follow us in feedly
Tabloid headlines rewritten not to be sexist!
05.05.2014
08:57 am

Topics:
Feminism
Pop Culture

Tags:
sexism

Normalizing headlines
 
The smart feminists over at Vagenda Magazine (slogan: “Like King Lear, but for girls”) asked their Twitter followers to fix the reflexively, egregiously, hyperbolically, breathlessly sexist tabloid headlines by creating new ones that seem to adhere to the actually humdrum events that happened. The celebrity press can’t exist without maintaining a continuous state of hysteria or high dudgeon over what is really nothing, and we certainly appreciate the corrective measures.

There’s no hashtag, apparently, but just go to the Vagenda twitter feed and you’ll see a bunch of them mixed in with other things.
 
Normalizing headlines
 
Normalizing headlines
 
Normalizing headlines
 
Normalizing headlines
 
Normalizing headlines
 
Normalizing headlines
 
Normalizing headlines
 
via HUH.

Posted by Martin Schneider | Leave a comment
An amusing response to a sexist advertisement
02.28.2014
02:03 pm

Topics:
Advertising
Amusing

Tags:
sexism
Red Scharlach

111aaadersharchal.jpg
 
DM pal Red Scharlach has been described as “the best purveyor of graphic crack out there.” It’s a fair description, as the talented Ms. Scharlach produces a delightful variety of daily material that is entertaining, clever, often thought-provoking and wee a bit obsessed with Benedict Cumberbatch... but in a nice way.

Today Scharlach has created an amusing response to an offensive advertisement from the supposedly liberated “Swinging Sixties.” Ahem.

Above, you see a genuine ad from Popular Science (1968), courtesy of newhousebooks. Below is the image that popped into my mind when I first saw it.

Perhaps there IS an upside to sexist retro advertising after all?

See more of Red Scharlach’s work here.
 
222dersharchal.jpg
 
Previously on Dangerous MInds
Otters who look like Benedict Cumberbatch
 

Posted by Paul Gallagher | Leave a comment
What if we lived in a female-dominated society where women acted just like men?
02.12.2014
11:12 am

Topics:
Feminism

Tags:
sexism
Eleonoré Pourriat


 
French actress, writer, and director Eleonoré Pourriat made a short satirical film, Majorité Opprimée (Oppressed Majority), in 2010 about what life would be like for a man if he had to live in a female-dominated society where women acted like condescending, dismissive, violent, raging dickheads. It finally made its way to YouTube with English subtitles recently and has been lauded by many women who live in similar urban areas for being pretty spot-on. Pourriat told The Independent this week, “Obviously, I have touched a nerve. Women in France, but not just in France, feel that everyday sexism has been allowed to go on for too long.”
 
french film stroller
 
It’s an interesting companion piece to the recent experience of the guy who posed as a woman on OKCupid and was so disturbed by the harassing messages he received from dudes that he quit a mere two hours into the experiment.

(Trigger warning!) NSFW “Majorité Opprimée (Oppressed Majority),” below:

 

Posted by Kimberly J. Bright | Leave a comment
‘The He-Man Woman Haters Club’ of literature classes
09.27.2013
08:14 am

Topics:
Literature

Tags:
sexism
David Gilmour novelist


“Peace is Tough,” Jamie Reid

And the University of Toronto R.J. Gumby Chair in Literature goes to…..

Canadian novelist David Gilmour (author of Sparrow Nights, The Perfect Order of Things) teaches a literature class at Victoria College at the University of Toronto. Note that he is not Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour, although you have to wonder if he has ever used a fake British accent and pretended to be the other David Gilmour (like this guy) just to get laid, taking into consideration his rather low opinion of women (see below).

Gilmour teaches a class about only authors he personally enjoys and knows well. Fair enough. That’s what happens in academia. I should know, since I have to regularly endure unavoidable social events where I hear about this or that academic’s pet mania ad nauseum to the point where I consider committing homicide with flatware.

So I’m used to hearing about entire centuries of writers or historical events written off as meaningless if they do not fall into a professor or adjunct’s personal expertise. But I hadn’t heard about an entire gender (well, except for radical feminist philosopher Mary Daly’s classes at Boston College that men weren’t allowed to take) and an array of sexual orientations written off completely in one class until yesterday.

Dammit, David Gilmour doesn’t like female writers… with the kind of condescending exception of Virginia Woolf.

He told Random House Canada’s Hazlitt magazine:

I’m not interested in teaching books by women. Virginia Woolf is the only writer that interests me as a woman writer, so I do teach one of her short stories. But once again, when I was given this job I said I would only teach the people that I truly, truly love. Unfortunately, none of those happen to be Chinese, or women. Except for Virginia Woolf. And when I tried to teach Virginia Woolf, she’s too sophisticated, even for a third-year class. Usually at the beginning of the semester a hand shoots up and someone asks why there aren’t any women writers in the course. I say I don’t love women writers enough to teach them, if you want women writers go down the hall. What I teach is guys. Serious heterosexual guys. F. Scott Fitzgerald, Chekhov, Tolstoy. Real guy-guys. Henry Miller. Philip Roth.

“What Would John Wayne Read?”

Okay, so no women of any sexual orientation whatsoever. And specifically no bisexual or gay men (but maybe, just maybe, ones who look, sound, and act like “guy-guys”). 

But what about manly gay writers? Where do they fit into the curriculum? Walt Whitman, Gore Vidal, Robert Bly, Thom Gunn, or Augusten Burroughs? Does Jack Kerouac get excluded because, although he played football, he had a fling with Gore Vidal? Do butch lesbians (like Gertrude Stein) count? What about transgender writers like Leslie Feinberg?

What if a woman is straight but presents as masculine and likes guns, booze, and fishing like Hemingway did? Or does bro-ishness not save us? What if, say, a gay writer is not yet officially “out” but is posting personals ads looking for DL anonymous sex with other married men in the Lowe’s Home Improvement men’s bathroom? Does he qualify as an acceptable writer, if everyone who knows him thinks he is heterosexual??? Which basically means, you can be a passably straight gay but not a “fag”? (Sorry, Quentin.)

gilmourclass
Novelist David Gilmour busily crushing the literary career dreams of several vagina owners—who appear to be the majority of students—in his class in 2011

In all seriousness, Gilmour can still be a good novelist while having obnoxious opinions and saying things in interviews that make him come off as ridiculous and petty. He doesn’t have to be a likeable guy to have talent. I still wouldn’t want to have a beer with him.

Maureen Johnson wrote in response to Gilmour’s doozy of an interview:

Literature is kind of full of assholes.

And that is okay. Some great books have been written by assholes. I am looking at my shelf and it is full of beloved books by known assholes, and that’s fine. Assholism is one of the most common afflictions of literature. Certainly literature and writing programs are full of them. They are like wildlife refuges for assholes.

—snip—

I will continue to read the works of assholes. I do not discriminate. We all have our faults, and there is good in everyone. And you can be an asshole in life and somehow distill something good and pure by pushing it through the grit in your system.

Below, “man” of the hour, David Gilmour, not exactly oozing machismo, with his son, discussing The Film Club:

Posted by Kimberly J. Bright | Leave a comment
AMERICA - MIA HATES YOU!!! (according to Pitchfork)


 
It’s been brought to my attention by Collapse Board’s Wallace Wylie that Pitchfork have dedicated an entire page to calling MIA an asshole because she apparently told the American public to fuck off during Madonna’s Super Bowl performance last night. In case you hadn’t heard, MIA did indeed raise her middle finger during Madonna’s overblown performance of “Give Me All Your Luvin’,” on which the rapper makes a guest appearance. To see the incident, scroll down to the bottom of this post. 

Here’s an extract from the offending Pitchfork article:

What’s extra annoying about last night’s event is that M.I.A. doesn’t need these cheap ploys to up her visibility, even when the stage design and costuming is best described as “GoldenPalace.com.” After all, she released her first great single in years just last Thursday, and its music video had already racked up more than 3 million YouTube views even before the Super Bowl send-up. Following the rep-shattering press surrounding 2010’s /\/\/\Y/\, it wouldn’t be the worst idea to draw as much focus as possible back to her music. [So why run this story?]

Instead, in the few bars Madonna was kind enough to grant her during the biggest television event of the year, M.I.A.‘s message to America was simply, “Fuck you.” Well, in M.I.A.‘s own words, the little people will never win, but they can fuck shit up. Success might be the best revenge, but apparently, being an asshole is forever.

Seriously Pitchfork, GET A FUCKING GRIP.

As I stated in my last post about her, I am an MIA skeptic. I have found her performances and music to be underwhelming in the past, though I have really warmed to her latest video “Bad Girls.” The same goes for last night’s performance at the Super Bowl - it ain’t no great shakes, though she does look great. But if you take this much offense at last night’s throw-away hand gesture—which I honestly might not have noticed if it hadn’t been pointed out to me—then you seriously need your head examined. Yes, seriously. Just look at the clip below, and then tell us how offended you are on a scale of one to ten.

What I find truly bizarre about this reactionary Pitchfork piece is the level of personal affront the writer has taken at MIA’s (actually rather tame) gesture. According to this article MIA is not just flipping the bird at a camera or a camera person, she is not just flipping the bird as a routine hand gesture that countless MC regularly use, she’s not flipping the bird to accentuate her line about “not giving a shit” - no, MIA is flipping the bird to show her disgust at every single person in the United States of America. AMERICA, MIA HATES YOU!!! And especially those who may have tuned in to the Super Bowl to see her!! Yes, this makes perfect sense.

With that in mind I’m really, REALLY looking forward to seeing Pitchfork calling out Kanye West, Jay-Z, Eminem, Lil Wayne, Fred Durst, Jonathan Davis and countless other rappers and rockers who have raised their middle finger on national television at some point in the past and will do so again in the future. Because THEY must hate America and everyone watching them at that moment TOO, right?

Unfortunately, this will never happen. As other writers have pointed out in the past, Pitchfork has a legacy of sexism to its tarnished name, which explains the hyperbolic over-reaction to a common hand gesture in this news piece. Had this been done by a man it would surely be lauded as “punk,” yet when MIA flips the bird during a televised game where grown men BEAT THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF EACH OTHER, she’s an asshole who hates every single person watching her at that very moment. Living and dead. I mean seriously, how is anyone watching American Football going to cope with the mental scars that seeing a raised middle finger can bring?!?

That’s leaving aside the fact that MIA is a brown woman, and not even from America itself. Unlike Madonna of course, who can remain completely blameless during this entire farrago, and who was “kind enough” to grant MIA exposure on her tune. As opposed to hiring MIA in the hope that some of her credibility will rub off on a very lukewarm track. Or even—get this—simply being a female performer who wants to work with another female performer

What is also “extra annoying” is that Pitchfork has, in the past, given critical support to acts who condone the most brutal of violence against women and who have been deemed somehow edgy and confrontational because of it. Presumably because rape, sexism and homophobia is “punk” as opposed to “a cheap ploy to gain visibility.” I await with glee the moment when Pitchfork tells Tyler the Creator/Eminem/Lil Wayne to drop their bird-flipping schtick and draw our focus solely back to the music.

Again though, I doubt this will ever happen.

Pitchfork, with this news piece you have placed yourselves firmly (and finally) on the side of the fucking establishment.

Rock on, bros.

MIA HATES AMERICA!!! AND HERE IS THE PROOF:
 

Posted by Niall O'Conghaile | Leave a comment
Coffee Jerks
09.02.2011
09:05 am

Topics:
History

Tags:
sexism
Coffee
Jerks


 
Redditor Oppositeofprogress says, “My friend took a series of 1950s/60s-era coffee commercials and edited them down to just the moments when the guys were the biggest jerks to their wives about coffee.”

Posted by Tara McGinley | Leave a comment
Sexist vintage ad: ‘Show her it’s a man’s world’
07.25.2011
01:37 pm

Topics:
Feminism
History

Tags:
sexism
ties
vintage ads


 
No wonder this turkey’s sleeping in a single bed!

Previously on Dangerous Minds:
Extremely sexist ads of yesteryear
Women Are Like Used Cars: Unbelievable sexist ad

(via Sociological Images)

Posted by Tara McGinley | Leave a comment
Richard Morris’ ‘Tyler: The Creator, or an Old Skool Sexist?’


 
Amid the ongoing internet brouhaha surrounding Tyler The Creator’s lyrical content, this article from the website Soundblab is the best I have read on the subject so far, and pretty accurately nails the problems I have with Tyler’s approach to writing about sex and abuse. Yeah, I get that he’s still a kid so hasn’t had a great deal of real life experience in these areas, but like so many of the other excuses brought up in this debate, that’s still pretty weak. Richard Morris writes:

Now, there are three arguments being put forward to explain, excuse and otherwise justify Tyler’s lyrical concerns. These arguments are the same ones which get put forward time and time again when hip hop artists produce dubious lyrics: he’s just reflecting his background; he just repeating what’s everywhere in hip hop culture; he’s playing with a persona. A moment’s reflection is all you need to work out that that last excuse can’t exist with the first two. Either Tyler is honestly reflecting where he comes from and the culture he’s surrounded by, or he’s concocted a character as satire or narrative aid. It can’t be both.

...

However, if you still want to buy into any or all of those arguments listed above, fine, but I have a question for you: where are all the songs by female artists about attacking and raping men? If that seems a ridiculous thing to ponder, ask yourself why. Why does it make sense for a man to rap about raping a woman but not the other way round? The answer, when you pick it apart, is probably that there would be no audience for those kind of songs. Similarly, there’s not much call for songs where gay artists have a go at straight people. No one would buy into that kind of stupid prejudice. Gay activists would condemn it as counter-productive.

Tyler, the Creator has identified an audience and, with the media’s help, he’s milking that for all it’s worth. That audience is primarily made up of white young men. A couple of weeks ago, Hamish MacBain took Tyler to task in the pages of NME, pointing out that Odd Future had bypassed the traditional hip hop audience, instead crossing over quickly to the kind of alternative music fans who read Pitchfork, the Guardian and, hey, Soundblab. It’s exactly these alternative, typically liberal-leaning fans who repeatedly let hip hop artists off the hook when it comes to misogynistic and homophobic lyrics.

For me the problem is not so much that these excuses are not applicable - it’s that twenty years after the release of Death Certificate we’re still having the exact same debate. We’ve not moved on. It’s disheartening to see that popular hip-hop has devolved into a negatized musical format whose primary function is to piss off suburban parents, and where shock tactics outweigh genuine insight. Much of the blame for this can be heaped on the feet of the media, but surely the music is just as much at fault too? Because to me Tyler’s lyrics do not feel in any way transgressive. Really, they don’t, they’re the same old thing I have heard countless times before. If you do think they are transgressive, then I would say you are part of a social group that has thankfully never been subject to the threat of rape or abuse. Tyler’s lyrics simply re-enforce the status quo, and as such they’re just boring.

Read all of Richard Morris’ excellent article here. Soundblab also has another article defending Tyler’s lyrical content, by James Bray, which you can read here.

 

Posted by Niall O'Conghaile | Leave a comment
Women Are Like Used Cars: Unbelievable sexist ad
04.11.2011
02:36 pm

Topics:
Current Events

Tags:
sexism
cars
Dale Wurfel

image
 
Good gravy! Methinks Canadian car dealership Dale Wurfel is kind of pushing it here. Really, Dale Wurfel? Really??? 
 
Previously on Dangerous Minds:
‘Stuffed Girl’s Heads! Only $2.98’

(via The Hairpin)

Posted by Tara McGinley | Leave a comment