"for those with vaginas" and other provocative videos defend planned parenthood

[niyad]

(I have been thinking about lysistrata the last few days, and now this)

"For Those With Vaginas," And Other Provocative Videos Defend Planned Parenthood

[jladvo]

1. Small Question

I might be an idiot for not understanding this, so please do
enlighten me!

The video. 'For Those With Vaginas', I understand, and agree
completely with its premise. However, what I'm not sure I
fully grasp is whether you, (or the video makers), think
Lysistrata is a good thing? Surely those posters during the
Vietnam War promising draft dodgers trophy women are enforcing
negative stereotypes of both men and women? I.E. That only
beautiful women are good enough rewards for men who resist the
draft, ect...

I am expecting a reply proving my idiocy, and I am sorry in
advance if the answer is very obvious!

[musette_sf]

2. During the Viet Nam conflict, the saying actually was

"Girls say Yes to boys who say No".

Had nothing to do with "draft dodgers", "trophy women", or any "promise".

It had to do with women of integrity desiring relationships with men who were willing to put themselves at legal risk, and refuse to fight in an illegal war.

But I guess you had to be there....

[jladvo]

3. Well...

I'll ignore your patronizing tone, and just point out one or
two things. 

First, and I quote the OP, 'The poster suggests that men who
resist the draft would be rewarded by the beautiful woman at
home'. That seems exactly to do with trophy women. You say it
has to do with 'women of integrity'. Are the only women with
integrity beautiful women? Or are you purposely being ignorant
to the fact that the posters used beautiful women because in
our society, we assume that's the only thing that motivates
men? Because who wants an ugly woman as a reward? 

[musette_sf]

4. I'll ignore your chauvinistic tone, and point out:

I was a young woman during the Viet Nam conflict and I remember the poster quite well, which featured Joan Baez and her sisters Mimi Farina and Pauline Bryan (then Marden).



I was discussing life experience and reality.

Women and men of integrity are intrinsically beautiful.

We didn't know a term of "trophy woman" back then. That term came to be in the heyday of Reaganomics, an era that began the ever-escalating patriarchal backlash against the latter 20th century women's movement.

And I think your attitude about women leaves much to be desired. The two posts of yours that I've read seem to have an agenda has absolutely nothing to do with women's rights, and your purpose in promoting such an agenda in the Women's Rights group at Democratic Underground is questionable, at best.


PS, the OP is not the originator of the quote with which you seem to have personal issues. You need to take this up with blogger Ximena at Care2.com.

[jladvo]

5. Hmmm...

Yes, I agree, women and men of integrity are intrinsically beautiful. However, it is rather naive to assume the idea of the poster was to capture beauty on the inside, and rather naive to assume that 'Girls say yes to boys who say no' is a phrase to do with anything other than sex.

You're getting far too caught up in terminology. 'Arm candy', 'eye candy', all terms around at that time, substitute those for 'trophy women', it all means the same thing. My point is, the poster was promising sex with beautiful women for resisting the draft, and I wanted to raise the question as to whether this is actually rather misogynistic - a typical example of the patriarchal society of then and now.

You also seem to be making a lot of assumptions about me, based on two posts. You assume I'm a young person, or at least, not alive during the war. You assume I'm 'promoting an agenda', when in actual fact I would call my views radical feminist. Not that you would have any idea of my views, because as you pointed out, you've only read two posts of mine. Sorry if that comes across as snappy, but I am rather offended you a) think I used a chauvinistic tone, and b) think I am anything other than a pro-feminist male.

[seabeyond]

6. actually, the op has been bothering me fro a couple days. why women chose to use sex as a weapon

bother me. a lot. you will never here a man say... i am going to strip down in protest, or i am going to withhold sex in protest. i have never agreed with it and am uncomfortable with it.

it is females promoting their worth in sex, the smae old tired that our patriarchal society is pushing hard. damn hard.

[musette_sf]

7. Speaking only from my own point of view,

As a person who was aware at that time of the skills, talents and knowledge of the Baez sisters, I personally did not see them as "eye candy", or whatever other term you want to use that is clearly intended to clearly objectify females.

I knew of the work and commitment that Joan and Mimi gave to the anti-war movement, and I admired Joan for her brave stand in marrying David Harris. I admired David greatly for all of his work in the draft resistance movement.

During the years of the Viet Nam conflict, I was rather young, and correspondingly idealistic and perhaps a bit naive.

I'm just not coming away from it all with any sense whatsoever of sex, as in "trophy woman", "eye candy", women-as-objects sex. I didn't see it as misogynistic - I saw it as solidarity.

And I'm just not getting why you have come here to make your very first point on DU that the "GSYTBWSN" campaign was, first and foremost, a misogynistic example of the patriarchy.

Now, Stokely Carmichael saying "The only position for women in SNCC is prone", I DID see as misogynistic, but not representative of the patriarchy in the US, as the patriarchy of the US was, and is, overwhelmingly white. But that's another story.

[jladvo]

8. Thing is...

We probably misunderstood each other from the start, and probably got off on a bad footing. I do apologise if I came across as anything other than a pro-feminist male.

I understand now that you see the poster in a different light, because you know who the women are, know a lot about their life, and admire them greatly for their various achievements. However, the average male seeing that poster probably wouldn't know as much as you about them. They might not have even known who they are. So, it could end up being seen in some peoples eyes as three 'faceless' women, promising sex if you resist the draft. And so my issue with it is that it enforces all kinds of negative stereotypes, of both women and men. Perhaps you don't see it that way, and no one is saying you have to, however I would place money on it that there were people out there who did see it that way, and were in some way negatively influenced by it.

I didn't 'come here' specifically to attack something you quite obviously believe in. This post simply caught my eye, and I thought I'd share my thoughts - the fact that I have four or five posts to my name is irrelevant. If I'd have had 1000+, I would have made the exact same point.