A couple of recent threads – on nudity and pop culture, where separately the related issues of women’s body images and young women’s magazines were discussed – have got me thinking about the Slate email that landed in my inbox the other day. Body image is a pressing concern for many, if not most, women. I think that many of us only realised the link between cultural standards of beauty, and the incitement to conform through their commodification, when Naomi Wolf clued us in.
One trend that’s been evident in Australian mags like Cosmo and Cleo has been to get “real readers” to model clothes. The idea is that you get a variety of body sizes rather than just Mischa Barton lookalikes.
So, I was interested in the story from Slate. It was about a campaign by a US cosmetics company to feature and empower curvy women in their advertising.
The (male) Slate writer started his story off:
But these are not models. These women have paunches. And asses. And are not pouting. Dove says these ladies range from size 4 to size 12 (it’s not tough to tell which is which), and were discovered all over the country. One was working at the Gap, another was a student, a third was a barista.
When I first saw one of these smiley, husky gals on the side of a building, my brain hiccupped. Something seemed out of place. Here I was, staring at a “big-boned” woman in her underwear, but this wasn’t an Adam Sandler movie, and I wasn’t supposed to laugh at her. It felt almost revolutionary.
Note the use of words such as “paunches” (wouldn’t “bellies” be less loaded?) and the suggestion that the normal reaction would be laughter. The writer goes on to talk patronisingly, posing as a cool resister of corporate cons, about the associated campaign.
The story ends:
Sadly, this is not a winning play for the long haul. If Dove keeps running ads like this, women will get bored with the feel-good, politically correct message. Eventually (though perhaps only subconsciously), they’ll come to think of Dove as the brand for fat girls. Talk about “real beauty” all you want‚Äîonce you’re the brand for fat girls, you’re toast.
Hello? This is the same sort of normative sneer that the magazines play out (in a less obvious way) when they juxtapose their size 12 or 14 models with articles on how to lose weight, and all sorts of stories about being embarrassed about boys seeing cellulite or your bum or something.
I wonder if the author of the article has a beer-induced paunch under his “No Fat Chix” t-shirt. But of course, guys are the gazers in these stories, and so it’s rude to point out their physical imperfections.
Another interesting factoid from the women’s magazines is that a lot of the boys interviewed (and in some of the stories, they rate naked photos of girls) prefer a few curves to a lettuce fed frame.
Cherish your curves, I say!
Kim, if you think that blokes don’t agonise over things like overweight, paunches, flaccid muscles, nerdish demeanour, poor conversation skills, bad breath and falling hair – especially the last – then you’re missing an important part of the plot. And we worry about it most because we think it makes us unattractive to women. We just don’t make so much public noise about it.
Of course it probably didn’t worry Aristotle Onassis too much but he had other compensations.
Oh, Rob, I know that’s the case. It’s just that you don’t do it in public like women do (and are encouraged to). And there’s still, I think, much more overt pressure on women from society. I should let you into the secret of how much beauty and grooming costs me weekly!
Curves are good. The stick insect look has never really done it for me. Someone should let Mischa Barton in on the wonders of food. Real women are much better looking.
I’ve been following this in the blog-world in the US.
For one thing, the women in the Dove ads are hardly fat. As I said in the Bridget Jones’ post, sure, they’re not ’skinny’ but not being a size 6-8 in Australia or a size 0-4 in the US does not immediately make someone ‘fat’. The women in those ads look remarkably fit and healthy, they’re all very attractive. But they don’t all have a cookie-cutter model’s body, which seems very threatening to some commentators.
Another is that this idea of the ‘brand for fat girls’ thing is just rubbish. There’s a clothing chain in the US that has been set up for larger teen girls — it’s called Torrid, BTW — and it’s doing extremely well. The Slate writer’s assumption is that everyone views in the ads in the same way he does — as an affront to his beauty standards, and hence an affront to everyone.
Anyway, I’m all for curves. I’ve been very heavy and I’ve been very thin (size 18 to size 8), and I’m now a steady size 10-12. Neither extreme (89kg to 49kg) was much fun, let me tell you, but the low end of the scale was only achieved via a diet of cigarettes and the occasional apple. (The upper end of the scale at least involved enjoying my food.)
Finally, the point is that these are just ads. They alone won’t change the whole stupid consumerist beauty standard thing, which, as Rob pointed out, is being increasingly foisted on men.
I imagine, Kim, that’s quite likely to be the case. However as a beer lover I should point out that beer itself is not particularly fattening, or, apart from its highly toxic ethanol content, unhealthy. The so-called ‘beer belly’ is usually the result of the exercise us beer drinkers are not doing while we’re drinking, and the chips and delicious fried food we’re eating.
That’s the real crime of ‘body’ advertising. The myth that people can have both healthy bodies and a sedentary lifestyle.
Naomi, good point — there’s a weird dichotomy between ‘real’ Americans and ‘media’ Americans. Real Americans are large people, in their media, thiness is extremely prized.
Cultures with a shortage of food prize fatness; cultures with an excess of food prize thinness.
It’s been that way since at least the Venus of Willendorf was made.
Beyonce ain’t that thin, and she’s still bootylicious, girlfriend.
EP, read the post preceding yours. I dare you to reconcile Kate’s statement with yours.
What’s to reconcile? I’m right, if Kate differs then she is wrong.
Actually, EP, I agree to a point — societies that exist in areas where food is not so readily available do tend to prize fat as it is a symbol of wealth and abundance. See: Africa.
However, I think thiness, in the American culture, has strong resonances with self-reliance and self-control. There’s a protestant thing going on there, class-based stuff, as well as race issues.
Additionally, until modern times, the female body has always been associated with roundness and fertility with fat. It’s only been in the last century or so that wealth/status/class has been associated with thinness. So it’s not just about the food, in other words, there are other things going on…
I think the word for the most desired condition was ‘voluptuous’, Kate. And a good word it is, too. (And a good condition.)
Gyms are dandy but nothing slims like photoshop.
Speaking as a fella, and a generally venal and shallow one at that, women wh oclosely resemble bikes with lipstick rate somewhere between “no thanks” and “really, no thanks” on the attractiveness scale.
That said, there’s something un-nerving about the extreme response to that, which is for unhealthily overweight people to prance about declaring they’re beautiful, proud of how they look etc etc. You might love yourself, but your doctor won’t.
The happy medium is called that for a reason.
I’m a size 10, and have been most of my life – except when I was having chemo obviously! I’ve got broad shoulders and a bit of a J-Lo bum
I certainly don’t fit the model template, though I’m not in the slightest bit overweight.
Kate’s quite right about the shifts in desirable body shape. This also applies to men – have a look at a statue in any Australian capital city of a 19th century Premier or Governor and have a look at how proud some of them were of their generous bellies – it signified wealth, prosperity, and not having to work with your hands.
I think that Kate’s also right about the puritan/Protestant ethic motifs of self-denial and self-discipline being particularly relevant in the States. A counter motif is bigness in everything – huge servings of food demonstrating how America is the biggest and best country in the world. So you get these two cultural factors creating adult and childhood obesity and pressure to be thin at the same time.
Oh, and like Naomi, I like my curves embraced too!
On Beyonce, Angelina Jolie also seems to have slimmed down and I think she looks the worse for it. Lots of women I know or just see around who’ve done massive diet things look kinda ill and much more unattractive when they’re doing a size 8 weight on a size 10 or 12 frame.
I agree with Luke. I bet we are but two of hundreds of millions of guys who don’t get it why women spend so much time and money ‘beautifying’ themselves. In the words of the Harrsion Ford character in ‘Six Days, Seven Nights’:
Or similar.
That’s why I don’t buy ‘The Beauty Myth’ stuff.
That’s cause you’re not a girl, Rob. I don’t go overboard but I spend dosh on makeup, waxing, skin products, hair products, getting my hair done, getting my nails done. In a professional context, women need to present themselves this way as well.
Blokes just need some deodorant, shampoo and the occasional haircut. Except for metrosexuals of course!
Um, Rob, you can not buy the beauty myth stuff as much as you want.
But, as someone who’s had an eating disorder (see my post about going from 89 to 49 kilos) I can assure you that there is a great deal of pressure placed upon women and girls to look a certain way.
You think when I weighed 89 kilos I could get a boyfriend? Uh, not. I couldn’t even get a pub pash. With drunk guys! I’d dress up and do my hair and put on my sexiest pout and I’d be passed over the whole night long. It wasn’t until my weight dipped below 70kg that men became interested in me.
Men want a woman who shows up — so long as she’s reasonably attractive and takes care of herself to a degree.
Of course not all men want a Paris Hilton fake-boobed tanned stick insect, (and women also apply beauty standards to men, I would never claim otherwise) but to say, ingenuously, that men don’t care about all the make-pretty stuff doesn’t really wash. If women stopped doing it, you’d know about it. (Hairy-legged feminists and all that…)
Look, the feminine beauty rituals (make-up, dressing up, doing the hair) are fun too, I’m not claiming some huge oppression from my lipstick. I’m not against femininity, either.
It’s just that for many women, the quest to fit into what society says in beautiful is absolutely crippling. To be a fat girl in our society is to be utterly worthless. At least fat guys appear on TV, can be seen as heads of corporations, or even as musicians. Fat girls are virtually (with a few very notable exceptions) invisible. I’ve been there, I know of what I speak.
What Kate said, and full marks to her for being open about her past experiences.
And I’m not oppressed by my lipstick either (in fact I like to match it with my shoes, fingernail and toenail polish and handbag – so perhaps I’m obsessed) but I am trying to get across the point to Rob that this stuff doesn’t come cheap.
Yes, but Kate, you found a solution, surely? You lost weight. It was within your power and range of choices to do that. What about those that have none? I wish I was taller than five feet eight inches, but there’s nothing I can do about it. I’d like to be 6′ 2″ and physically lovely but I’m not. What about the poor guy that’s only five foot two – how easy is it for him to get the hot babes down at the bar?
Point being, we all have to work these things out for ourselves. There’s no point railing at society for making it all so terribly unfair. A few years ago there was a guy in the US who started a society for ugly people: it was soooo unfair, said this guy, that ugly people didn’t get as much sex as pretty people. Too bad, dude. Get used to it, or do something about it.
Rob, it’s not just about sex. It’s also about presentation in the workforce, and it’s about feeling “feminine” and normal. All of which is strongly socially and culturally mediated.
Yes, but Kate, you found a solution, surely? You lost weight.
I’m sure it’s not your intention, but if Kate had an eating disorder, that comment is open to being read as trivialising what she went through.
Rob, I’m not sure what your point is. Why can’t I rail against stuff I think is unfair? Are you telling me that whenever I encounter unfairness I should just walk away? That’s a rather bleak worldview, don’t you think?
Oh, you mean because I’m a woman and I live in a society which places extreme demands upon women in terms of beauty ideals I should just suck it up and accept that the ideal of beauty is a 16 year old with fake breasts? Silicon boobies, here I come.
That’s very positive. I feel way empowered now.
And Rob, yes, I took my solution into my own hands. But then something weird happened. I became obsessed with my weight. I began to calculate every single calorie I ate. I spent hours at the gym. My weight dropped below 50 kilograms. I stopped menstruating. I became anemic. Of my own accord I realised the damage I was doing and I went to see a psychologist, stopped drinking, did all the useful stuff and now I’m a healthy person.
But I still struggle daily with my own appearance.
Honestly, I don’t think there’s any harm in discussing these issues and trying to communicate with other people about our frailties, and admitting to others that we too feel bad that we do not live up to some ‘ideal’.
Obviously you disagree. You think I blame society for my problems. I don’t, at all, because I understand that things are more complex than “advertising gave me anorexia”.
However, I do blame our culture for projecting narrow beauty standards, which I think is just a tool for advertisers. Sewing discontent to sell us arse-firming cream, no? And that discontent is a weighty pressure on some people, especially young women, and I think society all around would be a nicer place if we weren’t all so obsessed with ‘hotness’. And fatness. And lack thereof.
Or, rather, if we weren’t all so obsessed with one narrow view of hotness. I’m a big fan of hotness, but I find hotness in all sorts of places, and not just in the pages of a glossy magazine.
I blame men.
Singing a new tune today, EP?
I wanted to second what Kate said. It’s not just a matter of “evil advertising oppresses us”. And as I said very early in the thread, men suffer from these pressures too.
I think the situation is more complex than the Naomi Wolf presentation of it, but sometimes you need a strong argument to wake people up and start people thinking.
Feminism, 2005, style, as I think the comments from women on this thread demonstrate, is nuanced and not about “blaming men”.
Well, I’d also add that representation is only a tiny bit of what feminism is about.
Personally I’m just as (more, in fact) concerned with child care, equal pay, domestic violence, rape, third world poverty etc; it’s just that it’s satisfying, sometimes, to have a whinge about advertising and body image and so on. It’s easy to rail against advertisers for using too-thin teenagers as models. And this is a bad thing, but it is a different order again to many Bad Things out there in the world.
Sometimes it is easy to pick an obvious target and fuel the fire of indignation that way.
Kate, my point about not railing is that it won’t make any difference. Society won’t stop in its tracks because some people are made unhappy by it any more than the world will stop turning on its axis.
I’m not trivialising anything (Kim), and of course these issues need to be discussed. Guys get pressures too – e.g. the size and effectiveness of their wedding tackle (a stangely outdated term, no doubt). These pressures have been around since the dawn of time and they aren’t going to go away just by wishing they would.
As individuals we have to find a way of dealing with it, not blaming somebody or something else (and I’m not saying you were, Kate, you have found your own solutions – good for you).
That’s why I hate Mark’s favourite mantra that the personal is the political. The personal is the personal!!
The personal is the political, Rob, because these matters aren’t just amenable to an individual response and aren’t just a result of individual characteristics and choices.
Who is “society”? People who think like Slateman make choices about what desirable body shapes are. It’s a small step, but representing women with average body shapes in the media sends a message.
So I think Kate and I have a right to rail!
On Naomi’s point, I went to buy some moisturiser at Woolies today and noticed that I could have spent about $200 getting every single facial skincare product that I needed to “prevent ageing”. But I like being 32 and I like my crows’ feet. I also noticed that none of the moisturisers in the men’s section made any mention of “preventing the seven signs of ageing” – so I bought one of them because it was cheaper than the cheapest one marketed to women.
Sure Rob, in 2005 Australia, for many people the personal is the personal. But if you, for instance, suddenly found yourself a woman in 1960s in Australia and you were forbidden from working in the public service after you were married, wouldn’t you start to wonder at the intersection between your personal life and the politics of the day (ie, rules, regulations, laws, how they are made and who makes them?)
Similarly, when I think about having children, it’s not just a personal choice. I am faced with the implications of political decisions about school and child care funding, with the political implications of hospitals not having enough Ob. gyns, with the debate about midwives, with the situation with maternity leave. So, can you see, for me, the personal issue for having children is also deeply wrapped up with the politics of this day and age?
Right, Kim, and I’ll go out and buy the hundred or so pill treatments, lotions, exercise regimes, and meditation packs that just ‘guarantee’ a three inch penis extension overnight, just to make sure I don’t ‘disappoint that special someone’, as the spammers are kind enough put it.
And it’s somebody else’s fault if I do, and somebody else’s fault if it fails.
Mischa is curvy. She has hips and and arse but is skinny up-top. She’s not a traditional model/ or waif. She’s like most girls – different!
I can send you some useful links from LP’s spammers, Rob. But I’m not quite sure how your comment is responsive to what Kate and Kim are saying.
It was a specific response to Kim’s 6.32 pm comment. And its point was that both endeavours would be similarly pointless.
Russell, I bet if you saw Mischa in person she’d be a tad thin.
Rob, I’m at a bit of a loss as to your point as well. However, the difference seems to be that no-one believes that penis extension techniques work, whereas women from girlhood onwards are sold on the wonders and virtues of cosmetics. And I think there’s a lot more girls and women out there having cosmetic surgery than men too.
What’s going on here? Does the most donwtrodden victim win the argument?
I’m not positioning myself as a victim, Fyodor.
Rob seems to think that society is an immovable force and individuals have choice. I think. Or that railing against society is pointless and individuals don’t have choice. I think.
Btw, it’s not the size etc. Sometimes too much size is definitely a bad thing.
That’s my problem exactly, Kim. Not the size issue, but the point of this thread.
Yes, society holds up ideals that, by definition, cannot represent the norm, and we feel bad about our looks when we don’t measure up. So what? Is society going to change so that looks become unimportant? We can all answer that question for ourselves. So what do we do about it? Deal. As best you can.
Well, to underline the point, nature from out of its infinite deck deals us a finite hand of cards that we have to play with for the rest of our lives. How well we do it depends on our own degree of skill. (No Oprah comments, please, Mark.) If you think you can defeat the process of aging or the attribution to you of physical body parts of a certain shape or size, society isn’t kidding you, you’re just kidding yourself.
Two things, gentlemen.
Kate’s story teaches us two lessons – the pressure to be thin, and how illness can result from it. In other words, it can have a detrimental impact on women’s health and wellbeing and takes a fair bit out of our pocketbooks too. And I think women are judged physically much more than men, as Kate and Naomi both pointed out.
As to “society”, what’s that? A reification! As a number of male commenters indicated, their preference isn’t necessarily for size 6 girls. But the beauty industry, and advertising and creative industries reinforce that presumed norm. It is changeable, and efforts at the margins to do so are worthwhile.
Yes, I can see that, Kim, but I think you have to persuade the consumers, not the industries that feed off them. If they weren’t prepared to buy the products, no-one could sell them.
My Mum, wonderful wise woman that she is told me long ago, when I was complaining about how the boys never looked at me and never would, to look at all the larger ladies on the teaching staff at my school. Then she asked me to name them. Well there’s Mrs X, Mrs Y, Mrs Z etc. So what? She then pointed out the obvious – that all the large women were happily married, while some of the slimmer glamour pusses were still single and searching. It was food for thought in a small country highschool where the boys were only interested in the skinny girls.
I had a similar experience to Kate’s at Uni, although I was still a curvy size 14 when I met my husband. I have since grown some and slimmed down some to be around the 16-18 mark now.
Interestingly enough if looks could kill then I would be dead several hundred times over from skinny women looking at me, my child and my husband with a ‘how the hell did a fat girl like you get what I want?’ look. I don’t fit the beauty mould, but my husband couldn’t care less. Most days, neither could I. I know that I won’t get as many promotions as more conventionally pretty girls, but I have found that if I work for the guys not considered conventionally handsome, then I get along pretty well anyway. There are ways of working the system.
When I read stuff like the Slate article I usually feel sorry for the guy writing it. Doesn’t he realise what he’s missing out on? Queen certainly knew what they were on about (yes I know Freddy was gay) ‘Fat bottomed girls you make the rocking world go round’.
Rob, your comment assumes an unrealistic model of an advanced economy – the whole point of advertising and films/tv etc is to create and shape demand not respond to it.
Well, I’m sorry this discussion got derailed into ‘my midday movie struggle with my body image’ and that some people read that as victimisation.
I don’t feel like a victim, just so you know.
I also don’t want to be the poster-girl for bourgeois self-absorption, as I said, I think there are many more pressing issues for the feminazi naked knitting circle to take action upon than the evilness of snake oil beauty products and the nefarious methods used to sell ‘em.
And, I think Popper would agree that the selling of snake oil beauty products are a mere blip on the radar in the vast scheme of horrible things currently going on in the world.
It’s something I don’t know a lot about, Mark, so I’m just talking off the top of my head – or out of the back of it.
But I exercise my individual choice not to eat at MacDonald’s – not because of a political objection, but because I tried it once and nearly puked. Others exercise their choices in different ways. How much advertising has to do with it I really don’t know.
Advertising to an extent appeals to the pack animal in us all. You many not eat McDonalds, but you probably don’t dress in the style of the 1920’s either, although men’s suits haven’t changed that much, and it wouldn’t be too difficult to find a suitable hat. (Well maybe in Alice it might). But we are all affected in some way by fashion, advertising etc. Some of us more than others. Personally it depends on whether I’m having a good or bad day whether the proliferation of skinny models bothers me or not. Comments like ‘jeez if you hugged her she’d snap in half’ from my better half do help.
Yes, what Mindy said, Rob. McDonalds is a poor comparison. With women being socialised to concentrate on their appearance from girlhood, and with all media reinforcing one single norm, it adds up to a very powerful message.
Oh, well, it’s all part of the currents that flow and the winds that blow. Expect protection from any of it and you’re bound to be disappointed. Sorry, I just don’t see advertising as a big deal. Got your choices, got your voices. Use ‘em.
And it’s Mc not Mac, under the yellow arches, is it? Shows how much notice I take of the stupid bloody things.
OT.
Oui, but Rob, it isn’t just ads. OK, that’s enough from me, I think.
I think the main problem arises when a woman’s appearence affects irrelevant parts of her life.
Yeah, men get judged on their looks, but only in (as Michael Walzer would say) the “looks” sphere. But a woman’s appearance is relevant in many other “spheres”. Just look at Vanstone and Stott Despoja – we hear so much more about their appearance and dress than say, Beazley or Howard.
And as for Rob’s comment: “Got your choices, got your voices. Use ‘em.” Kim just did and you told her it was a waste of time…
What interests me is the way certain aspects of the beauty myth survive without any real resonance with actual modes of male desire. Scrawny just doesnt do it for most men at all, at a visceral level. Considering is supposedly for the male eye, its puzzling.
Equally odd – but a testament to the strength of the myth – I had a friend who worked in fashion, who told me that stores always order way too many small/slim sizes, which they can never sell, as women dont physcially conform. So, they will actually lose money to conform to the myth – rather than meet actual demand. She told me the big fashion houses lose thousands on this. Extraordinary.
In Mexico – certainly my favourite country on the globe – curves are the cat’s pajamas.
Overheard catcall in Mexico city: “ooh, what curves… and me with no brakes!”
Not that it is a great example considering it is A Current Acrap and I have other feelings about the behaviour of the girl but there was a ten year old girl who had an eating disorder on yesterdays show. This is reflective of our culture – we have people starving themselves to fit this ‘beauty’ ideal and then we have this opposing ‘big is beautiful’ ideal where obsese people don’t realise the health risks. It’s quite the paradox.
Which is what is interesting about the Dove ads – the fact that we highlight that they are ‘big’ or ‘not normal’ woman – if we didn’t bignote these ads then maybe we could allow it to become a part from our social conscience. Maybe ’society’ will never be happy with the body – the women’s magazines belittle someone for losing weight and then belittle women for gaining weight. We can’t ‘win’.
And I’ll stop rambling and heading OT!
In a different place and time, you could reverse the qualities in your comment Lefty E, and it would read the same.
Beauty is not a myth. It’s a burdensome commonplace. The particular properties of beauty do of course vary from time to time. Fetishisation seems to occur whether driven by restless commercialisation or by social ossification.
The politics here and the inescapable psychology are at cross-purposes here. We shouldn’t over-burden our public environment with the corrosive advertising of the current form of beauty while remaining decently private on our personal appreciation of beauty.
Social conformity and hierarchy however will always be pushing us to tend to an orthodox perception of beauty. But in our vast and varied multi-cultural society we should be able to fashion a place where there are more than one “ideal”.
Beauty itself however is something we cannot live without. It’s one of the biologically pre-determined categories we use to filter our experiences of our world.
Perhaps it’s all a function of some deep female psychic need never to be happy with anything?
Sounds like you’ve got that bad, EP. Consult your doctor if symptoms persist.
Not me, mate. The females who are complaining about being too fat, too thin, too medium, too told bad things by the magazines they buy, too whatever …
I just read in the Canberra Times today that a magazine survey found that only 47% of their women readers regularly let their partner see them naked, while a third (32%) never did, and 60% felt embarrassed about their bodies during sex. I find this incredibly sad. A very dear friend, who is a large, lush, stunning woman, told me a few months ago that she never lets her partner see her naked in full light, and rarely without makeup. She has set her bedroom up with dim lights, lots of fringed scarves, lots of things to throw around her if she has to get up and around the house. Her partner, on th other hand, loves what he has been allowed to see of her body and thinks she’s incredibly beautiful. This is one of the strongest, most self-sufficient women I know in every other way. It makes me so mad that societial pressure and peer pressure can do that!
My own attitude is that if my partner doesn’t like what he sees he can fix his own bodily imperfections as a good example and maybe I’ll follow. Maybe. I like my lumps, and my partners, past and current, seem to respond in kind.
The most important thing for me is to pass on this confidence and bodily appreciation on to my young son. We discuss beauty and weight issues often, and I’m trying to teach him to see more than just the surface. Who knows if it will work? All I can do is try. I think a bad body image is very easily passed down the family, as studies on obese and food-controlling children are starting to find out.
Thanks for an interesting thread, Kim.
Gawd, I find that hard to believe. I thought it was part of the whole partnership thing. Me and mine wander around with no clothes on quite a lot. She has absolutely nothing to worry about and looks just gorgeous. I, on the other hand… [sad sigh..]
I would still question that ’societal pressure and peer pressure’ are the reason, though.
Seems we have just a slight divergence between the male and female positions here. I’m going a little bit back, but one of Kim’s comments – relating to the dosh she spent on shi… er, keeping up appearances – caught my eye and stuck in my memory.
Male perspective time.
Makeup: works, but if you don’t need it, you don’t need it. More frequently than you realise, you don’t need it. All too often women tell themselves they’re doing it for men, but we men know you’re not – you’re doing it because of other women’s opinion of you.
Waxing: Nothing against hair removal here… Sorry.
Skin products: You’ve been had baby! Stick to good ol’ sorbolene or vitamin E. Either one is all you need. The rest of them are just 50 chemicals boiled together to form a non-immediately-toxic stew.
Hair products: What, a bit of spray/wax/gel? My last tub of wax lasted three years. I didn’t use it every day, but I didn’t need to! Neither do you!
Getting my hair done: Once every coupla months, right? No big deal. Just stop killing it with kemical kolouring everytime. Do that once a year and really get yourself noticed when you walk into a room.
Getting my nails done: Um… I file mine twice a week. Paint’s still a no-no (I haven’t gone thru either of an ultra-cool metro or a downtrodden goth stage) but even if it’s a go-go for you, how often do you do it and how much time does it take to do? Special occasions only are acceptable, I’m afraid. Anything else is self-indulgent.
In other words, loosen up and be yourselves. When you gotta look good, go and make yourself look good. But at other times – ie most of the time – just make do. Please.
I would still question that ’societal pressure and peer pressure’ are the reason, though.
Precisely.
Feminist propaganda has convinced too many women that all their problems stem fromexternal causes. If they took a look at which problems were the result of their own attitudes, they might be surprised at how many they can solve.
Any chance of bringing in a gender balanced comment quota system to drown moggy out?
Censorship, the first resort of the political coward.
Talking bollocks, the first resort of a political bellend.
I liked Youie’s comment a lot.
So you’re both a political coward and a political bellend. No surprise, really.
Do you have anything to say about the topic of the thread, or are you just here to humiliate yourself?
My comment was, of course, not aimed at Rob.
In india and china fat equates with wealth and status.
The thais never finish all the food on the table,only the poor eat everything.
Funny,isn’t it?
Wow Kate! You sizzlin’ girl! uhuh
*clicks fingers in ‘z’ shape in the air*
More posts from you please. And to Kim, nice to see that ‘Society is Transcendent’ pining responded to articulately.
For me, the confidence to cherish curves is a confidence to embrace good discourses around appearance. That same confidence needn’t dictate the ideal size of your clothes on the fickle, arbitrary, proportions of the prevalent pin-up, but place your wellbeing at the fore. That’s where ‘embracing the curves’ plays second fiddle to ‘not dying of heart disease.’ Obviously you have to work with what you have, and biology is not a dirty word in these discussions – particularly with a condition like PCOS.
Appearance matters. Of course it does. But my prurient thoughts are usually sparked by an attitude. Needless to say that’s why I find Avenue D’s ueber-parodies so utterly charming.
Come on, guys, we’re just confirming the worst suspicions of Kim & Co. Do we really need another bar-room brawl? This was one of the nice threads.
EP, if you don’t know me by now, you will never ever know me. oooh oooh oooh.
Thanks Rob. You’re usually a little too far over towards the RW side of an argument for me, so I think we should all take a moment to smell the rose of harmony, and delight in the ability of different minds to meet every so often.
The particularly interesting thing here is that LP has brought together – in essentials if not specifics – the respective opinions of EP, CL, Fyodor and Nabakov (plus you & me Rob, but these guys have form and battle experience behind them). Kim, Kate et al, please provide some analysis of this: do discussions of women’s issues bring men of all kinds closer together?
Ok, ok. OT… But y’know, it’s worth asking!
Something got me started. Flutey, have you ever considered growing a goatee? I’ve got a mate at Juxtaposition Records who could get you a contract.
Datzda one.
Sorry for the late responses to some thoughtful comments (and some stoushing predictably inspired by EP’s contribution whenever the ‘F’ word is mentioned – sorry Rob – hard to have a nice thread when you get EP doing his thang! – and to be fair the thang in response to EP – it’s pretty ritualised by now, I think), but I’ve been off
making myself prettyearning a living and having a life.My first comment is that not all of the boys have lined up on one side just *most* of the boys!
amanda is quite right, of course. Witness male newsreaders dying in their late 60s when they’re still working while female ones are hard pressed to work beyond 40 (rumour around the media grapevine has it that the gorgeous Juanita Phillips got a bit annoyed at Channel Nine’s raising issues about her age – 39).
Or, another juicy anecdote, a certain academic who was asked to appear on a current affairs show and when the producer saw a photo (young and blonde) insisted that she fax him a copy of her degree certificate for her PhD. Like, sorry, you can’t be taken seriously because you’re attractive. Would that happen to a hottie young male academic?
Rob persists in some sort of bizarre argument that it’s all just personal. Well, Rob, why do so many women have the same experiences if there aren’t broader structural causes at work? Coincidence? And thanks, amanda, for reinforcing my point.
On Youie’s point, try being a woman and turning up to a job interview, or to work in lots of professions without wearing makeup and see how far you get. And as to nails, sweetie, there’s more to them than just filing them!
I’m with you on the skincare thingie – though I do tend towards the Elizabeth Arden products….
Elizajoey, yeah, when I say curves, I don’t want to align myself in the slightest with the “obese is not a worry” folks, and I did make some comments about the cultural factors behind that too. Thinking over Russell’s comment again, yes, Mischa is curvy but still stick thin. That’s probably why she looks good on the teev. Me, I’m a size 10 and a healthy weight but have a bigger than approved bum and thighs. Just me and my genes which don’t look too bad in slimfit jeans!
And Ampersand Duck, your comments about your friend and the survey don’t surprise me. It’s a bitch, this worrying about body image thing. If you can’t feel comfortable nude in an act of intimacy with a partner, then something sure ain’t right with the world.
Naomi and Kim,
I would be happy to embrace your curves at any time.
Enough of all the aggro – I prefer it when LP goes into flirt mode …
Kim’s rant is an example of the deep female psychic need never to be happy about anything, with a spicing of man-bashing.
dk, thanks!
I was thinking about this some more yesterday. I don’t feel bad walking around naked in front of my partner, though as I’ve said before I won’t wear revealing swimmers to the beach.
Anyway, I don’t think advertising or our culture causes anorexia and other eating disorders in the same way that pollution doesn’t cause asthma, for example. However, I think exacerbation is probably the right word. Pollution makes asthma worse, and I think our consumer society makes eating disorders worse.
For anyone who has suffered an eating disorder, it becomes clear that you need to fix yourself and come to terms with your own imperfections — we cannot live in an imagery free world. So I’d again like to dispute anyone who thinks I’m assuming victimhood. It was never my intention when mentioning my problems to assert that I have a special status. Merely to indicate that these things do affect women.
Also, the pressure to look a certain way is not a pressure that men solely put on women — I appreciate the posters who come here and say “girls, don’t try so hard”.
But the thing is, women don’t do it solely for men. It’s a pressure that women put on other women, that women put on themselves, that even when we’re with men who assure us daily that we’re beautiful, we still feel we don’t measure up in the eyes of ’society’ at large.
Anyway, I don’t think there’s any way to erase these pressures. There will always be people considered more attractive in society. I can appreciate the beauty of other people without jealousy; this isn’t the problem.
The problem is that as women, we’re presented with the idea that unless we’re beautiful, we’re worthless. Of course, most of realise as we get older that this isn’t true. And sometimes the word ‘beautiful’ is replaced with other words, like ‘mother’ or ‘married’ or even nice.
And I know there are similar pressures on men. The whole “be a hard-working provider or you’re worthless”. “Be good at sport or you’re useless.” And, increasingly, “be a hard bodied metrosexual or you’re worthless.”
The key, to me, is to try to encourage a public culture where the range of inidividuals in the public eye are not limited to one particular ideal. This cuts across all sorts of spheres, across genders, across races, across ages. It’s not just about non-models wearing swimmers in magazines. It’s about the recognition that physical attractiveness is but one element of life.
Okay, everyone can accuse me of wishful thinking now.
(My skincare regime, for those who care, consists of the inexpensive but wonderful Ego range of products from the pharmacy. This is for guys and gals with super-sensitive skin, like myself–I have excma so I can’t use anything that has fragrances in it. Also, once a week I make my own facial scrub with bicarb of soda and face wash. Works wonders and really cheap.)
As usual, EP tries to derail a constructive discussion with shitty little one liners.
Yes, Robert, we knew your opinion before you expressed it.
Now, do you have anything of substance to contribute, such as my suggestion that many of women’s image problems are their own, and can be constructively addressed by themselves instead of railing at society?
Nobody else has attempted to counter that point of view with a rational argument. There has only been abuse and attempts to exclude my viewpoint (Flute, Kim, Robert).
Yes, EP, we knew your opinion before you expressed it.
And you clearly haven’t read what Naomi, Kim or Kate said, if you think they didn’t address your… well, I’m reluctant to call it a contribution.
I didn’t need to read what Naomi, Kim or Kate said. I knew their opinions before they expressed them.
Sigh.
Do you know what I’m about to express, EP?
My mother used to say that if you can’t add anything constructive, keep your snout out. I think that applies to EP in most threads i’ve read.
Do you have anything of substance to contribute, such as my suggestion that many of women’s image problems are their own, and can be constructively addressed by themselves instead of railing at society?
Nobody else has attempted to counter that point of view with a rational argument. There has only been abuse and attempts to exclude my viewpoint (Flute, Kim, Robert, Fyodor, Ampersand Duck).
Your logic is baffling EP. If you won’t engage with the argument that individuals are born into and interact with (not stand ‘externally from’) something called “society” – which has been studied under that name for almost two centuries now – why do you bother to turn up? Go and reread the comments above.
Nah, that wasn’t it, though the bit about being constructive you could afford to take on board.
To be more specific, let us return to a previously mentioned case:
A very dear friend, who is a large, lush, stunning woman, told me a few months ago that she never lets her partner see her naked in full light, and rarely without makeup. She has set her bedroom up with dim lights, lots of fringed scarves, lots of things to throw around her if she has to get up and around the house. Her partner, on th other hand, loves what he has been allowed to see of her body and thinks she’s incredibly beautiful.
I’ve encountered large, lush women who have no such problem despite having been exposed to the same societal pressures as any other Australian woman. So we can eliminate social causes as an inevitable, absolute generator of such psychological problems.
However, regardless of the cause, we do have an existing dysfunction in an individual. The important quastion in this case is, how do we cure her?
Those who claim that all such problems are caused by society have no answer, and can offer no help. To them, the only possible treatment is a wholesale, fundamental change in society which would take decades — if it were possible at all. And there is research which indicates that at least some human standards of beauty are largely determined by biology.
Therefore, in the case of this woman, her only reasonable hope of achieving a normal sex life lies in individual therapy to overcome her inhibitions. To blame everything on society is a cruel way of robbing her of her potential by making a personal solution unattainable.
Now, you can all return to the abusive nonsense that constitutes your only response to dissenting ideas.
dk.au, I’m engaging with the “social causes” argument by suggesting alternatives. It’s Flute, Kim, Robert, Fyodor and Ampersand Duck who are failing to engage, since instead of reasoning, they only post abuse and attempts to shut me up.
The more I talk to the leftist intelligentsia, the less I respect their cognitive abilities. I am, however, beginning to develop a theory about the mechanism by which leftist belief systems cripple the intellect.
So we can eliminate social causes as an inevitable, absolute generator of such psychological problems.
Oh well of course we can! Simple absolute causes have such an uncontested, important place in the contemporary in the social sciences!!
To blame everything on society is a cruel way of robbing her of her potential by making a personal solution unattainable.
So what’s your point? That women don’t have a right to be dissatisfied with their place in society? With just their personal lot? Or just that they don’t have a right to talk about it in public (stiff upper lip and all that)?
If you can’t feel comfortable nude in an act of intimacy with a partner, then something sure ain’t right with the world.
This might have just been a throwaway line, Kim, but in such a case I would still be inclined to think that the ’something ain’t right’ applies to you (not you, of course), rather than the world.
It could also apply to men. If I had the body shape of some of my male friends and colleagues I think I’d be a bit coy about taking off my pyjamas in plain sight.
EP, you’ve used one anecdotal piece of evidence to deny the evidence of somebody else’s. You can’t do that.
It’s like saying, well, I’ve been driving around without a seatbelt for years, and never had a crash, therefore it must be safe to drive around without a seatbelt.
That social pressure causes anxiety about body image is not disproved by some people not having anxiety about body image.
That social pressure causes anxiety about body image is not disproved by some people not having anxiety about body image.
I never said it was. I pointed out that the existence of counterexamples proves that social pressure does not always cause people to have anxiety about body image.
dk.au: So what’s your point?
If you read my post, you would know what my point is.
The fact that you’re suggesting various strawman-type putative “points” indicates that you know perfectly well what I’m saying, but that you don’t like it, and are therefore trying to pretend that I said something that I didn’t say. That’s an inferior tactic.
EP, do you have anything of substance to contribute, such as my suggestion that all of your delusions of persecution are your own, and can be constructively addressed by you instead of railing at the leftist intelligentsia?
I am, however, beginning to develop a theory about the mechanism by which leftist belief systems cripple the intellect.
May I suggest a title for the publication? “Stop thief!” How I Lost My Mojo and My Smarts
That’s an inferior tactic.
Oh let’s not start this again. Look, either you’re saying that women should shut up, that they don’t have a right to complain about their lot, or you’re saying that they don’t actually have anything to complain about. Either proposition goes against established sentiments.
Simply saying that “those who claim that all such problems are caused by society have no answer, and can offer no help” is the most hideous straw-man in this argument. Find me a single theorist (even a “Leftist” one) who has thrown their hands in the air in despair (like they just don’t care) and we’ll continue.
Look, either you’re saying that women should shut up, that they don’t have a right to complain about their lot, or you’re saying that they don’t actually have anything to complain about.
There’s a great, big, fat, hairy strawman if I ever saw one.
I’m not saying anything of the sort. I’m saying what I said, in reasonably plain language, and which you have persisted in attempting to twist into something completely different.
Those who claim that all such problems are caused by society have no answer, and can offer no help to the problem of this individual woman, who I was specifically discussing.
Leaving out the context of a statement is another inferior method of argument, closely related to the strawman fallacy.
Third time lucky — why don’t you read my comment again, and this time try to respond to what I actually said? As a special bonus, if you actually manage to do that, you’ll be the first leftist in this thread to have achieved it.
EP, not everybody who smokes gets cancer. But that doesn’t mean there’s no link between smoking and cancer. Nor does it mean we should do nothing to discourage smoking, and instead tell those who got cancer that it’s their dysfunction and they should just get on with it.
On the other hand, pointing out that smoking causes cancer does not mean we should not attend to the immediate needs of the smoker who has contracted cancer. We should give them medical help, counselling, and yes, encourage them to quit smoking.
You’re presenting a false dichotomy.
Therefore, in the case of this woman, her only reasonable hope of achieving a normal sex life lies in individual therapy to overcome her inhibitions
EP, you’re vacillating between ‘individual women’ and general ‘gender bashing’ whenever it suits you. I can’t possible contend with such sophistry.
I’m glad you’ve engaged the argument, Robert.
Perhaps my presentation of the issue as a dichotomy was too extreme, but this was done in opposition to an argument that presented the opposite extreme — all social and no individual causes or solutions.
I think the best approach to many issues involves social, individual, and biological approaches working in a complementary way. Many schools of thought fall short by accepting only one of these, and denying the others.
No, the argument of Kim et al did not present it as “all social and no individual causes or solutions” — as you’d know if you actually read their posts, instead of going with what you thought you knew they’d say.
I think the best approach to many issues involves social, individual, and biological approaches working in a complementary way. Many schools of thought fall short by accepting only one of these, and denying the others
Very noble admitting your own shortcomings EP. I’m impressed.
(*Takes deep breath*)
I kinda agree with EP’s point. I think what he’s getting at is that there are social pressures on everyone, but we, as individuals, are able to determine which ones we’ll bow to and which ones we’ll stand against.
These pressures are everywhere – they don’t just relate to body image. I, for example, confront a daily pressure to come into work, put my head down, not make too much noise, and not go for a lunchtime ale too often. That’s fine. I accept most people are happy to do these things, but I set my own boundaries on the extent to which I’m willing to comply with the unspoken word.
To return to the point, it is incredibly frustrating to see/hear so many women (both here and in my personal life) worry about their body image. I know there is intense, unspoken pressure to conform with an ideal (unrealistic for many, as it is) but… You. Do. Not. Have. To.
I’m attracted to a remarkable variety of looks and figures (note: figures, not sizes; there’s an important difference) and, overwhelmingly, the women I find most attractive are those who are comfortable with themselves – a sense of self they surely must have developed personally. Mind you, I can assure you there’s at least one male out here who turns his head away from the poseur chicks (and they don’t deserve to be called women or ladies, cos even they don’t think they are) who walk around like they own the place because they know they’re hot. I refuse to give them the satisfaction of having every man in the pub/club/bar/alleyway turn his head. But I guess I fight my own little battles in my own little way sometimes…
Oh, come on, Robert. My knowledge of what Kim and others will say is far more accurate than what they actually say.
It’s not my fault if they get it wrong.
Youie, there are indeed social pressures on everyone but the degree to which we determine which ones we stand against is already shaped by those same pressures. Having said that, innumerable individual acts of rebellion add up to social change. Slowly, but sometimes the tide crests and you ride the wave.
And yes, I think that what you say about people being comfortable with their own self is highly attractive.
I was thinking about Ampersand Duck’s comments earlier tonight. From my own experience, being naked in front of a partner is a risk – exposing yourself – and Rob, yes I also feel worry and concern about my body at such times. I could talk about the different ways naked male bodies and female bodies are perceived in terms of power relations, but in deference to EP, I won’t. But – thinking honestly about my own past experience – partners of mine who are absolutely gorgeous and have no problem whatever getting naked for sex often still want to cover themselves when they walk away from the bed. Even when I’ve been living by myself and there’s no chance they’ll encounter a flatmate in the dead of night in the corridor. Maybe only one or two women I’ve been with have felt entirely comfortable just being naked and being seen.
It’s worth thinking about.
As to this comment by EP:
I don’t think what Kim wrote either in the post or in comments could be in anyway characterised as a “rant”. It seemed to me rather to be very thoughtful, and avoiding confrontation along gender lines.
But what gets me is two things.
First, and I’m aware of the fact that I know Kim personally and other readers perhaps don’t, but I can’t see how what she wrote can in any way be read as some sort of “deep female psychic need never to be happy about anything”.
If you read her comments, and as Rob pointed out, it’s worthwhile doing so rather than constructing a straw Kim, she’s actually being quite celebratory about her own body, while not minimising the social pressures she confronts.
And I fail to see how a post that ends by calling for women to cherish their curves can be characterised as unhappy or negative or whatever.
But Kim being my friend as she is, I can assure you that she’s a very happy and positive and strong person, and nothing at all like any stereotype of an “embittered feminist” in EP land. Go back and read her comment about matching lipstick, handbags, nailpolish etc. She’s an intelligent woman who can at the same time enjoy her femininity while recognising that it’s a double edged sword.
And I don’t think I’m betraying any confidences here, or talking out of school, because Kim has written about this at LP before, but her own perception of body image was much accentuated by her experience of having bone cancer as a teenager and having a leg amputated at a time when young girls (and young boys) are perhaps most nervous about changes in their bodies and body norms – that is to say, early adolescence. So I know that experience has led her to be very aware indeed of these issues. But it’s to her credit that she can step out of her own story and think deeply and dispassionately (while at the same time being very empathetic and aware) about how such issues affect people generally.
So, I, too, think some interesting issues have been raised in this thread, and some uninteresting and predictable stoushing, but I’d prefer to accentuate the positive.
And btw – I met Kim for a drink at the Alibi Room on Brunswick St after work tonight and she wants me to pass on the message that she’s just moved house and her internet access hasn’t followed her yet, so she’s disappointed that she can’t contribute further to the conversation at the moment.
But she says hi.
And asked me to flirt on her behalf with flirty commenters, but I’m loath to, as no-one does online flirting like Kimbo.
So please take Kim’s flirting as read.
So please take Kim’s flirting as read.
It’s just not the same, is it…
It‚Äôs just not the same, is it…
No. You said it well then, comrade!
Like I said, no-one does flirting like Kimbo.
Barnaby Joyce should raise the serious matter of Telstra’s recalcitrance in installing broadband in her new digs.
Finally, back to flirt mode!
I am happy to take Kim’s flirting as read.
I was going to suggest a menage a trois, but don’t know how to say it in French …
This is why I keep coming back to Larva Rodeo.
I’m with you Fyodor
Don’t know if there’s any life left in this thread, but……here goes (non-flirty).
I think women are stronger emotionally than men, and perhaps that’s why they they don’t mind being more public about things – it takes a certain innate strength. I’m not playing competitive victimhood here: but guys get pressured too – to be strong, sensitive, intellectual, sporty, brave, handsome, rich, athletic, successful, fantastic in bed, all of that, and all at once. It’s impossible. Most of us don’t achieve more than one or two of those things, unless we’re Jude Law, which most of us aren’t. What are the comparative figures for male/female suicide and depression, and from what causes? I suspect that guys who realise they don’t ‘measure up’ bury their troubles deep, and it does them the greater damage.
To guys like that, assuming their problems weren’t obviously clinical, I’d say the same kind of thing. It’s your life, you have to sort it out. If you think you can get through through it without pressure and pain, you’re just fooling yourself. And if you really can’t deal with it (being seriously short, or extra fat, whatever), for God’s sake go and get help. There are professionals for that kind of thing. Blaming the world is just an alibi.
Well, Rob, one of the major social pressures in Australia that’s directly related to young male suicides, is the pressure not to be gay.
Sometimes the social pressures of the world really are dangerous. Telling people just to ‘get help’ is a bit of a cop-out.
Mark, excellent comment. As I said, I can’t see the danger is discussing these issues, or why when women talk about them we’re shouted down as whingers and whiners.
As I wrote to Kim in an email a while back, her discussion of her body was very inspiring to me, as a person who has a perfectly ‘whole’ body and yet one that I often dislike very much.
For me and many other women I know, being able to talk about our insecurities is hugely liberating. It puts a lot of things into perspective. Knowing that other people feel the same way but at the same time can overcome these feelings is very important.
And I think one thing that may be lacking for many young men is an ability to talk about things in helpful ways with their peers — as a woman I have a wonderful support network of friends with who I can discuss these things.
When young men reveal weakness they are often mocked and taunted, called ‘gay’ or not manly or whatever. It’s bullshit and it claims lives, as Liam points out.
liam! Urging a young man contemplating suicide to seek psychiatric assistance is not a cop out. It’s the most sensible thing you could get him to do. Blaming the world is a cop out.
I never said people shouldn’t get help if they need it. They should, and we’re agreed on that. The point is that a major cause of male youth suicide in Australia is homophobia, and social attitudes need to change to save more lives.
Kim being my friend as she is, I can assure you that she‚Äôs a very happy and positive and strong person, and nothing at all like any stereotype of an “embittered feminist” in EP land.
I’m sure she is a nice person — even though she does have a go at men from time to time. I just had a stab because I was miffed at Kim’s comment:
Sorry for the late responses to some thoughtful comments (and some stoushing predictably inspired by EP‚Äôs contribution whenever the ‘F‚Äô word is mentioned – sorry Rob – hard to have a nice thread when you get EP doing his thang! – and to be fair the thang in response to EP – it‚Äôs pretty ritualised by now, I think)
I’m usually nicer, but I was feeling a little set-upon at the time.
EP, you do have to admit that your comments on feminism are somewhat repetitive no matter what the context. I’m sure that’s what Kim was alluding to.
I think Kim’s comments on men, and on myself, are also somewhat repetitive no matter what the context.
That tends to be the case with people who hold consistent beliefs.
I don’t think Kim makes too many comments about men in the sense that you mean, EP, but hey, maybe you can enlighten me?
I’m back!
Not aware of making generalisations about men, EP – perhaps I have and I’ve been too hasty. I’ll happily respond if you draw any to my attention.
Will catch up with the rest of the comments soon!
No-one around to flirt with tonight!
xx
It’s no big deal. But several times, especially in the case of Big Brother, Kim has characterised male group behaviour as rude, uncouth and disrespectful of women, with the strong implication that men should change the way they act, even if there are no women present.
I think I would be rightly criticised if I disparaged female group behaviour, and implied that women should act in a way that suits men, even when there are no men present.
Kate, thanks for your comment. I agree about being able to talk about this sort of thing.
EP, well, perhaps I was too sweeping – but the boys on BB weren’t exactly setting a good example. I don’t think all men disparage women, but I think those who do should examine what it is in masculine behaviour patterns that leads them to do so.
EP, don’t squib on my response, please answer me.
So sorry to bump it, but curiously, this body thing is all the rage again. Every day is a new day when it comes to ‘real’ women.
I like this line the best in that:
“By now, everyone should realise that the only people out there who aren’t ”real women” are men.”
And never missing the opportunity to youtubes youse darlings, this man song was really good IMO.
Those were the days, Casey. That was almost the Original Cast. Nearly all gone now. I especially miss Kate.
I am happy to say Kate is a friend of mine Rob. So don’t get to miss her as much as you do, luckily! But she was great here wasn’t she? LP is poorer for the loss of some of these feisty wimmens I say.
I agree, Casey. It’s unfortunate that it was some of the commenters on this thread and others who contributed (in part) to their not wanting to blog any more.
Yes, that’s right Mark.
The ghosts of stoushes past, Mark. Let’s not go there, eh. None of us was blameless. But it was fun in those days. Give my sincere regards to Kate, Casey (if you feel so inclined). I agree that LP was much richer for the rich cast of female bloggers it then boasted.
Haiku was right way back up there.
LP always was, and remains, better in flirt mode. Not that I’ve done the research but [prepares for an unsubstantiated assertion and the use of a totally speculative fact] I certainly think there’s a correlation between good stoush and comments made between the hours of 9pm and 4am AEST. And with Youtube open in another firefox window, and a bottle of whiskey within easy reach of a glass perched on one’s mousepad. And all one’s grievances at the forefront of the mind.
Rob, you may say “but”, I would instead suggest “therefore”.
I can’t think of anything more boring than being held blameless.