Left-feminist new Outrage(s) du Jour [Darleen Click]
I don’t think I need even comment further on how much Left-feminist “seriousness” is really self-parody
Every month or so, I receive a glossy coupon from Victoria’s Secret in my mailbox. “Free panty!” it beckons. “No purchase necessary!”
Reading those words, I cringe a little bit. Not because I hate underwear—I’m an ardent lover of underwear. It’s because I hate the word “panty.” I hate the plural form of “panty” as well. “Panties” creeps me out.
Poor Sarah is torn between the “ee” sound being diminutive and the word also being “too sexy”
Why does panties sound sexual? Many arguments could be made, not the least concerning advertising. I have a hunch that the sexualization of the word “panties” is the result of some marketing focus group grasping for a word to run alongside pictures of lingerie models in “tempting” mesh undergarments.
Oh.my. Poh-tay-to Poh-tah-to however shall a woman cope?
Least you think the great panty-linguistic debate is all-consuming, across the pond a Brit feminist struggles in the supermarket with everyday body hatred
This evening, shopping at Sainsbury’s, I was greeted by the following headlines, in bold capitals and at eye level, as I entered the store: WEIGHT TORMENT (New! magazine), OUR BODY WARS (Star), BODY PANICS! (Heat)… The very existence of these things can mess with your head. You can try to avert your eyes as you head for the fruit and veg but if you look back once – sneak even the slightest glance – all this can send you straight to the cake counter for yet another miserable pre-starvation-diet binge.
Will no one step up to save this poor lass, least we need to install fainting couches in the produce aisle?
And I bet you never thought that bad posture by males on public transportation leads directly to rape
[S]ome Swedish women apparently think that the image of the Nordic country as a feminist’s paradise is just a veneer hiding deep-seated misogyny. Their evidence? Men slouching and taking up more than one seat on buses, trains, and subways.
To counter this “normalized expression of power” (that’s what they call slouching), a group of firebrand feminists have set up a blog called “Macho i Kollektivtrafiken” (“Macho in Public Transport”), encouraging readers to send in sneaky snaps of men in relaxed poses. The aim is to spread awareness of a “symbolic and active recreation not just of power, but of a stereotypical form of masculinity.” [...]
VICE: Your blog claims that men who take up more space than they physically need when using public transport are practicing an “invisible and unconscious expression of power in an everyday, public space.” Can men oppress women without even knowing it?
My Vingren: Absolutely. I think one of the most problematic aspects of having such an extensive power structure is that a lot of people aren’t even aware that how they act affects others. The fact that men get more space in classrooms, at board meetings, and so on, is part of a structural oppression that not everyone knows they’re taking part in.
What would you say to those claiming that, in the grand scheme of things, this issue is a “luxury problem”?
My point is that this is part and parcel of the kind of oppression that leads to women being raped, getting lower salaries, and being exposed to violence in relationships.
No Victorian lady putting ruffled curtains on table legs was this obsessed by Beastly Men.
Tags: feminism, hysteria, leftism