Safe Sex Advertisement

The ol' Link.

As the article says this is a Portuguese advertisement that is encouraging safe sex. In the article Megan Carpentier is quoted as equating the image with the sexualization of rape but the articles author does a good job of refuting these claims. Of course, that image can be drawn but what the image is elucidating is that practicing unsafe sex is violence against women.

By illustrating, in a somewhat exaggerated fashion, how dangerous it is to have unprotected sex and illustrate how much responsibility women carry towards themselves to make sure their partners use protection the image creates a sense of real unease. It is disturbing to look at. The image is not meant to glorify coercion in the least.

As the author of the article says, this advertisement is not meant to make one feel safe. Rather, it is meant to disrupt how one feels about unprotected sex and I think the ad makes a fair point of illustrating how dangerous it is. It is meant to remind women of their responsibilities to themselves and bodies and to make sure they are always in control of their health. As the article says: "women must be responsible for their own safety when it comes to sex and not rely on the man to do it for them." As I said, unsafe sex is a form of violence, but it is a preventable one in consensual relationships. So no matter who you are, man or women, never leave it up to your partner to decide and protect yourself.

It's all in the lips, apparently

Mood Lipstick. Yup. According to this article the nearly twenty dollar lipstick works with a woman's body chemistry to illustrate how aroused she is by turning colors. Problems: 1) if you need to spend 20 bucks on color change lipstick to illustrate to partners or potential partners that you are aroused there is likely something wrong with the way one of you communicates with other people. Maybe both of you. 2) Who wants to bust out a color wheel to find out how someone feels? 3) Are you kidding me?

The dating expert cited in the article claims that this is the best "ice breaker". So the intended purpose is to let a date know you are physically interested, because this is obviously the most important way for people to get along. Which raises the question: are women who wear this going to hand the color wheel to their dates at the start or wait for the end? It's just silly.

I don't think I'd be going out on a limb here by saying that the primary demographic for this garbage are heterosexual women (and so in a way it is really aimed at heterosexual men). So what does this say about the perceptions of the heterosexual populace? That men are either way too dumb, lazy or both to understand what a partner may want from them and that women are so passive that they cannot initiate any kind of sexual relations with men but have to spend $20 on something that will do it for them. Because women aren't supposed to be aggressive, right, and men are supposed to be that ignorant.

It is bad enough the amount of money both men and women alike spend on cosmetics to appeal to prevailing ideals of our times: hair gels, sprays, waxes, foundations, tans and all this crap just to feel comfortable when someone happens to look in one's direction but going so far as to wear color changing make up to tell someone you are horny seems a little ridiculous and a little desperate. Next thing you know we'll have men's pants that light up when the wearer has an erection. Of course, if this lipstick gets popular I'm going to regret not patenting that idea.

What are we searching for?

I was sitting in the computer lab wondering where to begin with this blog and my friend directed me to an interesting website called www.autocompleteme.com. After perusing the website for a few minutes (okay, so maybe a half hour or so, it is hilarious at times: "I ate all your bees" and what not) I found this image. Apparently the things google's users want to know about women are for the most part sexist, irrelevant or idiotic. I'll give the combat question and the egg question reasonable passes as they seem to be satisfying intellectual curiosities.

I find the popularity of the question "are women human?" to be the most distressing of these. It was likely meant as a joke but has become such a pervasive question that google recommends it as a logical finish to the phrase "are women". But for these questions to be so popular on google it is obvious that a lot of them are serious queries people have or at least stereotypes that people are looking for ways to actively reinforce. Besides the combat and biological question all of these seem to be grounded in prejudices towards both men and women and it is ridiculous and insulting that these are the common things we are asking about each other. I have not checked but it is reasonable to assume that "are men", "are black people," "are Asian people", "are gay/lesbian/queer people" or any other permutation of race, color, class, gender, sex, etc. would yield results that are just as offensive. So people are searching for these things either for a cheap laugh or to validate something they believe I suppose. I guess that is more important than "are women more likely to get osteoporosis?" or millions of more relevant questions. So search for some of these searches and let me see what you find. I'd like to see just how bad these questions get and see what y'all think.