Today an old friend of mine posted this picture on his wall.
As you can see it’s a charming depiction of a motorbike with a chassis (or whatever that middle bit is called) painted to look like a naked, headless woman who is taken from behind by the rider.
It popped up as my 3-year-old son and I were scrolling through looking for pictures of his bestie, Harry. A nice little image to plant in his brain.
Admittedly, using Facebook with my young son was a mistake. There’s a reason Facebook restrict age to 13, but I guess I thought I was safe within my relatively small (in FB terms) group of friends. Lesson learned.
Now while I totally accept that Facebook is a free forum and that people can post what they like, I’m afraid I found this all kinds of offensive.
Should I ignore it and just scroll past?
He’s a friend after all. It’s his page, it’s his sense of humour. Freedom of speech! I hear you cry.
I couldn’t. I simply couldn’t make myself scroll on.
But then I’m left with a problem: how do you tell someone nicely that they’re being sexist?
I posted a quick ‘pathetic’ to which he posted back ‘blah blah’.
Perhaps I should have left it there but this irritated me a little so I then responded with:
‘Blah blah so hilarious, when the 12-year-old girl sees some twat driving this bike, what does she think? All women should be naked, headless and fucked from behind? Adult women can look at the driver and think ‘Ah, must be sexually inadequate’; younger girls wouldn’t know what to think. Sorry if I don’t find it funny. Blah blah.’
To which he retorted:
“If u don’t find it funny then scroll past Kate – it’s called a sense of humour #strewth”
I came back with:
“It’s not called a sense of humour, it’s called sexist and misogynist. You’re allowed to post it. I’m allowed to comment. It’s called Facebook.”
For this I got the impassioned response of:
“Whatever.”
…at which point I bowed out and got on with my day. I’d made my point, he hadn’t got it, so why waste more time?
When I logged in later the following comment popped up in my stream:
“Maybe I should start a blog about uptight feminists who need to get over themselves…. I have no problem with women going to Chippendale shows or such like IF THEY WISH so it works both ways. Democracy is about free speech and expression – I am free to have a rude sense of humour, you are free to dislike it, I am free to think ‘if u don’t like it just ignore’ or ‘unfriend’ #touche Now back to the BRITS on telly for my entertainment.”
Well – now he’s used the double whammy of ‘Chippendale shows’ and ‘uptight feminists’, I really can’t argue can I?
A friend sent me a great quote this morning from Dame Rebecca West, which is very apt:
“I myself have never been able to find out what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute.”
So while I think this was a random slip from a genuinely nice bloke, I’m pretty sure he left my exchange thinking: ‘What a humourless bitch, it’s just a bit of fun, go burn your bra.’
I wished him luck with his future blogging efforts (that site would be crazy popular, right?) And after that several other people commented saying that in reality the image was tame, and that most teens had probably seen much worse.
Of course most of us are faced with this situation every day – the casual sexist joke, the unfunny stereotypical advert, the throwaway sexist remark.
Do we pull people up on it or let it pass? Is commenting on a picture like this making a big fuss about nothing, or is it by chipping away at vaguely offensive images like this the way we solve the bigger problem? That women are relentlessly objectified by the media as sexual objects.
Imagine if the person were making homophobic or racist remarks. Imagine the joke isn’t about a ‘woman’ but instead focuses on ‘blacks’, ‘Jews’, ‘Gays’ or ‘Muslims’.
How does it sound?
Would you laugh it off or stop and point it out?
So tell me people; how do you tell someone that they’re being sexist? Is it even possible to argue your point without coming off like some kind of pinched, prudey killjoy? Or should you just keep your mouth shut?
About the Author: Kate Toon
Kate Toon is a writer, poet, copywriter and hula hoopa who lives on the Central Coast, (NSW) with her husband, son and dog. She likes to writes about dog poo, stalkers, bogans, being a mum and all the little things in life.
Kate has had heaps of plays performed across the globe.
She’s an active member of the Australian Poetry Society and is signed with literary agents Curtis Brown who are representing her children’s books. Her anthology of poetry “Gone Dotty” was recently published with Vivid Publishing. In ‘real life’ she’s a well-known advertising copywriter for large brands and small businesses. She can't bake cup cakes but she can play the recorder with her nose. Which is far more important really.
Kate regularly blogs her general ramblings at www.katetoon.com Related Posts
-
Somewhere over the rainbow: making gay babies
Sitting closely beside the politics of marriage equality is the notion that same sex couples thinking of raising kids will erode... -
Mother’s Day 2013: Are we moving forward?
Michelle Shearer, the founder of women’s movement and labour saver Mamabake, guest posts for Mother’s Day on... -
Don’t call me a Mumpreneur
I have children and a business. I work from home in a state of ordered chaos. For some hours on days when the children are in...
Kate,
You weren’t wrong. It’s the largest quandary in our existence where we try to point out to people where they are just adding to the issue. In society, these things have become accepted and as soon as you state that they are unacceptable, then they go the personal attack. Wonder how he’ll feel about this kind of image if he ever has a daughter who attracts a man like that into his life.
Perspective is imperative, and I believe yours is best and the one we need to hang onto with a death grip.
His reaction says everything about him, and nothing about you. Your reaction says everything about you and you should be proud of that.
We’ll stand with you in saying enough is enough.
Cheers
Amanda
Thanks Amanda
It’s vaguely irritating to have ‘feminist’ thrown around like an insult.
What’s wrong with standing up for yourself as a woman?
If you don’t stand up for anything, you’ll fall for anything right?
Appreciate your comment.
Best wishes
Kate
Also, you can pull him up on his misuse of hashtags.
Ah that’s just one of his things. He’s a nice bloke generally and very funny, apart for his choice in tacky unfunny imagery.
Great article. I think women like me (30, white, live in the west) can’t see sexism as readily as we should be able to. We haven’t been trained to see what remains post feminist-revolution. 2 ideas: If that was a child or a baby as the ‘chassis’ you can bet he wouldn’t have found that funny. People can be happily crass in so many domains, but interestingly draw the line at paedophilia. Would that make him sit up and pay attention?
I also like the idea of self-censoring. If you think you are about to say something crass about a ‘group’ eg Chileans, Catholics, Baby Boomers, WOMEN…just substitute the noun for Asians or Jews and hear how racist it sounds. Perhaps that is a way of raising the issue with your friend. Substitution. I have many friends who think they are PC and are constantly dropping the word “Indian” into their descriptions of people who have been shits to them. If someone has been a pain in the arse, it is not because of their nationality.
Yep substitution works well doesn’t it. Surprisingly so.
While I don’t want to live in a censored society where no one can make a joke, I do feel that the jokes should at least be funny. Is that too much to ask?
And I totally agree that it’s harder these days to tell what’s sexist and what isn’t. Women are so sexualised from such an early age across all forms of media.
Maybe if she’d had a head and looked like she was enjoying the experience I’d have liked the picture more. No head. No mouth. No complaints.
Chris Morris an English comedian did an episode of ‘The Day Today’ about paedophilia. It offended just about everyone. But parts of it were actually quite funny. And you know why? ‘Cos it was clever, it challenged the cliches, it made you think.
That image is neither funny, or clever, or challenging. It’s just a bit sad.
Thanks for reading and commenting!
Kate
While its your prerogative to point out sexism, racism, homophobia and general dickheadedness when it appears, I’ve got to kind of side with your friend to an extent on this one.
He is, after all, allowed to express his sense of humour whether he offends you or not, and of course you’re free to berate him for doing so, but as you point out yourself in your article, you were surprised to have seen the picture on his wall in the first place given the expectations you have with your group of friends, which indicates that this is likely to be an example of the exception rather than the rule. Publicly pointing out that he therefore is sexist and misogynistic is a bit rich when you have but one example in amongst a myriad of other posts / opinions / statements that probably aren’t.
I’m not saying he’s right and you’re wrong but if you can put hand on heart and say that you’ve never in your life found anything funny that could remotely offend any person or group of people for any reason related to differences between the aforementioned person or groups of people, then good luck with that sainthood – but if not, then that’s a tad hypocritical of you to brand him something on the basis of one example.
Amanda replies with “His reaction says everything about him, and nothing about you. Your reaction says everything about you and you should be proud of that” – what else can she tell about this person other than the fact he found an off-colour picture funny, and he didn’t like being lectured about it? His reaction says nothing about him except for what he said about the photo. His defence of it seems to be more related to avoiding the comments being hijacked and less about extolling the virtues of the photo. And even his enjoyment of the photo was vicarious, because assuming he’s not actually in the photo, he’s jokingly hitching his humour wagon to someone else anyway.
In fact, if he was to continue into a tirade against you on the basis that you didn’t find the picture funny (as he states “it’s called a sense of humour”) and therefore you must be a humourless, militant, man-hating lesbian would Amanda be siding with him – for the same reasons as she sides with you above? She would have as much information available informing that decision as she did in tarring him with the sexist brush, but would it be different because you’re not a man?
Is it fair that a man (or anyone for that matter) should be labelled and accused of being something on the basis of one single example of behaviour? Or are you, in fact, being equally intolerant because you perceive him to be a ‘tall poppy’ of sorts and ripe for being cut down?
I look forward to your thoughts on it.
Hey Dan
Thanks for taking the time to read and comment on the article. You’ve raised a lot of points there so let me attempt to address them with my point of view, one by one:
- His posting was an exception to the rule. My berating him was an exception for the rule. A first for both of us. I found the picture really offensive so said something. How many times to you think you should let someone get away with being racist, or sexist, or homophobic? If not once, then twice? Three times or more? Nip it in the bud I say.
- I find lots of things funny that might offend others but generally not really much to do with sexism, racism or being gay. I find religion quite amusing/ irritating. If I posted something on my wall (which is my right) that offended and someone commented (which is there right) I’d take it on the chin. Argue a bit. Possibly even take the piss but I’m not sure I’d resort to insults. He would then be perfectly in his rights to blog about it. So fair all round.
-Amanda’s comment is Amanda’s so I let her respond to that point.
- No sure I understand the next point re tirade. He kind of did continue the argument (though I wouldn’t call it a tirade) he didn’t call me a humourless, militant, man-hating lesbian, but he did refer to ‘uptight feminists who need to get over themselves’ and I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean feminist as a compliment.
- I didn’t call him ‘sexist and misogynist’, I said the picture was sexist and misogynist, a subtle difference but not quite the same as labeling and accusing him. He didn’t make the picture and star in it. So really all I can accuse him on is stupidity for sharing it.
- I don’t see myself as a ‘tall poppy’, I don’t think that ‘label’ applies in this situation. I saw something that was, in my opinion, sexist and then I commented. Maybe I made him stop and think for a minute. Maybe I didn’t but it’s all about standing up for you think is right, right?
That’s what he did.
That’s what I did.
Gotta love a country (and a silly social network) that lets you do that.
I posted to see how other people deal with situations like this.
Me and said person are all good, we’re able to argue about stuff and get over it. But if he posts a picture of some tits tomorrow then I’ll really get angry.
Thanks again for joining the discussion.
Ta
Kate
There’s a great bit of stand up by the Aussie comedian Steve Hughes where he talks about offending people and his point is that nothing happens afterwards. The only consequence of being offended is that you get offended. That’s all.
Your blog is extrapolating this nothing to a point where you’re trying to find a something as a consequence and there just isn’t anything there, except in your mind.
You freely admit to finding things funny that other people may not – such as religion, which of course isn’t ever fundamental to anybody else’s life so is fair game for parody – yet you’re making a big deal out of something so trivial committed by someone who you acknowledge is “a nice bloke generally and very funny” when it happens that he crosses an invisible, imaginary, arbitrary line in your humour sand.
I’m not defending this particular work of art whatsoever (for the record, I don’t think its that clever or funny either) but I’m not trying to take away anyone else’s enjoyment of it if they wish, or make them think that they are someone a bad person for laughing at it.
Offense is a very necessary cost of living in a society where everyone is free to express themselves. If I went a whole day without being offended by something I would go nuts.
Sure, be offended if you genuinely are. Be angry if something makes you angry. Or sad. Or happy. Whatever. These things are privileges, not punishments.
Thanks Dan – your comment seems to be mostly about being offended, so I’ll deal with that…
Being offended is part of every day living, but I FEEL that occasionally you have to stand up and say something.
If no one stood up and were offended by racism, we’d still be making black people sit on the back of the bus.
You call it being offend, I call it standing up for what I believe is right.
I’ll add that yes this trivial matter is part of something I experience every day – the relentless objectification of women. I don’t spend the whole day being offended, not sure how you read that into anything.
Instead I spend 20 minutes writing about a picture that made me think about sexisim.
I’m not sure that that’s making a big deal, or merely expressing myself, which you’ve done freely and at length here.
Thanks again for your comments.
Your male friend is right. A small portion of women choosing to see strippers means that you can be objectified constantly as a matter of course, regardless of your opinions.
Did I say right? I meant he’s a bit of a tosser.
This wins the award for best comment ever!
Thanks for reading.
Kate
Yes the photo is in bad taste, but so much nonsense on facebook is.
It has a become a forum for public spam that people take way too seriously.
I don’t doubt many photos of this kind are doctored and circulated to create these exact reactions.
Basically I think the pic is ridiculous but I am not offended.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions but I think this photo has created way too much discussion.
I am not saying you are wrong to be offended, but I don’t think this is any kind of ‘situation’.
I don’t think it’s a ‘situation’ either, merely a little example of the public spam you mention, that sparked me to think about sexism and how you deal with it.
I’m also of the opinion that when it comes to sexism – there’s no problem with a bit of discussion.
Anyway, glad you weren’t offended, thanks for commenting and adding to the discussion.
Thanks
Kate
One thing I think is important to note, and your friend emphasised it:
“I have no problem with women going to Chippendale shows or such like IF THEY WISH”
and there’s the thing. Going to Chippendales is a choice. Whoever is riding that headless woman around is not giving people a choice. Aside from the fact that the Chippendales are allowed to keep their heads, they’re not taken out on public streets, no parody is made of them being on their knees and taken from behind, and paraded around the streets for all to see – and if such things were to happen, the outcry would be deafening.
Incidentally and FYI, that poor tired old photo can be hidden from your facebook news feed. I know you know this, but here’s the thing – telling facebook you don’t want to see photos like that actually helps buff their algorithm. At least according to Robert Scoble, who is said to know about such things. I don’t mean telling facebook you don’t want to see John Smith’s photos, I mean simply using the drop down beside the picture to hid that one graphic. I have been experimenting with the countless pro-gun graphics, because I cannot have this argument with people I love any more, I am tired. And so far, it’s working. Those photos are showing in other people’s streams, but not in mine. It’s just something readers might like to know
Hey yep the hiding things is a good point, thanks Mally’s girl. That’s what I usually do, but it feels a bit passive. You know?
The Chippendales point is a worn old argument – the fact that a tiny percentage of women see a group of semi naked men on a hen night once every 20 years is used as justification for any kind of sexist portrayal of women. I agree with everything you’ve said there. Very well put.
Thanks for joining the discussion.
I really enjoy the Discordia articles, and I have particularly enjoyed your recent posts.
All very interesting, relevant and thought provoking topics.
But in comparison, I think this is really over the top.
Some things, while in bad taste, can be funny and not necessarily meant to offend.
Not everything is an attack on ‘The sisterhood’.
I am not trying to spark an argument, I just have a very different view on this topic.
Ah well I guess it’s all subjective.
I didn’t feel I had gone over the top in my article, just used this one picture as an example of random sexism. While you may not have found the picture offensive, would you agree it’s a tad sexist?
I wanted to spark a discussion more about how other people deal with sexist remarks in day to day life, but the focus seems to now be all on this particular picture/example and how I handled it. Rather than the wider question.
Glad you like my other posts and no argument sparked here at all! Just a bit of healthy debate which is never a bad thing.
I agree with your reaction. If we brush off everything as “humour” then it’s perfectly fine to objectify or treat someone badly. It’s not about not having a sense of humour, it’s about standing up to something that keeps the degradation and stereotypes alive.
Would it be okay if it was a child painted on it? Try to think of different scenarios and see if its still funny.
Thanks illy – This comment sums it up completely for me.’It’s not about not having a sense of humour, it’s about standing up to something that keeps the degradation and stereotypes alive.’
Thanks for commenting.
I’m male and I don’t find the picture funny. I can understand your stance against such imagery completely, since I’m not too fond of the female equivilent, such as “Men have feelings, but who cares?” written on T-shirts. This is basically the same thing, so I don’t see how he can defend his bad choice to put up that photo as a “joke.” The phrase Freedom of Expression gets thrown around a lot in these situations, but what is being expressed here through such a photo? Not much worth saying, I think.