HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » History of Feminism (Group) » Regarding "Naked = Empowe...

Wed May 22, 2013, 01:51 PM

Regarding "Naked = Empowerment"

In an article about Christie Hefner from Reclusive Leftist:

And yes, of course the famous women who’ve posed have done so willingly. That’s because they’ve been persuaded by the anti-feminist backlash that to do so is “empowering,” which is proof that there is almost nothing propaganda can’t do. No idea is too absurd, no suggestion too preposterous that a good propaganda campaign can’t make it seem perfectly logical and appealing. Look, if posing naked were empowering, then the rich men who run the world would be lining up for it. We would be awash in naked dick shots of Warren Buffet and Bill Gates and Barack Obama; magazines would be filled with male politicians and financiers and moguls with their bits hanging out. Softly lit, perhaps; head coyly tilted, bunny tail on the ass. Power.

(bold added by me)

Link here


7 replies, 1633 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply Regarding "Naked = Empowerment" (Original post)
MadrasT May 2013 OP
redqueen May 2013 #1
ismnotwasm May 2013 #2
redqueen May 2013 #3
ismnotwasm May 2013 #6
MadrasT May 2013 #5
Sheldon Cooper May 2013 #4
ismnotwasm May 2013 #7

Response to MadrasT (Original post)

Wed May 22, 2013, 02:40 PM

1. This really is a kick-ass post. Everyone should read it.

My favorite parts:

But Playboy is guilty of more than just being a capitalistic vampire squid. They’ve been firing on the ideological front as well. One of the most noxious things Christie Hefner did was hire Camille Paglia as Playboy’s in-house anti-feminist pundit. And make no mistake, Paglia is definitely anti-feminist; she calls herself a feminist purely as a marketing ploy, to get people to pay attention. “Oh, look! A feminist who says that patriarchy is good and women are happier being oppressed and that ‘no’ really means ‘please fuck me!’ Cool!” Paglia spent years shoveling that horseshit in the pages of Playboy, particularly her claim that second-wave feminism was puritanical and anti-sex. This is all part of the game, you understand: it’s how patriarchy fights back. Feminists say they don’t want sexuality that is warped by misogyny; patriarchalists say that means feminists don’t want sex. See the sleight of hand? Sex = misogynist sex. In the world of Playboy, there is no other kind..
Sound familiar?



Playboy has also fought the feminist revolution with its “show us yer tits” series of famous women. For decades, female entertainers have been heckled by drunks demanding that they disrobe. You could be Joni Fucking Mitchell singing “A Case of You,” but some asshole in the back will still yell “show us yer tits,” thus reminding you and everybody else that while you may think you’re a fancy-schmancy singer-songwriter who can give Dylan a run for his money, underneath the clothes you’re just a pair of tits. And that is the psychological essence of every single Playboy feature on women-in-the-news. As women have branched out and become high achievers in sports, cinema, education, law, and politics, Playboy has been there at every step of the way to yell, “show us yer tits!” Think you’re a famous director? Show us yer tits! An Olympic gold medalist? Show us yer tits! Rhodes scholar? Champion athlete? Show us yer tits! A collection of Playboy back issues is like a serial killer’s trophy room: photographic mementos of all the uppity women who’ve been reduced to masturbation fodder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Wed May 22, 2013, 06:02 PM

2. Of Course they hired 'ol Camille

Last edited Thu May 23, 2013, 01:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Who else? Anita Bryant? Even among the diversity of feminists there is no one who speaks playboy better than Camille.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #2)

Thu May 23, 2013, 11:54 AM

3. The only reason she hasn't faded into obscurity

is massive amounts of internalized patriarchy. How else can you explain anyone who takes her seriously?

Well, them and the sexist and misogynist men who love it that they can refer to such women as feminists. Kinda like republicans do with Sarah Palin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #3)

Thu May 23, 2013, 01:14 PM

6. LOL

Exactly.


Great article, by the way

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Thu May 23, 2013, 01:08 PM

5. It was a really good article, I thought. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadrasT (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 12:17 PM

4. There are almost no circumstances where nudity actually empowers a woman.

Lots of people delude themselves into thinking it, but I just don't find that to be true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheldon Cooper (Reply #4)

Thu May 23, 2013, 01:33 PM

7. I have to agree

The last activism by FEMEN relied on shock tactics around a suicide. I understand what they're trying to do, but as their activism goes forward I think we'll see more of that type of protest. They combine quasi-violence with nudity, which is far more effective than nudity alone. Women's bodies are so sexualized, just taking off your clothes isn't near enough to make a point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread