to do. Big surprise. Her passive acceptance translates to audiences that women accept men who are violent, in control, abusive, and if they know what’s good for them, should not show their discontent to their boyfriends’ faces. She eventually broke up with him, but her boyfriend stalked her and beat up her new male interest. It also sends the message that verbal and emotional abuse against a woman is to be tolerated by men and women.

  The director had at least three 15 second semi-nude camera shots of Jesse in the film. During the pool scene, she stripped semi-nude while her date watched in amusement — he did not take one article of clothing off. This unbalance of nudity created a power imbalance as opposed to a mutually intimate moment on screen. Jesse was thoroughly physically exploited and then killed quickly by the Predator near the end of the movie. She was also used as an object of desire and affection for one of the lead male characters.

  The heroine of the film, Kelly (Reiko Aylesworth), was a military woman. Like many films with a part-time heroine, there was a point in the film where her expertise could not be trusted because she was a woman. Transformers (2007) had a similar character that was blatantly ignored because she was a woman. Everyone knows a woman in charge in an action-adventure movie should not be trusted! Sarcasm aside, Kelly should have been trusted. A few of the people who trusted a woman survived while the rest of the town ceased to exist. Kelly’s military experience was not used until the very end of the film. I as hoping at some point that the writers would rectify her role as a leading action woman, but the writers failed to do so.

  Kelly’s connection to her daughter was unfair compared to the role men play in this genre of film. At the beginning of the movie, her daughter preferred her husband to read to her at night because he was at home more than she was. The price she paid for being a military mother was emotional distance from her daughter. If the roles were reversed, and the father was the military hero, it is likely that the child would have requested the father’s presence. Why? Because the child would have wanted to spend as much time with with father before he left again. In the end, the military mother saved her child’s life. Ironically, the father died very early in the film despite the privilege of spending more time with his child compared to the mother.

  Screenwriter of Memoirs of Geisha (2005) and Matilda (1996),Robin Swicord said,

  “It is very hard to get movies made that are genuinely feminist, or even portray women in a fair way. I genuinely believe there is a big domestic audience for this kind of movie, but if there is only a domestic audience, it won’t get made.”

  
  How could this film be feminist friendly and still maintain it’s pop appeal?

  1. Perpetuating the stereotype that heroine’s should not be trusted or are somehow incapable because they are women needs to stop. This is a gender specific stereotype that does not create a strong heroic female character. This stereotype sends the message to audience members that no matter how great a woman is, her logic cannot be trusted over a male’s. More often than not, film watchers have a difficult time believing that a woman can be a hero — this is because of stereotypes like this. It is no wonder why people have a hard time believing a woman is capable of physically overthrowing a man. Even in fiction people refuse to believe it saying, “Oh that’s ridiculous . . . a woman could NEVER do that!”

  2. To be fair, a mother who is a hero should not necessarily lose the admiration of her child(ren). Most movies with male heroes are admired by their children for what they do.

  3. The stereotype of the disgruntled girlfriend who is controlled by an abusive boyfriend sends the message that it is acceptable for men to abuse women — whether it’s verbal, physical, spiritual, financial, or emotional. In order to make this movie more feminist friendly, Jesse’s boyfriend could have shown his girlfriend more respect. How many movies have a character like his? Too many . . . way too many.

  4. There is nothing wrong with nudity, but when men do not strip as much as women, it creates a situation where women are physically objectified. The proof is in the pudding. Click here to view a snapshot of the proof of how the “pool scene” effected males. All the writers and director would have to do to remedy this would be to have 15 second nude-focused shots of men. A good example would be a phallic focus.

   

• 04:46:47 am on December 19, 2007 | 1 | # |
  
  

  

  Eureka 7 was essentially a mecha-romantic tale of two teenagers slowly falling in love with one another. The female character of Eureka 7 was named Eureka. She was an alien. Her partner was Renton. He was human. Eureka was just as powerful as Renton mentally and physically. Bones writers did an excellent job of showing that it took the power of both characters to operate the Nirvash. The way in which their romance blossomed was equally a challenge for both of them. Both Eureka and Renton had to face their own internal and external emotional barriers. Internal barriers for Eureka and Renton were many, but mostly around the feeling of shame. Eureka felt ashamed that she killed so many innocent people before becoming a parental figure for orphaned children. She felt she did not deserve to be a mother. Renton was ashamed that before becoming a member of the Gekko State, he was naive and was made fun of because he was not masculine enough for his crew members on the GekkoGo.

  There are several times when Holland (the leader of Gekko State) beats up Renton into submission. The result of the beatings are all about power, as all domestic violence is. Domestic violence may be popular for some, but in feminism, it is a big no-no. The amount of domestic violence that Renton endured was ridiculously extensive and pointless. Holland used Renton as a punching bag every time that he could not muster enough courage to face his fears. Any emotion that was not anger he expressed as anger. It is common place in a patriarchal establishment, wherever that might be, to express most uncomfortable emotions with anger. Anger is seen by other men as a strength. Crying is seen as weak and that only women should express.

  Renton cried a lot. He cried so much that most of the male crew shamed him to change his behavior. Renton was not ashamed of his feelings of fear or sadness, and let them out in front of the whole crew many times. Eureka did not shame Renton for crying; in fact, she cried along with him and validated his feelings.

  Also, let us not forget the blatant physically objectification of the women in this show, particularly Gidget, Hilda, and Talho. It is interesting to note that Talho’s character was hyper-sexualized until she learned she was pregnant. At that point, the writers decided to portray as nurturing and cover previously half naked body. Remember ladies, if you’re pregnant, don’t be too sexy. Heavens, after all, just think of what the neighbors would say!

  If there were not so many elements of domestic violence, gender discrimination, physically objectification and shame in this anime, it would have received a feminist friendly rating. Japanese writers, still you’ve got some work to do to get it right.

   

• 10:18:35 pm on December 15, 2007 | 3 | # |
  
  

  

  There was little content to analyze in this movie because most of the time Robert Neville (Will Smith) was the main attraction. There were three important female characters in this film. The female characters were Neville’s wife Zoe (Salli Richardson), Marley (Willow Smith), and Anna (Alice Braga).

  Zoe’s purpose was as that of the typical motherly-martyr. Film after film, a wife dies for the sole purpose of giving the male protagonist a reason to fight. The same can be said for children. It is on a rare occasion in film where the husband dies and his wife lives on to seek revenge for her loss. Smith’s role was none other than the typical paternalistic archetype that continues to foster the idea that women are not capable of fighting to make right that which went wrong.

  On the other hand, Anna did save Neville toward the end of the movie. For a brief moment, the hero shifted from Neville to Anna. It was not long until Anna’s role quickly shifted back to a woman’s domestic role as she cooked breakfast for the “man” of the house. She spent most of her time in amazement at the greatness of Neville and strove to please his ego. Anna was was portrayed as optimistic. She had a plan to visit the human colony in Vermont. Neville insinuated Anna plan naive. I wonder how many times a man has called a woman’s idea naive, only later to find out she was actually right? Typically, even if a woman is right, men get credit for her ideas. History is mostly written to glorify men and not women.

  By the end of the movie, Neville saved the human race by creating the cure to save humanity from the zombie disease. Anna’s purpose was as an errand-woman for Neville. She also narrated how without Neville humanity would be lost. Roughly translated, without man, humanity would be lost. This is in staunch contrast to the movie Children of Men, where without women, life would not exist.

  How could this film be feminist friendly and still maintain it’s pop appeal?

  1. Writers continuously base stories on paternalistic foundations. All too often, women and children are portrayed as martyrs to justify a man’s revenge seeking and means to glory. In order to be equal and balanced in film, women need to be given this exact same role. The amount of popular films where this is the case is limited.

  2. A heroine should remain a heroine. How long did Anna remain the heroine? Not long. The story could have shifted where the protagonist was first a male, and then, it could shift to being a female. How much would it hurt to shift from a male hero to a female hero in a film? It would definitely be a nice change of pace. It is almost as if the writers are allowing women a brief taste of heroism, but then, immediately retracting their status as to that of the “assistant” role. How often do women get brief interludes of heroism in films? Think about it.

   

• 02:25:06 am on December 13, 2007 | 1 | # |
  
  

  

  Take a good look at that photo right above this sentence. Chris Brown and T-Pain are physically and sexually objectifying this young black woman, and thus, reduce her to eye candy and perpetuating stereotypes about black women. To prove everything is mutual, the video director even had this woman smiling like that is the sort of thing a woman wants. Step right up black ladies! You’re going to be featured in a video where everyone is going to look at your ass. If you’re black, then it’s almost certain we’ll stereotype you for having a big ol’ butt!

  The problem does not stop there. Over the course of pop music history black women have consistently been objectified. If there are women in a hip-hop video, and the lead singers are men, one can almost be certain that a display of the female anatomy will be just what the doctor ordered.

  Even before hip-hop emerged, black women’s bodies have been objectified. In The rebirth of the booty: America’s obsession with my big black ass., student writer Amber Williams discusses mainstream America’s obsession with big black ass:

  Black women have been objectified as sex objects ever since their voluptuous bodies were seen as a welcome change to the bony figures of European women to whom the male settlers were accustomed. When African women arrived in America via a “free cruise” through the middle passage with their large posteriors, it was assumed that they were sex-craving, savage beasts. The view of black women as sexual predators is still seen today in both the entertainment industry and society at large.

  
  
  Ms. Williams gives an example of how black female slaves were displayed like circus freaks to amuse white audiences everywhere:

  In 1810, Sarah Bartmann, “The Hottentot Venus,” was forced to parade her naked body around at high-society functions to entertain European audiences with her distinctive buttocks and genitalia. Instead of being seen as a person, she was objectified by her blackness – an objectification that still exists today. Why is that black women’s bodies are seen merely as sex objects and nothing more? In Africa, a large posterior is a sign of fertility and healthiness. In black America, having a big butt is still seen as beautiful, but only because it is seen as a sign that a woman is sexually provocative.

  
  
  The black women in this video are not only being objectified. They are also being racially discriminated. How? It’s simple. Discrimination is the action of prejudice. Prejudice is the sum of stereotypes. In this case, what we have here is Chris Brown and T-Pain doing the exact same thing to this young black woman that happened to Sarah Bartmann. In other words, Chris Brown an T-Pain actively engaged in parading a black woman’s ass to mainstream America (and the globe) by objectifying her blackness in order to increase music sales.

  This black woman could have chosen not to be in this video, but what pop hip-hop video could she have been in that would not have objectified her? The options for her would have been slim. Our society has done a great job of normalizing the stereotyping of black women for their bodies.

  The chorus of this song suggests that women want physical affection and that Chris Brown will give it to them:

  She want that lovey dovey (lovey dovey)
  Kiss kiss (kiss kiss)
  Her mind she fantasize bout’ gettin’ wit’ me
  They hatin on me (hatin’ on me)
  They only diss diss (diss diss)
  Cause’ she’s mine, and so fine
  and thick as can be

  
  
  Chris Brown labels himself as fine even if he’s got a “bird-like” body. Even though he does not have a model’s physique, he claims himself as the “demonstration” of being “fly”:

  I’m the epitamy of this demonstration
  I got the remedy
  Ya feelin’ me
  So why is you hatin’ on my anatomy
  It’s bird like (yeah)
  You heard right
  Girl I’m the king so that means that I’m fly (ruff)
  If you wit it girl (ruff)

  
  
  At the same time, he is quick to judge another woman’s body. He goes as far as saying that if a woman is not fine, then he can’t get with her.

  Shawty lemme holla at you
  You so hot hot hot hot
  You ain’t got me hollin’ if you not not not not

  
  
  What exactly does fly constitute? What exactly makes Chris Brown so fly? He does a better job defining what makes a woman beautiful than he does describing why he is so hot.

  How could this song / music video be feminist friendly and still maintain it’s pop appeal?

  1. Hip-hop needs to stop blatantly reducing black women to eye-candy — period. Too many people other than black women have benefited financially from the racial discrimination and racial stereotyping of black women. How have black women benefited? They haven’t. How much respect is earned for black women on hip-hop videos? None. It’s all racist and sexist bullshit that is not necessary to sell music.

  2. At the beginning of the song, the “caller” had a problem and said “It aint goin good. My girl aint doin her thang she used to do…” This suggests that it is a woman’s duty to please her parter. Sexual intimacy is a two-way street. Sex benefiting one person is not consensual sex. The problem is not his woman. His problem is expecting his woman do perform sexual favors for him without doing his job to make the intimacy better. Chris Brown could have written a song about the responsibilities of a heterosexual man to satisfy his women as he would want to be satisfied. Instead of that, he tells the caller that all she wants is some “lovey dovey kiss kiss” with someone “fine” like him.

  3. Once again, no woman is singing. There is a crowd full of women of color that do not say a word. T-Pain could have been replaced by a female rapper. What is it? All women are reserved for eye-candy and not utilized as musicians?

   

• 05:28:51 pm on November 30, 2007 | 5 | # |
  
  

  

  Raw feelings is what Alicia Keys is conveying in her song and video. This is exactly what is translated. Alica Keys is working with business partners that do not expect her to be caught up in a scene where she is physically or sexually objectified. There is not a single layer of disrespect to other women or other men for that matter. Her message is simple: “No one can get in the way of what I’m feeling” –

  You And Me Together Through The Days And Nights
  I Don’t Worry Cause
  Everything’s Gonna Be Alright
  People Keep Talking
  They Can Say What They Like
  But All I Know Is Everything Is Gonna Be Alright

  Some pop love songs have feminist friendly lyrics, but their videos end up portraying women as objects to be consumed. This video is different.

   

• 01:58:31 am on November 27, 2007 | 5 | # |
  
  

  

  Gunslinger Girl is the type of anime where little girls are used to fulfill the desired of men. What do the men want? The men who “condition” them (i.e., brainwash) are assassins. That’s right people. Little girls brainwashed into becoming assassins. What a way to train those females! Train them while they’re young so they won’t rebel; that way, they’ll do exactly what they’re told.

  The girls are, for the most part, completely loyal to their “brothers”. The girls and their brothers are called a fratelo. In Italian, fratelo means siblings. Siblings are the furthest things from the truth. The truth of the story is that these girls are being exploited by men.

  The girls are exploited, but they are also epitomized as heroines. They display courageous acts of loyalty to their fratelos and their fellow cyborg sisters. In this regard, the cyborg-girl-assassins are revered if they are loyal. Triela is the only cyborg who shows emotional rebellion among the other cyborgs. According to the storyline, Triela was the least brainwashed of the girls. The girls who were brainwashed the most are the most loyal.

  Paternalism is a recurring theme in this show. Paternalism is the policy or practice on the part of the people in positions of authority of restricting the freedom and responsibilities of those subordinate to them in the subordinates’ supposed best interests. On several occasions the girl-cyborg-assassins were expected to believe that their brothers knew what was best for them even if it meant death. In that regard, the particular paternalism that goes into play here is in the form of a sexist one in which males vied for gender supremacy through the manipulation of girls to prevent death on their part. Their primary competition are terrorists in Italy and the mafia. Section 2 (the group of mostly men who control the girls) are supposedly more advanced than the competitors because they have the girls to work for them.

  Physical power is not something the girls are lacking, but emotional control is. They must constantly not allow their emotions to dictate orders from their brothers. If they let their emotions dictate their actions, then they are easily replaceable.

  The only factor where an empowered sisterhood took place was when the cyborg-girls met together for tea and cake. They supported one another’s emotions and accepted one another for who they were — mistakes and all.

  How could this anime be feminist friendly and still maintain it’s pop appeal?

  1. The writers could have developed their characters in a more empowering way. The power was in the hands of male assassins. The idea that some males have control of a bunch of little girls only perpetuates the notion in Japanese culture that it is normal to exploit little girls. The idea is not very unique and is used frequently in anime. Most of the time little boys are rebellious and earn their power as opposed to it being bestowed upon them. As mentioned in previous critiques, whenever a female’s power is bestowed, it is viewed as less powerful than the type of power that is fought for. In many instances in pop media, men are only bestowed power through family legacy. The men who are bestowed power through legacy are never as heroic as those who earn it by fighting for it. Some men are even stereotyped as weak if they don’t fight for their power. After all, bestowing power is reserved for females, right?

  2. The female characters could have fought their way out of being exploited. Instead of fighting their way out, they were written as complacent and loyal to the very end of all 13 episodes. The second season comes out spring 2008. Perhaps the writers will develop their characters and have them rebel so they reflect an empowered stance.

  3. Many aspects of shame were enforced. Some of the girls rather die than disappoint their brothers. The females were not given their own sense of autonomy. The writers should have given these girls, at least one of them, the will be challenge authoriy. Triela was the only character who somewhat challenged authority, but not at any substantial level. Like most shonen anime, where the boys are the heroes, the girls of Gunslinger Girl should also be written in a way where they are free to express their emotions and actions.

   

• 11:58:01 pm on November 21, 2007 | 5 | # |
  
  

  

  Limited lead female characters is an understatement with regard to this movie. The only part of the movie where there were a lot of females was during the scene where women were stuffing small packages of heroine. Traditionally the women have to be naked since there is the possibility they might steal some, but seriously, black nude females? Goodness knows we never see enough black women poorly represented in the media.

  The female characters of this film were rendered powerless. The one incident where Eve (Lymari Nadal) spoke up against a man, she was immediately slapped in the face. She cowered with fear and was not able to defend herself. Mama Lucas (Ruby Dee), the mother of Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington), never asked her son how he had enough money to afford to buy her a house clear out of the blue. She was portrayed as being completely naive throughout the film. Towards the end of the movie she confronted her son about his gangster activities. After he lied to her she slapped him in the face for it. She said that she did not like to be lied to. The wife and mother of this film were both written as mentally and physically powerless in the face of male goals. What was the message of the movie? If a woman was in the way of what a man wants, then who is she to stand in a his way?

  Laurie Roberts (Carla Gugino) was portrayed as a bitter woman who had enough of her husband’s cheating, lies, and inattentiveness to their son. Detective Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe) was written as a deadbeat Dad with good intentions. Hollywood consistently portrays men as insensitive and expected to do one thing and one thing only… financially provide for the family. It is as if men are written in movies as a combination of breadwinners, female conquerers, and competitive masterminds. Women are usually portrayed as the sexual partners of the male protagonists and mothers. Laurie Roberts was rightfully upset at her husband for him not being there for their son, but she was angry at him for not financially providing for her. At what point are characters like the ones in this movie able to be someone other than what Hollywood stereotypes them to be?

  The one highlight of this movie that almost deserves honorable mention is the fact that the romance between Frank Lucas and Eva was, for the most part, not a dominating one. The egalitarianism of the movie ended when Frank Lucas when Eva was on the floor aiding the butler cleanup of blood on “his” Alpaca rug. The sincerity that Frank Lucas had given to her went down the tube at that point. Left and right he continued to put her “in her place”.

  How could this film be feminist friendly and still maintain it’s pop appeal?

  1. Do not limit character roles by maintaining gender roles. Who is to say that a person won’t buy a ticket because traditional gender roles are challenged?

  2. Images of black women portrayed as jezebels continue the racist objectification of black women. Stop reducing a woman’s role to eye candy.

  3. Is it possible to have a powerful female gangster in the presence of male gangsters? Write a movie about female gangsters who lead gangs in America. Surely at least one female gang existed in America.

   

Next Page »