I have to make fun of this because otherwise I'm going to cry.
Perhaps you can help me choose which is worse - the t-shirt above or the one I can't get a shot of which said "No trespassing. I'm waiting for my husband." Or is there no lesser evil in this case?
24 comments:
Are you sure this isn't taking the proverbial? If it isn't, then it certainly should be.
Yeah, I was hoping it came from a line of ironic feminist apparel. Not so, you say? Drat.
Fathers controlling their daughters' sexuality gives me a serious dose of the willies.
Fathers controlling their daughters' sexuality gives me a serious dose of the willies.
Or not, as the case may be.
Sadly it's not a spoof, there are many versions of this t-shirt out there, some of them sold by organisations called things like True Love Waits, and "waitwear".
The worst stuff I saw was a cap and keyring with BSTR8T (something like that) on it in rainbow colours, but again I couldn't get pics of those.
Has anyone else seen those mock wedding ceremonies some of those fundy groups do between fathers and daughters? creepy much?
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1822906,00.html?iid=redirect-purity
Can a woman not choose to wear what she wants or must she only wear slogans approved by left-wing feminists?
Can a woman not make her own choice to not have her breasts ogled and cite whatever reason she chooses to or must she only be allowed to object to being objectified by using slogans approved by left-wing feminists?
Can a woman not make her own choices about when and who she chooses to have sex with and the reasons for her decision or must she only utilise left-wing feminist approved reasons before being permitted to make this choice?
Who is it who is trying to control women's bodies here?
Can a woman not make her own choice to not have her breasts ogled and cite whatever reason she chooses to
Writing something on a shirt at breast-height isn't generally considered the best way to achieve that particular goal, but that's very much by the by.
Madeleine we seem to be making you very angry today, from the number of comments you are adding to our threads. By all means feel free to continue, but don't expect to convert anyone!
If someone wants to wear this t-shirt that's their issue not mine. But I do have the right to disagree with its sentiment surely? Just as I could disagree with a t-shirt that says Christians Are Going to Hell?
Just as I could disagree with a t-shirt that says Christians Are Going to Hell?
Okay, I'm off to print a ton of those.
(And at the back: "Buddhists don't reincarnate")
My cut is 25% G, you can pay me in pageloads :-)
It's a deal. Soon as I find out what a "pageload" is.
Madeleine - sure I support a woman's choice to make any statement she cares to with her clothing but slogans that basically say "my body and sexuality belong to my father until my husband takes over ownership" do not imply that the woman has any kind of autonomy so I'd question the "choice" available to her. A t-shirt that said "I'm a virgin because I wanna be" would be kind of cool.
Let me guess, James commented about me?
James, feel free to repeat what you said over at MandM.
So a woman can make any statement she wants except for x,y,z.
If she states x,y,z she is a victim of oppression. There is no other possible explanation.
So you have any idea how paternalistic and condescending that is?
So you have any idea how paternalistic and condescending that is?
Whereas putting your father in charge of your sexuality is the very definition of paternalistic. I suspect that's the thrust of Julie's criticism.
"Putting" denotes choice on the part of the woman.
If a woman chooses to put her father or her husband in charge of her sexuality then it is her body, her decision.
Who are you to question it?
Hang on a minute, we seem to have gone a long long way from the original post, which was to call a t-shirt slogan silly.
Talk about taking the ball and running with it!
I am absolutely nobody, let's clear that up right away. However, were I a feminist, I might conceivably want to comment on the "wearing" of such a decision, the boasting and promoting of subservience to men.
Or: what Julie said.
Yes, lets ban women having a sense of humour on a tee shirt and make sure that all logos and words on a t shirt move down away from the breast area.
This T shirt is humour, I saw this on a joke t shirt webpage years ago. Why oh why do you make this into something it isn't.
I guess I read this quite differently. In another post there is comment from Anna about a women bearing her breasts for an advertisement at a steak house. Anna and others suggested that this ad was denigrating women treating her like a piece of meat, even though the women voluntarily chose to do the add.
Now I actually agree with this, a women can choose to bear her breasts in a manner that means she is being denigraded and exploited. For that reason I reject the idea that anything a women consents to do with her body is OK, a women can consent to do denigrating things which we should opposed being done to her.
Also for this reason, I as a father want to protect my daughters from being denigrated in this fashion and I encourage them to not allow themselves to be treated in this way, I also make efforts to protect my daughters from such treatment.
Now suppose my daughters respect these efforts on my part and make it clear to men that they do not want to be treated in this way and also that I will support them in their efforts and am willing to do what I can to protect them from it.
Why is that objectionable?
Anon, who said anything about banning this t-shirt, or the wearing of it?
I'm a bit mystified as to why this post has received so much misinterpretation, and a few people have read into all this things that haven't been said by anyone.
So perhaps I need to clarify. Again.
My issue with the t-shirt's slogan is the implication that a woman's body can belong to someone else. In this case her father, in another case that I mentioned in the text of the post her husband.
Is that clearer?
By all means go on making this thread longer though, it is doing wonders for our stats, although it is starting to irritate me personally ;-)
Problem is Julie is that the slogan does not say that a women’s father owns her body. Those are your words they are not in the text or implied by it.
It fact the shirt says nothing about ownership at all. It simply makes a request. “Don’t touch my breasts” and states that her father is *watching*
If I don’t want to be in your car when you are speeding and so ask you not to speed and and add the police are watching. Does it follow the police owns me. Or if I say to women, do not hit on me and add that my wife is watching. Does it follow my wife owns my body and I am her slave.
Similarly the claim that she is waiting for her husband does not entail the husband owns her body either. I choose not to have sex with anyone except the women I married. I made a covenant with her to keep this commitment. Does it follow I am a slave to my wife and she owns my body. That’s simply a ludicrous claim and one insulting the many people who live in monogamous relationships of this sort.
I feel really naive now as I had completely misunderstood the shirt messages. I thought they were referring to rape not consensual sex. So I felt a little puzzled wondering why it was sexist.
Post a Comment