That Girl from Derwent dwells on the value of religion this Christmas.
That Girl from Derwent has learned a few more things about prejudice since moving up North.
That Girl From Derwent reckons if you're going to be offensive, you should find a better reason.
That Girl from Derwent considers why it is that some words have wider implications than others.
Porno V is just about to rear its uncontested head, and I think this is the time to think about some things that worm their way in to our consciousness, without us having any idea.
That is to say, sexualised women.
We live in a society that relies on half naked women as the most powerful advertising campaign. If there is a way to post an image of a woman in fewer clothes than normal, it will be done. If it were possible to have a semi-nude woman eating cat food to sell it, I’m sure that someone would do it. And yet who are they advertising for?
If it were possible to have a semi-nude woman eating cat food to sell it, I’m sure that someone would do it.
Our Derwent Bar Reps are advertising the St. Patrick’s Day bar quiz with the image of a severely out of proportioned woman, in tiny green pants and a drooping green top. This greatly confused me. Will she be there? Will there be suggestive women reading out the questions? Or worse, is it possible that she could be the prize? I really do not think so.
And so my next point of query. Do they not want me there, as a straight female? Is this quiz specifically for straight men and lesbians? Do I need to attach a penis onto my body to be allowed in? Again, I came to the conclusion that this is probably not so. And so what is her relevance? She is possibly a great fan of St. Patrick’s Day, and she may even enjoy the odd bar quiz. But this tells me personally nothing about why I should attend.
I think that it is down to a severe lack of imagination on the part of advertisers to rely on the bodies of women. But it is rather offensive that as a straight female I am kept completely out of the loop. It feels like my presence is unwanted unless I choose to dress like she is. Possibly I will be allowed in if I wear nothing but a pint of Guinness on my head.
The advertising for Porno V at least makes sense in the way that it is relevant to the theme. But, unless I have been tricked into believing this, the event is about safe sex. Porn does not encourage safe sex. The participants often suffer from STIs, partly because condoms reduce the appeal for a lot of people. A condom bukake may not work. If you know what that is, you will know why.
And apart from a little snippet at the end of the YUSU page for the event, saying, rather inconspicuously, almost as if to avoid detection, “...and remember, use protection”, there is nothing about safe sex, only lots of it and with the most scantily dressed people.
This is closely followed by the screamingly uninventive “CUM ON DOWN”... Right. Firstly, ‘come’ spelt ‘cum’ refers only to men. Secondly, I’m aware that this is a joke. And yet the advertising cannot be called a joke. It is not funny. I do not see anything amusing about a woman’s backside. It seems that at the heart of this seemingly tongue in cheek night, equipped with bucking cock to ride, there is the very real notion that women are the sexy ones in porn, boring unless they constantly have their skirts hitched up.
And to have fun if you are a woman, you must be that sexy woman. There are no other roles for women featuring in the event. There are awards at the end for the ‘kinkiest dressed’, and I’m positive that girls will feel the need to dress sexily and revealingly, whereas the guys will dress to get a funny reaction. This is the incredibly serious distinction. It is acceptable for men to dress as revealing or conservative as they like and still fit into the theme. They could go as Hugh Hefner. And any costume that a girl chooses to wear will have to be sexually attractive. There is no other option, unless they choose to not go, or do not go in costume. And I think this is crucial: should the university be encouraging and supporting events that potentially make people feel so physically inadequate that they do not attend?
A major cause of concern for me at the moment is the amount of young women in education who strive to be glamour models. There is an abundance of Facebook groups started by these entrepreneurs, asking people to vote for them in various ‘Nuts’ competitions. And yes, it is nuts! Most of these young women are at university. Does our society tell them that the glass ceiling is still there, so just lie back, have your photo taken, and think of England? Is this what the suffragettes went on hunger strike for? I do not know enough about psychology to say this and uphold it fully, but I think that they are really lacking in confidence. It may sound like a cliché, but confidence in your mind and personality is much harder to sustain that confidence in your breasts. Surgery can fix it for one thing.
So, at universities where women can be educated into holding top positions for leading companies, can begin their political careers, can become doctors, we have naked women selling things, and students becoming those women. How depressing.
Interesting to note that (fill in blank), convicted of rape or sexual abuse, mostly with children, was a priest/reverend/whatever. A link between the church and good morals? I don't think so - more of a proof that the Bible is the theory and Rape is the practice. (About as convincing an argument - maybe even slightly more as few people use porn as a justification for actions, whereas the bible...).
I don't feel any less abhorred by rape after watching porn or Sexcetera... Do you Marie..?
#59 - rape would be more commonplace without porn? porn is used in some treatment of sex offenders to release their urges. however, it also leads to wanting more and more violent porn. this has also led to actual attacks because vicarious violent sex is not enough for some people. Also, if someone could potentially be a rapist without the saving aid of porn, in my mind, they are a rapist. I do not know ANY men who are capable of rape, even if they had no porn. That is stupid and degrading to men.
"Also, if someone could potentially be a rapist without the saving aid of porn, in my mind, they are a rapist."
That is a very bold statement. Is someone a thief without the 'saving deterrent effect of police' or a manic-depressive without the 'saving aid of medication'? Without modern ethics, laws and cultures, most men would be rapist. Most of us have rapists as their ancestors (though hopefully many generations away), so it is something quite natural (this NOT making it any more acceptable or OK by the way) and thus hard to say what hypothetical circumstances make someone a 'real' raper, and which don't.
What?!? Rape is common but not right? someone being capable of rape is completely different to someone who is not at all, and more similar to a rapist. a lot of porn is aggressive towrads the woman. A lot gag during blow jobs, and attempt to pull away but are held back. They do it because maybe they have no other option, are broken down and manipulated, or groomed. People who watch porn which can be seen as aggressive, and don't care, are in my mind potential sex offenders. but this is nothing to do with the article by the way. Also, PORNO V posters were criticised by Charlie Leyland. haha Kate Taylor.
Actually I left a PORNO poster on Charlie's desk along with the message "Any problems, ring me"... I never got a phonecall nor were they removed from the YUSU poster oards around campus.
ha ha anonymous.
Kate
x
I tried to organise PRUDE V but no one came. As it were.
Kate Taylor, your defensiveness and petty attitude as JCRC rep is disgusting. Tim Wallace, it is attitudes like that that make girls feel the need to dress revealingly when an event of such theme is put on. If they don't, people like you will call them prudes. Well! this is making PORNO V look like a very mature and well thought out decision! the article didn't need to be put up at all. They could have just interviewed the Vanbrugh JCRC.
Kate Taylor is the female welfare of Vanbrugh. Yet is unable to discuss an issue which has clearly created discussion. Maybe Vanbrugh would be better suited to a rep who would be willing to listen to such worries? Even if not many people agree with the fair amount of people who have commented against PORNO V on here, surely people should feel able to!
I'm feeling a lack of confidence in this "Taylor" character. Anyone else?
From what I've seen and heard of her on EWD Committee, she's very good. You leave Katie Taylor alone.
Kate Taylor is defending her JCRC the same as many other JCRC members would do. The fact she is Welfare Rep I think speaks volumes. If someone had a problem they could go to her and speak about it and I'm sure neither Kate nor any of the other Vanbrugh Welfare Reps have had people being upset by the event or the theme.
The people who are suggesting a link between those who watch porn and rape are missing the point entirely and need to stop leaving, frankly, stupid comments.
The point of this article is a valid one. Women are over sexualised in the media and simply because this is the status quo does not make it ok. This I agree with.
The fact is noone was forced to attend P.O.R.N.O. and noone was forced to dress in any way. Many people did not dress provocatively or overly sexual.
The reason I'm posting this is mainly because of those spouting about rape and rapists. This article is nothing to do with that and using it to push a weak argument is disgusting and offensive.
WHO CARES?!!!!
This is the same conversation every year.
I'm happy to discuss the event, I just don't have time to refresh the article every day (I have an exam tomorrow!).
Thank you Nathan....a good introduction for me:
I personally do not have a problem with PORNO. I attended the event and had a fantastic time. But yes, if somebody did come to me with complaints about the event then I would have dealt with them appropriately. However, nobody did!
As mentioned in the article regarding the posters, Charlie asked me for a copy, which I gave her, and I told her to contact me with any further problems. I was not contacted!
Lack of confidence in me? Why? Because I was not asked by anybody to take action, and so, did not?
I agree with #72. This does happen every year, so why not try to talk to the committee before the theme and posters are sorted before complaining.
comment deleted by the author Well done Hannah on an excellent article. I felt you addressed the main issues on not just P.O.R.N.O but on advertising and events on campus as a whole. It is a shame that people have warped and twisted your views to a much more extreme mould. There are many points i agree with and some that i disagree with, however, it is important that someone does raise these issues on behalf of those who are too nervous or shy to do so. Those who reply to this article...'let your hair down,' or go anyways, 'have some fun,' look quite frankly, laughable when responding to an article such as this. Finally, this article made me much more aware of just how inherent sexism is in all spheres of society and i'm glad that people are sitting up and taking notice.
Stop posting on the Yorker and get back in the kitchen. Or bedroom, wherever the nearest man has told you to go.
What on earth have naked women got to do with selling cat food?! I understand that you are trying to make a point about how women are 'sexualised' by the media, but surely you could have found a more effective argument than resorting to base sarcasm.
If it was a naked cat posing in a sexy way, that would be different. I tell you what, I'll ring my cat tomorrow and ask him what he'd prefer on his tin.
Kate Taylor, your point is completely invalid. Being female does not mean you are for womens' rights. The worst kind of sexism is where females are sexist against themselves, and unfortunately I have found this to be prolific in York University.
Porno V IS exploiting women because it is advertised using scantily clad women - NOT MEN. The people walking around selling the tickets confirm this, with a girl wearing skimpy clothes and a guy in shirt and trousers.
Some people are blind to these sexist issues because society has conditioned us to think that this is normal for women to be sex objects.
As a high-ranking university, we should be scrutinising this type of event more heavily.
Nathan Ratcliffe on Kate Taylor:
"If someone had a problem they could go to her and speak about it and I'm sure neither Kate nor any of the other Vanbrugh Welfare Reps have had people being upset by the event or the theme."
Because why would people go to her about a sexism problem when she is clearly so anti-feminist?
It's not your fault Kate, but I'd ask you to think more deeply about this issue.
People are saying feminism is over. And it's attitudes like this that cause the number of women in high powered jobs to decline, as they did last year.
As welfare rep you're in a prime position to be more supportive of your own gender. A mere 50 years ago women didn't have the vote. Major inequality like that doesn't disappear. We are surrounded by it, but people don't see it because it's all they've ever known.
Sorry, but it seems to me that this is becoming more about slagging off Kate Taylor as a Welfare Rep, who I've always found to be very clued-up when I've spoke to her at EWD Committee, and less about discussing the article.
Cut it out please. It isn't fair to be marginalising her in particular regardless of if you agree with the event and its' publicity. She's not the only person responsible for PORNO V either. Vanbrugh JCR put the event on, NOT Katie Taylor. Moreover, the event was approved by YUSU Events Committee, and the publicity was ok'd as well it seems. Leave her alone, instead of annonymously bullying her, which is what you're doing currently.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report