Archive for June, 2011

“Women hate hard work” and other stereotypes

Posted in New Zealand on June 26th, 2011 by steph – Comments Off on “Women hate hard work” and other stereotypes

Good news, everyone! Kerre Woodham has explained to us the REAL reason for the wage gap between men and women. Fuck Alasdair Thompson’s explanation that it’s due to periods and babies; Kerre knows the real reason: it’s because women don’t want to earn as much as men!

What does gender pay parity really mean? If women aren’t earning as much as men, quite often it’s because they don’t want to.

They don’t want to put in the hours and the weekends and the stress and the politics that are involved in clawing your way to the top of your field.

WE ARE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT CEO’S, KERRE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WOMEN AT ALL LEVELS OF THE CAREER LADDER. And major fail by comparing apples and oranges; the wage gap isn’t the difference between what John Key earns and what a women who cleans offices earns. The gap is between men and women doing the SAME JOB who are equivalent in things such as experience, qualifications, etc. So the number of women getting to the tops of their fields is not what this is about – although it is a interesting issue in it’s own right.

I would be more ranty about this, but this steaming pile of women-bashing garbage with no actual evidence or stats to back it up is classic Kerre Woodham, so I can’t really be surprised or taken aback. In fact, I think that from now on whenever someone uses baseless speculation and anecdotes based on tired stereotypes to offer up the solution to an issue, especially if it involves women or poor people, I’m going to re-name that “pulling a Kerre”. You hear someone saying that rape victims aren’t to blame, but really women should be careful about what they wear? They just pulled a Kerre.



Posted in New Zealand on June 24th, 2011 by steph – Comments Off on Slutwalk

Slutwalk Auckland and Slutwalk Wellington are today! I’m thinking of all you Slutwalkers, and hoping for good weather, a good turnout, and that the people doing the media coverage will pull up their socks and actually engage in the issue and practice some legitimate journalism!

It’s like Carrie’s prom in here

Posted in fail, New Zealand on June 23rd, 2011 by steph – 5 Comments

Sorry everyone, I can’t blog today;  I’m bleeding.

If we’re going to protect women, let’s do it properly.

Posted in missing the point, rape, rape culture on June 2nd, 2011 by steph – 2 Comments

The topic of who’s to blame for rape is red-hot right now in the wake of comments by Paul Quinn and discussions about Slutwalk. And I’ve been thinking a lot about rape culture and victim-blaming. In light of these serious discussions about the role of clothing in rape and how it’s not a woman’s fault for being raped but she could’ve been more careful or something, the idea of ‘slutty’ clothing comes up often. And oh so helpful people have explained to me that slutty clothing makes you an easy target and let’s people know certain things about you that they might just have to act on. Short skirts are not as innocent as they appear. And I figure that if provocative clothing is really so dangerous, and so culpable in the act of rape as people keep saying, why is slutty clothing even allowed to exist? If an outfit is “designed to turn men on” (13th comment in the comments section), and it is so dangerous for women to wear such outfits and send these siren song messages of whoreishness, and these things are actual factual real risk-elevators for the act of rape, then why are we not just trying to outright ban them? I mean, we as a society obviously care about our women- after all, we’re just trying to protect them by telling them what clothing is “safe” and what is rape-lust-inducing, so we obviously care about the safety of women! But if we know these types of clothing to be so key in rape and have such power to drive the urges of rapists, then why aren’t we going that extra step further to protect women and calling for slutty clothing to be banned full-stop? I mean, it’s not like women need to wear miniskirts, right? And bad things happen when women do wear miniskirts. So why don’t we get rid of these horrible rape-facilitating items? Don’t we care about protecting women???  If something like a short skirt has potential to incite such an awful sexual crime, then it isn’t enough to say “don’t wear that to the club while you’re drunk”- after all, that isn’t the only place you could wear a short skirt. We need to stop focusing on women who dress like whores when they’re out on a Friday night- the power of the short skirt is obviously somehow inherant in the skirt itself and thus can be wielded in any location or at any time. I’m wearing a skirt right now, at work, and the hemline hits me mid-thigh. I shouldn’t be allowed to wear something to work that has the power to provoke rape! Why isn’t anyone stopping me? Do you people who say “she isn’t to blame, but is wearing that kind of outfit really wise..?” only care about those sluts in bars?

The only solution: total miniskirt ban. And probably a ban on v-neck tops just to be on the safe side. I mean, maybe we could make an allowance for a woman who wants to wear a short skirt for the purpose of titiallating her husband in her own home in the context of maritial relations- as long as the curtains are closed so no rapists can see it and be compelled to rape her. Seriously; all you people out there who are trying to help us ladies by letting us know that what we wear out on the town could be a bad choice: why don’t you care? Why are you half-assing this campaign to stop rape? Are your cries of “but I’m only trying to  keep you safe!” not actually true? If you were really trying to keep us safe you would  ban the demon miniskirts from ever touching the legs of another woman again, and we would all be safe from rape, hooray!



Posted in links on June 1st, 2011 by steph – 2 Comments

First and foremost, a major shout out to Boganette for organizing The 37th Down Under Feminist Carnival; check it out because there is so much good stuff to read.


Via Sociological Images (a great site in general): I’m not racist, but… , which catalogues some instances of shitty justification for racist statements. They’re not racist, they’re just stating facts!

And, an affiliate site: I’m not sexist, but…


An article on Ms. magazine blog by Michael Kimmel: “Dominique Strauss-Kahn and the Myth of Consent”. I particularly like this bit:

The question is how many groupies are actually out there? In the Colorado case, one of the attorneys for the raped women asked the football players a most telling question:  “How many female students here at CU would you consider to be ‘football groupies’? One running back said, “About half.” Another player, a wide receiver, answered “a majority.”

In these guys’ minds, every other female student at Colorado would have sex with them, any time and anywhere. But I’d say it’s more likely that, at any one moment, only a handful–oh, let’s inflate wildly and say one-half of 1 percent, or about 72 women on the campus–might actually be classified as groupies. That would put these football stars off by about 14,300.  In other words, their celebrity so distorted their vision that they misconceived the sexual interest of women they encountered on a daily basis–“misoverestimated”–as our former president might have said–by a factor of 10,000 percent.


“Too Young to Wed” by Cynthia Gorney on the topic of child brides.


I also recently got around to watching North Country (directed by Niki Caro), which has been sitting in my MySky pile for ages, and I highly recommend it. And yes, I totally cried.