porn for women

[IAmBooyhoo]

a FB friend posted a photo on her page (pic on my profile). just incase the pic hasn't uploaded or something it's a pic of a man hoovering and the words 'porn for women'. (the man is fully clothed BTW, nothing sexual in it at all). this just makes me so sad. this is 2012.

[Starwisher]

There's a book on amazon called porn for women filled with pictures like that

I thought is just a bit of tongue in cheek humour.

Why do you feel it is sad?

[KRITIQ]

I've seen the book. Don't like the appropriation of the word "porn" in this context (the implication is that women will "get off" on photos of attractive men saying nice, caring, sensitive things, in the same way men "get off" on actual porn.)

On one hand, the images sort of invert the stereotypes - the men are all doing domestic work, childcare and special things for women, all willingly if not enthusiastically. That's the humour factor - but that in itself what's rather sad about the book . . . that so many women find the idea of a man willingly doing these things so unusual that it's funny.

[IAmBooyhoo]

well for starters it makes me sad that men doing housework is still a joke, as in "wouldn't it be great if...haha" rather than just plain old normal and not comment worthy IYSWIM

and also, just the whole equating housework to porn, as if housework is totally the woman's domain and sex (or rather sexual pleasure i.e watching porn) is totally the man's.

plus it sort of implies that women would get a quick out of men doing housework, when in actual fact, most women just want their partners to recognise that cleaning up after themselves is basic life skill rather than some lovely thing they would do for their partner.

[IAmBooyhoo]

never seen the book BTW.

[CadburysHeaveEgg]

Housework = womans job.
Man doing housework is therefore attractive.

Bleurgh.

[Starwisher]

I can see your line of thinking but personally I just see it as subverting stereotype for humour.

I don't personally find it hilarious nor offensive either way.

[VickityBoo]

feeling misled by thread title having not realised this was in feminism

[VickityBoo]

Clearly, meant to look like this

[Starwisher]

Ha ha vickity!

[IAmBooyhoo]

@ vickity.

[BasilFoulTea]

I don't think it's subverting stereotypes.

I think it's re-inforcing them. While pretending to subvert them.

[Starwisher]

Ahh... Yes...

[solidgoldbrass]

Hey I thought this was going to be an interesting discussion and like someone might have actually NOTICED that it is 20 years ago this month since the launch of For Women magazine.

(sulking).

[MardyBaaLamb]

Bloody hell. I remember buying For Women. Me and a friend had a right old giggle over the bloke from Right Said Fred posing around with his todger out. It was not in the least erotic iirc, but we did have a good laugh over a bottle of wine.

[MardyBaaLamb]

Shit. Probably shouldn't have admitted to that in Feminism. It was 20 years ago...

[carernotasaint]

I was thinking along similar lines Solid. i thought Scarlet mag might have been back for a minute.
This picture got posted to my fb page too.

[Starwisher]

I hate scarlet magazine :(

[solidgoldbrass]

I know it was 20 years ago. I was there. (sulks some more).

If I could find an old diary I could probably give you the exact launch date...I remember it was April, I remember it was sunny, and spending that Easter weekend in Bristol with friends and even the stuffiest ones passing me chunks of the Sunday papers going ooh look, there you are again!

[solidgoldbrass]

Scarlet was rubbish, just talked up a storm by good contacts. Filament was the best so far. To be fair FW was not all that good, not really they wouldn't LET me make it better but 20 years ago it was ever so exciting.

[Starwisher]

Eh? You were in scarlet magazine or the Sunday paper? Whatcha mean?

[carernotasaint]

solid they should let you develop a mag similar to this for us ladies. i didnt know you were involved with FW. i remember the publicity all over the press.
Do you go to that erotica event they do every November in London. Sorry i cant remember its proper name.

[solidgoldbrass]

I was part of the launch team on For Women in 1992. Total media storm the week it came out. at the memories...

[laurawriter]

I agree with Basil - pretend subversion of sterotype for humour actually reinforces stereotype.
The sense that it's so ridiculously unlikely that men would do housework that women would 'get off on it' compounds the stereotype and the idea that women would buy the book suggests a female acceptance and even wry humour at the stereotype rather than taking a stand against it. I think this kind of thing fuels the fire of men who say women who object to 'little' things like sexist jokes are overreacting - when they can point to other women who 'see the funny side' and think this gives them the right to categorise you as uptight/rampant feminist/bra burner etc etc urgh

[IAmBooyhoo]

yes i agree laura. i am finding it very hard to put into words what it is about this picture that saddens me but i do know that i feel quite annoyed for the fb friend that posted it and others that commented on it. it might sound silly because they are absoloutely etitled to find whatever they want funny but i feel like almost as if they have been conned into thinking this is funny and that in actul fct men are laughing at them for being so easily amused/accepting their 'role' so readily. does that makes sense?

[catgirl1976]

Good God 20 years has gone quick.

I remember that coming out. My then bfs mother owned a Post Office with a shop attatched and stocked it amid much excitement. It was rubbish IIRC though :(