One more reason that I’ll never be a hit generating machine. I do have lovely feet–do you think I could corner the foot fetishist, half-eared cat enthusiast market?
Unfortunately, that’s probably what we’ll have to do in order to have our blogs noticed. Wonderful and sadly very true post, Lauren. Shit, I’m starting to wonder what kind of “naughty” pic I’ll have to post in order to have my blog noticed by the “big-whig, old blogger boy network”.
I don’t know, you better be careful… Someone who posts a ‘sexy pic’ of themselves on their blog might have a boyfriend who’ll come here and pick on you for this. hehehe.
hi lauren, great blog! i got here by searching for feminist blogs and it is great to see another woman doing what she does not because she is defined by her gender but because she has a brain, lives in the world and has an opinion! – re: the boobs to sell blogs, i have a similiar experience with my blog http://www.missbadger.squarespace.com, i am an artist living in glasgow, scotland, the subject matter of my work being representation of female sexuality and my quest to reclaim the word ‘cunt’ as a positive as opposed to the common, derogatory use – and of course this brings a whole lot of traffic my way, those that were expecting gratuitous imagery of female genitalia get my art work or my daily ramblings !!!! – oh and thanks for the multitude of amazing links to really good feminist blogs!
badgergirl: the word ‘cunt’ is the oldest taboo word in the English language, we’re talking about 7-8 centuries. it isnt even a polite way to refer to the female vagina.
very funny… but i think the focus on lack of attention on female blogs is getting stale. maybe it’s time to stop putting gender labels on blogs on just seeing them for their content. calling attention to ‘this is my gender. i am empowered’ can be distracting…
“This is my gender. i am empowered” is not the overall goal of calling attention to, or more accurately challenging the repetition of, this issue. We aren’t the ones musing on the lack of political women in blogging because we are and are aware of plenty of political women in blogging. That the top-ranked men don’t see us doesn’t mean that we don’t exist, don’t like a challenge, and aren’t dedicated. It’s that they don’t see us. Period. The onus is not on us. Thus, the consistent suggestion is that we (i.e. digital women as op-ed writers) should change is not only offensive, but ridiculously stupid. It is a stale issue? Of course. That’s why we’re pissed off.
Don’t put pictures of your tits, put pictures of goddesses and amazons from ancient art. That would create a lot of different rhetorical statements at once, and cause some head-explosion among the sorts of people who make facile assumptions and blat them out and don’t think about what they’re saying, while avoiding personal embarrassment. You could also separate the…truly liberated from the pseudo-libs by putting up *male* nudes – after all, FARK doesn’t have male nudes when you get there, but female ones. If *we* fem bloggers posted gorgeous beefcake shots, that too would be a radical meme-breakage, since women are supposed to be sexual *objects* not desiring beings. Any time you find beefcake art, from advertising to nude reviews to film to paintings, it’s assumed to be *homoerotic* – yet no one thinks that *cheesecake* is designed to appeal to that vast purchasing-power majority, the lesbian market!
Oh, really, really amused. Now all you have to do is lose half your body weight and make a minidress out of the seatcovers from your car and you can make the leap into multimedia julia sisyphus shrugged
Yow!!!! You got next year’s Wampum entry for best post already!!! What do they use to sell to women? :*
To make it complete, you should also have a sexual related internet nickname like “hornybabe” or “hotlips4u”. haha.
Classical art featured males as the perfection of the human body. Until very recently it was young male adonises that were considered ‘beauty’. In actual fact portraying the female form as the perfection of the human body is really a very recent occurance, and roughly coincided with women’s liberation. When you consider the historical/religious attitudes to the human form, it can be argued that using breasts to sell is actually empowering women. If you consider the banner here at feministe, we have a woman in a cocktail glass showing off her legs – what is the perceived symbology behind that? What is the intended, only Lauren can answer. If any women wish to be ‘ironic’ and have good looking men (traditionally late teens, muscular, long hair – think the story of Samson, he was emascualted not by references to male genitalia but by the cutting of his hair) on their sites, good for them. I don’t really see anything ironic behind it as men like that are the physical embodiment of human perfection: young, strong and virile.
Monjo, have you *spent* much time in museums? Or are you repeating something you read in a magazine once? Venus de Milo. Venus Anodyne. Nike of Samothrace. The Elgin Marbles. The Kore of Auxerre. The Wounded Amazon. The Acropolis Caryatids. Athena Lemnia. Venus Callipyge. The “Three Graces.” This is off the top of my head, mind you, not looking anything up, and covers centuries of classical history from the very early stages of realistic sculpture attempts to the end of the Roman Empire. And we’re not even covering Egypt (Isis, Hathor, in countless representations), or Mesopotamia (Ashera, Inanna), or Asia Minor (Diana Polymastes) and still less going into the far and non-verbal -record-leaving past, where you have both sensitive portraits, majestic nudes, and breasts-onna-stick coming out of the neolithic era. Most of those societiess used breasts to sell things, (including sex itself) but were not particularly woman-friendly, if I recall my source materials correctly… As for what the masthead of this blog (which I hadn’t even noticed, it being that dark and imo cluttered a design, until you mentioned it) is supposed to mean, the designer will have to explain.
Monjo, have you *spent* much time in museums? Or are you repeating something you read in a magazine once? Venus de Milo. Venus Anodyne. Nike of Samothrace. The Elgin Marbles. The Kore of Auxerre. The Wounded Amazon. The Acropolis Caryatids. Athena Lemnia. Venus Callipyge. The “Three Graces.” This is off the top of my head, mind you, not looking anything up, and covers centuries of classical history from the very early stages of realistic sculpture attempts to the end of the Roman Empire. And we’re not even covering Egypt (Isis, Hathor, in countless representations), or Mesopotamia (Ashera, Inanna), or Asia Minor (Diana Polymastes) and still less going into the far and non-verbal -record-leaving past, where you have both sensitive portraits, majestic nudes, and breasts-onna-stick coming out of the neolithic era. Most of those societiess used breasts to sell things, (including sex itself) but were not particularly woman-friendly, if I recall my source materials correctly… Put up male nudes, “Barberini Faun” style, and watch straight (or, more accurately, ambivalent and in denial) men twitch and eventually spaz out in a “My eyes! My eyes!” way. I’ve seen this reaction before, (and I think it’s funny as hell.) As for what the masthead of this blog (which I hadn’t even noticed, it being that dark and imo cluttered a design, until you mentioned it) is supposed to mean, the designer will have to explain, I don’t have any grounds to start presuming on, and why WAG when the author is present?
You know, I have lots of beefcake on my site, just not on my blog. Should I import some? Any of you ladies want to borrow a screen cap for you blogs?
Venus de Milo = depicts a Goddess; Venus Anodyne = not sure, probably is a Goddess; Nike of Samothrace = winged Goddess; Elgin Marbles = again depicts Gods and Godesses… spotting a theme? Barberini Faun = not a God, is a sexual piece of art Remember art = Depiction + Intention (hence why I asked Lauren of her intentions with the banner art) To state that these civilisations were anti-woman, is a little silly. You may wish to read about the Minoan goddesses and how Zeus and Hera may have originated. Still, I shall admit, I do not care much to go to museums or art galleries. You got me there! How would I react to a nude male, I don’t know. Since I was born all depictions of human beauty, perfection, even intelligence, have been thrust upon women. The PM and Monarch for my early childhood were both women – Im in the UK. The sexual organs of both men and women are not aesthetically good, and women have the advantage there that their sexual organ is mostly internal. Frankly I probably would be a little uncomfortable seeing it, but I am not “in denial”. The one area where men still are definitely considered superior is sport. My example to demonstrate this fact is Maria Sharapova vs Roger Federer – only someone who hates tennis (but likes watching good-looking women) could choose to watch Sharapova above federer. But maybe women disagree. And, of course, sport started with the Olympics and before as a male-only contest in the early years of paternalistic societies: the move to urbanisation changed society. But that is all really a complete essay (book even!) in itself.
The bra-pics reminded me of early Matt Groening cartoons- each like two persons in burkas carrying on secret conversations- or trying to kiss while wearing gas masks… ^..^