Violent masculinity and the military

Senior US officer and former NATO commander General John Sheehan has sparked outrage in the Netherlands after he suggested that the Srebrenica massacre was allowed to occur because of a culture within European military forces that has become "socialise[d]" by unionisation and open homosexuality, which apparently leads to a soft army that can't fight.

While queer rights bloggers can obviously dissect this issue far better than I can, something struck me about General Sheehan's comments that displayed very clearly just how ingrained the link is between female sexual subordination and dominant masculinity.

To put it in a nutshell: If you don't stick it in a woman then you are a woman, and you fight like a girl.

(Erm, this is the first time I've blogged on heteronormative attitudes relating specifically to gay men, and far be it from me to take this issue away from them and make it all about women or feminism, but I see the two as intrinsically linked, and that's what I'm commenting on.)

Sheehan is betraying a particularly violent idea about masculinity, one that says men fuck up the enemy and fuck women; while women "socialise" society and are fucked by men. You can't simultaneously be fucked by a man and fuck up the enemy, you pussy boy, it just don't work that way. Apparently.

I find this sort of thing problematic for the general reasons that it promotes a link between violence and acceptable masculinity, and subordinates women, linking in particular dominating/penetrative/violent sexual subordination of women with the perceived survival of the nation state via military success.

However, Sheehan is suggesting that a feminised military culture (socialised, unionised, open) is not as capable of winning battles, and in some sense I think he could be right. While I have no doubt individual women and gay men can be just as violently driven towards a military objective as their heterosexual male peers, the whole military establishment is built on foundations of violent masculinity; subverting that regimented tradition is necessarily going to change things. Not that this would be a bad thing!!


Ok, quick post, just to help me get back in the swing of things, after prompting from The God of Dishes! Thanks babe x

Objectifiying our bodies drives us from them

There is an idea I've been toying with for a while, its not well developed yet, but the bones are thus: our obsession with physical attractiveness (heck let's just say it - BEING SKINNY) is in a huge part responsible not only for eating disorders that restrict caloric intake, but also obesity and the pandemic problem of not finding enough time to exercise. Yes, I think people are generally fat because we're obsessed with not being fat.

Appearance obsession is I think, for some people, causing them to hate and flee from their bodies. We constantly dissect and criticise our bodies - my thighs are x, my belly is y, sweet Jesus help I HAVE CANKLES!

One idea floating around is 'The fantasy of being thin', where people image how wonderful their lives will be when they're thin; where when we imagine the future, it always seems to include a better, thinner you. When we attempt to fulfill this fantasy by dieting and apperance-orientated exercise, the majority of people fail because they want to be instantly thin, because they're hurting themselves, physically and mentally, by being driven by body-hate and the shadows of a shallow fantasy.

Our bodies feel neglected, they're not an ally in the change, and they fight back. The more you say "no chocolate", the more your body craves chocolate. The more you say "run you fat ass!" the more your muscles scream for you to stop; I don't think they appreciate being spoken to like that. And finally failure comes, thank god because changing your life based on body-hate and image-obsessed fantasy is cruel to your body and soul.

And with failure we retreat again from our bodies. We're not on speaking terms with our bodies because we feel they're letting us down so devastatingly. And I think, for some people, this is where overeating and sloth take over, cue obesity crisis. Stuffing yourself and lying about for more than a few hours does NOT feel good. But we're too angry with our bodies to listen to them, so instead we seek a quick-fix physical pleasure, and we punish our bodies. It's a nasty, nasty cycle.

Perhaps the only path to good health, for both the individual and society, is through body-love, not body-hate. If we took some time to be nice to our bodies, to listen to them, we would realise they're not actually telling us that they want lard and laziness, but that they want good nutrition and healthy exertion. And in this scenario the same activities - good diet and exercise - are not a painful chore but a pleasurable fulfillment of a physical need. So in order to be healthy we need to stop worrying about what our bodies look like, and start listening to what they feel like on the inside.

I'm touching heavily on ideas of body acceptance, of which there is way more coherent literature than I want to focus on here. However one issue relating to body acceptance that is pertinent here is the power of the fantasy of being thin, where people espouse body acceptance, but in the back of their minds it's still the same - "I'll accept my body with all its 'flaws'....when I've lost 15kgs."

I think body-love makes people healthier, and in some cases that may mean slimmer; but attempting to use body-love to achieve some goal of weight-loss is never gonna work. After all, your body will know the love is shallow, cos your body is you! lol.

Anyway, that's just the first rambling on this issue, I'm sure there'll be more to come.

(Disclaimer: I'm not suggesting obesity is caused solely by image-obsession. There are significant issues relating to socio-economic status and access to healthy foods, education about healthy diet, medications and weight, obsessive and compulsive mental illness etc. My musings are based entirely on my own experience, and the experience of my mainly white, university-educated, middle class girlfriends.)

Because feeling beautiful is central to women's self worth?

Jennifer Hawkins, former Miss Universe, appeared naked and unphotoshopped on the cover of Marie Claire. She had a crease on her waist *gasp* and apparently some cellulite. It was meant to raise awareness about eating disorders, and help your average woman feel better about herself. Anyway, not only did the feminist blogosphere go mad, but a large portion of the general public weighed in to the debate. In my opinion they rightly pointed out that the picture didn't really make much of a point because a) she's not an average woman, she's a supermodel, and b) she doesn't really look any different when she IS photoshopped, cos you know, she's a supermodel.

There has been a lot of talk about how they should have put on an un-photoshopped image of a woman who doesn't fit perfectly into the current cultural ideal of female beauty. Part of the problem is that we are exposed to so many images of one ideal, and so few positive images of anything else. A positive image of a fat chick for example, may have had a good impact on women seeing that even though they don't fit the ideal, they are still beautiful.

Marie Claire's actions, and the response, was largely predictable. It's been analysed until the cows come home. But as I've reflected, something else has stood out for me....

The whole argument seems to revolve around how a naked picture of Jennifer Hawkins does not make other women feel beautiful, in fact it makes them feel unattractive, which in turn makes the whole thing deplorable because it was supposed to be fighting eating disorders. A positive image of a 'real woman' ('real woman' - that's a whole other side to the debate) who doesn't perfectly fit the cultural ideal is advocated because this, it is presumed, will make women feel beautiful.

I'm going to assume it is believed that women will feel beautiful if they see a naked picture of an average woman because they will appreciate that the female body is quite beautiful even when it doesn't fit a cultural ideal, and that despite media saturation only genetic freaks fit the cultural ideal, so we should all stop worrying.

I think this is a fair enough statement. Working in a bikini shop and seeing women's bodies all day, I did in fact grow an appreciation for the beauty of the female body in all its diversity. But what irks me is that the implication coming across, including from those working to fight eating disorders, is that we must do everything we can to make women feel like they are physically beautiful. The goal is to redefine beauty so that more women fit it because 'feeling beautiful' is seen as centrally important to a woman's perception of self worth.

This is a fundamentally counterproductive approach to women's empowerment in general and eating disorders in particular. Sure, attempt to shift the goal posts so more women fit into the 'beautiful' category, there is merit in that particularly when ideals promote unhealthy behaviours. There is merit in expanding ideas about female beauty to appreciate women's bodies with their cesarean scars, womanly dimply thighs and flabby stomachs. But what would really benefit all women - conventionally beautiful, butt ugly and everything in between - would be to reduce the focus on women's bodies entirely.

Only when female physical attractiveness, however defined, is taken off its pedestal will we get somewhere with equality. And as men are drawn into this appearance obsession, we are not only risking equality of the sexes but a general healthy, mentally and physically, society. Seriously is it that difficult to imagine a society where being fat or ugly isn't the end of the fucking world? My sense of humour isn't to many people's tastes, but its not the end of the world, I just tend to consider the people who do appreciate it as connoisseurs of a fine brew.

"But being fat is unhealthy! And a drain on the health care system!" - it's true, it is. But so is cigarette smoking and sodium intake and not getting pap smears. But smokers, fish 'n' chips lovers, and women with creepy doctors do not center their entire self worth and behaviour around these issues.

I'm gonna put it out there - it's more acceptable for a man to fugly than a woman. Some women would say that's unfair and they resent being expected to hook up with ugly guys, and that's a fair point of personal taste. But drawing men into this insanity is not the answer, what a perverse equality that would be. A promotion of a wider variety of female beauty would be beneficial, but more importantly maybe we should all realise that being, or even feeling, like the opitomy of sexual attractiveness is not the be all and end all of existence.

You're taking up too much space

I take the tram to and from work. It's a lovely, quintessentially Melbourne experience. I get on out in the 'burbs, so more times than often score a seat. One thing I've noticed though, and its been getting on my nerves: men just don't move over. The double seats on the standard and W-class (not the 'new' bullet looking trams) trams are not divided, just a double bench. People generally take up a bit more than half the seat if they have it to themselves, but when somebody sits down next to them I've noticed a marked gender difference. Women tend to pull their bag in closer and scooch across the seat and cross their legs, so the other person has ample room. Men, on the other hand, remain sitting wide legged, taking up 3/4 of the seat. And when you sit down, they stay that way! Like do I have to sit on your lap so you get the message? Well that's what I've been resorting to - when they don't move over, I just sidle up real close, bump them a few times and half dump my bag on their laps. I'm being rude, I know it, I'm essentially shoving them, but seriously, get a fucking clue.

(Of course this is a generalisation, I should take a poll or something).

This whole tram seating thing got me thinking about space in general and I've started noticing a myriad of different ways in which men feel entitled to space, and women feel like they shouldn't take up any...

-Men sit wide legged, women cross their legs (this is of course also because we couldn't have our legs open because you know we have vaginas).

-I feel unfeminine when I sit with my legs wide and sturdy...so I try to do it as much as possible!

-Gee I dunno, the whole women-should-diet-themselves-to-nothing-to-be-attractive, but men get to have muscles.

-A woman wants a dressing table - gah she takes up so much space! A man wants a shed - well that's reasonable isn't it?

-The way women with big breasts tend to slouch.

-The way blokes hardly ever move out of the way when you're on a collision course on the street. If I don't move, we bump shoulders. (Yes I know, another generalisation)

-I'm ashamed to tell shoe sales girls that my feet are a size 9. Big feet = man. Doesn't matter that I'm nearly 6 ft of course.

-Trams again - the way men, and only men (ie not tall women) seem to expect you to duck under their outstretched arm to get out of the tram. Seriously could you let go for one sec so I don't have to stick my face in your sweaty armpit?

And I could go on, but I'm off to purchase World War Z :-)

Nothing like the threat of sexual assault to keep yo ass movin'

This morning I'm at the gym (applause please! thank you!) puffing away on the treadmill. A young woman hops on the treadmill next to me. After a couple of minutes a staff member comes up, he's clearly her personal trainer. They chat a bit, I puff a lot. He cranks up the incline on her treadmill. She's climbing that hill for what seems like forever. She's starting to get puffed and struggling, his job is to encourage her: "Just 60 seconds to go!" - "You can do it!" - "Just imagine there's a creepy guy chasing you down a dark street! He's going to attack you! You can't stop running!"

Wait, hang on. WTF?!?!

Her response was muted by her gasping for breath, but I think she sort of laughed. I wasn't laughing. I was upset. Do I really need to be reminded of threat of sexual assault during my morning workout? And what about the chick?! Does this guy know her well enough to know that she's never been assaulted, or that her sister hasn't been, or whatever? Is the threat of sexual assault a valid personal training method?? Is it something that's ok to joke about?

What a crock.

I told some of my girlfriends, the resident gym junkie in my little possie seemed to think I was overreacting because women getting attacked by strangers is rare...rare I suppose compared to women getting attacked by men they know. Which is true.

But I still don't feel my upset was an overreaction. I told a few other people and they had the exact same response as me. Which felt good. Because I need validation of my opinions.

So I sent the gym a complaint. I figured it was kind of my responsibility to mention that I found the comment completely inappropriate in a professional setting, because other women who may be far more affected by that kind of thing than me might not be in a position to want to bring it up with management. And even not considering that, it upset me as a woman, and I don't usually keep my mouth shut when something bothers me :-D

I have had no response to my complaint as of yet. Now I am worried they think I'm some feminazi freak and that I'll get sniggers and snide looks next time I'm there. But I'm just going to have to believe in myself and be confident in my standing up for what I believe in. And who are we kidding, I am a feminazi freak :-D

My smelly crotch

Panty liners. Talk about a con. This is how it went down at Carefree marketing HQ: "Wow wouldn't it be great if women got their periods all month long!" - "Yeah we'd be raking it in" - "How can we convince them that they need to wear pads even when they don't have their periods?"....

PANTY LINERS!

That's right girls, your crotch is just so gross that you need to protect even your underpants from it! Your normal couple of drips of normal, clear discharge is just sooooo yukky that you need to change your knickers three times a day, you smelly things!

Ok like I can understand using panty liners on a long haul flight, and I'm sure there are other good reasons for them (none of which springs to my mind at the moment). But honestly, what a con. What a waste of money and resources.

Goddamn and don't even get me started on vagina perfume!

*ahem* ok another rather uninteresting, poorly researched and badly written post. But at least I'm getting in the habit of blogging :-)

Bra burning, repair men and rape culture

Bras. I hate them. Wherever they came from, they remind me of something very Victorian and very restrictive. With their nasty little hooks, their inadequate straps, their rigid underwire; yes I have been properly fitted, thanks for asking. My bras are as comfortable as is possible for bras, I just find them generally physically and intellectually unpleasant. Wriggling out from my bra while still fully clothed is the first thing I do every evening when I get home from work.

Bras. Talk about the gender pay gap - $50 for a decent bra! And they only last 6 months. Someone's making a packet here and it ain't the little fingers putting them together in a South Asian factory. Buying bras is one of my pet hates - you're a 10DD? Really? Er I don't think we have anything in that size. You could try a 12D, it's the same - it's not, it's really not, it just means the back strap is too loose and hence stretches out even quicker, and the underwire cuts into some major veins supplying blood to my heart. Because I spent much of university selling swim ware to women of all shapes and sizes, and doing a damn good job of it, I feel particular disdain for unhelpful bra fitters. Apparently to be less of a hassle to shop assistants I should either have some ribs removed, or put on 10kgs and move into the nanna range. And don't get me started on the fact that the types of bras available to women are based entirely on their breast size!

Bras. They make a statement. The story of feminists burning their bras in the 1960s (whether or not its true or was widespread or whatever) has entered the public consciousness. I used to think those women felt the same way I did about bras - that they were uncomfortable and expensive. But the other day I had an experience that deepened my understanding of why bra burning may be a powerful statement. Here it is:

The smoke alarm needed fixing recently, so I got to 'work from home' between 8 am and 5 pm waiting for Warren the repair man to arrive. One of the reasons I love working from home is that I get to sit around in my trackies sans bra. Warren phoned at 9 am (good service!) and said he was half an hour away. I was wearing track pants, slippers and one of Mr T's baggy t-shirts - no bra of course. I looked down at myself, my ample bust hanging the way it does, and it was clear I wasn't wearing a bra. I wouldn't mind opening the door to a repair man while wearing slippers, or even a dressing gown, but the obviousness of my lack of bra set off a chain of thought in my mind that went something like this:

Repair man coming, home alone - risk of sexual assault - do everything you can to reduce this risk (maybe call Mr T while repair man here?) - no revealing clothing - you're not wearing a bra - no bra equals state of undress - state of undress plus tradie equals invitation for sexual assault.

I put on a bra. I felt silly, but I put it on. Why had I thought that not wearing a bra was a state of undress? From head to toe I was wearing baggy clothing, but I felt undressed.

Do we find the natural female shape somehow unacceptable for public consumption? (Eating disorders and plastic surgery anyone?) Maybe what those bra burners were getting at (apart from their desire not to wear uncomfortable and expensive boob corsets) was that bras are primarily designed to squeeze and mold the female form into something more desirable to the male gaze. Even glimpsing the curve of unshackled female breasts is so unacceptable that not wearing a bra felt to me to be akin to not wearing anything at all! When anybody but Mr T sees me without a bra I feel like they are seeing, uninvited, my true, naked form instead of the fantasy that my breasts are perfectly round, gravity defying, and sitting just below my collar bone.

I don't think its quite the same if you have relatively small breasts. Mum loves letting her A-cups free under a skimpy singlet, but I think she'd be quite disgusted, yes disgusted, if I presented my DDs without 'support' - she thinks "big titty wop wops" are gross. No that attitude totally didn't affect me during adolescence, thanks for asking. But I digress. Some women with small breasts don't like going without a bra either because they equally feel that the natural shape of their breast is inadequate. Hum so maybe it is the same.

Bras. Burn em all.

The chain of thought associated with my state of dress and the repair man not only got me thinking about bras, it got me thinking about rape culture. How messed up is it that having a repair man come to my house while I was alone automatically made me go through the almost unconscious reducing-the-risk-of-sexual-assault checklist. I don't assume that every man is a rapist. But I do not walk on dark streets at night, I call friends when in taxis alone, don't drink too much with blokes you don't know etc etc. These things might seem like normal, risk-reduction activities sure, but they're part of a culture where women are repeatedly reminded that they are at risk, and that it is their responsibility, and in their power, to stop men raping them.

How many times have women been blamed for being raped - She walked down THAT street at 2 am, seriously what was she thinking?? Well getting into a cab by yourself is a risk, we all know that!! Well why did she think they were hanging around buying her drinks? Derr!! This is part of rape culture. Where hem lines rape people, not rapists. Rape culture puts the onus almost completely on the victim to prevent sexual assault. I think my putting on a bra was, in a small way, part of that culture. A culture that says that if I open the door to a tradesmen in a state of undress (not hoisted and molded for acceptable public consumption) then I'm pretty much enacting a porno and asking for it, so what the hell would I expect.

I'm not saying that this is what anyone would think, I'm just trying to pick apart my own chain of thought from that morning. And of course there are so many issue here, like how women are far far far more likely to be assaulted by someone they know etc.