The pendulum set in motion by the infamous Mary Jane maquette is swinging back towards thoughtful, intelligent commentary. Imagine that.
"To argue that cheesecake imagery is harmful to women is to argue that male desire itself is harmful to women."
--Dirk Deppey, Journalista
"Male desire is not inherently harmful, the male gaze is not inherently pernicious, and to think otherwise is to set yourself up for a lot of frustration and misunderstanding."
--Laura Hudson, Myriad Issues
Fanboys pay $125 a pop for this thing, buying out the production run months before it actually ships, and women feel exploited. I don't get it.
1 comment:
To argue that cheesecake imagery is harmful to women is to argue that male desire itself is harmful to women."
Only if you think male desire is inexorably bound with submission and subservience, or that men can't look at women as anything but sex objects.
"Male desire is not inherently harmful, the male gaze is not inherently pernicious, and to think otherwise is to set yourself up for a lot of frustration and misunderstanding."
Again - why is male desire equated with a blatantly submissive sexual pose, anatomically impossible contortions, and cultural symbols (laundry, barefoot, pearls) that harken back to the good ol' sexist past?
Fanboys pay $125 a pop for this thing, buying out the production run months before it actually ships, and women feel exploited. I don't get it.
Yeah, and prostitutes actually have all the power because men pay them for sex!!!
Yeesh. Some guys (and girls...)just don't get it.
Post a Comment