Comments (18)

By Katie Kish, February 20, 2009 8:50 pm

...thats not funny either...

This study is the least awesome study I’ve ever read. I’ve shouted and complained before about men objectifying women’s bodies. Just the other day I was walking from getting lunch to go back to work and say a man, literally lean 1/2 body out his car and yell at a woman crossing the street “Hey baby! That ass would look so good with me in it.” and today just outside of Starbucks there were 4 guys commenting on every single girls body as they walked in to get their coffee.

Maybe I’m just not watching for it, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a women lean outside of her window to catcall at a woman crossing the street. Nor have I seen a group of girls standing outside of a store purposely watching men walk into it and commenting on their “fine asses” or “beautiful men titties”. Men objectify women.

And now, we can prove it scientifically. When a man is show a picture of a women who is less than dressed the region of their brain that is associated with tool use….lights up. They literally associate that woman’s body with the same purpose as a hammer or a drill. (hardy har) …And they would use the same words to describe using the woman…like pushing, grasping and handling.

But wait! That’s not even my favorite part…

And in a “shocking” finding, Fiske noted, some of the men studied showed no activity in the part of the brain that usually responds when a person ponders another’s intentions.

This means that these men see women “as sexually inviting, but they are not thinking about their minds,” Fiske said. “The lack of activation in this social cognition area is really odd, because it hardly ever happens.”

What?! Wait! Waaait! aaaaand:

And the men who scored higher as “hostile sexists”—those who view women as controlling and invaders of male space—didn’t show brain activity that indicates they saw the women in bikinis as humans with thoughts and intentions.

Scientists have seen this absence of activation only once before, in a study where people were shown off-putting photographs of homeless people and drug addicts.

…Those men associated women on the same level as homeless people and drug addicts. How charming. Now of course one of the first questions that comes to my mind after being grossed out is “well, what about women?” and …”well, is it the society? or is it evolutionary?”

In regards to the women, if they were shown men in sexualized outfits (or lack there of) they probably won’t have the same reation, only because women are turned on and look for mates who have power and wealth. So, if the men were run with affluent symbols attached to them, that could result in similar studies, perhaps.

But Fiske doesn’t think such an experiment would work the same way, because women usually react to men they desire by “interpreting their minds, thinking about what they’re interested in, and then trying to please them,” she said.

So are these traits simply evolutionary? And if they are – should they be allowed? I really don’t think its healthy for a man to see a woman’s body, disassociated it as a person and reassociate it as a tool… and then to top it all off they completely disregard what the woman is interested in or would agree to doing. …scary hairy, IMO.

Comments (6)

By Katie Kish, April 7, 2008 3:26 pm

Pineview Elementary school in Reedsburg, Wisconsin has a traditional “Wacky Week” and on the Friday of this week they encourage the kids to dress up as members of the opposite sex or senior citizens.

Well, wind of this outrageous display of disgustingnes this prompted rage from a Christian radio group, Crossroads in Milawaukee (which is syndicated across the state). They were pissed off because this elementary school was apparently promoting alternative lifestyles with this wacky day.

“We believe it’s the wrong message to send to elementary students,” said Jim Schneider, the network’s program director. “Our station is one that promotes traditional family values. It concerns us when a school district strikes at the heart and core of the Biblical values. To promote this to elementary-school students is a great error.”

Following the program the school started getting angry calls. Not surprisingly the school claimed that promoting the transgendered lifestyle was not their intent, but rather something FUN for the kids to do.

The kids picked the idea themselves, and now the theme will no longer be tolerated or done again at the school. What I absolutely hate about this is that the kids who may have caught wind of the situation will now think that the way you dress defines you as a person. Or that transgenderism is wrong. I think they need to make me the president or boss or whatever of this school district for a week so we can have a pride week and the kids can learn all about different sexualities, dressing how they want and taking pride in everything they do.

Then I’ll take on the christians. *growls* bring it!

Comments (6)

By Katie Kish, May 5, 2007 1:37 pm

Lately I’ve been reading a lot online about sex positivism. I attempted to write about it before, but I wasn’t too happy with the post that came out of it. To get myself going I started talking about the 4 young women around me aged 17 – 20. All of them claim to have “sex positive” views on life, and to test this I asked them how often they masturbate. They all answered quite openly with answers ranging from “everyday” to “once every two weeks”. 

They also described what ”sex positive” means to them. To these four it was being open and not having to be ashamed. Being honest and appreciating the ”wonderful world of sex”, which is most definitely a human thing. Feeling good about yourself whether you’ve slept with 4 guys or 42 and having this as an across the board thing, no double standards. Saving ones self for marriage has the problem of marrying someone who likes S&M while you like missionary… or you not knowing what you want at all – so there should be exploration so you don’t get a Hot Carl on your honeymoon.

They believe that sex negatives “need to get laid more”. They got a little side tracked on that question. … They all agreed that they had grown up in sexual homes and that their attitudues are all about how they were brought up.

For me personally, sex positive doesn’t mean having a high sex drive or slinking around in clothing that hides little to nothing. It’s not about being able to talk amongst friends about masturbation and sexual acts, although that is important, sex positivism is about so much more than that. It’s about the importance of fighting for women whose sexuality fits in and out of the box.

A big part of political and patriarchal control is limiting the sexual acts and freedom of a woman and even of men. Sexual violence against women is one of the many ways that this happens, also the negative attitudes towards escorts and strippers – people are trying to limit and control their sexuality. The key here is to create a world in which women’s sexual choices are always respected. ALL women. If they’re monogamous, polyamorous, dykes, asexuals, bisexuals, like to sleep around… etc. they should all be respected. Is that enough? I don’t think so. As well as being respected their sexualities should be appreciated.

What I loved about talking to the four women today was that each one of us respected the answers of the other. We didn’t devalue each other’s sexuality and choices instead we treated each others sexuality as the norm, no matter what the answers were. Everyone in the world shoud understand that any sort of healthy choice about sex is one that is to be respected and appreciated. By healthy I mean consentual and practiced with condoms, or other birth control and defense against disease. Men have, for a long time, been given the privilege of having a sex life that is normalized and valorized.

Samie and I are sex positive women because we believe in liberation of women and their sexualities. We believe in the importance of celebrating women and having each and every one of their voices heard. When we each speak of our personal sexual experiences and choices we’re not just talking about a small deal. We’re talking about something that many women in the world are too scared to talk about, what some women have been conditioned to be embarassed about and what some women have just completely have had stolen from them. The fact that the five of us sat around talking about our sex lives, desires and activities was liberating, exhilerating and full of such hope.

None of them put themselves into a box, one likes to explore all sexes, the other likes to dabble with multiple guys at a time, another liked straight vanilla sex… We didn’t put each other into a box. We didn’t make fun. We weren’t embarassed. All women in the world need this level of freedom. They all need to know their sexualities are down right sexy. Their sexualities are exciting. Their sexualities are interesting, honorable and most of all -completely f’n gorgeous.

That! is why I am a sex positive woman. And why I believe that every woman in the world should learn that their sexualities and desires are beautiful, normal and completely alright to talk about.

Comments (8)

By Katie Kish, March 11, 2007 7:30 pm

Durex 2003 Sex Survey Highlights:

• People have sex an average of 127 times a year.

• Three quarters of those polled are happy with their sex lives.

• Eastern Europeans (Hungarians, Bulgarians, and Russians) are the most sexually active 45% of those taking the survey reported having a one night stand.

• Those in Thailand, China, and Vietnam were the most contented with their sex life.

• Fins and Russians were the least happy.

• Americans were low on the frequency list in 2003 at 118 times per year.

• The three countries with the lowest sexual frequency were Sweden (102), Maylasia (100),and Singapore (96).

• 48% of women admitted to faking an orgasm.

**In an attempt to force myself to write more regularly on eco-chick I’m implementing a day devoted to an environmental post that has nothing to little to do with current news. Instead it will focus on a particular issue and some cool solutions that you can partake in, or a philosophy post about something – animal rights is usually my favorite one to pull out. I think the next couple of weeks are going to based around sex-things, because that’s what I’ve been reading about lately… Eco-Sex toys, lubes, condoms, porn, vibrators…yar.**

One of the most interesting topics I’ve come across in my eco-sexual readings this week is the topic of condoms. I used to be on the pill, but now I’m not. I don’t really have a reason for going off of it, I just did. Anyway, that means when it comes to sex condoms are the way to go… but I’ve found that going down the condom road gets a little bit ethically bumpy.

The question is still floating around about latex condoms – are they biodegradable and are the additives biodegradable? I will admit that I haven’t found an consensus on it, so I’m not convinced that there is a agreed upon answer. (If someone knows differently, please feel free to school me. I have found places that say they are biodegradable, and others that say they are not.) A lot of people are allergic to latex, so there is always the option of polyurethane condoms, but these are a type of plastic and thus not biodegradable, so so far latex is the better choice between the two. There are of course condoms that are biodegradable, but they are not effective against STDs. Flushing condoms is a huge no-go, more so than flushing tampons. It will clog pipes and treatment plants – not to mention that flushed water often runs out eventually into the environment. (By now I’m sure you are starting to see why this topic isn’t exactly an easy one.)

Continue reading 'Sunday Greens: Condoms'»

Comments (5)

By Katie Kish, March 7, 2007 3:51 pm

Imagine you drop your daughter off at school, and you have yet to leave the parking lot, because something has distracted you. You’re about to leave and you see her and her ex-boyfriend outside of the school talking, when all of the sudden he pulls a gun out and starts to shoot her. 4 times. And then kills himself.

Jessica Forsyth, 17, was taken to Hurley Medical Center in Flint, where she was in serious but stable condition, hospital spokeswoman Christie White said Wednesday afternoon.

Midland Police Chief James St. Louis said the gunman died in the parking lot.

First of all, something has got to be done about American gun laws, but that’s besides the point… It’s a really sad thing that happened. And a few things piss me off about it, too.

Where does a boy learn that the life of a woman is in his hands? That killing a woman is completely okay if she has broken your heart. So many of these gun cases are men shooting or hurting women. Like the girl from Mississauga who was gang raped by 4 boys.

 Four teens have been charged after a 16-year-old Mississauga girl was sexually assaulted while she was unconscious – attacks that were videotaped and photographed with students’ cellphones, police say.

Where did these boys get the idea that it is in their power to take advantage of a woman? To kill a woman? To destroy her integrity?  What’s really sad about the Mississauga case is that the boys likely did it “joking around” and thought it would be “hilarious” to get some action from a drunk girl who didn’t know what was going on. So I’m extremely glad that they’re getting so many charges and that the school is making a big deal out of it. Because it is a big deal.

On a much smaller piss off and almost unrelated, but not really – something needs to be done about this whole teenage love struck business. Teenagers in high school date for 2 months and all of the sudden they’re so in love that they’re saying things like “I could never live without you” and meaning it. Everyone who is out of high school knows that it’s very rare for a high school relationship to last – sure, they do sometimes, but generally speaking… they don’t last.

The first year of university completely transforms people, and clinging on to significant others from high school just doesn’t happen. But these kids in high school think that they’ve found their life partner. They’re completely convinced that they’ll never find anyone better for them – when most of them don’t even know who they themselves are. But they got so consumed in them, and turn all emo. …Cutting their wrists, wallowing away for weeks if he hasn’t said “I love you” and just getting way to connected.

But then again – how do you stop it? Well, I don’t know. I guess part of it would be the parent’s responsibility to explain how important it is to focus on education and figuring out who you are before getting involved with someone else… But if my mom told me in grade 11 that I was going to be a completely different person in 2nd year university I’d have told her to screw off because she clearly knew nothing about my life! (I love you mom. I know now that you know everything.) But really, now I’m seeing that almost every relationship I’ve had in the past was a complete train wreck and should never have happened because until 3 months ago I didn’t even have a personal style of music to label myself with.

People say labels are dangerous – but they’re sometimes pretty necessary for yourself. Finding personal niches is important. We all know high school students don’t do that – they conform to whatever niche looks cool and eerie enough to fit their mood that month.

Anyway, I’ve gotten way off topic. My point is  a) I’m glad the school is sending out the message that that sort of behavior isn’t funny or cool in the least bit and really snapping down b) I will spend the next 4 years of my life (if I dont get it by then, i’ll give up) trying to figure out how we can stop teenagers from thinking their in love and really getting into self exploration c) whatever is sending the message to young boys that they can demean a woman when ever they feel like it, really needs to feck off.