Empowering women?

[Four Cofffee]

It is probably just me ( I am thinking) but just what do the women who get their bodies out as part of the career plan do for women?


Take Girls Aloud. Even the Ginger Minger is putting on some skimpy black lace thing and grinding her groin in my face/against a mic stand. Almost every female in the charts, and certainly al the women in the videos seem to have their fun bags out. Oh Yes, you are a great example of empowered women, please let me take you, your talent and your views seriously. I am sure all your young female fans see you as role models for how to make a success of their lives: get hair extensions, a tan and a tattoo and pimp myself to blokes.

Same goes for women in proper work who (and I have seen this happen overtly) unbutton the blouse, or hitch up the skirt that extra bit when they think it will work for them with some drooling bloke.

Claiming it is just using 'womanly charms with stupid men' is a cop out IMHO.

Minor rant over, just fed up of some women who want to be treated as intelligent, still depending on tits and arse to get what they want.

[BrabusMog]

To be fair, in these days of tighter jeans for men, I always make sure I have an extra pair of socks stuffed by my crotch if I am going into a pitch that has more women than men at the table...

[DrTre]

Any time I read of "empowering women" I always think of this:



But anyway, for every woman that does as you say, there are an awful lot more who don't.

Re: Girls Aloud etc, thats a slightly unfair view..it's the entertainment business and sex sells. GA weren't going to be the success they are solely on the strength of their singing abilities (although, I actually think they're not bad anyway)....although I guess the Spice Girls managed to achieve that with less "sexiness"

[OnTheOverrun]

DrTre said:

Re: Girls Aloud etc, thats a slightly unfair view..it's the entertainment business and sex sells. GA weren't going to be the success they are solely on the strength of their singing abilities (although, I actually think they're not bad anyway)....although I guess the Spice Girls managed to achieve that with less "sexiness"

Yet the vast majority of GA's audience appear to be pre-pubescant girls and homosexuals. Oh, and you.

So who exactly does this 'sex' sell to? Apart from you.

[DrTre]

OnTheOverrun said:

Yet the vast majority of GA's audience appear to be pre-pubescant girls and homosexuals. Oh, and you.

So who exactly does this 'sex' sell to? Apart from you.

I'm quite glad you've not lumped me in with either of the other two categories.

You're right, I retract my comment; the entertainment industry has in no way, shape or form ever, everused sex to sell anything.

I humbly apologise for using a single example (notwithstanding the "etc" I put in) and letting the reader extrapolate that to a wider point.

[Don]

Two points.

The Ordinary women who live and work in this country "empower" the female sex by getting on with living and working and they do a perfectly decent job of it.

Sex sells. Get over it. Does it gives women a "power" over men? Only if you can't keep your cock in your trousers. You don't see women trying it on in the boardroom because it doesn't work.

If you are the kind of bloke who can be led around by his cock then you will most certainly be taken advantage of over and over again. Funnily enough it works the other way around, too...

[anonymous-user]

I'm all for it.

[davido140]

OnTheOverrun said:

DrTre said:

Re: Girls Aloud etc, thats a slightly unfair view..it's the entertainment business and sex sells. GA weren't going to be the success they are solely on the strength of their singing abilities (although, I actually think they're not bad anyway)....although I guess the Spice Girls managed to achieve that with less "sexiness"

Yet the vast majority of GA's audience appear to be pre-pubescant girls and homosexuals. Oh, and you.

So who exactly does this 'sex' sell to? Apart from you.

Indeed, apparenyly sex sells, but I dont think many straight males are buying anything from the GA product range... every heterosexual male I know would happily nail every one of them but has never spent a penny (bar a tiny fraction of their licence fee via radio royalties) on a GA "product".

Edited by davido140 on Sunday 20th September 13:46

[OnTheOverrun]

DrTre said:

OnTheOverrun said:

Yet the vast majority of GA's audience appear to be pre-pubescant girls and homosexuals. Oh, and you.

So who exactly does this 'sex' sell to? Apart from you.

I'm quite glad you've not lumped me in with either of the other two categories.

You're right, I retract my comment; the entertainment industry has in no way, shape or form ever, everused sex to sell anything.

I humbly apologise for using a single example (notwithstanding the "etc" I put in) and letting the reader extrapolate that to a wider point.

Your wider point was undoubtedly true. Your example however, didn't support that theory, it contradicted it.

Now go and pick up all those toys and put them back in your pram.

[drivin_me_nuts]

So, for a woman to be taken 'seriously' she has to dress like a nun and be the epitomie of modesty and virtue?

By and large, successful people don't choose to become role models. More often than not that is not part of why they do what they do. I don't for a moment think that industry leaders like Beyonce the Pussycat Dolls as two examples started out saying 'yes, we want to be famous and role models for the kids'..

Look at it another way, they are highly successful 'industries' in their own way BECAUSE of the way they carry themselves and the way they behave. It's marketing and they market their brand in the best way possible.

Independent women? Indeed and highly successful in that they do. Not every one needs to dress like your mother to be taken seriously and the fact that you are so dismissive of them speaks more about you than it does about them.

[OnTheOverrun]

drivin_me_nuts said:

Independent women? Indeed and highly successful in that they do. Not every one needs to dress like your mother to be taken seriously and the fact that you are so dismissive of them speaks more about you than it does about them.

Members of manufactured girl bands are independent and successful women? I thought they were owned by (usually) male managers who get their songs written for them, tell them how to dress, teach them to sing and take 95% of their earnings. Still, 5% for shaking your ass and miming isn't a bad deal.

[OnTheOverrun]

drivin_me_nuts said:

Independent women? Indeed and highly successful in that they do. Not every one needs to dress like your mother to be taken seriously and the fact that you are so dismissive of them speaks more about you than it does about them.

Members of manufactured girl bands are independent and successful women? I thought they were owned by (usually) male managers who get their songs written for them, tell them how to dress, teach them to sing and take 95% of their earnings. Still, 5% for shaking your ass and miming isn't a bad deal.

[drivin_me_nuts]

OnTheOverrun said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

Independent women? Indeed and highly successful in that they do. Not every one needs to dress like your mother to be taken seriously and the fact that you are so dismissive of them speaks more about you than it does about them.

Members of manufactured girl bands are independent and successful women? I thought they were owned by (usually) male managers who get their songs written for them, tell them how to dress, teach them to sing and take 95% of their earnings. Still, 5% for shaking your ass and miming isn't a bad deal.

Substite in the first line girl for boy and women for man.

Your response stands for both sexes. Equally.

Sex and bodies sell. They always have and until El Gordo finds a way of legislating against them, I suspect they always will.

[voyds9]

As much as I dislike the Katie Price/Jordan persona I have to admire the business woman behind it. She is about as empowered as it gets. No-one tells her what to do and no-one restricts her freedoms (unlike say a female politician)

[DrTre]

OnTheOverrun said:

Your wider point was undoubtedly true. Your example however, didn't support that theory, it contradicted it.

Now go and pick up all those toys and put them back in your pram.

Bless.

Yes, of course all the GA calendars and appearances in the lads mags etc are aimed directly at pre pubescent girls and homosexuals.

[OnTheOverrun]

drivin_me_nuts said:

OnTheOverrun said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

Independent women? Indeed and highly successful in that they do. Not every one needs to dress like your mother to be taken seriously and the fact that you are so dismissive of them speaks more about you than it does about them.

Members of manufactured girl bands are independent and successful women? I thought they were owned by (usually) male managers who get their songs written for them, tell them how to dress, teach them to sing and take 95% of their earnings. Still, 5% for shaking your ass and miming isn't a bad deal.

Substite in the first line girl for boy and women for man.

Your response stands for both sexes. Equally.

Sex and bodies sell. They always have and until El Gordo finds a way of legislating against them, I suspect they always will.

It doesn't make them icons of independence and success as you suggest though does it?

[OnTheOverrun]

DrTre said:

OnTheOverrun said:

Your wider point was undoubtedly true. Your example however, didn't support that theory, it contradicted it.

Now go and pick up all those toys and put them back in your pram.

Bless.

Yes, of course all the GA calendars and appearances in the lads mags etc are aimed directly at pre pubescent girls and homosexuals.

I bow to your superior knowledge of GA as I've never met a heterosexual male who would admit to owning their calendars nor have I seen them stripping off in lads mags as you say, but clearly it's a subject you are close to.

[elster]

el stovey said:

I'm all for it.

I'm with you on this issue.

Nothing wrong with a woman showing off a bit of her body to try and get her own way. I'm all for it, only a sucker falls for it.

Those complaining about this must clearly fall into the homosexual camp.

[DrTre]

OnTheOverrun said:

but clearly it's a subject you are close to.

Not remotely, I was merely responding (sensibly) to a question posed on an internet BB.

You're the one that got your knickers in a twist and instantly resorted to childish digs at a complete stranger over it, for what reason I haven't the foggiest.

To be honest, I've found this entire exchange to be bizarre, still, it's been emotional and all that

[Olf]

Best bit of Women Empowering Women I ever saw.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1312667/Pyr...

Greedy dumbasses

Edited by Olf on Sunday 20th September 16:57