<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Good news, bad news</title>
	<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 19:43:20 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Rebecca</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-117873</link>
		<author>Rebecca</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 04:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-117873</guid>
		<description>How tasteless.
Well, at least it didn't say we're going to "rape it."

:P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How tasteless.<br />
Well, at least it didn&#8217;t say we&#8217;re going to &#8220;rape it.&#8221;</p>
<p>:P</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: consumerism for the cure &#171; resistance is fertile</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-95945</link>
		<author>consumerism for the cure &#171; resistance is fertile</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:45:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-95945</guid>
		<description>[...] for me (though her post seems to be a repeat from January of this year - how did I miss it?). I couldn&#8217;t agree more.   [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] for me (though her post seems to be a repeat from January of this year - how did I miss it?). I couldn&#8217;t agree more.   [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oldmama</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-54194</link>
		<author>Oldmama</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 01:43:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-54194</guid>
		<description>So, I saw this poster for the first time today - always running behind the times.  It took my breath away, but I LIKED it!  I went searching for how to buy one and found your site.  I'm one of those old ones who was around to march for the Equal Rights Amendment and did, so I think I've earned the right to say that it's OK to express anger and hatred toward breast cancer, and that's what this poster does from my viewpoint.  I didn't for a second think that this was pro-abuse or anti-woman.  Just thought I'd offer a different opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, I saw this poster for the first time today - always running behind the times.  It took my breath away, but I LIKED it!  I went searching for how to buy one and found your site.  I&#8217;m one of those old ones who was around to march for the Equal Rights Amendment and did, so I think I&#8217;ve earned the right to say that it&#8217;s OK to express anger and hatred toward breast cancer, and that&#8217;s what this poster does from my viewpoint.  I didn&#8217;t for a second think that this was pro-abuse or anti-woman.  Just thought I&#8217;d offer a different opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Public Service Announcement Watch &#8216;07 at I Blame The Patriarchy</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34820</link>
		<author>Public Service Announcement Watch &#8216;07 at I Blame The Patriarchy</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2007 01:07:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34820</guid>
		<description>[...] Speaking of PSA posters that objectify with pornulated imagery the very class of people their message purports to serve, get a load of this &#8220;consent awareness&#8221; ad from the British Home Office. The ad is intended for publication in a magazine read (or, possibly more accurately, looked at) by puerile male heterosexuals, the chief attraction of which periodical is photos of &#8220;Bedroom Babes!&#8221; and &#8220;Celebs Naked on TV!&#8221; The magazine, naturally, is called Nuts. The Home Office hopes their ad will guide the insightful readers of Nuts &#8220;to greater awareness and understanding of what consent means&#8221; and even that it will somehow &#8220;[dispel] myths about the type of people who commit rape.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Speaking of PSA posters that objectify with pornulated imagery the very class of people their message purports to serve, get a load of this &#8220;consent awareness&#8221; ad from the British Home Office. The ad is intended for publication in a magazine read (or, possibly more accurately, looked at) by puerile male heterosexuals, the chief attraction of which periodical is photos of &#8220;Bedroom Babes!&#8221; and &#8220;Celebs Naked on TV!&#8221; The magazine, naturally, is called Nuts. The Home Office hopes their ad will guide the insightful readers of Nuts &#8220;to greater awareness and understanding of what consent means&#8221; and even that it will somehow &#8220;[dispel] myths about the type of people who commit rape.&#8221; [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rei</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34661</link>
		<author>Rei</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Feb 2007 00:39:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34661</guid>
		<description>I saw another ad in the campaign recently- same basic decapitated woman image, but the text ran:

"WE ONLY FOCUS ON ONE THING - Or, depending on how you look at it, two."

God.  Thanks for making your priorities clear.

Also, what focus group research showed young women respond well to, and identify with, the Venus de Milo shot?  I don't know, perhaps we're so overwhelmingly crazy that it IS effective, but when I see torso shots, I always instinctively feel that the ad is aimed at the grosser sort of male.  I identify with pictures of women that show their faces, and quite often limbs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw another ad in the campaign recently- same basic decapitated woman image, but the text ran:</p>
<p>&#8220;WE ONLY FOCUS ON ONE THING - Or, depending on how you look at it, two.&#8221;</p>
<p>God.  Thanks for making your priorities clear.</p>
<p>Also, what focus group research showed young women respond well to, and identify with, the Venus de Milo shot?  I don&#8217;t know, perhaps we&#8217;re so overwhelmingly crazy that it IS effective, but when I see torso shots, I always instinctively feel that the ad is aimed at the grosser sort of male.  I identify with pictures of women that show their faces, and quite often limbs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bitey</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34227</link>
		<author>Bitey</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:01:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34227</guid>
		<description>I showed the poster to my husband.  He said, "Wow.  I'm used to breast cancer kitsch, but this is like breast cancer 'Jackass.'"</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I showed the poster to my husband.  He said, &#8220;Wow.  I&#8217;m used to breast cancer kitsch, but this is like breast cancer &#8216;Jackass.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vera</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34140</link>
		<author>vera</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 01:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34140</guid>
		<description>I've tried writing back to Ms. Bodell too. Here's part of what I said:


These posters are design to suggest that the message "punch it kick it strangle it spit on it" applies to the woman's torso it's printed on. [...] I have two daughters in the age group you mention, and it horrifies me that in our porn and violence-saturated culture, &lt;i&gt;even an organization pledged to end breast cancer&lt;/i&gt; employs such images to get its point across. I fear for my daughters every day. Do you realize that in the U.S., nearly 25 percent of all women have experienced some type of sexual assault by the time they are in their twenties? This statistic is based on reported assaults. In actuality the percentage is certainly higher. Images like your poster are everywhere, and these images contribute to a sense that sexual violence is normal. I wish my daughters could have grown up in a safer culture. I wish they didn't have to see these types of images every day.


I don't know what good does to write back, but it makes me feel a little better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve tried writing back to Ms. Bodell too. Here&#8217;s part of what I said:</p>
<p>These posters are design to suggest that the message &#8220;punch it kick it strangle it spit on it&#8221; applies to the woman&#8217;s torso it&#8217;s printed on. [&#8230;] I have two daughters in the age group you mention, and it horrifies me that in our porn and violence-saturated culture, <i>even an organization pledged to end breast cancer</i> employs such images to get its point across. I fear for my daughters every day. Do you realize that in the U.S., nearly 25 percent of all women have experienced some type of sexual assault by the time they are in their twenties? This statistic is based on reported assaults. In actuality the percentage is certainly higher. Images like your poster are everywhere, and these images contribute to a sense that sexual violence is normal. I wish my daughters could have grown up in a safer culture. I wish they didn&#8217;t have to see these types of images every day.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know what good does to write back, but it makes me feel a little better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Twisty</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34137</link>
		<author>Twisty</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 01:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34137</guid>
		<description>Yay Bitey.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yay Bitey.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bitey</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34127</link>
		<author>Bitey</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 00:05:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34127</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I got that form-letter, too.  This was my response to it:

"This form letter does not address my concerns.  My specific question was about the ad's evocation of sexualized violence against women.  Surely it is possible to 'grab' women in my age group without perpetuating--indeed, contributing to--our society's perception of women as rape objects.  
 
"You are such a powerful organization, with such a powerful voice.  Look at this ad.  What are you saying?  What are you doing?  Why do you think it's cute when you do it?
 
"Sincerely,
"Bitey"

Strangely, I haven't heard anything back yet.  Maybe I should email Ms. Bodell again?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I got that form-letter, too.  This was my response to it:</p>
<p>&#8220;This form letter does not address my concerns.  My specific question was about the ad&#8217;s evocation of sexualized violence against women.  Surely it is possible to &#8216;grab&#8217; women in my age group without perpetuating&#8211;indeed, contributing to&#8211;our society&#8217;s perception of women as rape objects.  </p>
<p>&#8220;You are such a powerful organization, with such a powerful voice.  Look at this ad.  What are you saying?  What are you doing?  Why do you think it&#8217;s cute when you do it?</p>
<p>&#8220;Sincerely,<br />
&#8220;Bitey&#8221;</p>
<p>Strangely, I haven&#8217;t heard anything back yet.  Maybe I should email Ms. Bodell again?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ugly in Pink</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34080</link>
		<author>Ugly in Pink</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/01/26/good-news-bad-news-2/#comment-34080</guid>
		<description>I actually reared back a little upon seeing the ad.  I can't imagine how much it would bother someone who's actually experienced domestic abuse.  What the hell were they THINKING?

On a different note, Twisty's tattoo looks like chopsticks from here.  Yum.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually reared back a little upon seeing the ad.  I can&#8217;t imagine how much it would bother someone who&#8217;s actually experienced domestic abuse.  What the hell were they THINKING?</p>
<p>On a different note, Twisty&#8217;s tattoo looks like chopsticks from here.  Yum.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
