What We Missed

Filament, an erotic magazine for women featuring semi-naked men, can’t get a printer to publish photographs of aroused men, even though their readers say it’s what they’d like to see.
Nancy Griffin, a tennis player in Raleigh, is suing the city for refusing to let her play against men. An actual quote from the article: “Men have invoked both their wives and God to avoid matches against her.” Wowzer.
For an -ism (sizeism, classism…) packed punch from the New York Times, don’t miss this piece on J.C. Penney coming to Manhattan’s Herald Square.
New study indicates that the choice of major explained 19 percent of the income gap between college-educated men and women.
What else did you find interesting today?

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. aleks
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

    You mean that she’s suing the city for refusing to make men play against her.

  2. Ravencomeslaughing
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

    wow, that JC Penney rant is downright HATEFUL. She thinks the mannequins are obese? You’re right her -isms are dropping from her tongue like acid.

  3. Stephen A
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    The person who wrote that Penney’s article needs to be fired and never write again.

  4. uberhausfrau
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    being a midwesterner i can say i was quite pissed when macy’s (and what the fuck is sooooo special about them some one please tell me.) bought chicago’s own marshal field’s.
    but maybe im stupid or something but i gotta think new yorkers need a reasonably priced department store with the rest of the country. sorry if it bursts this gal’s bubble. not everyone can drop $300 on a pair of jeans.

  5. A male
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

    Technically correct, as it is a community amateur league and people should be free to play who they wish. However, men’s reasons for refusing to play Griffin, quite likely to avoid being publicly beaten by a woman, are bullshit. Where is the shame in being beaten by a player who rates beyond the community’s ranking system? (In a related note, at the nearest fitness club, all the trainers are women. If a man wants a pro to formulate his fitness plan or teach him how to lift, it will be a woman who does it. Almost all class instructors are also women.)

  6. FrumiousB
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

    Re: Filament:
    the struggles faced by Filament highlight a deeply entrenched sexism: men can look at women but women cannot look at men.
    I think there is more than that going on. I think there is a distinct taboo against showing men erotically where straight men might be confronted with it. It’s tied into the relative unattractiveness of male actors in straight porn vs female actresses. You can find it in other places, too. Eg, the gym my brother-in-law used to go to prohibited men from wearing tank tops. They didn’t want an atmosphere where less muscular guys would feel intimidated. When my b-i-l pointed out to them that they had no such prohibition for women, he was told that they didn’t want the kind of women who feel intimidated to join that gym. Result – the average schmoo has a place where he can ogle women in skimpy gear, but doesn’t have to feel inadequate next to buff guys. In contrast, women are confronted wth images of sexualized babes everywhere we turn.

  7. ekpe
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:14 pm | Permalink

    interesting. i wonder if the league can force one to play with someone they don’t want to play with, even if it’s because they feel losing to her would make them feel bad. i guess if government money is involved, perhaps.
    so on what basis was she granted permission to play in the men’s league, or is it open to anyone.
    this is always interesting when it involves one woman trying to play in a male league. what happens if men decide they want to play in a league.

  8. aleks
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

    I have no particular respect for the players involved, it’s just a matter accuracy. People who refuse to play when challenged should forfeit (take a loss), although when some Muslim women don’t want to play against men for reasons relating to God and their husbands we’ll see how that goes over.
    But the fact is that Griffin is suing the city to compel men to play against her, not to be allowed to play against them. She’s not wrong to do so, but call it what it is.

  9. maco
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    Uh… some of them are. The ones in the picture, no, but they DO have larger mannequins in the plus-size section.
    And I was rather disappointed to read she had trouble finding a size 2. It seems all the clothes made nowadays are made for the (steadily growing) crowd of people who are overweight. Finding clothes that don’t need to be tailored when your waist is smaller than your hips is HARD!

  10. maco
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

    Oh, and even the size 2s these days aren’t made like they used to be. Just like the larger sizes, they assume your stomach is as big as your boobs and butt. Makes it pretty much impossible to buy a pair of jeans that won’t stick out and show your panties in the back…unless Penneys is selling Apple Bottoms now?
    I grew up hearing it was impossible for plus-size girls to find clothes because everything’s made for the skinny girls. Now it’s very easy for plus-size girls to find clothes that fit. For us girls that are thin AND curvy though…well, I’m just glad I learned how to sew.

  11. meganaut524
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

    aw poor thing had to dig to find her size. what a tragedy. i love how it’s all a novelty for her and yet for those of us who aren’t rich and skinny it’s a regular occurence to have to search for a size or maybe feel like we don’t fit in at a clothing store. as a fat woman, i have had more humiliating experiences shopping for clothes than i care to remember. i am appalled at this writer’s tone and clear disdain for every day women and men.

  12. maco
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

    Hell who wants to drop > $20 on a pair of jeans? Penney’s'll still charge you like $35. Aeropostale FTW!

  13. Nordc
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

    AH! A few days ago I posted an article on the whole Filament “women don’t want erect penises” shit.
    check it out
    http://logicgod.com/2009/08/apparentely-erect-penises-arent-welcome/ :D

  14. maco
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 7:11 pm | Permalink

    I don’t know where you’ve been shopping or if you simply haven’t gone shopping in 10 years, but nowadays finding anything smaller than a 6 or 8 is hard. Finding *flattering* clothings for big women…I’ll grant you that one.
    Clothes nowadays are all shapeless. If you’re a 36-36-36 like I was 5 years ago, you’ll have no issues. Now I’m a 34-27-37 and I have the same problems a 45-35-45 would have: the clothes aren’t the right shape so they hang wrong and just plain look funny.
    Where do curvy girls get clothes? AFAICT, Apple Bottoms is the only option, but DANG! They’re expensive!

  15. katemoore
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

    That study just shows how fucked-up our priorities are, as a society. There are few things more important than education – certainly not CEO douchebaggery – and look how we reward teachers.

  16. katemoore
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

    Of course not, because the only possible meaning for a sexualized man is that he’s gay. And everyone knows there’s nothing worse than that, right?
    (Please note extreme, extreme sarcasm.)

  17. llevinso
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

    Hell yes uberhasfrau! I’m from Chicago and Marshall Fields was an institution here. I was soooo pissed when Macy’s took over.

  18. Spiffy McBang
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 7:53 pm | Permalink

    Read the article again. She was initially allowed to play without anyone raising a beef, thus precedent was set- this is ok. Then people started bailing on her for shit reasons, so there was a rule put in place awarding a challenger points if someone ducked a challenge. This, also, is fair. But then that rule was rescinded, leaving guys with zero penalty if they refuse to play her.
    She’s not suing to force men to play her. She’s suing to get the penalty reinstated. That’s absolutely fair, and markedly different from this suggestion that she’s trying to get the courts to compel men into matches with her.

  19. A male
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

    Gaining nearly 40 lbs. since my 20s was the best thing I could have done to find pants which fit me (not a lot in stock for adult men in 28 or 30 inch waists). Now I can wear medium or large clothes made for caucasian men.

  20. Spiffy McBang
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, men not wanting to look at men is probably some part of it. I don’t think I know any guys that do, though I know plenty of women who don’t mind seeing other women in sexy poses. Blame that on whatever you’d like (probably society). But, hey, if someone can make money sticking a mag on the newsstand with big piles of cock in it, more power to them.
    The thing that came as a legitimate surprise to me was the fact that this is an issue about erections. I freely admit to being one of those who figured that because mags like Playgirl flopped, it meant there probably wasn’t a market for it (at least not at the time it was printed). But were there really no boners in it? I would have assumed they’d have that shit in every form they could show. That’s all I can figure they mean by saying Playgirl “fell short” of what women wanted, but I’d be really quite stunned if they never or very rarely tossed an erection in their pages.

  21. Naught
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    Most people would consider the threat of a penalty to be a compulsion…
    Even if you don’t, it is ALSO markedly different from the city not permitting her to play men.

  22. Jenshine
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

    This: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Female%20killer%20imprisoned%20body/1888719/story.html
    I have been so furious over this situation for most of the day that I’ve contacted every organisation/person that I can think of to get more coverage of this and to advocate on behalf of her.
    I hope there are enough of us that we manage to push the Corrections people to think differently about this situation and transfer her to a safe(r) space!

  23. aleks
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 8:27 pm | Permalink

    By “compel” them I meant penalize players who duck challenges, not shoot or jail them. Sorry for being unclear. If you’d read my post you’d have noticed that I said people who ducked challenges should be considered forfeits/losers.

  24. Gopher
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    I had a subscription to Playgirl and yeah there were bonesr galore at least for the American version.

  25. aleks
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    I should hope so, otherwise what’s the point?

  26. FrumiousB
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

    Just to be clear: the article appalled me. It practically dripped with condescension.
    That said, JCPenney’s really doesn’t have small sizes in the women’s section. If you want women’s clothes, and are skinny, you have to shop in juniors. That’s great for casual stuff, but sucks for professional clothes. Sears is the same way. I find it interesting that stores which cater to the lower end market don’t carry small sizes.

  27. Jacob
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 9:25 pm | Permalink
  28. FrumiousB
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 9:28 pm | Permalink

    I don’t know if it’s really a “men not looking at men” thing or a “don’t show dick to men” thing. Like, some straight men might be ok or even into seeing dick. I know a lot men who can’t handle seeing dick (do they never look down?), but I really think the taboo is equally against *showing* as against *looking* _just in case_ there’s one of those guys around who can’t handle dick (really, how do they pee? do they shut their eyes?)

  29. aleks
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 9:50 pm | Permalink

    When I was a young and vaguely homophobic man I’d have gone far out of my way to avoid seeing another man naked. There’s nothing especially complex or articulated about it, just vague homophobia.

  30. anteup
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

    If I’m going to look at naked dudes, I want them to not be flaccid. Flaccid penises look so bummed out and sad.

  31. zp27
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 10:22 pm | Permalink

    In other news:
    Michael Vick, one of the scummiest of scummy dog killers has been signed by the Eagles.
    GROSS. Why the pass for atheletes? Why why WHY?

    Posted August 13, 2009 at 10:38 pm | Permalink

    Cintra Wilson is definitely a fatophobic snob (and probably a closet racist as well – note her patronising interview with a JC Penney salesclerk who is, based on her name, probably African American).
    What’s wrong with physically robust working class women wanting to wear nice looking clothes!
    Apparently, on the planet that Ms Wilson (and, apparently, her editors) live on, only rich and skinny women get to wear nice clothes.

    Posted August 13, 2009 at 10:43 pm | Permalink

    Who defines what is “overweight”?
    The insurance companies came up with the idea that people should be a certain weight back in the 1950′s – and it wasn’t based on medical science, since it was insurance company actuaries, not doctors, that came up with the numbers.
    Also, since it was the 1950′s, they decided that women are supposed to be skinner than men of the same height.
    In the subsequent 60 years, those guesstimates by insurance company bean counters have become chiseled in stone – and tens of millions of American women hate themselves because of those numbers.
    Since there’s lots of money to be made by playing on the insecurities of women who’ve been made to think they’re “fat” the doctors have subsequently layered lots of “science” on top of those insurance company guesstimiates – and in many industries, women get fired because they don’t live up to those numbers.

  34. Kim C.
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

    Maybe it’s because they’re hanging their heads…

    Posted August 13, 2009 at 10:51 pm | Permalink

    It’s one thing to look at your own penis, but looking at another mans penis is considered gay and is taboo among most straight men.
    Example, at the urinals in a mens room, men keep our heads up, stare straight at the wall in front of us and never ever ever ever look at another man’s penis or even in the general direction of another man’s penis!
    If possible, men try to keep at least one urinal’s distance between each other – and many men get VERY uncomfortable using a urinal next to another man unless there is absolutely no other choice.
    There have actually been cases where men have murdered other men for appearing to be looking at their penises at the urinals in mens rooms – so this is something that most straight guys take very seriously.
    When it comes to porn, a lot of men do not like seeing other men’s penises (I know I don’t) – this may explain the popularity of “girl on girl” porn – it’s two people, they’re doing sexual stuff, but there are no penises in sight!

    Posted August 13, 2009 at 11:06 pm | Permalink

    I read the article, and (at the risk of creating an enormous shitstorm) I have to question this sentence:
    “She says she was born with a female mind but the body of a male,”
    What exactly is a “female mind”?
    Isn’t that an incredibly sexist concept?
    It seems that way to me!
    Then again, I’ve always had a lot of problems with the whole “transgender” concept – seeing as how “gender” is a political concept created by socialization and culture and “biological sex” is, well, biological and genetic.
    Example – having mammary glands, ovaries, double XX chromosomes and vaginas makes you biologically female; wearing a dress, using makeup and shaving all of your body hair except for the hair on your head fits are all female gender associated behaviors.
    So, yes you can be a person who is oriented towards the female gender as constructed in Canadian society and who happens to be biologically male – but is surgery really a solution to that?
    Wouldn’t it be more constructive to change gender as a political concept so folks could still be – as in this case – a biological male who is really feminine, without having to have major surgery?
    I know having that opinion is verboten these days, but hey, I still think it’s a legitimate opinion that deserves discussion.

    Posted August 13, 2009 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

    So called “flaccid” is the natural state of a penis 99% of the time.
    Penises are only erect when being used for sex, generally speaking.
    Most of the rest of the time, the penis is At Rest (the term I prefer).
    In fact, if a man’s penis is erect for more than 4 consecutive hours, the penis will begin to die – because the blood that is engorged in the penile tissues starts to die, the dead blood cells become acidic and the penis starts to rot away from within.
    So, the penis in it’s at rest state is the penis in it’s natural state – engorged and filled with blood is only a temporary, and actually very dangerous, state for the penis.

    Posted August 13, 2009 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

    The man did his time (way too much time – 2 years in prison for a crime that – were Mr Vick not famous and Black – would have normally been punished with a fine.
    Why shouldn’t he have an opportunity to work.
    As far as the whole animal killing thing goes – American animal shelters kill hundreds of thousands of dogs and cats a year. American meat packing plants kill 2 billion chickens and hundreds of millions of pigs, cattle, lambs and other animals. And there are people who legally kill animals and fish for sport.
    If it’s OK for them to kill animals, why does Mr Vick get demonized?

  39. Gretchen
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 11:17 pm | Permalink

    My hatred for what Vick did is stronger than, well, a lot of things. Dogfighting is absolutely despicable, and I’m so happy that public awareness about the issue has increased so much since Vick’s arrest.
    If it had been my way, he probably would have served a longer sentence, but he *did* serve his time – and I wouldn’t call serving 2 years in Leavenworth a “pass.” Of course, you’re right in saying that athletes do often get off easy in criminal proceedings, just like other celebrities. Him being signed again is a sign of that. Am I happy that he was signed with the Eagles so quickly? Not particularly. I was hoping he would be “exiled,” for lack of a better word, from the NFL for a bit longer. However, I do think that his fame (and hopefully, remorse) will help promote the anti-dogfighting cause, if he chooses to pursue it.
    I’m one of those hopelessly naive people that thinks that once you serve your court-mandated sentence, you deserve a second chance – and that includes Michael Vick, heinous and terrible though his crime was. If he can turn this into something good – like volunteering at humane societies, donating money to shelters, and educating youth about the evils of dogfighting – then I think Michael Vick can do more good than harm in the long run.

  40. aleks
    Posted August 13, 2009 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

    Has he made anything more than pro forma indications of regret?

  41. Lucy Gillam
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:00 am | Permalink

    They may not have much in smaller sizes, but they have crap in actual plus sizes, which makes that article all the more appalling.

  42. A male
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:12 am | Permalink

    I avoided being CAUGHT looking at other boys and men. Curiosity or aesthetic concerns (my ideal for males is somewhat like a surfer’s or gymnast’s body) led me to look.

  43. JessWin
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:14 am | Permalink

    This is in the news today: “Stamford Marriott claims woman was negligent in her own rape”

  44. A male
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:26 am | Permalink

    Like the pregnant man, Thomas Beatie, who continues to be a man despite having a functioning uterus, and is expecting his second child. Being a two time mother and going off his hormone therapy does not change his identity. Self proclaimed, trademarked Man With a Pussy, adult actor Buck Angel also is a traditional ideal of man like few other men, but has a vulva and functioning vagina, which he uses in his work.
    People should be free to match their body to their ideals, but it would certainly be easier if people could be happy in the bodies they have.

  45. A male
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:27 am | Permalink

    This was in response to gregorybutler’s
    “Wouldn’t it be more constructive to change gender as a political concept so folks could still be – as in this case – a biological male who is really feminine, without having to have major surgery?”

  46. Gopher
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:37 am | Permalink

    I’ve wondered the same thing.

  47. Gopher
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:41 am | Permalink

    “In fact, if a man’s penis is erect for more than 4 consecutive hours, the penis will begin to die – because the blood that is engorged in the penile tissues starts to die, the dead blood cells become acidic and the penis starts to rot away from within”
    Ahhhh, so this explains the ‘erection lasting longer than 4 hours’ warning on mens libido products.

  48. Gopher
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:42 am | Permalink

    Does that happen to females?

  49. Gopher
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 12:45 am | Permalink

    “Buck Angel ”
    Je adore Buck!!

  50. wax_ghost
    Posted August 14, 2009 at 1:23 am | Permalink

    Oh my god, that’s horrific.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

248 queries. 0.546 seconds