Is this protest only by photogenic women or the editorial have focused only on pictures of hot women?

<blockquote>

<p>There's no wonder we don't have more women participating here.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Good point. Sarah is the only one on this thread. On Facebook, at least 90% of the comments I see on this protest are from women.</p>

<p>My apologies...I wish we all could sit, drink coffee and have an in depth discussion, *face to face*. It's rather difficult to do here, on an online forum. Different worldviews have a lot to do with it, <a href="http://www.vdare.com/posts/weirdwestern-educated-industrialized-rich-and-democratic-societies-think-differently"><em>WEIRD</em></a> have a lot to do with it. Online miscommunications have a lot to do with it...</p>

<p>ps. Actually, it is damn impossible to explain myself here.</p>

<p>I find that, sometimes, when I can't explain myself, it's because I have an incoherent position. Then again, sometimes it's my audience's inability to understand. Knowing that difference is important but not always easy to disentangle.</p>

<p>This is the second time you've brought up the possibility that those who think differently are not in touch with the sensibilities of the rest of the world. Let's look at that. At a certain point in U.S. history, racism (both overt and more subtle, both intentionally brutal and much less intentionally benign but still racism just the same) was pretty much what the majority practiced or thought. It was cultural and societal and there was a shameful level of acceptance of it. Same was true a mere couple of decades ago regarding gay people. All that bigotry still exists to some extent as does the brutalization of and discrimination against women. I suppose one could have told the few that were against the worst of it in the past to be more sensitive to the majority, who were of a different world view. NOT!</p>

<p>It's never acceptable to me to appease a mass sensibility merely because it is held by or ingrained in so many and even when it has far-reaching historical roots. If there are many, many people who can't understand what these women are protesting and can't see past the form of protest to the barbaric issues being protested, that is their problem, not mine, even if they are somewhat innocent or naive (though complicit in their silence and lack of understanding). And, whether it takes reason, offense, or might to right the wrongs being done to women, I make no apologies for not sympathizing with any part of the world, no matter how big, that can't or won't understand and act.</p>

<p>For me the most compelling image was that of an old man kicking a bare-breasted naked young woman. Such narrative power in the capture.</p>

<p>BTW: I first looked through these with my wife and her first comment (not having read Starvy's introductory comments) was, "None of those women are fat."</p>

<p>And in response to Starvy's original question: perhaps it was the movement itself that selected young women, who might be more likely to be politically active on this issue than middle-aged women. It might not have been the photo editor. </p>

<p>double</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"BTW: I first looked through these with my wife and her first comment (not having read Starvy's introductory comments) was, "None of those women are fat."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>The physique of participating women and reactions from observing women is revealing in itself. </p>

<p>Apart from the Tunisian activist's age (19) who might attract women of similar age, going topless is another level of feminism that can cause most women to be uncomfortable. </p>

<p>By their own admission and without clarification, the movement is using women's beauty and sexuality as their weapon, but the underlying implication reveals another contradiction perceived even by women - that what defines beauty and sexuality. <br>

<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/266762/">http://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/266762/</a></p>

<p>We're indeed a long ways from equality even among the same gender. </p>

<p>Fred,<br /> Your example -Racism- along with slavery, imperialism and neocolonialism is mostly a WEIRD thingy. Again, I may sound incoherent to you, but it's mostly your (worldview) interpretation. I'm not about to discuss different worldviews here, on an online forum...</p>

<p>Leslie, the only thing weird here is your choosing to morally relativize racism and slavery. I choose to condemn them outright, no matter the worldview of those practicing them. And I'll protest and fight against them, along with barbaric practices perpetrated on women throughout the world. But I'll also note your supposedly very worldly, non-leftist, non-Democratic, and non-liberal standing by and sympathizing with those heinous world views. Just be aware than many who aren't left leaning at all won't be standing with you either.</p>

<p>We all have those days, Leslie! ;-)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Q.G. - And still that 'don't they look pleasing to us men' theme running strongly... Lots of work to do, still.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>and</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Fred - And breasts as adornment for the eyes of men in the perpetual state of being pre-teens. It doesn't get much more honest than this.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But this is how our souls talk to us men, through images of women. Nothing is so involving, yet somehow the mystery of it all gets glossed over, in this thread, everywhere men congregate really, it instead gets expressed with the emphasis on pure physicality. A silly remark the most acceptable, anything intimate avoided. Probably because we men experience discomfort when speaking to how bonded we are to both the women in our lives and the 'otherness' that seeks us despite the women in our lives. We don't as a rule share the details of our inner life with other men, a life with which women are the greatest part.</p>

<p>The ancient women of Crete, riding their bulls, that was a soul image, a reality so different. What it meant to be a woman back then in Crete seemed to me somehow more complete. More complete than could be lived in the roles our culture offered us 50 years ago. A woman riding a bull doing a handstand on it? To me as a pre-teen, women were cheerleaders. They were not performers of great physical feats performed before spectators. Women instead were the supportive watchers of men performing in sports. In that image from Crete, women were a marvel capable of great physical feats and bare breasted to boot. I so wanted to have been able to have lived in ancient Crete. </p>

<p>For us, it is instead as if men are the where all and be all of everything. Men as the where all and be all, that is what we celebrate now. It's always some big mouth male with a stake in the control of women, control of how her sexuality is expressed, control of her reproduction, control of her job description, control, control, control: and the result is that we men get cheated out of women who grow naturally. Instead they have to grow in opposition to some big STONES in the way of what she is and wants to become. Instead they are forced to define themselves in opposition to some big mouth man, and end up wasting a lot of energy doing that instead of just living the life they want without some big mouth man in opposition to them.</p>

<p>Women don't participate in these forums? Probably because we are big mouths and argumentative. What else is new?</p>

<p>I think what we have to take into account is the beliefs, culture, of different folks in the world. Our judgement is based on western values which is not the values of many cultures.</p>

<p>I think that is what Leslie is saying.</p>

<p>The argument is are our values superior to others? And are we seen trying to force those values on others. Are we perceived as another Rome? That is how we can/are being seen. Education, persuasion, is the key.</p>

<p>Personally I think any form of repression is disgusting.</p>

<p>Very brave ladies.</p>

<p>Anyway, for good soul images of women portrayed in song see Meg Christian's earlier albums.</p>

<p>Charles, according to Wikipedia, the figure performing the bull-leaping on the ancient fresco is a man, flanked by two women.<br>

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_civilization">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_civilization</a> </p>

<p> If I'm not against it, I must be for it....quite a worldview you got there, Fred.</p>

 

<p>"the life they want without some big mouth man in opposition to them"</p>

<p>From the mouth of a greedy western man without any beliefs other than his own greed and ego.</p>

<p>That is how a western man is perceived in many parts of the world. Particularly among Islamists. Most women, from my understanding of Islam are happy with their role in Islam.</p>

<p>They do not feel oppressed.</p>

<p>However, in most religions/cultures extremists exist......</p>

<p>Whether in the" land of the free "or Islam.</p>

<p>It is always about understanding before one engages the mouth.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Understanding and respect of other folks beliefs and culture.</p>

<p>That is how you make friends in the world.</p>

<p>And bring about changes.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Think what you are saying.</p>

<p>This website is worldwide.</p>

<p>I know Michael, I've looked at Wiki, the web, before for that image and my parents book is long gone. That image from my youth does exist. In a way you made my point: women leaped bulls, but so did men, it wasn't just something that the women did. Or should I say the same thing by saying "it wasn't just something that the men did?" The choice of expressions we make, that is, 1. women first, or 2. women always secondary: that is learned. That is how we are cheated. Those two expressions are entirely different ways of casting men and women into 'place'. Odd really.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"It is always about understanding before one engages the mouth."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Allen, I think the thread has been about clear human rights abuse for which there can be little understanding. </p>

<p>Practices such as honor killings, female genital mutilation, bride burning, femicide in general really have no place in modern society, and organizations such as Amnesty International exists precisely to address these abuses and demand justice for those who are unrepresented. </p>

<p>I don't think there's anything wrong with expressing ones honest opinion even if it's not necessarily politically correct or crafted to appease a wide audience. </p>

 

<p>Democracy, individualism, freedom of choice, (ideal) love, analytical etc...worldview are highly valued in <strong>W</strong>estern<strong>E</strong>ducated<strong>I</strong>ndustrial<strong>R</strong>ich<strong>D</strong>emocracies. Can you imagine a place where they aren't vital, of much importance, or even nonexistence? Try most places in the world, besides WEIRD regions. It's too bad most wired folks are of the first world, if not, maybe I won't sound like a crank:)</p>

<ul>

<li>Individualism gets you in trouble, or even can get you killed in some places. In the east, they highly value harmony, like ants purely for survival and longevity.</li>

<li>Freedom of choice? you've got no freedom, if you ain't got no money...</li>

<li>Ideal love? Huh, what's that? you've got three siblings, an sick grandpa and no time to date, let alone read Stendahl:)</li>

<li>Analytical? Try catching a city bus in Xian, or figuring out the city layout of Guangzhou where people don't follow order, lines, or reasons (or, so called western logic) They do push, pull and shove pretty good.</li>

<li>Democracy? India...heard the recent gang rape cases of late and the general misogyny there? How about the the infamous untouchables? Democracy isn't all good. Shall I mention the US gun culture? How about American porn-tertainment and its impact?</li>

</ul>

<p>I grew up in the States and HK, with mainland parents. With my WEIRD glasses on, I love it dearly. With my other goggle on, it isn't so pretty, or all that. I hope I don't come across consistently inconsistent, but I am. As for my burkas and naked comment, I was speaking as an photog/artist/activist. It'd have been brutally (good) and beautiful i.e. *brutiful*</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I think what we have to take into account is the beliefs, culture, of different folks in the world. Our judgement is based on western values which is not the values of many cultures.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thank you, Allen, but that merely skims the surface. It even has to do with our very definition of words like love, freedom and, say, preconceived notion of individuality and family. Even linguistic nuances contribute to our different cultural/era/habitual world views. It is too complex, long to discuss here...</p>

<p>I would like to hear more from Leslie on linguistic nuances...</p>

<p>Leslie, I can appreciate some of what you and Allen are saying. To impose my own WEIRD wording, I would say it is acceptable in some cultures for people to be the property of other people -- like a goat or a sturdy cart. That is really what this entire issue is about -- women being the property of men and being controlled by them. </p>

<p>Even here in the US, women are to some extent becoming the property of the government, forced in some jurisdictions to bring their unborn children to term when it is not their wish -- essentially robbed of their reproductive freedom (including freedom NOT to reproduce or freedom not to reproduce with a particular individual). I realize there are other sides to the issue, but certainly this issue exists, that a woman's body is not fully her own, even in the US.</p>

<p>I think this concept of people having the right to be free from ownership by or servitude to others is not just a WEIRD one. I think this concept is broadly accepted, in principal, across cultures, and it is largely consistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, drafted by representatives of numerous diverse cultures from around the globe.</p>

<p>Perhaps the only issue on the table right now is what constitutes "servitude." I contend that when any person cannot do whatever they want to with their own body, that's a form of servitude. I recognize many people disagree with this assertion, but it is my opinion nevertheless.</p>

<p>On a side note, it is really interesting to read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is essentially a list of rights all people should have, in principle, but that we do not necessarily have, depending on who we are and where we live. In other words, practice often falls well short of theory in many parts of the world, including by signatory nations -- and including by even the principal drafters. There are many rights in this Declaration that I do not have and probably never will. The document is thick with idealistic hypocrisy!</p>

 

<p>Lesley, thanks.<br>

If everybody wrote like you, we might be able to communicate better between us all, across national, linguistic and ethic borders.<br>

Our exchanges in photos include also these communicative borders, although we rarely manage to mention them or identify them. <br>

The unique thing about Photonet is, that mostly, the communication is civil and respectful.</p>

<p>Here's some news about someone who was shot in the head because she wanted to go to school<br>

<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22045269">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22045269</a></p>

<p>I believe that I'll need to visit the Ukraine someday soon...</p>

<p>Or Paris...</p>

<p>I certainly wouldn't mind covering such a story. ;-)</p>