I think there’s actually something political about prettying up unattractive or average looking male characters, I mean considering what Hollywood does to ANY female character who’s not totally babein’, and how often women are punished for enjoying fanservice, I think making Snape sexy is actually an act of rebellion.
Tag: feminism
A Long Rant About Lady Armor and Boob Plate
I keep seeing arguments as to why boob plate should be banned from fantasy art because it is unworkable and will kill you and the argument basically says that should you ever fall down or get a blow to the chest, your armor will crunch in on your sternum killing you instantly This argument makes me mad partially because it’s not true, and partially because people’s proposed solutions are usually shitty boring ass “realistic”/”practical” armor (that’s wildly unrealistic and just exists in their imagination because of modern ideas of utilitarianism and practicality and the Victorians removing all the fouffy fabric bits and beautiful paint work from medieval suits of armor so that it looked “right” to them) so here’s my explanation of why it’s wrong and what we should do instead of the boring shit people usually suggest.
Boob plate.
by Feng Liu
And here’s why this argument makes me mad:
1. The problem isn’t whether or not it’s accurate, the problem is whether or not it’s misogynist, Most fantasy armor wouldn’t articulate right, has pointy sticky offy bits that would fuck you up in all sorts of ways, and removes a lot of the ornate metal work and fabric decoration that armor actually involved, but it’s fantasy SO THAT’S OKAY
The issue is that we keep hypersexualizing every goddamned female character ever put in armor and not doing the same thing to dudes, either put the dudes in a chainmail loincloth or don’t draw goddamn boob plate. I mean don’t even get me started on how leather armor is used so goddamned often when it was in fact a weird and incredibly rare choice.
Making it about accuracy distracts from the fact that the actual issue at hand is misogyny.
2. Ever seen Lorica Musculata?
3. That would only happen if you hammered a cleavage line in to a regular cuirass, if you hammer cups out, poured molten metal into a mold, or added boobs externally onto a cuirass (because I mean the real ones are kinda behind a bunch of padding) you’d be fine. This also assumes that armor bends or breaks MUCH more easily than it actually does. Armor is THICK bronze or steel.
4. But the real thing is, the onus is not on you to prove it’s impossible, the onus is on designers to justify why they’re putting it in there in the first place. Especially if you’re doing something where the designs are based on any actual period of history rather than a mishmash, because like men’s armor was based on the fashion trends of the day, and honestly designers are always missing out on awesome design inspiration, because like they could be using ladies’ fashion of the era to inspire their designs and it’d look fucking cool. I mean there are some eras where boob plate makes sense (17th century, ancient rome) and others where it doesn’t (13th to 16th century)
But seriously let’s have a loot at some fashion and armor of history:
14th century:
15th century:
16th Century:
Please note how the men’s fashion mirrors the silhouettes of the armor and vice versa, now please use more creativity in your costume design, armor was way more interesting and varied than most fantasy artists draw and it sucks, also make use of the elaborate headdresses, they look awesome. Like you don’t need to feel utterly bound to historical accuracy but the dull consistency of silhouettes in a lot of fantasy armor bores me to fucking tears, do some actual research and use some actual historical inspiration
Here’s a shitty scan of my husband being clever and awesome.
I wish there were a term for working class feminism
Separate from feminism because like feminism has a long history of focusing on the ideas and interests of bourgeois women, and ignoring or pathologizing working class women’s needs and so like a lot of women (rightly) associate it with stuff that does no good for them and also it would be nice to be able to find each other without ending up in a sea of bougie bullshit. Femmunism? Lady’s Class War? gyno-communism? Ladyism?
Like I Don’t Think You Can Really Tell If A Woman Is Being Objectified By Looking At The Behavior Of The Woman
And I don’t think you can stop women being objectified by changing women’s behavior, like there isn’t a way to behave that will make men treat you as a real person on an individual level.
Like you can tell if men are objectifying a woman, and then like the issue isn’t making her stop doing whatever so they stop objectifying her, the issue is making them stop objectifying her.
Which is why I get so mad when sex worker exterminatory reactionary feminists see men making nasty comments about like Sasha Grey or whatever and are like “This is why choice rhetoric is bullshit, men will objectify you anyway” but like here’s the thing, in a patriarchal society men will objectify women whether or not there’s hardcore gangbang porn, the existence of Sasha Grey isn’t the reason men are making shitty gross misogynist comments about women. If you shift societal modesty standards towards something more conservative, that won’t eliminate patriarchy. If the most erotic piece of media you can get is the Eileen Fisher catalogue they’ll just make horrible comments about the models in that.
You can’t change men’s behavior by changing women’s to comply with whatever shitty standards they set in order for you to be treated like a person, they’ll just shift the goal posts, all you can do is fight them head on.
I Think That The Excessive Focus On Sex In Feminism Is Rooted In Bourgeois Concern Over Regulating Sexual Morality
I’m not talking about the focus on rape, that’s an act of violence.
I’m talking about how the whole “how should a feminist fuck? who should a feminist fuck? Is porn feminist? Can you be sexually submissive and a feminist? Is this underwear feminist? for what reasons can a feminist acceptably fuck? What sex positions are feminist?” is making feminism a matter of individual sexual morality, and of regulating the sexual practices of women. By making feminist (aka: moral) sexual practice a central concern for individuals, it distracts from collective organizing, and revolutionary practice. Like bourgeois concern over proper sexual practice and regulating the sexualities of working class women and sex workers is just transmuted into the language of bourgeois feminism. Like whether you’re condemning it or proclaiming loudly that “This porn is feminist” or that “strippers are feminist” you’re still putting yourself in a position of determining sexual morality and giving the discourse of sexual morality central importance.
It’s similar to locating moral practice in the dietary or body regulation habits of individuals. It’s a bourgeois distraction from the project of actual gender liberation.
I largely agree. I mean, I think a lot of feminism that gets mainstream attention is so focused on individual choices (to shave or not to shave? Work outside the home or take on the domestic work? etc.) that it ignores collective action or systemic factors.
That said, I’m not sure we should completely get rid of all feminist conversations about sex. Like, I’m really skeptical of feminism that asks nothing of men and I’ve encountered too many men with misogynistic attitudes towards sex over the years. So, like, I agree with every that you’ve said, but I do think we should address misogynistic attitudes toward sex. It’s not entirely incompatible with anything you’ve said, though, but I’m not sure how it fits in exactly.
I mean yeah, I think we do need to address that, but like making it about women’s choices or behavior on an individual level is weird. Like “Is what she does sexually undermining feminism” is like a way to divide women into “fucks right” and “fucks wrong” which is just like “madonna” and “whore” or “healthy” and “frigid”. I don’t think we should never talk about sex, but it seems like sexuality is the primary area we look at when determining if a woman or piece of media is feminist. Like the whole discussion of like every female popstar ever (which like I don’t think is super useful anyway, because media is more symptom than cause) is “Is she sexually empowered or sexually objectified?” and like really why is that the question we ask? Why are we asking that? Why are we assuming that like women are in charge of how a society like ours receives any image of them sexual or not? Like isn’t the problem how people respond to those images more than which ones are created? Why aren’t we asking “why aren’t people treating women regardless of attire or sexual behavior as fully human?” because like James Bond can be a horrible human being, run around in a speedo and have sex with everything that moves and he’s a power fantasy not a sex object and that’s partially because of how society perceives him, not because of what his behavior actually is. And so like liberate women, stop objectification, I think.
Like I think we need to organize together to demand shit from men, because like an individual woman asking an individual man to quit being such a dickhead involves a massive power differential and is ineffectual.
Like if we have mass organizations that are ours, and don’t include them in any positions of power we can do things like making sure everyone knows when a dude is a street harasser, or says shitty things about women or has misogynist entitled sexual attitudes or whatever and we can collectively come down on the fucker.
I guess I feel like:
A: misogynist attitudes towards sex are indicative of misogynist attitudes in general, like it’s hard to think women are sex objects if you actually think women are people in general, like at best they’re conditionally people, and like it’s been proven that men who exhibit high levels of hostile misogyny see scantily clad women as objects but it’s like they already exhibit high levels of hostile misogyny, a dude’s not going to be mr. actually a good feminist and then only bring out the misogyny in the sack. If we fight misogynist attitudes in society
overall, we’re probably helping to deal with misogynist attitudes towards sex
B: I guess I don’t feel like feminism can really ask anything of men, because like that’ll only get the ones who are already listening and they’ll still think of it as doing us a favor rather than doing the most basic “don’t be a piece of shit” stuff. We have to demand change from a place of strength. We need to have consistent mass organization with a structure and strength that allows us to demand change from men and to preserve past gains (like we’re losing reproductive rights left and right, and most feminists live in states where we don’t have to worry too much about that, or in liberal bastions and have resources to travel to get reproductive care and our lack of mass organization has allowed misogynist shitheads to trample on rights we won decades ago). Asking doesn’t get systemic change, concerted collective effort and organized resistance do, you know what I mean?
I Think That The Excessive Focus On Sex In Feminism Is Rooted In Bourgeois Concern Over Regulating Sexual Morality
I’m not talking about the focus on rape, that’s an act of violence.
I’m talking about how the whole “how should a feminist fuck? who should a feminist fuck? Is porn feminist? Can you be sexually submissive and a feminist? Is this underwear feminist? for what reasons can a feminist acceptably fuck? What sex positions are feminist?” is making feminism a matter of individual sexual morality, and of regulating the sexual practices of women. By making feminist (aka: moral) sexual practice a central concern for individuals, it distracts from collective organizing, and revolutionary practice. Like bourgeois concern over proper sexual practice and regulating the sexualities of working class women and sex workers is just transmuted into the language of bourgeois feminism. Like whether you’re condemning it or proclaiming loudly that “This porn is feminist” or that “strippers are feminist” you’re still putting yourself in a position of determining sexual morality and giving the discourse of sexual morality central importance.
It’s similar to locating moral practice in the dietary or body regulation habits of individuals. It’s a bourgeois distraction from the project of actual gender liberation.
This Book On Working Class Women Makes Me Think A Lot Of Stuff About Class Consciousness and Womanhood
It gets into all the ways working class women get shat on by society, and all the shitty unpaid labour we’re made to feel guilty for not doing, and basically all the guilt and shame that gets piled on us. (The book is Formations of Class and Gender by Beverley Skeggs)
I think you don’t see more women in leftist movements a lot of the time because the class self consciousness societal messages force us to internalize make us too uncomfortable to admit we are and what that means, because the stigma around working class womanhood is SO nasty and intense.
Like for men admitting working class status doesn’t undermine their gender and can in fact be seen as enhancing masculinity (although prole men still exist in a subordinated and shitty position) whereas for women it calls womanhood into question and our class status means constant scrutiny of our sexual behavior, of our mothering, of our housekeeping,of our appearance, of everything, and working class women are utterly and completely pathologized as deviant, hypersexual, uncaring, vain (taking time for the self for the sake of yourself as opposed to for others), bad mothers, strident, demanding, unable to “keep a man” because of the aforementioned traits, essentially as pathological non-women, Lilith to the bourgeois Eve.
We’re utterly back footed, put on the defensive from day one, society sees us as a potential revolutionary threat, and so we are made to justify ourselves as decent, as respectable, as human every moment of every day. Unconstrained working class femininity is seen as a profound threat to capitalist order, or there would not be so much effort put into repressing it. Think of “teen moms” and “welfare mothers” and “sluts” (all class and often racially coded terms) being blamed for every social ill, for the collapse of society, and while society isn’t currently collapsing and if it is it certainly isn’t our fault, I think that if we fight back against their attempts to guilt trip us and shame us into compliance and silence, working class women might just be able to collapse this mess of a society if we get together and try, and that would be a damned fine thing.
The Problem With Burlesque Dancers & Vintage Lovers Who Shame Sex Workers
My only issue with “we’re the same” is it doesn’t acknowledge the systemic differences in treatment of women who do “the classy version” and those of us who do the “trashy evil version” but yeah basically
Though admittedly I feel really fucking resentful of people who do get to enjoy the cultures we created without experiencing social stigma sometimes, even if they’re not being actively whorephobic, but like it’s not that I resent sharing the culture really so much as resent the fact that they get to have sexy fun times (often because of societal privileges actual sex workers lack) while we’re treated like shit, and like I think a lot of them don’t understand fighting, and the struggle involved in carving out those spaces for ourselves, you know?
The Problem With Burlesque Dancers & Vintage Lovers Who Shame Sex Workers
Whenever I hear guys expressing a preference for virgins/inexperienced or even non-slutty women, all I hear is ‘no basis for comparison on how bad I am in bed, no basis for comparison for how bad I am in bed, no basis for comparison for how bad I am in bed,’ I dunno, it’s probably problematic, but it just screams insecurity over their sexual performance to me
D
(D is cute)
there’s literally no way to be anti sex work without being anti sex worker
Absolutely not true. If I am anti-sweatshop labour, am I against the poor women who are forced to work in those conditions? If I am anti-child labour, am I anti children in poverty? No. It is BECAUSE we give a shit about exploited people that we are against these industries. The vast majority of women in prostitution are not there because they want to be, and they want out. A minority of middle class, white cam girls who like what they do should not be able to trump the rights of the most marginalized women in the world.
The example given above is nothing short of bullshit, but before I explain let me make it clear I am not coming out with a stance on sex work because as I have said before I am still learning and have seen conflicting studies and anecdotal accounts from sex workers, and as someone with no experience in sex work I don’t feel that I have yet gathered enough information to form an opinion.
Now that I have gotten that out of the way, the reason that explanation is bullshit is quite simple. Those of us who are anti-sweatshop labor because of the abuse and exploitation of poor, underprivileged, and voiceless peoples are not against factory labor as a whole. Our demands are that factories treat labors humanely, increase wages, allow them to have decent hours, give them sick leave etc etc and therefore to compare it to the stance “sex-trafficking is exploitative and because so many people in the sex industry are trafficked or exploited in other ways, sex industry and sex work should be eradicated completely” is not the parallel response. The parallel response would be “because sex trafficking and exploitation of sex workers is so high, things within the industry must be changed, and criminal traffickers must be punished.”
Against sex-work but not sex-workers? That’s fine, I’m not going to argue with that stance, but come up with more logical arguments. Also, if you really care about the well-being of sex-workers then stop talking down to white sex workers. I’m as anti-white feminism as they come, but the fact of the matter is that in most instances (there are examples), despite their race sex-workers tend not to come from privilege even when they’re white (like there are other contributing factors such as SES). I’m sure if you think about it, you’d be able to understand why it is problematic for you to talk over and talk down to sex workers, at least I hope so.
In conclusion…get off your high horse?
Well, I would argue that mass production of cheap goods in factories SHOULD be abolished, as it is a symptom of capitalism, and even when workers have rights that protect them, the CEO of that company is still banking on the labour of women. I mean, when I say I am against child labour, I most definitely DO think children should not be involved in paid work at all, and that it should be abolished. Are you saying that if kids have workers’ rights, that it’s okay for them to be working 40 hour weeks in factories in Bangladesh?
I also wasn’t meaning to talk down to all white women in “sex work”, but specifically the middle class ones who aren’t forced into it and have the luxury of choice when it comes to clientele–as I specified in my post. I stand in solidarity with all “sex workers” who live in poverty, as the overwhelming majority of them WANT OUT.
I thought I made it clear in my post and my tags that I wasn’t all that interested in getting into a long discussion (because I’m a lazy pos), and that I didn’t want to discuss my perspective (because I don’t feel that I’m educated enough about these things to do so, plus I’m a lazy, cranky pos) but I’ll give it a go just this once.
I really respect that you have a consistent stance when it comes to the destruction of the system, and I have seen others have a similar-ish perspective as you do (I think) and tbh it often comes off as a bit backwards to me. Wanting to abolish capitalism is probably a great goal, but I’m not so sure that the right or sustainable order to do is to get rid of the jobs that lower ses and underprivileged people might have access to, except maybe there is a way to abolish all the shit with one wave of a wand? But even then, I’m not sure I agree that capitalism is that problem. I’m not a fan of capitalism (especially unchecked capitalism), but I just tend to be of the perspective that any system humans would replace capitalism would be shitty, and people would be exploited…and that the issue is our species and well DNA more than anything, but I guess that’s a different conversation.
I’m not sure why you brought up child labor, but no I am not for any sort of institutionalized child labor – but I am lucky as I have grown up in a first world country. Being South Asian, I have had the opportunity to have conversations with such laborers (not in Bangladesh, though I am close to people who have worked with Bengali laborers – including children) and their perspective seems to be “don’t obliterate what little opportunity we have to make money, make working conditions humane, only allow children to work part time so they can go to school and after doing that establish services (such as pension/welfare) so that things can change.” The system has to change, but it has to change in a sustainable way. As a South Asian, I don’t want things to change in such a way that would result in mass suicides.
I understand that you didn’t mean to talk down to sex workers, however, that is how it comes off especially to white (and non-white) sex workers who aren’t privileged but did choose sex work over other forms of work and yes, they exist. I’ve met them, and yes many do want to get out but talking in a manner that “talks down to them” won’t help them in this regard because intentionally or not it furthers the notion that sex workers – and I’m not talking about trafficked individuals – are morally corrupt, lazy individuals who can’t be trusted and wholl take the easy way out (which, by the way, every time you discuss “middle class sex worker” in this manner, you are perpetuating that stereotype).
I’m trying to learn, and so far what I’m coming to learn is that the best way to fight for individuals in that industry is to fight to provide them with the tools for them to strong advocate for themselves so that they can have these conversations amongst themselves.
Anyway, if you respond and I don’t reply, please don’t take it personally. I’m just injured, sleep deprived, stressed….and like…it’s hard for me to think about serious things atm. I need some light hearted stuff while I’m online.
I mean, here’s the thing. The only people who have a right to talk about “middle class vs working class” sex workers or wtv are sex workers themselves. This is an intra-community discussion, not for outsiders critiquing the industry. I have never been a middle class sex worker really, but I’m sure I have a better understanding of them than a non sex worker.
There are issues of classism and these girls not understanding other girls realities, but that’s not for non sex workers to talk about.
Some of us don’t have another choice, because of race, being a trans woman (tho I’m assuming this rad fem doesn’t give a shit about trans women and probably thinks trans men have it worse in the sex industry since they’re “biologically female” barf) and disabilities. I don’t have another choice either. So even if I did make a lot of money, the point is still moot.
Plus it further pushes this dichotomy of “hapless victim who can’t speak for herself” or “happy hooker who needs to shut up because her experiences arent representative”
SWERFS kill sex workers. Their policies put us in danger. the nordic model kills women. Anti trafficking laws are so horrible we can be charged with trafficking ourselves in certain states.
There’s no point to this conversation tho, because SWERFS continually talk over sex workers. If we have a platform to speak, they assume we’re “privileged” even tho I’ve seen street based sex workers blog and advocate decriminalization from their mobile phones they use.
And the current state of anti trafficking laws and resources hurt trafficking victims as well. Trafficked minors are still often put in fucking juvie. It’s disgusting.
I’m a sex worker as well and an ardent anti-capitalist, and like here’s the thing: You can be against sweatshop labor, you can be opposed to work in textile factories under capitalism but I’m pretty sure you’re not inherently opposed to shirts, and the thing is, opposing sex work rather than capitalism and the conditions of our labor is like opposing shirts rather than capitalism.
Also who doesn’t want out of their shitty job under capitalism? So does the factory worker, so does the retail worker. Sex workers living in poverty want to not live in poverty and work in shit conditions. That’s a condition of work in general not sex work in particular. If you want to fix that you have to get rid of capitalism, not try and reform it.
Also your class analysis is bad and you should feel bad, you aren’t dividing your classes correctly, sex workers are workers, and thus pretty generally proletarians.
Also mass production although it developed under capitalism isn’t inherently a symptom of capitalism, like anarcho syndicalism is a proletarian movement and wants worker control of mass production of goods, and eventually probably full automation.
Honestly, you sound real fuckin’ bougie, like you’re all “consumerism, consumption is bad”
Whereas in my experience proles like myself and my peer group are generally a lot more like “I want all that my labor produces” while you’re all like “hand sewn sustainable hemp smocks” and we’re like “Can we have a chair that isn’t falling to pieces” and you’re like “Garden in your yard!” and we’re like “We’re in chronic pain from being on our feet all day and not having health insurance”
Also: There is no ethical consumption under late capitalism.
Thoughts From The Peacock Angel 