A new show has been launched on Danish television. The idea of the show is that women walk on in a bathrobe, stand in front of two men, take their robe off and stand there silently, completely naked, while the men discuss, praise and disparage the various parts of their body. That’s it.
Blachman claims that he is doing the women a favour because ‘the female body thirsts for the words of a man’. I wonder what woman wouldn’t be positively throbbing at the thought of being gawped at and criticised by two such fine specimens of manhood?!
…Or perhaps not. Do they do it for you ladies? No?! But of course that isn’t the point: it’s the women who are there to be judged, examined, measured up, approved of or found lacking. It doesn’t matter what he looks like: middle-aged, overweight, bald, mop-headed, double-chinned – women will be grateful to be looked at, the show implies, just because he’s male. Women will accept his authority to judge and validate or invalidate them as a person, or, more accurately, as a collection of body parts.
Blachman, who named his show the imaginative, descriptive, and not at all narcissistic title Blachman, has remained ‘humble’ about the achievement of this obviously important creative endeavour. At the deluge of criticism the show immediately faced, he fled to his home in New York and claimed ‘Ungratefulness is the only thing that can really wear down the few genius who reside in our country.’ And I’m sure Denmark is anguished by the loss of the genius who invented the idea of giggling at breasts and marking them out of ten.
Of course, one of the reasons Denmark and the rest of the world hasn’t been wowed, and hordes of naked women haven’t started begging their co-workers, shop assistants and neighbours to sit on a leather sofa looking smug and remarking on their labia, is because of how distinctly unoriginal this show is. Women are objectified and judged on their looks and bodies all the time. Despite the outrage, this is hardly a new way of thinking, damaging and sexist as it is. Blachman’s assertion that the female body – not the woman, but her body – longs for male approval is hardly a new idea – women have been being encouraged, to view themselves as an object to please the male gaze for centuries. Mainstream porn is a key genre where women are meant to get their satisfaction by pleasing and serving men. Female porn stars are often surgically enhanced and ‘perfect’ and the men performing in the films (beer belly, hairy crack, socks and all) are often unattractive.
The idea that men can have other features – wealth, power, a good sense of humour – that make them attractive irrespective of their appearance is common, whereas for women these things alone are never enough: they can instantly be disregarded or mocked if they don’t shape up to standards of female beauty. That’s why this show, far from being original, creative and avant-garde, almost seems like a parody. It makes explicit a vague, shifting but pervasive idea that we all recognise and encounter – in newspapers (page three girls), on television (in adverts) on such archaic events such as Miss World and just walking down the street (builders first started to wolf whistle me when I was 11).
In my films I enjoy turning existing (gender) stereotypes upside down. I often try to subvert exactly this kind of objectification of women by handing the power to women and making men the ‘objects’. In The Female Voyeur we shot a sexy, tongue-in-cheek male talent show called XXX Men, where the boys had to parade in their underwear and perform a sexual talent for our all-female judges panel, such as pole-dancing, masturbating and giving oral sex.
The shoot of this unconventional scene empowered the female as well as the male performers: The guys enjoyed being the object of desire, and ‘prey’ instead of predator for once. And the women loved having the power, being the voyeurs and judging jury for once. When the female jury ‘marked’ the men it was fun, flirty and approving, and of course in some contexts – like this one – consensual objectification can make people feel sexy and appreciated.
Some people have criticized this XXX Men scene as ‘too simple’. I feel that sometimes we have to turn existing patterns upside down to make us aware how engrained gender-patters are. It rubs us up the wrong way when suddenly the women do to men what is the male prerogative. And that exactly is the point. We need images that show women in control and men to be passive and/or submissive as a counterbalance to the flood of images that empower men and objectify women. I would like to live in a world where we can chose how we express ourselves and our sexuality – independent of our gender. The choices are not just black or white but there is a kaleidoscope of colour out there for all of us to be experienced and enjoyed. Maybe one day we want to be looked at and the next day we enjoy being the voyeur. What matters is that we can choose.
But this is not what’s happening on Blachman: the clinical examination of different body parts (Blachman is reported to have asked his friend ‘how’s that pussy working out for you?’), the enforced silence of the women, and the sneering, chuckling smarminess of this self-proclaimed ‘genius’ demonstrate just how chauvinistic and dated this programme is.
One of the worst things is that this is state-sponsored sexism. DR2, the channel that airs Blachman, is a publicly funded station. Sofia Fromberg, the producer of the show, has attempted to justify the show by saying that DR2 ‘is a society channel. Our main focus is what’s going on in society and we debate it.’ Well, she’s right about one thing: Blachman does show something that goes on in society: sexism and female objectification. But she’s very wrong to call it a debate. On the most basic level, the women are being silenced and we just hear and see the male perspective. All this show does is to replay and condone the objectification of women in the most blatant and unashamed way, and it deserves every bit of ridicule it receives.
Oh and Mr. Blachman, just so you know – the male body thirsts for the words of a woman, and if you have a quick look through The Female Voyeur you’ll see the proof…
I was talking to a friend of mine the other day about how hard she’s finding her relationship. Part of the problem is that they’ve been together for quite a long time and are monogamous. He’s not interested in negotiating any other kind of relationship and, frankly, she’s starting to go a bit crazy! Having spent years having a lot of fun and enjoying polyamorous relationships before she met him, she decided she wanted something with more of an emotional connection and committed to an exclusive relationship. At first she enjoyed the sexual and emotional exclusiveness but now she feels she cannot be truly herself in this relationship any longer. Even though she loves him, she has some sexual needs that she cannot live out with her partner. He does not want her to live out her kinkier desires with other lovers and she finds it impossible to repress those desires any longer. Until recently she has been ‘paying’ for the emotional security that the relationship offers with her freedom, having had to neglect parts of her sexual self in order to keep him happy and the relationship going.
This got us talking and me thinking about how important it is to be able to make choices about the kind of unique relationships you want, rather than being coerced into the kind society thinks is ‘normal’ and acceptable. I’m a big fan of the book The Ethical Slut by Dossie Easton and Janet W. Hardy, which is a classic for anyone interested in open relationships and how we can achieve sexual and personal freedoms whilst treating all the people we relate to with the utmost respect and honesty that everyone deserves.
One of the important ideas at the heart of this book is that everyone is an individual responsible for their own happiness, and that while we can have deep, loving connections with people, no-one should be responsible for someone else’s happiness. This approach to relationships is one that values everyone as strong, independent individuals rather than suggesting people are incomplete and need someone else to make them whole. This is especially relevant for women, who have been, and sadly often still are, conditioned to sacrifice their own life goals and autonomy in favour of romantic relationships. Not only that, but conventional opinion often encourages these sacrifices, positing emotional dependence as the only ‘right’ and ‘natural’ way to love another human being.
Of course this just isn’t true! It’s completely possible to be a strong, satisfied individual and to choose to love someone just because they’re so wonderful – in fact this must be the best way to love – out of choice rather than need! A relationship as the icing on the cake of our happiness rather than our emotional ‘bread and butter’. As my friend is currently finding out, love and sex can be two very different things. They don’t necessarily come together and can’t always be satisfied by the same person. Often we live out completely different facets of our sexuality with different people. And many of our fantasies involve multiple lovers.
Loads of the fantasies shared with me by my female audience involve some form of group sex. I enjoy turning these female fantasies into reality for my performers in my films: in Female Fantasies a woman is licked to orgasm by two skilled male lovers at once and in The Female Voyeur there’s a sumptuous, exotic orgy with sex slaves all pleasuring the women. These are the sorts of things so many women dream about that just aren’t possible if people aren’t allowed to think outside the monogamy box once they are in a relationship! And when you start to explore other options, dreams really can come true.
This is why I think challenging the cultural dominance of monogamy is an important part of female liberation. It’s not to say that some women depending on their situation or needs won’t want to choose a monogamous relationship anyway – I’ve been very happy in my monogamous relationship for years – but that often they don’t really get to make an active choice about it. The films I make are all focused on allowing women to be honest about what they want and what turns them on – and sometimes that just isn’t monogamy. As my despairing friend said to me, sex is like eating ice cream: strawberry is her favourite flavour but she doesn’t want to eat it all the time. Sometimes she wants other flavours she knows she likes, or to try new ones, and every once in a while she wants a giant sundae with whipped cream and a cherry on top!
In fact, her sweet tooth is so strong that eventually she did start to sample some other sexual flavours again, and her taste buds are tingling. But where normally she would be happy and blossoming if she had such an abundance of love and sex, the experience is tainted with an enormous sense of guilt – not because she’s enjoying sex with several people, but because she’s lying to her partner about it. It’s a tricky situation; she knows no matter what she says to reassure him he won’t give her the freedom she needs to be happy. She loves him very much and fears that her honesty would mean losing him. And this is the downside of a society that refuses to discuss or accept other relationship options: if you feel you cannot live with monogamy you are left with the choice to either end your exclusive relationship, or to live out your fantasies behind your partner’s back and lie. So in this case, he is still experiencing the very thing he can’t stand the thought of, he just is not aware what is going on. She can neither fully enjoy her sexuality (with other lovers) or her intimate, loving relationship with her partner without feeling guilty. It’s a lose-lose situation, and one that would really benefit from some openness and honesty. All involved deserve to know what is going on so they can make an informed choice about what kind of relationship they want to live. Maybe the needs of my friend her partner are just not compatible any longer – even if they still love each other…
To love polyamorously does not mean doing whatever you want without any care for others – that’s where the ‘ethical’ part of Dossie and Janet’s book comes in. They spend most of the book discussing communicating, compromising and caring for your partners and yourself, and recognise that all open relationships are going to take hard work and can and will be subject to bouts of jealousy and insecurity. The irony is that by refusing people their desires – as my friend’s boyfriend has – you often might end up more hurt than if you had been willing to give your partner the freedom they desire. She has now betrayed his trust in a way that might eventually destroy their relationship for good…
Monogamous, polyamorous, single or partnered – love and relationships are always difficult seas to navigate, but we should all have the freedom to live and love in whatever way we wish, whether that means having sex five times a day or never, with one person or with dozens. And with that in mind, I hope my friend finds a way to resolve her dilemma soon and live as the ice-cream-loving ethical slut I know she truly is!
You might have seen in the news recently that Iceland is considering a ban on certain types of online porn, while the European Parliament just took a vote on whether to ban all online porn across Europe (they voted against, thankfully!) You can watch a youtube debate about Iceland’s ban that I took part in a couple of weeks ago here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzzYFHX5-ek
Banning porn seems to be a hot topic at the moment, and of course this is a difficult issue. Most people who support the ban seem to do so for the right reasons – they are worried about the exploitation and objectification of women rather just rehashing old-fashioned morality about sex being obscene. Tanya Gold recently called for ‘fair porn’ (which I support) but wants to ban all other porn (which I am against).
Of course, most mainstream porn is sexist: it glorifies the degradation of women and suggests all ideas of sexuality and beauty are confined to narrow, repetitive clichés. The mainstream porn industry creates a damaging image of sexuality, and continues to entrench misogyny and sexual violence as normal and even desirable. A large part of the problem is that porn is the only way a lot of people get to see other people express their sexuality, so the way that porn stars look and behave comes to seem the norm. Porn serves as sex education for a lot of (young) people, so I feel that as a pornographer I have a responsibility to show a great variety of sex including foreplay and sexy safer sex.
When you have facial cum-shots, extremely rough anal sex and forced blowjobs shown almost all the time, it starts to be expected that all women will want and enjoy these things, when in fact most don’t. I can see the temptation of trying to restrict this, and this was exactly the reason I was involved in the anti-porn movement in the 80s. But if the reason porn is being discussed is women’s rights, then I don’t see how banning it is the answer. More and more women chose to express and enjoy their sexuality by shooting or watching porn.
A ban on porn suggests there’s something innately bad and exploitative about filming and watching sex – which there isn’t. It’s not porn itself that’s bad, it’s certain elements of the commercial mainstream porn industry. We don’t need a ban: sex isn’t something that’s dirty and bad and needs to be kept private. There’s nothing wrong with people wanting to watch other people have sex, getting turned on and using it for their own pleasure. That can be a positive, wonderful and empowering thing.
What we need are alternatives. As the fabulous Annie Sprinkle once said: “The answer to ‘bad’ porn is not ‘no porn’ but ‘good’ porn!” By creating sex-positive porn I and lots of other adventurous feminist pornographers show that sex and porn can be erotic and empowering for everyone, including and especially women. We need porn that shows real, genuine passion, performers who actually enjoy themselves and fancy each other, and women who love sex and have amazing orgasms.
Banning porn can only make our society more sexually repressed, and repression always makes guilty, messed up attitudes towards sex and women even worse. One problem in censoring porn would be: who would be employed to classify and censor porn? One person’s fetish is another person’s ‘perversion’. I can easily imagine someone objecting to my “Joy Club” scene from “A Taste of Joy” because they don’t like to see women fucking guys with a strap-on as they consider this as ‘degrading’ (even though the guys thoroughly enjoyed it). Ultimately I think the people who watch porn need to make choices and will hopefully support “fair porn” where it is obvious that the performers had choices, are enjoying themselves and have not been exploited.
If we as a society openly embraced positive, consensual porn we could change people’s attitudes for the better, not to mention enhancing their sex lives.
The porn I and other feminist directors make does challenge the mainstream industry and porn critics alike. Why? Because it’s genuine, sexy and original, and appeals to a large part of the population that mainstream porn usually excludes – women. Women have their own desires and fantasies and more and more of the chose to spend their money on their (sexual) pleasure.
With an increasing number of creative and idealistic female porn-makers producing amazing, sexy films, mainstream porn is going to face a challenge. I get emails from so many ‘fans’ telling me how boring and predictable mainstream porn is – even hetero men, who commercial porn is designed to appeal to, get bored of the same formulaic pounding and faked expressions. Eventually a lot of mainstream porn is going to sabotage itself because it’s so boring, passionless and fake. We provide people with alternatives so they realise that there’s something much more exciting out there.
This is why we need more porn, not less! Rather than trying to take away the problem of a sexist porn industry by banning access to its products, we need to change it from the inside. Porn can be a great thing. It doesn’t have to be something harmful, degrading and sexist. If people – especially women – could indulge their fantasies while watching safe, consensual sex play everyone is enjoying – why would there be any need to get rid of it?
When I first read about the release of “Fifty Shades of Grey” I was really excited. I feel that the more women express their fantasies and create porn from a female perspective (in words or images), the better. Female fantasies are still greatly hidden and there is a lack of erotica by and for women. So I applaud all women who publish erotica soft or hard. I was looking forward to a good and exciting read.
I should have known better. “Fifty Shades of Grey” started out as a fan fiction novel based on the Twilight saga. It became a huge online success and was then snapped up by a major publisher and re-released in a whitewashed version. What remains is a romantic, anti-feminist fairytale with very little sexually explicit and exciting content. I had to get past page 200 for the first sex to happen and found it hard to keep reading, in the hope for some spice. Even though the book allegedly is about sm sex most of the (little) sex that actually happens is pretty vanilla. But what disappoints me most is not the lack of explicit and well-written sex scenes but the fact that the “heroine” Ana is still supposed to be a virgin in her twenties and only agrees to have sex and try out (light) SM-play with the multi-billionaire Christian Grey because she loves him. This is so true to the dated gender-clichés in classic romantic novels that I was surprised a book like this would be published in 2012. As if it was true that women cannot separate sex from love and choose to remain “innocent” (including never having masturbated themselves to orgasm) until they eventually give up their virginity in the name of love as a gift for the prince that sweeps them off their feet. So much for sexual liberation, women enjoying sex with no strings attached or giving themselves pleasure…
The book’s conservative streak continues by describing the dominant SM prince, Christian Grey, as deeply scarred and emotionally damaged (presumably because he was abused as a child). His fuckedupness seems to be the only reason for having fetishes and being into SM sex. As if in real life perfectly healthy, happy and balanced people do not enjoy role-play and experimenting with a power exchange in the bedroom (with or without cuffs and whips). In reality women and men both have fantasies about being dominant and/or submissive. Some choose to live those fantasies out, others choose for their fantasies remain a sexy movie in the head to be enjoyed during sex or masturbation. Reading an SM book or watching SM porn does not necessarily mean that you want to be a dom or sub in real life. This is why it is so annoying that the media now claims that the massive sales of the book are proof for the fact that most women are submissive and want to be dominated.
To me, the massive sales figures of the book are the perfect example of the power of marketing. The book promises something it does not give – It is sold as “porn for women” when it is not really pornographic (as in “explicit” and “aimed for arousal”) at all. Women snap this book up because they have so little pornographic material aimed at them to choose from but many end up being bitterly disappointed. No woman I have spoken to about “Fifty Shades” got turned on by reading it. Most stopped reading it after 50 or 100 pages because they were bored. By then, they have gone down in the statistics as a buyer and are allegedly a woman who wants to be dominated and got turned on by the book. The media perpetuates the endless marketing the book receives over and over again – usually without questioning the blurb created by the publishers. Not a day goes by without “Fifty Shades” being described as “porn for women” in most mainstream media.
Sadly, the truth is that if “Fifty Shades” really was explicit porn for women and featured a strong heroine who is sexually experienced and enjoys experimenting with SM sex (god forbid maybe even in the dominant role) and a hot, healthy and liberated man who gets off on being a dom just because he enjoys it, this book would not be available at your local supermarket. This book would have been published by a small indie publisher, available only at women’s sex shops or selected sites online because it would have been branded as “obscene pornographic material” that no major brand wants to be associated with and it.
This kind of book exists: “Carrie’s Story” came out over a decade ago, published by Cleiss press. I read it twice with gusto and it turned me on – a lot. I had quite a few great orgasms initiated by the scenarios in this book. Of course, this book never became a bestseller because it is genuinely explicit (SM) porn from a female perspective and simply not mainstream enough.
I don’t doubt that “Fifty Shades” will pave the way for more female erotica writers to be published – but hopefully one day without censoring by the publishers and plenty of explicit erotic content.
I do hope that “Fifty Shades” turns at least some women on. If it does then it will live up at least partially to the hype surrounding it.
One year on the fact is that we still have a long, long way to go to achieve full gender equality all over the globe. The burning issues remain: violence against women, including genital mutilation, sex trafficking and rape as well as inherent sexism that denies women fundamental human rights such as getting an education or having the freedom to live their lives and express themselves without the supervision or judgement of men. In Western societies equality is theoretically written into the law but there still is a glass ceiling preventing most women from gaining positions of power even if they are equally qualified as their male competitors. Women also still receive less pay than men for the same amount of work. Economically women are usually less well off than men and find it harder to borrow money to invest into projects or a business.
We have to continue our fight for true equality but also do ourselves what we can to support other women. This could be through donations of time or money into your local women’s shelter or by helping other women to make their dreams a reality. Sometimes a little goes a long way.
Eight years ago I met a woman who changed the course of my life. Emma C was one of my photography customers. When I met her I had shot a few erotic scenes but had no funds to shoot more, edit and publish them. Emma believed in my vision of erotica from a female perspective and chose to help me to get my film seen and my message heard. She paid for two more shoots and the postproduction and this is why “Sexual Sushi” ever made it into the shops. Emma was not worried about making a profit with her investment. She told me that to her it was enough satisfaction to help me getting started. I will be eternally grateful to Emma – without her my films might not exist and my life could have taken a different direction.
I would like to empower other women to express their fantasies on film – this is why I created the Petra Joy Award in 2009. For years I have been looking for a sponsor for the prize money so I could run the short film competition again. A trophy is great and it is fab to get your film published but money goes a long way, enabling you to keep on working and shoot more films. I have decided to put my money where my mouth is and will donate the prize money for the second competition for emerging female filmmakers myself. The topic is “female fantasies” and you can get all info on the award here: www.joyawards.com
If you want to help other women to set up a business and make a living, there are various fantastic microfinance charities set up such as www.kiva.org
which enables you to give loans. You can lend £5 or £500 – even small amounts make a huge difference in countries like Africa. For example 56 year old Kisaru who has five children needs to borrow $500 to buy maize and sugar for her small retail store. She has already raised 75% of that loan and only needs $125 to be able to invest into her business. So if only 5 people lend her $25 she will have succeeded. The loans will be paid back once the business is writing black figures. You will not gain interest in financial terms but in the satisfaction that comes with helping other women (or men) that are less well off than you are.
Make International Women’s Day 2012 – a day for giving…
“This book is about a 14 year old girl who goes on a diet and is transformed from being extremely overweight and insecure to a normal sized girl who becomes the school soccer star. Through time, exercise and hard work, Maggie becomes more and more confident and develops a positive self image.”
It think it is important to combat a wave of obesity in young people and adults with education about healthy nutrition and by making exercising fun but to just target teenage girls and promote dieting as a “quick fix” is a step too far.
Pre-teenage and Teenage years are exactly the age groups when girls are most vulnerable to anorexia. What girls need are books that celebrate diversity of body types and a wide variety of beauty. A book that equals skinny with beautiful and popular can be really harmful to self-esteem of insecure girls and might set them up with a life-time eating disorder.
Sadly it seems some go even further in their ideas of how attractive young girls should look. Skinny is not enough. They are also meant to look beautiful and sexy and if this means styling the girls with heavy make-up and selling them adult style underwear – so be it.
I could not believe my eyes when I saw the promo shots on the “Jours-Apres-Lunes” website. This company is selling exclusive underwear aimed at girls from three to twelve and features lots of Lolitas, some of them styled like a miniature version of Brigitte Bardot. The photos make it look as if after school girls like nothing more than cavorting round in tight knickers and tiny bras, stroking themselves seductively with plume feathers or cuddling their bear toy whilst looking seductively into the camera.
These highly stylised images seem to suggest that girls are sensual and sexy, “ripe for picking” and I can imagine how these shots could give many adults looking at them the wrong idea. Of course even before puberty many girls are discovering their sexuality but it is for them to explore by themselves or with equals rather than to be exploited by adults on pictures or in reality.
I wonder how the girls will grow up that even at 4, 8 or 12 years old they think they are only beautiful if they are skinny, wear make up and sexy underwear?! Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and girls are brainwashed at an early age to conform to an adult and often male idea of what is attractive and desirable. It is all about pleasing others and fitting the mould. When or how will they develop their sense of individuality and self-worth – independent of what their body shape is or what clothes, make-up or hairstyle they wear? Maybe never. And that makes me sad.
The New York Post discredited the maid Strauss-Kahn allegedly raped with the headline “DSK Maid Hooker”. As usual in a rape investigation, the press – and sadly often investigating police as well – open the witch hunt to discredit the victim, rather than making the rapist face up to his crimes without excuses.
Even if the maid had been a hooker (something she and her solicitor strongly deny, so much so that they are suing The Post and five journalists for libel) – does this mean she could not have been raped?
Do prostitutes not have the right to say “No”? Can a prostitute not be raped simply because she sometimes choses to sell sex? Surely a “no” means “no” – no matter what profession a woman has? Can the press and law representatives not see the difference between a consensual paid or unpaid sexual act that is beneficial to both and the non-consensual, enforced, violent act of sex used by one person to humiliate and dominate another?
But even though sex workers provide a relevant social service to society they are seen as cold and calculating individuals who have no emotions and do not provide more than a physical service.
The Muslim “Obedient Wives Club” recently hit the headlines by promoting to train wives to be as skilled as prostitutes in the bedroom, “so that men do not have to go and see hookers”. The clubs representatives then quickly explained that of course rough “hookers” are in a different category than sacred “wives”.
Fauziah Ariffin, the Malaysian OWC chapter’s national director, told the Malay Mail: ” We are not putting wives on the same level with prostitutes. We are talking about first-class elite types, not street hooker types … Ordinary prostitutes can only provide good sex, but not love and affection, which only a wife can provide.”
What about the prostitutes that listen hour after hour to those punters that want to chat as much as having sex? What about the wives and mothers that earn a living as prostitutes? It is all two sides of the same coin.
No matter how hard the press or religious organisations try – the enforced dichotomy between “normal woman” vs. “prostitute”, aka second class citizen does simply not work. To hell with the stereotypes of the sacred Madonna and the dirty whore. I am a woman. They are women. We are both citizens with the same hopes, fears and feelings and human rights. A woman is a woman. “No” means “No”. Fullstop.
I just read that in Germany, the country I grew up in, the share women have on corporate boards and executive committees is only 2%. This is the same low figure as in India, that we still arrogantly call a “developing nation” – as if we are so far ahead of them in economic, political and cultural matters. In the UK and US the share of women in these positions is 14%. The maximum input women have at this level of management world wide is still only 20%. Women are over 50% of humankind, so to be represented so poorly in top positions where crucial decisions are being made, is shocking and disappointing.
Quotas that would guarantee more women access to prime positions are hotly debated in Germany right now. The Deutsche Telekom has chosen to have at least 30% of female candidates on its job short lists. So now many men cry “murder” because they consider this move reverse sexism and feel disadvantaged (as if ?!). I think it is obvious that women will not get a job just because of their gender. They need to be at least just as qualified as the men who applied to do the job. The truth is that women are often more qualified than their male co-applicants but are often not even invited for an interview due to their female gender. The least that can be done is drawing up fairer shortlists that represent applicants of both genders fairly, rather than just men. Chances are it will still be a man who is picked for the job because he will be interviewed by an all male panel and will be working for male bosses.
Whenever I got a chance to make my mark or do a sale within the industry it was facilitated through another woman who was in a position of power and understood and supported my vision that most businessmen still are blind too.
Somewhere, somehow gender discrimination has to end – and in order to achieve this we have to temporarily create more windows for women to be seen, and open more doors for women to step through. We need to be given the chance to be seen and heard rather than hitting the glass ceiling over and over again.
I want to encourage women to go for an interview and possibly even a high-powered job based on the new quota (as well as their obvious qualifications), rather than being left out in the cold jet again – just because they are female. If there is an opportunity, take it ! It is your right.
Oh, the joys of working in the adult industry. Every month I receive a new edition of some of the adult trade magazines. Usually most items featured in these mags amuse or mildly annoy me. But sometimes they feature some stuff that really disturbs me.
On the front cover of the current issue of the “Sign” magazine are various “Realistic ‘fuck me silly’ Masturbators” which are basically dismembered female body parts with holes in them made of silicone.
I have no problems with genital toys such as cocks or pussies. Full size sex androids also exist in male and female form and I think: OK, each to their own. But some of the female body parts-cum-masturbators I find slightly unsettling. If not the product alone, it is usually the ad blurb that gives the misogynist attitude of the toy producers away.
Take the “Fuck me silly 3” which is an ass and pussy with extra long legs and feet.
On the producer’s website it says:
“You’ve always dreamt of fucking a long-legged beauty like this, so what are you waiting for? Take your fuck slut out of the box, push play on the hardcore DVD, get out the free lube, and pound that bitch ’til you Fuck Her Silly! This mega masturbator is the most realistic and lifelike lower half of a woman ever developed! You’ll swear it’s just like fucking the real thing – only better! She’s warm, tight, super-soft, and always ready for action! With over 20 lbs of super-soft Fanta-flesh engulfing and massaging your cock, this is the only woman you’ll ever need. When you’re done, blow a load deep inside her ass or pussy”
Another masturbator is a voluptuous bum with anus and vagina. The blurb reads:
“Slap that big round ass and listen to the whack – it sounds and feels just like a real ass! Spread her cheeks, ram her tight little asshole, and fill her with every inch of your man meat! Now, flip the slut over on her back and her perfect pink pussy lips are spread eagle and begging for your dick! She’s warm, she’s tight, and she NEVER says no! No commitments, no bullshit, and no worries about knocking her up.”
Apart from tailor-made torsos for any guys fetish – be it bum, breasts or legs and feet, the producer, pipedream has also created some Frankenstein like masturbators:
There is a pair of breasts with a pussy in between them or a tongue right next to the vagina. I find them comical but also kind of alienating. It gives me nightmares of bizarre sexual plastic surgery procedures to come… just like in the “Human Centipede” movies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_centipede) where humans are stitched together mouth-to-anus for the sexual pleasure of a demented surgeon. The theme of this horror porn seems to be: make them swallow someone else’s shit – that will shut them up!
A lot of men seem really pissed off with women saying “No” to being “rammed, slapped, and begging for dicks” (how dare we?) which might be the reason that most of the masturbators are currently sold out. I guess we are being heard when the fact that women know what they want has entered the mind of the male masturbator salesmen.