We’ve talked about porn before (here and here), what do we think of this?:

From the Feminist Daily News:
Sexually Explicit Magazines Return to Army Exchanges After 10 Year Ban

“Penthouse, along with Playgirl and Ultra for Men, returned to Army and Air Force military exchanges this summer after being banned 10 years ago by a Pentagon review board for being sexually explicit. By July, Penthouse was available in more than 500 exchange outlets worldwide, including in combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than 40 anti-pornography groups plan to appeal to the Pentagon Inspector General.
…
‘I know from my 20 years as a prosecutor and as an activist that men involved in porn look at women in a different way. At the military academies, they’re selling the same magazines. Don’t women deserve to be safe in that environment?’ Patrick Trueman, special counsel to one of the groups involved, told the Air Force Times. He cited incidents of sexual harassment in the military and other problems that he contends are exacerbated by pornography.”

The Feminist Daily News is strongly opposed to this development, but I’m unsure what I think.

On the one hand, I don’t really like the kind of porn that Penthouse and Playboy produce, more often than not it makes me feel uncomfortable and distressed. On the other hand, (I’m pretty sure that) the women in Penthouse and Playboy are consenting, and if the magazines brighten up the lives of soldiers fighting in this horrible war - because it is horrible, and I wouldn’t want to be them, no matter what I think of the war itself - isn’t that a good thing?

OCAP (the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty) has put together a great video to promote tomorrow’s Anti-Poverty Day of Action — several marches led by a variety of community organizations that will converge upon Queen’s Park (at 2 p.m.). On the agenda: demands for improved social assistance, a higher minimum wage, affordable housing and access to government services for non-status people.

You can join the central march, or one led by students, Raise the Rates, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell or Disability Action. Details here.

Hooray for activist video-making!

I’m loving this - a New york based “all girl creative agency” called 3iYing has released a series of videos on You Tube that features real teen girls reacting to a variety of print ads designed to market products to them.

From AdRants.com:

“OK. Pay attention. If you are a marketer or an ad agency that markets products and services to tweens, teens and twenty-something females you owe it to yourself to spend some time viewing these videos … hundreds of girls reacting to ads for a series called Adflip. In each of the videos, girls tell us why the ads they hold in their hands cause them to flip the page and get ignored.”

The girls themselves state that millions of dollars are being wasted on what they call bad advertising, and it’s bad primarily because it makes them feel bad. So if there was ever any doubt, now you know.

The campaign is a promotion for the 3iYing agency, inviting clients to stop wasting their money on ads that don’t work and listen directly to girls when creating campaigns. You know what? Not such a bad idea…

Tonight on CNN Gordon Ramsay, celebrity chef, will be talking about his experience growing up witnessing his father abuse his mother.
In the online promo for the interview he talks about his childhood and the charity work he does to help survivors of domestic violence. He even urges others to get involved in the issue: I encourage everyone to help take a stand against domestic violence.

So this is all good right? It draws attention to the issue. Makes it more visible and credible when a celebrity speaks out. But what difference does it make if that celebrity is a man or a woman?

In 2003 Joe Torre (famous manager of the New York Yankees) spoke openly about growing up in an abusive home. He got a lot of attention and so did the issue of domestic violence.

In general, I think its amazing when men speak about their experiences witnessing violence, especially when they do so from a place of emotion and vulnerability. But in a society that still values the experiences of men over women and stereotypes women as overly emotional do we pay more attention to some people because of their gender?

October 10 will be a big day in Ontario. Not only will we vote on the provincial government, but we have the chance to transform our electoral system which, as many commentators have pointed out, makes little sense.

In the last election, thanks to our antiquated first-past-the-post voting system, the Liberals were handed 70 percent of the seats in parliament but only earned 47 per cent of the vote! The current system also makes it very difficult for smaller parties to win seats, not to mention women politicians, who are often run by parties in ridings in which they have little chance of winning.

Ontario’s non-partisan, randomly-selected Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform (half of which are women!) has recommended a new system, Mixed Member Proportional (MMP), which is in place in countries such as Germany and New Zealand, and is considered to better reflect the popular vote.

You may have seen television and online ads about the referendum, but if you’ve looked to mainstream news coverage of the issue, chances are you’re still in the dark. This is a really important issue for those of us concerned with getting more women elected to all levels of government, and Equal Voice outlines the reasons why MMP is a better system for women.

If you’d like to find out more about what MMP means, a free info session will be held on Wednesday, Sept. 26 at 7 p.m. at Ryerson University (245 Church St., 3rd floor atrium).

Panel members include:

- Ed Broadbent, former MP and former director of the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development
- Ajamu Nangwaya, Executive member of CUPE 3907
- Catherine Baquero, member of the Ontario Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform
- Louisa Moya, Executive member for Equal Voice: An Action Group for the Election of Women

Whatever you do, make sure you vote on October 10!

Last year I taught acting to children ages 5 - 9, and was amazed at what some of the little divas were wearing: tight tank tops, mesh shawls tied under non-existent breasts, low-rise jeans slipping off their hipless hips. (“Melissa – pull up your pants!”) On the bright side, Ella Gunderson made headlines a couple of years ago when she fought against the limited selection of non-sexy clothes for girls her age. (Naturally, Shameless was on the ball and gave props to Ella in “Miss Modesty?” 2:5) Fashion marketers do push kids to grow up too fast, but the story gets even weirder with confirmed reports that puberty is hitting earlier than it used to.

A recent study by the Breast Cancer Fund confirms that girls in the US are reaching puberty sooner, and cites environmental factors as the cause. The report also notes that “…early puberty is not only a women’s issue (because it disproportionately affects girls) but it is a class and race issue as well.” The researchers found that girls within racial minority and low-income groups are at a higher risk for early breast development and menstruation because they face increased exposure to toxic chemicals, unhealthy food and lack of activity.

Check out the key findings of the report and where the research should go from here.

I apologize for my lack of music posts lately - it’s not that there’s not enough good music out there right now but rather that there’s too much! How’s a girl to make up her mind?

I also realize that I made it my mandate - ahem, ladydate - to introduce music that you may not have heard before, and I’ve noted that many folks here are no stranger to the wonder that is MIA. But every time I try to think about what music I’m most excited about right now, my mind keeps sliding back to Paper Planes, a track off of her new album Kala.

By now it’s all too clichee to describe music as “a revolution you can dance to” (hello, Le Tigre‘s been doing it since the nineties) so I’ll assume you all know what I mean, and move on to how amazing it is to hear a dance song dealing with issues of colonialism, border patrolling, and “Third World democracy”. Especially compelling is the tension in the song, between the aggression of the gunshots and the playful, hopscotch rhythm that incorporates them. It’s like “I’m dancing to the sounds of warfare, and I love it! Is this right? Oh well, pass the glowsticks…” Listen to the song, you’ll know what I mean. And, while I don’t want to suggest it’s not a bumpin’ dancehall future-classic (because no doubt it is), it’s also, well, kind of sad. As songs about war and containment of bodies often are.

As a follow-up to what’s sure to be the season’s most-spun album, may I suggest the track Love Me or Hate Me by Lady Sovereign, the self-described “biggest midget in the game”? (Note: Her album Public Warning also has a very catchy track called Hoodie, which is apparently Lady Sovereign’s response to England’s attempt to ban hooded sweatshirts in nightclubs. A worthier cause I couldn’t imagine.) If only more pop stars could adopt the Lady’s “take it or leave it, I couldn’t give a flying rat’s patootie” attitude - except “flying rat’s patootie” probably wouldn’t be her phrase of choice (yes, this track has swear words, and I’m not talking about “douchebag”. If you’re going to play this one for your grandma or baby sister, consider yourself warned). She’s a funky little monkey with the tiniest ears, she don’t like drinking fancy champy, she’ll stick to Heinekin beers (yes, these are her own words. I can’t invent stuff like that). A girl after my own heart.

Happy listening.

I think it’s safe to say that there’s something very wrong with American Apparel’s advertising techniques. Leave it to The Onion to make it funny…

14 American Apparel Models Freed In Daring Midnight Raid

via Racialicious

Last night I watched an old film I’ve been meaning to see for a long time. And I got it from my favourite movie store, the public library.

Not a Love Story: A Film About Pornography is a Canadian classic. Made by Bonnie Sherr Klein (mother of Seth and Naomi) and the National Film Board in 1981 I found this to be a thought provoking and powerful analysis of an industry that largely goes ignored by mainstream cultural critics.

I’m not sure how she did it but Klein found a way to get a men against pornography discussion group, pornographers, female anti-porn activists and writers, strippers, adult store owners and even male porn actors to agree to come under her camera’s gaze. She certainly has her own bias but she lets people speak for themselves and presents insight into this subject that feels totally relevant, even 26 years after it was made.

It seems our society has a really hard time talking about pornography in a meaningful way. As with so many subjects you’re either with it or against it. Questioning pornography’s legitimacy gets you labelled as a prude or a religious fundamentalist. Condoning or admitting interest in it gets you labelled a sexist or a freak. I think these labels (like most labels around sexuality) are especially vicious when aimed at women.

Despite its age I think this film is a great starting point for discussing pornography in an intelligent and useful way.
Be warned that the film contains a range of pornographic images and could be disturbing to some.

ps. Bonnie Sherr Klein’s newest film Shameless: The Art of Disability is also worth checking out.