babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » pre-feminism?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: pre-feminism?
sherpafish
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1568

posted 27 February 2002 01:25 AM      Profile for sherpafish   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I just wanted to get some of your viewpoints on this concept. Not so much just this article, but on the social/feministic (is that a word?) ramifications of what some would call, The Slutification of Young Society.

I personaly am more than a little disturbed when I see a 9 year old in full facial makeup, hiphuggers and a tight Brittney-top, and I wonder if these younger kids are taking the fad or the philosophy away from this popular fasion/music trend.

For boys it would be the N'Sync, BSB set but, to me, there doesn't seem to be as much male objectification there as there is in the female market.

A woman's right to be boombastic and sexy is not to be questioned. What I wonder is if kids this young really get the larger questions at all.


From: intra-crainial razor dust | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 27 February 2002 08:54 AM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yep I read that article too and wondered "What the hell are these parents thinking?".

Perhaps the children do not know how this sexualises them but the parents do. Children don't necesssarily know that running across the road without looking can get you killed but parents don't sit back and say "Oh well they are only expressing themselves"

I think it is disgusting the way Britnay Spears pimps herself her whole routine has more to do with stripping than with music. Right down to the pole she dances with.

Why any parent would allow a young girl to carry on in the same way is beyond me.

To me this also speaks to the larger issue of how younger and younger models are becoming the ideal so that now 12 and 13 year olds are the height of perfection, well isnt that lovely.

Perhaps it is no wonder than when pedophiles go to court they are treated so lightly, young girls now being seen as sexual instead of as children and a court system that still believes females "ask for it".

My daughter is 6 and a half when I buy music for her it is tapes of childrens songs she also enjoys listening to rock and roll. These kids aren't out there with a visa picking this stuff up for themselves and why and parent would want to supply it and the clothes and culture attendent with it is beyond me.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 27 February 2002 10:58 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sometimes I'm so happy I had a boy.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 27 February 2002 11:15 AM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Non-sequiter: I read somewhere that the majority of strippers in the US are former beauty pageant winners.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 27 February 2002 11:53 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't think that's a non sequitur, whether the stat is right or not. The first thing this article made me think of was the JonBenet Ramsay case.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 27 February 2002 11:54 AM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
That's not surprizing M'boy, it's not much of a jump.

I've noticed this trend myself, they are getting younger and younger. Spears is a disgusting marketing spike into our young female's lives. She is nothing like Madonna, she goes over that. I watched "Starlite" and "Like a Virgin" on MTV when I was little, -to my mother's dismay- but that was Circle-Square compared to what this little leech is doing. I saw her on Oprah the other day (yes, I admit it I stopped and stared), and she had her lowwwww slung pants on and a top that made her look, well, topless. Flesh coloured and tight with half poundnof makeup on. That's fine, but, the camera panned over and there were these LITTLE girls singing right along, dressed in non-little girl clothes.

We are sexualizing our children Earthmom. And it's not just in the media, it's in practise and it's legal. 14 yearolds can do what they want with a person of any age.

It keeps getting more and more strange.


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 27 February 2002 12:00 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Non-sequiter: I read somewhere that the majority of strippers in the US are former beauty pageant winners.

Yup, yup, doesn't take brains to do either...

Disturbing article.... Raising girls in this culture is such a minefield. My oldest daughter is 4, and already we're battling the Barbie thing. Spice Girls/Brittany Spears are just a later extension -- the living Barbie dolls...

Not that we don't occasionally put on glitter nail polish. There's nothing wrong with exploring one's feminine side, to some degree.

Our strategy is to teach the girls media literacy. Fortunately, with Ms B, it doesn't look like she's got much "follower" in her personality. We also try to get some more positive, less sexualized female characters into the mix. Movies like Mulan (not the Disney version, the other one), Chicken Run... Balance.

The thing is, while they pay lip service to empowerment of girls, these Barbie dolls are using images of the only power women have ever had -- sexual power. Same old, same old. What we need to teach girls is to take hold of other kinds of power.


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 28 February 2002 12:22 AM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sell stuff!
That's all it's about.
The younger you can start them consuming disposable stuff, the better for business.

Little girls explore their sexuality. Used to be, a six-year-old just lifted her dress a few times, to see if you'd yell, and flirted with Daddy, to see if you got jealous. Phase passed; they segued into the bossy stage; no problem. Now, they need a lot more props, because tv tells them they do.

Just don't buy the shit! The kids will whine and blackmail and cajole and pout, but they'll survive, just as they survived not owning a Lion King lunchbox for the fifteen minutes that lasted.


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
bandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1435

posted 28 February 2002 12:36 AM      Profile for bandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Just a question zoot, and a stupid one at that. Did Mulan die in the Disney version?
From: sudbury | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 28 February 2002 04:27 AM      Profile for Trisha     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I get quite concerned when seeing little girls dressed like MTV sexpots because I have seen the way that some men look at them. Some of the afternoon talk TV shows have had 11-13 year-old mothers on them, kids totally out of control from age 7 upward who are having sex, drinking, abusing their parents and siblings, etc. I don't call that female power, I call that young criminals learning to be bad. The attitude that being able to dress slutty and call the shots at such a young age is not giving these children anything good to become adults with. In order to make the right decisions, a person has to have some reasoning power, respect for themselves and the world around them and knowledge of how to look at the long term and prepare for the future. Too much freedom too soon doesn't give them that.

These kids are just acting out what they're seeing on TV and where does that information come from? They see rock stars, soap operas, movies about teen rebellion, idealized or very exciting lives, and don't have a clue that they're too young to understand what is and isn't real. They believe the hype and that is very dangerous.


From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 28 February 2002 01:25 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Just a question zoot, and a stupid one at that. Did Mulan die in the Disney version?

I don't think Mulan dies at the end of either of them.... The Disney one is okay, but at the end they make a big deal of her reclaiming her femininity -- ie, she returns to the female role. In the other version (made in Australia, if I remember it right), Mulan only reveals her gender to her best friend at the end, but maintains his respect. He then wants to marry her.

I thought it was kind of cool.


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 28 February 2002 09:43 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I came to know of Britteny Spears through my daughters, who have a huge hate thing going on for her.

I think there's a female reaction to "loose women" sometimes, in that they resent these women "watering down" what they consider their "sexual power" over men. ("If that slut's giv'n it away, how can I expect dinner and a movie now?")

So, some of this Britteny hate can be chaulked up to this. But not all.

This is wrong. Spear's was marketed at us as a sexual toy when she was still a child. I think it's disturbing a mother would allow that to happen. I don't dislike Britteny Spears. I do, however, feel nothing but contempt for Britteny Spears Inc.

Besides dress up as very young girls, I've noticed that girls tend to start experimenting with make up around grade seven or so. That's ify, in my view, it all depends on circumstance. Sometimes you see girls about this age go nuts with make up, and sometimes it's just part of a learning thing, experimentation, and it passes as they learn. Sometimes with a few girls, it IS advertising. As a parent, you have to play it by ear as to how you handle that.

I always went with my gut. If it looked wrong to me, it was. Fortunately, this kind of stuff has never come up much around here.


And that whole pagent scene with the Ramsey child. My skin literally crawled when I saw video on the news of pagents she was in.

Alarum bells toll loudly in my head when I see stuff like that. I can't believe those pagents have nothing to do with pedophilia.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 01 March 2002 02:58 AM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think this is a really complicated, problematic topic. Since we're in the 'feminism' forum, don't you think we should be careful about throwing around words like "slut" and "slutty," with the blithe acceptence that 'slut' is a perfectly innocent word, and not loaded with a helluva lotta sexist baggage and assumptions? Before we complain about young girls dressing 'slutty,' shouldn't we first be asking ourselves 1) What we mean by that and 2) Why this is supposedly a bad thing for girls to be--or even a bad way for them to look.

This is not to say I am not completely grossed out by the cynicism of the B. Spears phenomenon--it's the most exploitive thing to come along in quite a while, and the mixed messages it sends to girls is entirely unconscionable. But we have to really think about these message and what's at the root of them, don't you think? We have to accept how completely screwed up our society is about sexuality--women's sexuality in particular. We have to ask ourselves why we are simply horrified by an 8 year old girl behaving like Britney, but an 8 year old boy acting like. . .I dunno. . one of those cock-rockers out there (being old, I keep thinking of Axel Rose)would not be met with the same kind of horror--even though much of the bumping and grinding is still all about sex.

We have to ask ourselves why women's sexuality is *so* commodified, *so* constructed and, ultimately *so* feared compared to men's--don'tcha think?

What prompted this post is that the term "slut" reallllly pissed me off. I think it's a close second to the n-word when it comes to keeping people down. Could we watch that from here on in, or at least, you know, put quotes around it next time?


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 01 March 2002 11:11 AM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Relyc, you make a good point about what we mean when we use words like 'slut'. One of my favourite images is of Courtney Love attending some industry party dressed in a baby doll dress and mary jane's, with the words "bitch" and "slut" painted on her forearms. A more powerful feminist statement, I can't imagine.

Words that insult women, with few exceptions, invariably involve their sexuality in some way. For example, how a wonderful bit of women's anatomy became such a vile thing that to call a woman a cunt is the ultimate gender-based expletive, is an interesting indication of exactly how we, as a society, view women and their sexuality. Clearly, there's something scary about the sexualized woman - 'vagina dentata' and all that I suppose.

My teenaged daughter and I regularly deconstruct the most appalling of gender/sexuality based insults by parodying them and their excessive use as weapons. If I had a son, I would teach him that sex is fun, not dirty, age-appropriate, and ok to talk about above a whisper. I'd make sure he knew that girls make good friends.

The Brittneys and Baby Spices are presented to a pre-existing market created by our own warped ideas about sex and women. Change the marketplace by educating our sons and daughters and you change the product being exploited.


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
vickyinottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 350

posted 01 March 2002 03:05 PM      Profile for vickyinottawa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm making it my personal mission to reclaim the word "slut"....got myself a load of "Sluts for Social Justice" buttons at the NDP convention this year, and am starting my own affinity group
From: lost in the supermarket | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 01 March 2002 03:15 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm not a slut but I play one on the Internet.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
vickyinottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 350

posted 01 March 2002 03:19 PM      Profile for vickyinottawa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
well, then you'll have to make do with a virtual button
From: lost in the supermarket | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 01 March 2002 03:21 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Vicky, I MUST HAVE one of those buttons!
From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
vickyinottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 350

posted 01 March 2002 03:33 PM      Profile for vickyinottawa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
well, the woman who makes these can usually be found at any large left-wing gathering...she also did all of the "_____ against Mike Harris" buttons.
From: lost in the supermarket | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 03 March 2002 04:30 AM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:

I think there's a female reaction to "loose women" sometimes, in that they resent these women "watering down" what they consider their "sexual power" over men. ("If that slut's giv'n it away, how can I expect dinner and a movie now?")


What a disgusting sentiment, TP!!!!!

I pity "loose women" but I resent the men that take advantage of them. At what point do you figure a man should mature sexually and otherwise?


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 03 March 2002 09:26 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I was rather offended at that comment too, but more because Tommy was assuming that dinner and a movie was somehow payment for sex.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 03 March 2002 09:39 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sounds like a '40s western, doesn't it?

Actually, it's Stagecoach: The noble, liberated guy (John Wayne -- Tommy P?) recognizes that the dance-hall girl has a heart of gold, but all the other guys make a great show of protecting the "proper" young wife from her.

There's a happy ending, though: the "proper" young wife turns out to be quite genuinely nice; she and the dance-hall girl bond in a crisis, in spite of all the male power confusions; and by all that's logical, the men should become irrelevant, except it's a John Wayne movie, so he's got to get a reward at the end (the dance-hall girl).


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 03 March 2002 09:39 AM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I personally prefer jewelry and fur, but that's just me.
From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 03 March 2002 09:42 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Emeralds. Beautiful emeralds. That will be my reward someday. Well, as long as they're not yet another gemstone that is extracted at the cost of people's limbs and lives...sigh.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 03 March 2002 09:43 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
ROTFL, earthmum.

Take me to the Aegean!


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 03 March 2002 03:34 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I pity "loose women" but I resent the men that take advantage of them.

There it is again. "Loose women." So, how do you define a 'loose' woman and why, pray tell, would you pity one? Why? Why? Can someone explain to me why women who enjoy active sex lives are to be pitied? As opposed to envied?


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 03 March 2002 03:58 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"loose women" was TP's description so I can only assume he meant a woman that dresses like Brittney S. I don't personally think the way a woman dresses says much about her sexuality. I think the way men look at a woman in a mini and heels (for example) says more about their maturity level than the woman's lifestyle.

I believe the male claim that woman have sexual "power" over them is a mysoginist excuse for their inability to get over their fear of the oppisite sex. *sigh* I'm so disillusioned.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 03 March 2002 04:03 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I just wanted to add that I pity "loose women" because a mini and heels (for exsample) limits movement and freedom and is intensely uncomfortable. The pop media invents yet another way to shackle women. As far as a womans sex-life, fill yer boots. (But steer clear of my man.)
From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 03 March 2002 10:01 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
In that case, "loose" is a pretty misleading term, isn't it--since we're actually talking "tight." Clothing, that is. Har, har.

Hmm, I thought that would come out sounding a lot wittier. Good thing I added the "har, har."

From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 04 March 2002 12:05 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
No minis? No high heels? No way!!!!

I happen to be very fond of short skirts and somewhat high heels. And I am the antithesis of "loose" (which generally, in Tommy's context, means promiscuous). Not that there's a damn thing wrong with being "loose", if it suits you. Nobody picks on "loose" men....

Funny thing... I once told an ex-boyfriend, when we were comparing histories that he was quite the slut. He got really bent out of shape over it. Never mind that it was true....


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 04 March 2002 12:09 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Nobody picks on "loose" men....

That's not true.


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
vickyinottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 350

posted 04 March 2002 12:45 PM      Profile for vickyinottawa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
come on, you have to admit there's a double standard in the way society treats/refers to men and women with...shall we say....active sexual lives. When do we ever hear of men being referred to as "loose"???
From: lost in the supermarket | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 04 March 2002 12:46 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
How often do we hear men described as "lecherous" or "sexual predators"? Two sides of the same coin, as far as I'm concerned.

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Victor Von MediaBoy ]


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 04 March 2002 12:54 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've only described men as "lecherous" when they can't get it through their heads that "No" means "Not in this lifetime"....

And there is a major difference in how our society views women and men with, shall we say, "busy" sex lives...


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 04 March 2002 01:50 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think the terms 'promiscuous' and 'loose' can pretty much be given the same amount of serious consideration that Tommy gives them - none. They're words we can all recognize as belonging to a particularly narrow definition of a woman's role in society. Women condemn other women's sexual behavior and mode of dress, as do men, and it's helpful to admit that we're all a bit brainwashed with negative labels and archaic stereotypes.

How we dress for ourselves is a matter of personal taste and style. Period. I happen to like short skirts and deleteriously high heels and come-fuck-me platform boots. I also like baggy pants and birkenstock sandals.


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 04 March 2002 01:52 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've never heard of promiscuous men being refered to as lecherous or sexual predators. The only time I've heard men referred to by those words is when they have stalked women who are clearly not interested, or made repeated inappropriate and clearly unwanted sexual comments or advances toward someone.

But for just sleeping around a lot? Those words don't come to mind at all.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 04 March 2002 01:53 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've heard men described with those words, and others (pig, asshole, etc), many times just because someone thought they slept around a lot. Hell, sometimes just because they'd had one or two one-night-stands.

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Victor Von MediaBoy ]


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 04 March 2002 02:00 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The only really rude word I've heard used to describe guys who sleep around is "male slut", and even that term is annoying to me, considering that you're qualifying the word "slut" with the word "male" - which assumes that the standard for sluts is female.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 04 March 2002 04:24 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
According to my daughter's Lexicon of Teenage Insults, the terms 'slut' and 'player' are currently non gender-specific. There are, however, a whole host of new gender-specific insults that'll make the average adult recoil with horror.
From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 04 March 2002 04:30 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So spill, already, Rebecca West!
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 05 March 2002 01:30 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hmmm...and that would advance this discussion how 'lance...?


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 05 March 2002 01:46 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Er, um... not at all, I guess.

Always curious about what young folk are up to, is all. Pray continue.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Veronica
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2370

posted 17 March 2002 02:36 AM      Profile for Veronica        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
When did spike heels become "in" again (I see Ophrah and many influential women wearing spikey, teeter tottery heels) I must have been in a stupor walking around looking at, and admiring how so many young women are now wearing comfortable shoes that are good for your feet and don't hamper one's movement. But somehow, as I was admiring this phenomena for a few years, the spikes snuck in. What happened? I thought we had overgrown that. I thought women realized how ridiculous and unhealthy it was. I guess things go around in cycles.
From: Victoria | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 March 2002 09:44 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
My question exactly! I guess I could see the fun of dressing up for a special event in spikes, although I'm way past torturing my own tootsies that way ever again. But I am starting to see numbers of women hiking down the street on the things, and that seems to have happened only over this past winter.

The pointy toes, too. Quite apart from the way they squish most normal feet together, needle points have NO fashion future, in my view -- they've appeared before, and they've died fast before. More and more of them I see, and all I can think is


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca