Ann, you are the shit.

I think you did a fantastic job and hit your points quite clearly and concisely. One thing this also made me think of is the Israeli consulate's very limiting role for men in this country. As this was targeted to men 18-35, who are heterosexual I might add, in the US I find it sad that this was the only way they could think up to appeal to this demographic. Again, just another reproduction of the current state of "appropriate" and "traditional" masculinity in this country. It is already ever so difficult to challenge the strict and rigid gender roles for masculinity and things like this are not only a disservice to women, but to men as well.

I second Vanessa. Ann, you are the shit. I loved your points and you seemed so comfortable once you got warmed up. I look forward to seeing what you will do in the future.

Did anyone else watch the rest of that video? It was quite disturbing.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: You're poised to become the multimedia feminist. This interview just proves the point.

Excellent debut, Ann! You did a really fine job.

Great job, Ann! And sojourner, yeah I watched the rest of the video too. Disturbing is an understatement....

This robot says: way to go, Ann! Nice work!

Well done!

The whole army girl tits-and ass-thing makes a nasty, nasty juxtaposition with the Moshe Katsav rape allegations and the way they've been handled.

Great interview! The rest of that video was appalling; thanks for including it too...

Good job, Ann! I thought you were very well poised. I was on the radio once, and I thought my heart was actually going to explode. I don't think I could handle TV.

G'uh. It's so lame that to get American men to care about politics or other countries, the issue has to be presented in a "sexy" way. Then when breasts are presented in any other context, they're "gross" (i.e. when Hillary Clinton wears a low cut shirt or when a woman is breastfeeding).

"G'uh. It's so lame that to get American men to care about politics or other countries, the issue has to be presented in a "sexy" way."

Please tell me you're joking. Could you possibly paint with broader strokes? That's like me saying "It's so hard to get American women to care about politics because they're all so busy with gossip rags and buying shoes." Give me a freakin' break!

Second, what exactly is so offensive about these ads? It's a tourism bureau advertising in Maxim magazine. The target demographic loves pictures of girls dressed in revealing clothing. Is it because these women represent "unattainable standards"? First of all, they aren't unattainable; I see women who look like that every day. Second, men DON'T EXPECT or want every woman to look like that, just as women don't expect every man to have 6-pack abs like the guys in Calvin Klein ads or on soap operas. I think this huffing and puffing over the ad simply serves to cover insecurities raised when looking at pictures of beautiful women. If somebody here can explain to me why I'm wrong (and I'd love to be wrong in this case), please help.

Ann - though I don't agree with you, good job; you didn't look nervous at all.

I think you did a fantastic job and hit your points quite clearly and concisely. One thing this also made me think of is the Israeli consulate's very limiting role for men in this country. As this was targeted to men 18-35, who are heterosexual I might add, in the US I find it sad that this was the only way they could think up to appeal to this demographic. Again, just another reproduction of the current state of "appropriate" and "traditional" masculinity in this country. It is already ever so difficult to challenge the strict and rigid gender roles for masculinity and things like this are not only a disservice to women, but to men as well.
--007femme

Oh please! I'm about as much a male feminist as you're likely to meet, but I like looking at naked or near naked women. It's fun.

Steve said it best:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qje83fShvkg

As far as the Israeli government is concerned, what else can they do to appeal to young American males? Hockey and football aren't very big in that country, and the U.S. beer market is oversaturated. What does the Israeli government have to offer them? "Come see our new Apartheid Wall"? "Watch us ethnicly cleanse Palestinians and steal their land"? "Take the deluxe 'drop bombs on Lebanese children' tour"? Not likely, since any young man who is really hankerin' to kill Arabs can sign up for the Marines or Army (and from recruiting reports, those are getting harder to come by), the babes in bathing suits are about the only thing the government over there can come up with to appeal to the kinds of people who read Maxim.

On a side note, I think a woman who can handle firearms is incredibly HOT!

You did an awesome. Seemed very poised to me.

Hey, badinfluence. What your post boils down to is this: you're telling us we're jealous. So, any time a woman has something negative to say about the way "attractive" women are portrayed in a medium, that automatically means she's jealous of the women in question? Geez. Ya kind of box of us in when you put everything in that context, don't you?

FTR, I rarely feel jealous of other women for a myriad of reasons I really SHOULDN'T have to get into on a feminist blog.

"On a side note, I think a woman who can handle firearms is incredibly HOT!"
Right, so why the fuck does she need to be scantily clad, oiled up, and appear as though she's trying to seduce you?

Could you possibly paint with broader strokes?

Did you even watch the video? The woman said that "Israel mattered little to men aged 18-38". So their obvious solution? Not a thoughtful article about the politics of the Middle East. Just a bikini photo spread of female Israeli soldiers. It's enough that these women have to fight for their country, but now they have to strip down to get American males to care about what's going on over there?

Second, what exactly is so offensive about these ads? It's a tourism bureau advertising in Maxim magazine. The target demographic loves pictures of girls dressed in revealing clothing.

These ads are not offensive. What is offensive is the fact that they couldn't think of another way for men to care about the conflict without T&A. I am not faulting the women.

Is it because these women represent "unattainable standards"? First of all, they aren't unattainable; I see women who look like that every day.

So do I. In movies, TV, magazines, and every other form of media. However, in my real life I rarely see women who look like this. Besides, do you honestly think the photos are not airbrushed? Even "unattainably" beautiful women have flaws as far as the male gaze is concerned.

I think this huffing and puffing over the ad simply serves to cover insecurities raised when looking at pictures of beautiful women.

Ah, the classic "you're just jealous" argument. Looking at pictures of skinny, conventionally attractive, airbrushed women used to make me insecure, but that was when my looks defined who I was as a person. I've come to realize that I'm just fine with the way I look, and I've never felt better.

If you think my feminist views are just a bunch of "huffing and puffing" over pictures of beautiful women because it allegedly makes me insecure, you are wrong on so many levels. If I have to explain more, I might as well start my blog up again, because that would be one lengthy post.

Well said, Mary. My thoughts exactly. Can you believe that even here on a feminist blog we're being asked to defend our looks? Good god.

WOW!!
I love how you presented yourself, and let me tell you, even before I saw the video, I liked you becuz you inspired me to be more strong about my deciosion in majoring in a different subject from Women's Studies -Spanish Literature- but still follow my feministing ;)

"What is offensive is the fact that they couldn't think of another way for men to care about the conflict without T&A."

Did you even watch the video? It's a TOURISM campaign. They're trying to DISTRACT people from the conflict, not draw attention to it. If the ads were intended to generate interest in tourism in the 18-35 male demographic, how could you designate the campaign anything but a success? The magazine went out to hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of subscribers. If I'm the boss at the Israeli consulate, whoever came up with that idea is getting a big freakin' raise. Your fundamental reason for disliking the ads is invalid. No one has yet provided a legitimate reason for the disapproval.

"Could you possibly paint with broader strokes?
Did you even watch the video? ..."

Yes I watched the video, and what you said about American males not caring about politics or other countries is still an incorrect generalization. I care about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (as do many of my male friends), even though that is not the issue here.

"Can you believe that even here on a feminist blog we're being asked to defend our looks? Good god."

I suppose you'd prefer a nice quiet blog where everybody agrees with everyone else. I'm not asking you to defend your looks, but to simply provide a justification for your disapproval of the ads, which so far, you have not.

Did you even watch the video? It's a TOURISM campaign. They're trying to DISTRACT people from the conflict, not draw attention to it.

Yeah! Come to Israel! Where you can see hot chicks in the army! That's one helluva campaign. I'm sure when the men were busy looking at the Israeli bikini babes, all they could think about was how much they wanted to go to Israel.

Your fundamental reason for disliking the ads is invalid. No one has yet provided a legitimate reason for the disapproval.

Are you sure a feminist blog is the right place for you?

I suppose you'd prefer a nice quiet blog where everybody agrees with everyone else.

Do such things even exist? But it would certainly be nice to leave a remark on a feminist blog without having to explain basic feminist beliefs.

I'm not asking you to defend your looks, but to simply provide a justification for your disapproval of the ads, which so far, you have not.

I don't have to justify anything to you. I'm still waiting for an acceptable explanation for why someone would troll a feminist blog and act surprised that the feminists weren't thrilled that women's bodies are being used yet again to promote something to dudely men.

----

Well said, Mary. My thoughts exactly. Can you believe that even here on a feminist blog we're being asked to defend our looks? Good god.

I know exactly what you mean. I think I should start a drinking game for every time I see a troll on a feminist blog giving the "you're jealous" excuse or using the word "empowered" in a non-ironic sense. Hehe.

"On a side note, I think a woman who can handle firearms is incredibly HOT!"
Right, so why the fuck does she need to be scantily clad, oiled up, and appear as though she's trying to seduce you?
--Rock Star

Because straight men like to look at scantily clad women, perhaps?
See the YouTube link. Scantily clad women with guns are even sexier.

Yeah! Come to Israel! Where you can see hot chicks in the army! That's one helluva campaign. I'm sure when the men were busy looking at the Israeli bikini babes, all they could think about was how much they wanted to go to Israel.
--Mary B

Why not, it's how every other tourist trap advertises: "Come visit our beaches, where all these pretty people hang out!"

The Israeli government, knowing that the beaches in that country have nothing on say, Hawaii try to use as a selling point, something that makes Israel different: "Sure those other beaches have hot chicks in bikinis, but our hot chicks have GUNS!"

"I'm not asking you to defend your looks, but to simply provide a justification for your disapproval of the ads, which so far, you have not."

I don't have to justify anything to you. I'm still waiting for an acceptable explanation for why someone would troll a feminist blog and act surprised that the feminists weren't thrilled that women's bodies are being used yet again to promote something to dudely men.

So throwing around opinions without logic or facts to support them is what passes for argument on your part? I don't think the person is trolling at all, but looking for an explanation other than "because I say so".

By the way, what's wrong with trying to appeal to "dudely men"? Or sissies, or nerds, or any other type of male?

"Yeah! Come to Israel! Where you can see hot chicks in the army! That's one helluva campaign. I'm sure when the men were busy looking at the Israeli bikini babes, all they could think about was how much they wanted to go to Israel."

You have yet to explain clearly why you feel such disapproval for the campaign. Whether you like it or not, this effort certainly brought attention to Israel in the target demographic . Mission accomplished for the tourism bureau.

"I'm still waiting for an acceptable explanation for why someone would troll a feminist blog ..."

Ah yes, call me a troll. The ad hominem attack--often the last refuge of someone who can find no more justification for her/his position. I am an agnostic, and am constantly prepared to defend my postion aginst Holy Rollers that challenge me. If you aren't prepared to adequately defend your "basic feminist beliefs" against somebody who posts on your blog, I feel sorry for you. Enlighten me! Tell me why this ad campaign was so freakin' offensive to you! Otherwise, I will go with Occam's Razor and assume the obvious: the reason is your own insecurities.

Lee, I'm with ya. Everyone seems to be gliding over your comment, but Ann went on friggin Al Jazeera!!! I agree with what she said all the way, but the fact that it's being said on a network that, among other things, promotes hatred of Jews is just so upsetting.

So, to sum up: Ann, good job on the interview, but WRONG network. I would expect much more of an American feminist.

Um, guys?

Going on Al-Jazeera is not equivalent to saying Israel is a BAD BAD PLACE THAT SHOULD BE WIPED OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH. Saying that Ann is being a bad American feminist and that she isn't supporting the Jews by going on the network is like saying everyone that ever goes on Fox News completely supports the Republican agenda, and is a traitor to the Democratic party and everything it stands for (or would like to stand for). Which we know is not true.

Considering the fact that the original Al Jazeera is one of the largest news outlets in the part of the world where Israel is actually located, I think that Al Jazeera English, in choosing to discuss an issue which is very much related to this region, is not attempting so much to say something about religion so much as something about the fact that American culture, in general, cares so little for what is going on in that part of the world, THEIR part of the world, that the Israeli consulate thought a bikini spread of female soldiers in Maxim was a good way to gain awareness. I wasn't getting a, "look how terrible Israel is" message so much as a "look how little Americans care" one.

"Way to play into the hands of the Islamists."
Lee- way to malign an entire religion and all its denominations. Honestly. Do you listen to yourself?

And for the record, Qatar is one of the (relatively) more liberal Arab states- it was the first country on the Persian Gulf to grant women the right to vote, for example. And Al Jazeera is not merely a puppet for the governments of the region to brainwash people with. It actually provides a larger worldview and greater variation of ideas than was ever before found in many of the countries in the region. The network has experienced some smearing, especially in the U.S., for not supporting the war in Iraq. Because apparently what they SHOULD be telling the world is that the Middle East, as a whole, absolutely LOVES the fact that America wants to give them the great gift of democracy. Cause that's not brainwashing, surely.

Ann- you are the shit.

@ badnfluence:
I'm not as offended as many people are on this one, but I do understand where this is coming from. Here we have a huge conflict about land, life, democracy and the rights of the refugee (whether Jewish or Arab), and the only thing that crosses one's mind to spark interest and involvement in young men is, essentially, to reach into their pants and play with their dicks rather than engage their minds. It's offensive because, on the one hand, we have here young veterans just home from serving their country, their home and their right to exist, and then, they have to show their tits in order to get anyone on the outside to give a shit. That is disgusting on a level that is just mindblowing.

I'm all for girls with guns. It's sexy as hell. Hell, I'm ok with a photospread of hot female IDF vets. (More than ok, but that's another discussion) It's not about that. I know sex sells. Sex sells clothes, sex sells shampoo, sex sells friggin' cereal. But when someone has to resort to the use of sex to sell something this important--or even feels this is the way to sell something this important--I think that says something really sad about the level of discussion.

Besides that, it's massively insulting to young American men. Sure, getting a poll together, they'll admit they love gorgeous naked women. But they're not Pavlov's dogs, just because they drool doesn't mean you can use tits for mind control powers. "Support Israel -- Home of the Hawt Nekkid Chix" gives a low estimate of their intelligence that is simply unfair.

These women have just completed their (extremely fucking demanding) military service, where they were expected to lay their lives on the line for their country.

The reward?

Being pimped as hot pieces of ass to men overseas.

That's my issue with it.

And it happens at the same time that the former President gets to wriggle out of a rape charge after admitting to 'a long series of sex offences, including harassment and indecent acts.'

Lee- way to malign an entire religion and all its denominations. Honestly. Do you listen to yourself?

Not to mention the gross inaccuracies characteristic of Lee's trolling. Without giving him more ink than he deserves, the destruction of Israel is not a majority position amongst Arab states. Al-Jazeera is basically the only bastion of independent journalism in the entire Arab world, and routinely directs a critical eye toward the states of the region in a way that puts the US media to shame. The only thing off limits to Al-Jazeera is the Qatari royal family, which leaves them quite a bit of latitude, much more than is available to most other media outlets in the region, which are subject to heavy censorship. And, lastly, Israel doesn't need any help making itself look bad; it's doing a good enough job itself with its long history of preferring military over diplomatic means, expansionism, violations of every one of the Geneva Conventions, endorsement of torture, open espousement of second-class citizenship for non-Jewish citizens (the Israeli High Court is at great pains to make clear that "Israel is not the state of its citizens, but that of the Jewish people in Israel and the diaspora"), amongst so many other things.

Ann, you rock! Great job, and very poised, especially as you warmed up.

As for the troll in this discussion: WTF? What could possibly confuse you about "We don't think the best way to represent a country and its women is as scantily-clad plastic sex dolls"? Do you really believe that all Israel has to offer is a brutal war of occupation and hot girls with guns? Is there nothing else? And why do you lack enough basic empathy to comprehend that women might be tired of being used as bait?

Bah, I've fallen into the troller's trap, I know (they only want attention), but I couldn't help it.

Oh, and Al-Jazeera is a first-rate news source, certainly much better on middle eastern issues than US cable "news."

Ann - great job.. doing TV is HARD - I've been interviewed on radio and it's 10,000 times easier, there's something about that unblinking eye staring at you that's kinda scary.

But you didn't look nervous AT ALL - I only know you were nervous because you said you were!!!

On the subject - I can totally see why Israel's Tourism Ministry has turned to T & A advertising consideiring that Israel's traditional tourist base, pro Zionist Jewish people, have been scared away by the war and the bombings - and, for the dual citizens among them, fear that they might visit the country during a crisis, get called up and get shot (that actually happened to one of my former carpenter school instructors - he went to Israel for a family wedding, got called up and lost a kidney to a sniper in Lebanon).

Now, if you feel Maxim style softcore pictorials are offensive (I don't, but I know a lot of women do), I could see why you'd find these pics just as objectionable.

But, if you don't have a problem with Maxim-style girlie pics in general, what's the beef with these photos? Just because they're government sanctioned?

So, if the Jerusalem Post or El Al Airlines or some Israeli hotel chain, or some other private sector corporate entity in Israel sponsored these pics, they'd be OK?

In any case - the second segment, about the Vietnamese mail order brides auctioning themselves off in Singapore, was creepy as hell - trafficking in women is bad enough, but having them 'self-traffic" is even worse (things must be really awful in Vietnam these days for that kind of thing to go on!)

It's offensive because, on the one hand, we have here young veterans just home from serving their country...and they have to show their tits in order to get anyone on the outside to give a shit.

These women have just completed their... military service...
The reward?
Being pimped as hot pieces of ass to men overseas.

Give me a break...you make it sounds like these ladies were forced at knife point to pose for free. I'm sure they were handsomely paid for their time. Do you have some sort of savior complex?--you need to save those poor, innocent models from the horrors of paid photoshoots? Also, Bowleserised, I think many feminists would be quite offended at your idiotic comparison of modeling with the very real horror of forced prostitution.

And why do you lack enough basic empathy to comprehend that women might be tired of being used as bait?

Oh, so you've done some modeling for advertisements? If not, then what is your basis for this blanket statement? Obviously the women in the ads aren't "tired of being used as bait". They probably love that people will pay them big bucks for a couple hours of time and some photos in a bikini. Not to mention the attention. In fact, thousands of women send in their pictures to Maxim each year, FOR FREE, just to say they've been in Maxim.

Besides that, it's massively insulting to young American men.

This is true. It is sad that T&A is the best way to draw attention, and it's sad that so many people in our country don't understand or care about the conflict. However, this is simply a regrettable commentary on the state of the world, not a valid reason why the ads are wrong or immoral.

Umm...you realize that Al Jazeera--even the one in America--is at least run by people who stone women to death for showing too much skin...right?

The people who are complaining about these ads need to get a life. It's completely normal for het men to want to look at scantily clad women. If you think that an ad campaign is shameful and immoral for recognizing this basic fact, then maybe you need to join Pat Robertson and all the other holy rollers on the religious right.

As for the complaints about "unrealistic ideals of beauty"- well, that's true for both genders. How many fat, balding leading men in hollywood do you see? Not many.

Er for anyone who can't see why the ads are a bad idea maybe you should check out the facts on sex tourism. Women don't come out of it all too well I think you'll find....

They just shout out "come to Isreal for sex". Most travel places use attractive people in swimwear doing fun holiday things to sell a destination, but this is very different.

Why Isreal would want more men coming over for sex is beyond me but this would be the wat to go about it.

bad[i]nfluence – I'm saying military service is a serious business, so why degrade these women who have served their country by turning it into girly mag wanker material? They deserve more respect.

They weren't forced to do it, but I bet if any of them wants to continue having a career in the army, they'll find they get a bunch of crap from their colleagues who might have difficulty taking them seriously after they've been on thousands of locker room walls.

Minga – where's your evidence for that?

Qwertster, are you joking? You seriously don't think there are any famous fat or balding men? Have you never heard of John Candy, Chris Farley or Biggie Smalls/Notorious BIG? They were all fat and people LOVED them. Donald Trump and Bruce Willis are balding. Do you think they're not famous, or have you simply never heard of them? Bill Murray has had a receding hairline for most of his career. Fat Albert used to be the FUCKING FATTEST MAN ALIVE and he was the inspiration for the Bill Cosby character, and was depicted as a wise, fat, likable man in Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids cartoon. Seriously, could you have asked a question that was any easier to disprove? For fuck's sake, educate yourself before you spew your ignorance all over the Internet.

Also, I second what chem_fem said. At a workplace meeting yesterday we had a presentation on human trafficking, and it was just about the saddest thing ever. The issue is so unknown to most people, and even though I thought I knew something about it, I was surprised at just how little I knew. Trafficking in human beings is the world's fastest-growing international crime, and it's not just Asian women being trafficked around Asia. Here in the US, American women are kidnapped, forced, and coerced into sexual slavery every day, and the presenter said that what we know about human trafficking right now is just the very tip of the iceberg. Encouraging sex tourism is only going to exacerbate that problem.

Also, these tactics remind me of PETA, and Israel's campaign is going to fail for the same reason that PETA has failed to make animal rights an issue that people take seriously. When you get people interested in an issue in a way that has nothing to do with what the issue actually is, they're not going to stick with it. In other words, if people decide to care about Israel and/or the Middle East because they saw some pictures of a hot Israeli military chick, they might care about the region for a week or so, but they're not going to develop any type of significant concern for Israel, but what they probably will take with them is the idea that powerful women are sex objects rather than people to be taken seriously. I mean, think about it. The civil rights movement didn't succeed by arguing that we should give black people voting rights because ZOMG, black women are HAWT! It succeeded by arguing that black people are FUCKING HUMAN BEINGS and should be treated as such. Women didn't get the right to vote by arguing that we're hot, and formerly colonized countries such as East Timor, India, Ireland, et al didn't win their freedom by arguing that their women were hot. Apartheid didn't fall by convincing Afrikaners that non-white South African women were hot. If the intent of this campaign is truly to get young American men to care about the issues facing Israel, it's going to fail. All it will do is make them disrespect military women and Israeli women. Objectification only begets more objectification. It has never been, and never will be, an effective tool for education or change.

"They weren't forced to do it, but I bet if any of them wants to continue having a career in the army..."

What is the likelihood of that? I heard that in some counties Israel a high % of the young men (and in Israel, a high % of the young women too) are conscripted for a couple of years between high school and getting on with their lives.

In countries with this system, that probably includes a lot of people who don't want to continue having a career in the military and who wouldn't have joined the military in the first place had they grown up in countries without widespread consciption.

"See son - The west is corrupt. The women whores."

It could also get reactions like

"See son - The First World is corrupt. The women whores."

"See son - The intellectuals are corrupt. The women whores."

Some Muslims don't scorn women (including us), First World standards of living (including vaccines and email), academia (including 6th grade), etc. At the same time, some non-Muslims *do* scorn these...