Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Cancer isn't sexy.

81 replies

KarmaViolet · 11/10/2014 20:09

Why are so many cancer research campaigns focused on sexualised images of women? Whatever possessed this lot - does anybody really think "mmm, disembodied crotches and a side helping of body-hair-shaming, that reminds me I really ought to donate to cancer research?"

It really boils my piss.

OP posts:
TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:13

No, it's people without clothes. Define what's sexual? They are people stood without clothes covering their intimate areas with their hands. Where's the sex?

YonicScrewdriver · 12/10/2014 22:14

Do you know what? No. If you can't see it, I doubt anything I say will make you see it.

scallopsrgreat · 12/10/2014 22:14

And the poses, as rosabud points out, are coy for the women. Coy = performing femininity for men. Can you imagine men standing like that?

I hadn't noticed that until you pointed it out rosebud, but it's glaring really! Women = sexy (to men obviously) men = practical.

YonicScrewdriver · 12/10/2014 22:15

And if you also aren't aware that an awful lot of intimate waxes are linked to sex, again, I doubt anything I say will convince you.

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:21

Ah, I don't see it your way so I'm not worth talking to? Hmm

I suspect the legs together has far more to do with the fact that women have parts that need to be covered in an advertising shot between their legs whilst men don't than a subversive undermining of woman kind by the patriarch.

YonicScrewdriver · 12/10/2014 22:24

It's not that you're not worth talking to, it's that I don't feel like convincing you of something that's obvious to me.

scallopsrgreat · 12/10/2014 22:28

What parts would need to be covered that can't be covered by hands, as with the man? In fact surely the man is more in danger of showing his bits with a stance like that, than a woman? And you still wouldn't see a man posing with his legs crossed over like the third woman along (or like the other two in all probability.

But as a Yoni suggests I suspect you aren't going to see it.

rosabud · 12/10/2014 22:29

I don't understand how you thought my post was about sex? My post was about the beauty standards society expects women to adhere to and the message that society likes to give women: that they are vulnerable and should be permenantly unconfident or afraid.

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:29

Sounds like a one sided discussion to me, it also comes over as not really being able to say what it is about it that's sexual. To me it just doesn't seem it. There's no suggestive poses or anything else that makes me think sex - apart from the nudity obviously but I don't get why being naked has to equal sex? I'd actually like to understand because this stuff comes up a lot. I can't see it myself and no one has yet even attempted to explain the other view.

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:31

Rosa, I didn't think your post was about sex?

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:33

Scallops men don't have anything between their legs do they? Their bits can be contained in the hand in a pose like this where a womans can't?

rosabud · 12/10/2014 22:33

Oh crossed posts! Yes, I do agree with Yonic and Scallops that it is linked to sex, of course it is, but that wasn't what I was particularly analysing in my post.

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:36

But why is the pic above sexual? I get that you all see it and I don't but I would like to understand what I'm missing. Like I said it's come up many times, I would genuinely like to understand.

rosabud · 12/10/2014 22:37

Well, I think Yonic and Scallops have already explained that above. Why did you think my post was "an awfully big leap" then?

TSSDNCOP · 12/10/2014 22:41

Pull Your Pubes Out At The Root for Cancer.

Catchy.

I'd rather do the Moonwalk which I have done twice and hated passionately, I hate walking

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:41

Ok, first up I apologise, I was being pissy and it was uncalled for.

Hang on Rosa, I'll try to put it in words.

messyisthenewtidy · 12/10/2014 22:42

Of course it's sexual. Naked people usually equal sexual in our normally-covered-up society.

But the fact that something is sexual isn't necessarily bad. What is bad/annoying is that 1) sex to grab attention is used FAR more in the context of women than men and 2) the idea that to get people to care about a women's issue one has to dress it up in a sexy veneer.

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:47

Ok, first up it appears to me that the man has waxed too so I don't get the reference to women's grooming.

Secondly I don't see the thing about stances, women do tend to stand with their legs closer together than men. To me that is because of anatomy not society. Surely it's more comfortable for a men to have a wider stance?
It is exaggerated here but, like I say, I'd think that was about ensuring everything is covered.

Having said that there is definitely more room for the man....

EverythingCounts · 12/10/2014 22:49

and 3) that if you don't shave then you couldn't possibly 'dare to bare'

Plus, raise awareness? Who isn't aware of cancer?

EverythingCounts · 12/10/2014 22:50

Surely since women have wider hips, it'd be more comfortable for them to have a wider stance rather than men?

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:53

Messy I definitely agree that sex to grab attention centres around women.

The naked = sex thing is my stumbling block though. To me it would be sexual if there was suggestive posing but this is just people stood without clothes. I just can't wrap my head around why that has to be sexual? It certainly isn't in a nudist camp or on a topless beach, it's just people without clothes. I don't know, I get what you're saying, maybe I just see nudity differently?

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 22:55

Everything, I'm reasonably sure you know why men tend not to stand/sit with closed legs.

I kind of see your 3) though.

YonicScrewdriver · 12/10/2014 22:57

I think maybe you do! Thanks for explaining further.

Typically, when women are scantily clad in ads, is it primarily because the product requires it (eg bikini shop) or just because that's how things are (perfume ads, Flake ad etc)?

Do you think page 3 is sexualised?

TooMuchCantBreath · 12/10/2014 23:03

Yes I do think page 3 is sexualised, it has the classic suggestive poses and expressions etc that indicate sexual desire.

Hmm, food for thought. I do agree that it is unnecessary in this instance but afaik cancer research donations have gone up massively since the whole bra over the tshirt runs and the like started so clearly the approach works. Whether it should or not is another matter.

rosabud · 12/10/2014 23:06

You say that "women do tend to stand with their legs closer together" - well, that was the point of my post, really. Why do you think women do this? I don't think it's to do with being comfortable, I have analysed it and linked it to women not taking up as much space as men/women having to stand in a coy or suggestive way to be attractive to men/women having to stand in a way that suggests they need to protect themselves rather than be ready for action. Of course, not everyone will agree with my analysis, but what I am saying here does link to a lot of threads and discussions we have on FWR analysing exactly how and why women are expected to behave in society.

It's sexual because the image is typical of what is deemed sexually pleasing for men in our society (and women, too - the male body is muscular/young/ slim etc). If it was just people standing with no clothes on then one of the bodies may be older or chubbier, the hands wouldn't have nail polish on etc. I think the others have explained that point beter than I can, maybe read them over again?