Warwick University rowing club women's team calendar

[duchesse]

Are they being ironic?

I didn't say the images are porn. I said they are presenting women's bodies for public male consumption for money. Porn also does this. This is not these images = porn.

I think it's sad and depressing that you can't get that so I'm not surprised you don't understand feminism.

sigh. the e il of public male consumption..like my leaf pictures my religeous paintings my tv documentaries... come on why must you only see female nudity as negative unless its older WI women? I just find that odd,

Mind you the University of Warwick has sacked people for looking at figurative nudes.. whilst simultaneously having nude art classes and two nude calendars so hypocracy is everywhere!

sigh. Last post of NotDead is incomprehensible. Drunk?

What a bizarre analogy. Naked images of women compared with paintings of leaves, religious paintings or tv documentaries.

Leaves, religious paintings and tv documentaries are not oppressed and living in an anti-leaf, anti-religious paintings or anti-tv documentary society. The paintings or documentaries are not presented for the consumption of the beneficiaries of the anti-leaf, anti-religious painting or anti-tv documentary society.

I did not comment on whether I feel negatively about the images of naked older WI women. You are reading things into my comments based on your pre-baked, half-baked ideas of what feminists think. I was comparing the differences in the consumption of fireman and WI women vs. these types of calendars and the different impacts of individual choice on society as a whole. Those calendars still impact on the collective view because we know they are ironic / funny - isn't it hilarious these are not young naked women but semi-naked firemen or semi-naked old women. It's a slightly different impact but it comes from the same root.

sigh again. not at all nice weak as hell 'attack' I'm sorry I don't agree with you it must trouble you greatly.

I'm saying that buying pictures for money ..charity in the calendar's case.. could be viewed as evil exploitation but you have to extend this to all images for which money is exchanged. I just think it's weird to view particularly images of young women problematic but not older women, men, women in paintings men in paintings etc.

Again though the university of warwick have done worse - a maths professor viewing pornographic videos..hardcore videos which require credit card membership in front of students he taught was NOT fired.

Perhaps there are other battles to fight than women choosing an experience they want to have that seems to be promoting desexualised images of unclothed women over pornified ones.

I look forward to the next hint at character flaws you use if you don't agree or understand this post! :)

Again though the university of warwick have done worse - a maths professor viewing pornographic videos..hardcore videos which require credit card membership in front of students he taught was NOT fired.

Well, I don't know the details of that case - but it sounds pretty bad, from the way you've presented it.

What has it to do with flora's point though?

I am well aware that there are men who don't care about feminism but who like to tell women that they don't need to worry about x, y or z or tell them what battles they should be fighting. I am aware that there are men who tell women that they feel "sad" or "depressed" about how prudish those women and if only those women could be less negative they would see it's all fine. I am aware that there are men who call it an attack when a woman expresses a view they don't like about how women are treated in society. I'm aware that there are men who like to jump into discussions and, despite failing to grasp the concepts being discussed, carry on telling everyone their simple view of why there's nothing to worry about.

It happens all the time and it troubles me. However since I don't know you, your own personal view is neither here nor there to me. I could say "it must trouble you greatly when women are not concerned with your approval" however I don't have enough information about you to make that statement, as you don't with me.

I wonder if it will put off young women who want to go on the rowing team who don't feel they are conventionally pretty? If a young girl with say a disfigurement from burns on her body..will she feel shit if she wants to join, knowing she isn't society's typical idea of conventionally pretty and have to feel horribly awkward when she doesn't want to to do it?

They were all, without exception, white, conventionally pretty girls, with long flowing hair.

Well personally I think that nudity can be beautiful and nor sexual and non-sexual nudity is what this calendar seems to be about. To me there is something that sits badly about attacking what feels like a rational informed choice by sensible educated women who clearly want to be involved in an experience they are in control of.

Its a strange target. Warwick has both claimed that figurative art with nudity is offensive and that pornographic videos are acceptable in lectures, that right wing cults presenting on campus are expressing freedom of speech but that art that could offend muslims (nude females) should not be viewed by administrative staff but can be viewed by academixs in a mature way.

...and those ^ shouldn't be pre-requisites for a rowing club.

NotDead are you saying we cannot discuss one thing unless we discuss all others you consider more important? How not novel from a man discussing feminism.

Is the objection based on class, 'prettiness' and race then?? Are we now adding 'its ok if they are 'ugly' (define please!), not white, short haired' to ' old women or men' ??
please, this isn't helping..surely!

No. I'm not saying anything like that. nice attempt to set up a straw man though! its like debating with Boris himself!

You are continually failing to understand these arguments. I did not say it was "ok" for old women or men to pose nude. After you failed to understand this the first time, I clarified again. Don't let that stop a good straw man argument, though.

"Its a strange target. Warwick has both claimed that figurative art with nudity is offensive and that pornographic videos are acceptable in lectures, that right wing cults presenting on campus are expressing freedom of speech but that art that could offend muslims (nude females) should not be viewed by administrative staff but can be viewed by academixs in a mature way."

what's your point?

NotDead - it is clear you have not understood even one of flora's arguments. Or anything of feminism.

:) touche!

I don't think its so much not understanding as not agreeing with your type of feminism. I'm by no means a feminist academic, nor a gender studies expert nor claim to be. I still find the alliance of the prudish anti-female right and radfems over nudity problematic.

To me its akin to hunt sabs joining huntmasters in locking up foxes for their own good. It makes no sense to me, but I'm happy to accept that others don't agree

If you understand it, why do you keep repeating back incorrect summaries or nonsensical analogies? Why would huntmasters lock up foxes for their own good? I doubt would make sense to anyone.

The alliances point is a total derail. Prudish right wingers are against paedophilia, so lefties should be against it? The Catholic church is against the death penalty - should aetheists be for it?

I don't think there is much evidence that other women would be put off the rowing team if they didn't feel themselves up to scratch in the beauty stakes. It would be like saying men wouldn't join the fire service unless they looked like a bodybuilder. And I would also say that the women who have chosen are a fair assortment in terms of physique, looks and musculature.

I think it is misrepresentative to suggest that women do these projects purely for the gratification of men, or that all men will lust endlessly over such pictures, or that women might not even pose for such pictures to show off to other women. Feminism - or the bit we have discussed in here so far - seems to have everyone's role in society so firmly nailed down, so pre-defined, rigid and uniform, that there seems to be no room for self-expression, for freedom of though or action, for any chance to break the mould. If everybody is to be judged by such rigid, unbending standards - you as a woman MUST be oppressed and lusted after, you as a man MUST oppress women and lust for them - then what hope is there? Do you only see a bleak, unchanging, subjugated future for women?

Phaserstostun wrote - "there seems to be no room for self-expression, for freedom of though or action, for any chance to break the mould."

This thread is about yet another calendar of nude young women. How is that even close to breaking the mould?

Vesuvisa - I think they were talking about roles in society, in general. Ooops

Vesuvia, that is a fair point in this case. I said that, in my opinion, it's a tired cliche. But conversely, aren't we now saying 'Bloody hell, another nudey calendar! Enough already!', rather than, 'Phwoar, look - tits and ass!'? If so, it's engendering boredom rather than sexualised imagery.

And re breaking the mould - how do you get to the point where women's nude calendars are as ironical and downright hilarious as men's if you can never see women as anything other than the sex class, oppressed and subjugated?

I'm by no means a feminist academic, nor a gender studies expert nor claim to be.

Oh really, and here's us thinking that you were

Really - men being firemen and posing for a calendar is very different. Do we really have to go through that again?