Feminist blogging

I’m delighted to see Megan’s post. I’m going to comment on her post. But does anyone have any suggestions for our subheading/themes in addition to “Hot Topics” “Eco-Friendly Handy Hints”; “Happenings and Events”? “Feminist-Blogs and other Links”.

What will our columns be called?

Are there images you have we could upload – Tania what about the ones I sent you?

I’m going to ask Morgan to give us each our own passwords.

Did you see this morning’s Herald editorial. “http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/466/story.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10439684. “Broad the right man to lead the way”. Apparently and I quote:

We are in danger of succumbing to moral panic on any sexual subject these days. Society is much more sensitive to sexually exploitive images of women, though not of men, than it was 20 or 30 years ago and overt displays of sexuality have become less acceptable. The change is all to the good and owes much to the advancement of women in politics and other professions. The police have lagged behind the trend somewhat and the masculine requirements of the job might mean that they continue to do so.

Overt displays of female sexuality less acceptable? Since when? Hello, hello …parades of topless women on bikes through Auckland’s main street? And being a guy who likes pornography is a requirement for police work?

Your thoughts?

— JT

2 thoughts on “Feminist blogging

  1. megan

    Some opinions – I read this editorial and my concern is what does the writer mean by the “masculine requirements of the job” (referring to police work). What is it about ‘masculine requirements’ that allows the police to ‘lag behind’ the supposed trend of increased sensitivity to displays of female sexuality?

    Are there no women police officers?

    My own understanding of the rape cases againts police officers – which he brings up- was that it was about violence, intimidation and power used against women. Yet in his editorial he seems to link these women’s complaints with his own (dare I say) fear that he may be losing access to overt displays of female sexual imagry.

    Perhaps he blames them for sparking the ‘moral panic’ which means we should no longer accept that police may need to watch illegal pornography every now and then.

    Perhaps he is arguing that although women have made great professional strides, which he supports, we should not overstep the boundaries. Just as long as our bodies are still freely available in the public domain, then all is well with us wearing business suits – or not, of course.

    Oh lots of things could be said about this editorial …

  2. jtrue Post author

    Megan,

    You’re right. This editorial no doubt assumes that police officers viewing pornography is a form of free speech and an outlet for the tensions of being a “police-man”. Concerning today is the police press release that the media “slanders against them” due to the recent cases of police violence against women has empowered people to show their disrespect by violently attacking police on the street. i..e the implication being if we engage in any criticism of police culture we contribute to disorder and anarchy on the streets….Your thoughts?

Leave a Reply